June 2011 Study Group

User avatar
Eichörnchen
Posts: 1119
Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2009 8:51 pm

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby Eichörnchen » Sun Apr 24, 2011 12:57 pm

xjykybl wrote:
jim-green wrote:
Eichörnchen wrote:Thanks for the description of your approach to LG Mickey. It looks like it really worked so I can only hope that after another week/ week and a half I'll start to show some improvements. is anyone actually planning on doing the PT 52 review today at 1?
Not to lecture, but I really hope you do them untimed. This is the single greatest thing that helped me on LG. I cannot review at 1 because I'll be taking PT49, but I am free at 8. Will there be anyone meeting at 8? Happy Easter! Jim

Sorry for my dumb question. So when ppl are talking about "meeting", is there a chat room on the forum where ppl can have group talk to discuss questions?
I am taking PT 49 this afternoon as well, if anybody wants to review PT49 or any test before PT49, I am up for it.

It's not on the forum, it's for those registered with MLSAT. Page back through this thread and find MLSAT Noah and PM him for details.

User avatar
mickeyD
Posts: 357
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2011 12:43 pm

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby mickeyD » Sun Apr 24, 2011 1:03 pm

Eichörnchen wrote:Do you think that is a realistic approach? Sorry to interview you but it seems like we were both in the same crappy LG boat and you have successfully escaped.


Haha I wouldn't say I've escaped yet. But hopefully I'll get there soon.

It sounds like you're doing exactly what I did- LG chapter, game type, stopwatch. It's practice, so take your time and force yourself to understand. If you're sitting there reading/diagramming the rules and you can't think of what inferences result, don't get impatient, sit there and figure it out. If you don't immediately see the implications of a local condition, don't make a hypo, stare at the rules and force yourself to set off the chain of deductions. Eventually your brain will get used to it and start seeing that similar rules and combinations of rules set up similar inferences. It was when I started doing this, not when I had finished X number of games, when it started to "click" for me.

Edit: Happy Easter everyone!

User avatar
Eichörnchen
Posts: 1119
Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2009 8:51 pm

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby Eichörnchen » Sun Apr 24, 2011 1:46 pm

mickeyD wrote:
Eichörnchen wrote:Do you think that is a realistic approach? Sorry to interview you but it seems like we were both in the same crappy LG boat and you have successfully escaped.


Haha I wouldn't say I've escaped yet. But hopefully I'll get there soon.

It sounds like you're doing exactly what I did- LG chapter, game type, stopwatch. It's practice, so take your time and force yourself to understand. If you're sitting there reading/diagramming the rules and you can't think of what inferences result, don't get impatient, sit there and figure it out. If you don't immediately see the implications of a local condition, don't make a hypo, stare at the rules and force yourself to set off the chain of deductions. Eventually your brain will get used to it and start seeing that similar rules and combinations of rules set up similar inferences. It was when I started doing this, not when I had finished X number of games, when it started to "click" for me.
Edit: Happy Easter everyone!

ok great. A few days ago I started to try to do the inferenes in my head because I was feeling like I was relying on hypos to discover inferences that I was missing. I started to get a few more qs wrong when I did this but I guess that makes sense. So right now it can feel like:
Image

but hopefully I'll get faster and sharper soon! :)

Viper
Posts: 12
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2011 1:43 am

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby Viper » Sun Apr 24, 2011 2:15 pm

tmon wrote:
Viper wrote:
Any comments/advice/suggestions are welcome, especially directed towards my study plan. Is it a good idea to focus on LR first before RC, or is a bad idea to be doing all these tests and skipping the RC section? Oh right, I don't have test 40-53, and 60+. Where would be the best place to get those? I know i can order them from amazon for $8 a pop, is there another option for those tests?


Oh man. Do yourself a HUGE favor and think of all of your weaknesses as areas you need to focus on more than anything else. It is CRUCIAL that you focus on RC, and makes a world of sense to include it in your practice. I hope I'm not sounding like a jerk, but this is really important because you can't improve on something you're not practicing heavily.

As for the 5th section...there's a pretty good chance that will help too. Worst case scenario, you have no stamina issues and it's just extra practice. Use RC every time for awhile until you're more comfortable with it if you have to. But there's a chance that you could have score problem toward the end of your test because your mind becomes fatigued. I'm regretting not doing 5 sections the whole time, personally, but hopefully I started doing it early enough to get past the stamina wall.

I hope this helps! Good luck!


Stamina isn't really an issue. During undergrad I have pulled many many 24hour + cram sessions, and yesterday i powered through 7 sections, only breaking to review my wrong answers. My 2 biggest issues by far are RC and finishing LR/RC in 35 minutes. I'm definitely going to work on RC, I'm just trying to squeeze out all the extra points that I can from LR/LG as I'm actually learning something about these sections each time i do one. The only thing I've learned about RC is that I don't read fast enough

By the way, I found the explanations to all the questions for tests 1-56, I don't know if you guys have these already or if some of you even need them, but I don't mind sharing these with everyone. If anyone has 57+ that would be awesome.

User avatar
vissidarte27
Posts: 434
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 3:43 pm

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby vissidarte27 » Sun Apr 24, 2011 4:00 pm

Just checking in.

I'm still planning on taking the test (if finances allow), though I haven't been studying nearly as much as I had hoped to. Just moved to a new state, started a new full-time job, and am enjoying domestic bliss with my girlfriend. Motivation has been hard to find.

Took my first PT in two or three weeks and scored a 176, so I think I'm still on track with where I need to be. RC is the only thing really giving me problems (-4 compared to -2 total LR and -0 LG) and, while I am working on it, I'm trying not to stress about it. I think LR has finally clicked for me, and missing two on LR as opposed to four or six or whatnot has made a huge difference in my scores.

I'm sure it sounds really dumb, but I think not studying has worked really well for me. I studied really hard for February and I feel like I've retained a lot of that knowledge and that, now that my circumstances are calmer and happier (had some really awful work stuff going on in the six weeks before the February test mostly revolving around scabies), I'm able to really focus on PTs when I take them, even if I don't take them as often as I was before.

I feel much more confident than I did before and all of my recent test scores have been high enough (176, 172, 174, 171) for me to think that my 163 in February was a flukey product of a stressful environment and bad circumstances.

Hope everybody's prep continues to go well. We're going to kick this thing's ass in June.

User avatar
soj
Posts: 7735
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 11:10 pm

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby soj » Sun Apr 24, 2011 4:09 pm

Currently on break from PT43. Just peeked at my fourth section and loled.

LRe RC LR1 LR2 LG

I guess it's not as bad as rc lr lr lr lg, but RC was brutal. Not looking forward to scoring this one.

User avatar
vissidarte27
Posts: 434
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 3:43 pm

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby vissidarte27 » Sun Apr 24, 2011 4:12 pm

soj wrote:Currently on break from PT43. Just peeked at my fourth section and loled.

LRe RC LR1 LR2 LG

I guess it's not as bad as rc lr lr lr lg, but RC was brutal. Not looking forward to scoring this one.


43 is the one I just took this afternoon! And yeah, the RC was not my friend. It was one of those sneaky ones where I didn't think I missed all that many and was unpleasantly surprised when I scored it. The second and last passages were not so fun.

User avatar
soj
Posts: 7735
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 11:10 pm

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby soj » Sun Apr 24, 2011 5:32 pm

@ vissidarte: looks like we had a pretty similar experience with this PT. ugh, I knew bilingual was going to be a disaster even as I was just reading the passage.

PT43
LRe (PT41 S3): -0
RC: -6
LR1: -2
LR2: -0
LG: -0
Raw: -8
Scaled: 174

Everything else was nearly perfect but RC had to ruin my fun. :roll:

I got -1 in oil drilling, -3 in bilingual (I'd actually done this passage before, too), -0 in reader-response theory, and -2 in faculty patent rights. I actually predicted three of the Qs I would get wrong (4, 12, 13). I intended to come back to them, but ran out of time before I could do it.

I actually lost composure after the brutal RC and had trouble concentrating in LR1 and LR2. However, I still managed to finish both of them without a single Q remaining marked as unsure. The two Qs I got wrong in LR1 (15, 16) blindsided me!

I'd seen all the games before either in the LGB or the LGB workbook, which helped me breeze through the section. However, if I hadn't spent that extra time going over my answers, I could have gotten -2 due to misreads. Gotta be more careful. :|

jim-green
Posts: 808
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2011 7:55 pm

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby jim-green » Sun Apr 24, 2011 6:10 pm

Will there be anyone meeting at 8 pm tonight in the room?

User avatar
vissidarte27
Posts: 434
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 3:43 pm

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby vissidarte27 » Sun Apr 24, 2011 6:37 pm

@soj

I missed 12 and 13, too. The others were 22 and 26, both from the patent rights passage.

(I also got 16 wrong in the first LR. Interesting that the same questions tripped both of us up.)

Honestly, I'm encouraged enough by my LR and my LG scores to not worry too much about RC. I'm shooting for 170, so if I can keep the other two things consistent, I have a bit of leeway/room for error in RC. I'll try to improve, of course, but that bilingual passage kicked my ass and I am not afraid to own it.

User avatar
soj
Posts: 7735
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 11:10 pm

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby soj » Sun Apr 24, 2011 6:46 pm

My two mistakes in patent rights were 24 and 26. I have very few LR Qs to go over today, so I'm going to go a little more in-depth in analyzing RC. I'm shooting for -5 raw so I don't get scalepwned, which means unless I can start completely owning LR, I have to make way fewer mistakes in RC. The problem is I'm inconsistent--the last three RCs I scored -2s, but the four RCs before those were -2 -5 -5 -5. I can usually tell midway through a passage if I'm going to get 2+ wrong on that passage, and my predictions are surprisingly accurate. I wonder if there's something I can do specifically in those passages.

User avatar
99.9luft
Posts: 1244
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 4:32 pm

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby 99.9luft » Sun Apr 24, 2011 8:16 pm


jim-green
Posts: 808
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2011 7:55 pm

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby jim-green » Sun Apr 24, 2011 8:22 pm

Anyone done PT8 S4 #11 LR? I chose E becuase it sounded like the seals' immune systems were weakened. Ans A sounds out of scope, but is correct. Any idea why?

User avatar
Eichörnchen
Posts: 1119
Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2009 8:51 pm

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby Eichörnchen » Sun Apr 24, 2011 9:06 pm

it sounded like the seals' immune systems were weakened

haha I love that we say sentences like this when studying for the LSAT. It was just especially funny because I just got back from my family Easter party and their douchey neighbor was there. He goes "Ooh nice to meet you. You're probably a little socialite of the area, huh? [knowing smile]" Me: "No. I don't go outside. I study for the LSAT." (relative chimes in with "She's like applying to Harvard and Duke and stuff." (me cringing as I think about my paltry PT scores) and then the neighbor goes, "Ooh! QUICK! What was Brown vs Board?!?" :roll:

User avatar
crumpetsandtea
Posts: 7156
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2010 7:57 pm

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby crumpetsandtea » Sun Apr 24, 2011 9:29 pm

Doing PT 47 tonight. Hope I do wellll....Is anyone else experiencing severe nerves?

User avatar
mickeyD
Posts: 357
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2011 12:43 pm

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby mickeyD » Mon Apr 25, 2011 1:17 am

Took a much needed day off today, no studying whatsoever. Aside from a cruise on spring break (which was anything but relaxing), I haven't taken a day off since February really. After 8 hours on Saturday I was mentally exhausted and for the first time felt like I could be burning out. Felt really good to just hang out with my friends and watch basketball all day.

I'll probably take tomorrow off as well to focus on some schoolwork. Hope everyone enjoyed their weekend!

User avatar
coldshoulder
Posts: 963
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2011 4:05 pm

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby coldshoulder » Mon Apr 25, 2011 2:13 am

PT 32
04/25/11
LR: -4/-1
RC: -2
LG: -1
-8 total
93/175
I took a break since the last test, being lazy with very little studying. Didn't do a warm-up, and the first LR section (first section of the test) killed me. Must've been at least 8 assumption questions, which are my weakest type. Recovered and ended up with my best score yet on the second LR section at the very end of the test.

jim-green
Posts: 808
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2011 7:55 pm

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby jim-green » Mon Apr 25, 2011 10:45 am

coldshoulder wrote:PT 32
93/175
I took a break since the last test, being lazy with very little studying. Didn't do a warm-up, and the first LR section (first section of the test) killed me. Must've been at least 8 assumption questions, which are my weakest type. Recovered and ended up with my best score yet on the second LR section at the very end of the test.
Congrats! I found the 30s harder than the other sets of 10 (40s, 50s).

User avatar
coldshoulder
Posts: 963
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2011 4:05 pm

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby coldshoulder » Mon Apr 25, 2011 11:28 am

jim-green wrote:
coldshoulder wrote:PT 32
93/175
I took a break since the last test, being lazy with very little studying. Didn't do a warm-up, and the first LR section (first section of the test) killed me. Must've been at least 8 assumption questions, which are my weakest type. Recovered and ended up with my best score yet on the second LR section at the very end of the test.
Congrats! I found the 30s harder than the other sets of 10 (40s, 50s).

I sure hope your right, if these prepare me for the toughest then maybe I can score higher on the more recent tests right before I take the real thing. Time to review.

jim-green
Posts: 808
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2011 7:55 pm

PT40 LR S3 #14

Postby jim-green » Mon Apr 25, 2011 11:36 am

Guys, have you done PT40 LR S3 #14? The correct ans is A, though I picked E. Can't see why A is right becuase the stim doesn't really mention it must be only 1 joker. E looks good too because if the handwriting had been Miller, Franklin would have said the joker is Miller. What am I doing wrong?

xjykybl
Posts: 83
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2011 5:50 pm

Re: PT40 LR S3 #14

Postby xjykybl » Mon Apr 25, 2011 11:58 am

jim-green wrote:Guys, have you done PT40 LR S3 #14? The correct ans is A, though I picked E. Can't see why A is right becuase the stim doesn't really mention it must be only 1 joker. E looks good too because if the handwriting had been Miller, Franklin would have said the joker is Miller. What am I doing wrong?


This attribution in the stem takes from granted that the person and only the person who wrote on the note is the joker. That is: if joker -> wrote on the note, and the contrapostive of this assumption gives the argument in the stem: didn't write -> not joker.
A points out the flaw in this assumption: it's not necessary that the person who wrote on the note is the joker. or the only joker It's very possible that Miller thought of the idea and someone else executed the idea, and both of them are jokers.

What do you think?

jim-green
Posts: 808
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2011 7:55 pm

Re: PT40 LR S3 #14

Postby jim-green » Mon Apr 25, 2011 12:16 pm

xjykybl wrote:This attribution in the stem takes from granted that the person and only the person who wrote on the note is the joker. That is: if joker -> wrote on the note, and the contrapostive of this assumption gives the argument in the stem: didn't write -> not joker. A points out the flaw in this assumption: it's not necessary that the person who wrote on the note is the joker. or the only joker It's very possible that Miller thought of the idea and someone else executed the idea, and both of them are jokers. What do you think?
I think you are very smart. F says Not HM --> Not JM. He is assuming JM ---> HM. And E says he is assuming HM ---> JM, which is not correct. THANKS!

jim-green
Posts: 808
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2011 7:55 pm

Bruising battle with PT44 S2 LRs

Postby jim-green » Mon Apr 25, 2011 2:50 pm

Just emerged quite scathed from a bruising battle with PT44 S2 LR section. I think it is one of the hardest ever. Witness #13, where the correct answer is a negation of a double negative and involves some playing with few and most. Obviously, I chose the incorrect ans D. Anyone know what makes ans A correct? Another loss was #21, which I think the study grp went over last weekend. If I do a Venn diagram, I can figure it out. Did not think to try this when doing the section timed. Anyone do #21 without a Venn diagram?

User avatar
Neidermeyer519
Posts: 244
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 12:20 am

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby Neidermeyer519 » Mon Apr 25, 2011 3:02 pm

Hey guys! Hope everyone had a pretty good weekend. As per the usual I drank myself into oblivion one night and worked the rest of the weekend. About to head to the gym now. I was going to do PT 59 today, but I only slept 5 hours last night and I'd much rather not waste a PT when I can't even concentrate that well.

What is killing me with the LSAT prep is that on RC and LR my problem still seems to stem from my inability to either truly grasp or get interested in some of the questions. I think I'm going to try some natural supplements to see if I can't help myself.

Since I scored a 174 on PT 58, I'm a little worried about how far down I can fall on this next one. lol. Ugh

User avatar
Eichörnchen
Posts: 1119
Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2009 8:51 pm

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby Eichörnchen » Mon Apr 25, 2011 3:12 pm

I'm jealous that I am a teetotaler and pretty completely devoid of funtime and you still crush me score-wise :)




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: jagerbom79, Lahtso Nuggin, Majestic-12 [Bot], ngogirl12 and 2 guests