June 2011 Study Group

FloridaCoastalorbust
Posts: 1302
Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2011 4:43 pm

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby FloridaCoastalorbust » Wed Apr 27, 2011 10:53 pm

Eichörnchen wrote:Congrats Florida! What kind of fellowship? I'll be around that area this summer so I'll drop by and say hey ;) unfortunately I think car is your best bet in that area, but I must admit I don't know much about the bus system (I'm in DC a lot so I'm more familiar with that neck of the woods). Maybe you could make a fast friend who knows the way and offer them $100 to take you :) You might be more at ease than a cab. Would it be possible to rent a car?

Edited because congrats are followed by (!) not (?) hehehe


I'm 21 so I dunno if renting is possible. And I'll basically be doing public policy analysis/writing. To be honest I don't stand entirely square with some of the philosophical positions but I couldn't really say no. $ and policy WE is almost nonexistent as a UG. You should take at UVA Charlottesville and drive me!!!!!!!!!!!!

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

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby Eichörnchen » Wed Apr 27, 2011 11:10 pm

FloridaCoastalorbust wrote:
Eichörnchen wrote:Congrats Florida! What kind of fellowship? I'll be around that area this summer so I'll drop by and say hey ;) unfortunately I think car is your best bet in that area, but I must admit I don't know much about the bus system (I'm in DC a lot so I'm more familiar with that neck of the woods). Maybe you could make a fast friend who knows the way and offer them $100 to take you :) You might be more at ease than a cab. Would it be possible to rent a car?

Edited because congrats are followed by (!) not (?) hehehe


I'm 21 so I dunno if renting is possible. And I'll basically be doing public policy analysis/writing. To be honest I don't stand entirely square with some of the philosophical positions but I couldn't really say no. $ and policy WE is almost nonexistent as a UG. You should take at UVA Charlottesville and drive me!!!!!!!!!!!!

Wow I forgot us youngins can't rent cars haha. That sucks. But that will be awesome to put on your resume, dang. And sorry pal I have a test center I can visit beforehand and someone to drive me the half hour just cause I don't feel like it. :D

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

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby soj » Wed Apr 27, 2011 11:11 pm

My testing center is literally right next door. :lol:

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

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby Eichörnchen » Wed Apr 27, 2011 11:22 pm

soj wrote:My testing center is literally right next door. :lol:

Ooh so unfair :twisted:

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

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby soj » Thu Apr 28, 2011 12:47 am

Drilled LR today. I'm feeling great about the results because 1) I made only one silly error due to misreading, 2) I did great on pacing despite not encountering any previously encountered Qs (that I could remember, anyway) and 3) all of my mistakes were preventable ones that were nearly within reach of my reasoning abilities. I'm getting there!

PT25 S2 LR1: -2
PT25 S4 LR2: -1
PT26 S2 LR1: -1
PT26 S3 LR2: -1

Slaying those PT44 demons. :lol:

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

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby xjykybl » Thu Apr 28, 2011 1:05 am

Just finish PT 33.
LR1: -1
RC: -3
LR2: -0
LG: -0
Raw: -4
Scaled: 179
Totally skipped one question in LR. I shouldn't have disrupted the order of questions.
I don't think it's an authentic score though, because I have done PT 33 about 20 days ago.
I definitely need to work on RC more. I still got 3 wrong even if I have done it before.

How do you guys deal with PTs you have done before? I am at PT51 now, and don't want to rush through PT 50s in the next 10 days.

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

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby soj » Thu Apr 28, 2011 1:13 am

xjykybl wrote:Just finish PT 33.
LR1: -1
RC: -3
LR2: -0
LG: -0
Raw: -4
Scaled: 179
Totally skipped one question in LR. I shouldn't have disrupted the order of questions.
I don't think it's an authentic score though, because I have done PT 33 about 20 days ago.
I definitely need to work on RC more. I still got 3 wrong even if I have done it before.

How do you guys deal with PTs you have done before? I am at PT51 now, and don't want to rush through PT 50s in the next 10 days.

Congrats, that's really amazing!

Personally, the only sections that are spoiled once I take them are LR sections, and that's only because I extensively analyze every Q I get wrong. Yes, prior experience helps with LG and RC and might inflate your scores, but not to the extent that they no longer require you to think critically. Most of the time I only remember the gist and don't remember the particular Qs or ACs anyway.

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

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby xjykybl » Thu Apr 28, 2011 1:36 am

soj wrote:
xjykybl wrote:Just finish PT 33.
LR1: -1
RC: -3
LR2: -0
LG: -0
Raw: -4
Scaled: 179
Totally skipped one question in LR. I shouldn't have disrupted the order of questions.
I don't think it's an authentic score though, because I have done PT 33 about 20 days ago.
I definitely need to work on RC more. I still got 3 wrong even if I have done it before.

How do you guys deal with PTs you have done before? I am at PT51 now, and don't want to rush through PT 50s in the next 10 days.

Congrats, that's really amazing!

Personally, the only sections that are spoiled once I take them are LR sections, and that's only because I extensively analyze every Q I get wrong. Yes, prior experience helps with LG and RC and might inflate your scores, but not to the extent that they no longer require you to think critically. Most of the time I only remember the gist and don't remember the particular Qs or ACs anyway.

Thanks~ You are right.
I guess for LR sections, I will just focus on the underlying reasoning of each question or type of question, as well as classification within each question type. After all, the same line of reasoning would occur in LR questions over and over again.
What I do right now, is manually classify questions into types and subtypes, and adding notes to each one. For instance, assumption questions take me extra time, I am now trying to summarize subtypes of assumption questions and try to derive my own set of rules to attack them. I hope I am not wasting my time. Need to work harder :evil:

FloridaCoastalorbust
Posts: 1302
Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2011 4:43 pm

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby FloridaCoastalorbust » Thu Apr 28, 2011 1:57 am

Wildly inconsistent as usual. PT 30:

LR1 21/26
LR2 20/25
LG 23/23
RC 21/27

Raw 85 Scaled 167.

Getting worried about RC. I've neglected it far too long and whenever I break -4 or below I feel it's due to luck. It's hard to study a section that you know you suck at. And annoying to think that my diag RC was -7 and I sometimes exceed that even now.

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

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby Viper » Thu Apr 28, 2011 9:32 am

geverett wrote:Would love to hear an explanation for PT 52 Section 1 #3 complete with conditional logic diagram of the answer choice and the stimulus to show how they match up.

Also would love to hear an explanation of PT 52 Section 3 #20


These are explanations straight from Kaplan, so don't blame if they suck lol. I haven't taken this PT yet so i can't help you personally.

Section 1, #3:
There’s formal logic at work here, but begin as always: work with one piece of the argument at once. We have a neat, straightforward conclusion: Joe took his car to K & L auto to be fixed. We can characterize that as an assertions of fact: something definitely happened. Match that against the conclusions in your answer choices. (A) asserts that something happened (Emily took her medication), so we’ll keep that for now. (B) asserts that something DIDN’T happen; eliminate. (C) and (E) both assert that something occurred, but (D) introduces a qualifier—throw it out. With A, C and E remaining, look at the evidence. There’s a chain reaction at work here: if Joe’s car was vacuumed, K & L employees did it. If K & L employees did it, Joe took his car to K & L for service. (A) is a match—if Emily’s water glass is wet, she drank out of it this morning. If she drank out of it this morning, she took her medication. (C) lacks the trigger/effect relationship, and (E) introduces an element of choice not present in the stimulus.


Section 3, #20:
The first step is always to identify what seems to be wrong, but in this case half that work is done for us— the stem tells us that we’re looking to explain why the first alternative is rarely used. The stimulus tells us the first alternative is cheaper, so it seems it would make sense to use it, yet it doesn’t happen. We need an answer choice that gives us a possible reason for that apparent discrepancy. (A) doesn’t do it—in fact, it makes it harder to understand why we’re using radical reconstruction in most cases. (B) is irrelevant—amount of traffic has nothing to do (at least, nothing we’ve been told) with the approach chosen. (C) is another argument for performing continuous maintenance, even at a shoddy level—but we don’t. (D) Again, this presents a reason that we should be using continuous maintenance rather than explaining why we’re not. Only correct answer choice (E) makes sense of what’s going on—it’s easy to let ongoing maintenance slip by since the damage is slow to occur.

Hope this helps. I've noticed these Kaplan explanations don't always do it for me, but they are usually better than nothing.

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

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby jim-green » Thu Apr 28, 2011 11:10 am

soj wrote:Personally, the only sections that are spoiled once I take them are LR sections, and that's only because I extensively analyze every Q I get wrong. Yes, prior experience helps with LG and RC and might inflate your scores, but not to the extent that they no longer require you to think critically. Most of the time I only remember the gist and don't remember the particular Qs or ACs anyway.
Soj, do you remember how many you got right on PT A's S1 LR? I did it last year and just redid it, and got 4 wrong on the redo. I am wondering how you did on it, and whether I should be getting more correct, especially on a redo.

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

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby soj » Thu Apr 28, 2011 1:00 pm

jim-green wrote:Soj, do you remember how many you got right on PT A's S1 LR? I did it last year and just redid it, and got 4 wrong on the redo. I am wondering how you did on it, and whether I should be getting more correct, especially on a redo.

I got -2. Got 14 and 25 wrong.

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

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby mickeyD » Thu Apr 28, 2011 2:16 pm

Pleasant suprise: ordered the ManhattanLSAT LR Guide, which came in today. Included in the box was the Logic Games and Reading Comp guide! I contacted them about the mistake and they said that I can just keep them for free!

Gonna finish up my homework for my philosophy class (formal logic, helpfulness is overrated) and then dive into this thing.

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

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby Eichörnchen » Thu Apr 28, 2011 2:51 pm

mickeyD wrote:Pleasant suprise: ordered the ManhattanLSAT LR Guide, which came in today. Included in the box was the Logic Games and Reading Comp guide! I contacted them about the mistake and they said that I can just keep them for free!

Gonna finish up my homework for my philosophy class (formal logic, helpfulness is overrated) and then dive into this thing.

Haha that's awesome!

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

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby 99.9luft » Thu Apr 28, 2011 3:14 pm

mickeyD wrote:Pleasant suprise: ordered the ManhattanLSAT LR Guide, which came in today. Included in the box was the Logic Games and Reading Comp guide! I contacted them about the mistake and they said that I can just keep them for free!

Gonna finish up my homework for my philosophy class (formal logic, helpfulness is overrated) and then dive into this thing.


Must have been Noah's exploits :P

Manhattan LSAT Noah
Posts: 746
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2010 8:43 am

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby Manhattan LSAT Noah » Thu Apr 28, 2011 4:45 pm

99.9luft wrote:
mickeyD wrote:Pleasant suprise: ordered the ManhattanLSAT LR Guide, which came in today. Included in the box was the Logic Games and Reading Comp guide! I contacted them about the mistake and they said that I can just keep them for free!

Gonna finish up my homework for my philosophy class (formal logic, helpfulness is overrated) and then dive into this thing.


Must have been Noah's exploits :P

I wish I was that slick!

User avatar
chrisnyoder
Posts: 22
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 10:38 pm

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby chrisnyoder » Thu Apr 28, 2011 5:17 pm

mickeyD wrote:Pleasant suprise: ordered the ManhattanLSAT LR Guide, which came in today. Included in the box was the Logic Games and Reading Comp guide! I contacted them about the mistake and they said that I can just keep them for free!

Gonna finish up my homework for my philosophy class (formal logic, helpfulness is overrated) and then dive into this thing.


That is nice. I just got the MLSAT on LR today and so far I'm pretty impressed with their approach.

User avatar
tmon
Posts: 1242
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2011 10:52 pm

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby tmon » Thu Apr 28, 2011 5:24 pm

I got my first 170!!! :D

Just did PT 56, and as a way of compromising between my urge to know my score, and wanting to do the test again tomorrow, untimed and without bias, I scored it using the cambridge LSAT test tracker sheet, and zoomed in so I didn't see WHICH questions I got wrong. So I don't know where I missed questions (probably RC...) but wooohooo!

I'm done for the day. And going to get a beer from the fridge.

:D Cheers all!

User avatar
pkpop
Posts: 119
Joined: Fri May 23, 2008 9:09 pm

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby pkpop » Thu Apr 28, 2011 5:24 pm

Facing the demons today. I printed out the LG section to 62. I debated about just retaking the whole test, but I want to actually slow down and see what exactly made me so uncomfortable on test day. I'm going to take a short break then loosely time myself on the section alone followed by a complete breakdown of each of the games. I think doing this section now will give me a good boost of inspiration to study hard this next month.

Manhattan LSAT Noah
Posts: 746
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2010 8:43 am

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby Manhattan LSAT Noah » Thu Apr 28, 2011 5:27 pm

tmon wrote:I got my first 170!!! :D

Just did PT 56, and as a way of compromising between my urge to know my score, and wanting to do the test again tomorrow, untimed and without bias, I scored it using the cambridge LSAT test tracker sheet, and zoomed in so I didn't see WHICH questions I got wrong. So I don't know where I missed questions (probably RC...) but wooohooo!

I'm done for the day. And going to get a beer from the fridge.

:D Cheers all!

Congrats!

FloridaCoastalorbust
Posts: 1302
Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2011 4:43 pm

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby FloridaCoastalorbust » Thu Apr 28, 2011 5:52 pm

pkpop wrote:Facing the demons today.


Every time I practice RC I feel that way. Wish it was as engaging as LG

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

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby mickeyD » Thu Apr 28, 2011 5:54 pm

October study group thread is up. Here's to none of us ever having to post in there.

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

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby coldshoulder » Thu Apr 28, 2011 6:20 pm

Finals + LSAT is killing me. I'm thinking I'll just do some individual sections today...don't want to ruin a practice test but also don't want my brain to stop thinking about the LSAT.
Please god, let it be next wednesday so I can finally just focus on this test.

FloridaCoastalorbust
Posts: 1302
Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2011 4:43 pm

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby FloridaCoastalorbust » Thu Apr 28, 2011 6:31 pm

coldshoulder wrote:Finals + LSAT is killing me. I'm thinking I'll just do some individual sections today...don't want to ruin a practice test but also don't want my brain to stop thinking about the LSAT.
Please god, let it be next wednesday so I can finally just focus on this test.


No joke! I'll be finished up next Friday, can't wait for much needed pure LSATing

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

Re: June 2011 Study Group

Postby xjykybl » Thu Apr 28, 2011 7:04 pm

Anyone care to look at 20 in LR 1 of PT 33?
I am revewing this PT and wasn't sure whether my reasoning is right, even if I chose the right choice.
So the question is "weaken the argument against the predominant theory about northen cave paintings EXCEPT". The wording is very confusing, especially under time pressure. So I understood it as asking for answer choices that either " support the predominant theory about northen cave painting" or "support author's argument or not sufficient to weaken author's argument".

A): The cave painters' primary diet was land animals, so, naturally, the cave paintings didn't contain any sea animals. Therefore, it's consistent with the predominant theory.
B): Since author's argument is based on incomplete data, the argument is thus not sound enough. therefore, weaken the author's argument.
C): The cave paintings contain land animals. According to the author, the cave paintings don't depict sea animals. If it's true that sea animals are not depicted, and if the painters did make the long journey, they may well have had some sea animals. But the lack of depiction of sea animals is not consistent with the predominant theory.
D): Since meats can be preserved very well, painters may just ate the preserved meat instead of the sea animals. Therefore, the lack of sea animals in the paintings is well justified, and the predominant theory is ok.
E): paintings reflect the diet, which is meat of land animals.

plus, I was a bit confused about the phrase "if they were to make the long journey to and from the islands". The way I understand it is: 1) it's not necessary that they actually made the long journey to and from the islands 2) it's possible that they made the long journey to and from the islands. So the author's hypothesis is: if they have to make the long journey, they have to eat sea animals. But the validity of the premise that "they have made the long journey" is not neccesarily true.

This PT has another confusing wording in the LG. question 20:
"could be false except", I took it as "must be true".
Any thoughts? Thanks in advance




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Alexandros, bearedman8, dontsaywhatyoumean, drumpf, goldenbear2020, Google [Bot], LewD33, maybeman, SunDevil14, VMars, xtremenite and 31 guests