Retake advice please - focusing on LR and RC Forum

[agcl0913]

I'm planning to retake in June after getting a 168 in February. I'm aiming for mid-170s this time. My study plan the first go-round really wasn't as focused as it should have been. I read through the LRB and LGB, then did about 15 5-section, timed PTs for a month before February. I went through each wrong answer and wrote out why the right answer was right and why the answer I'd picked was wrong. Did this mentally for the questions I'd been uncertain about. I saw some improvement in my score doing this (163 diagnostic to average of 172, highest 174), but never felt super confident.

Looking back, I can see the biggest problem with my studying was not focusing on my areas of weakness - LR and RC. LR has always been my weakest section - anywhere from -1 to -9 per section, -4 average. RC is -1 to -4. LG is always -0 unless I forget to track time. Feb. LG threw me off though.

I've read through a bunch of threads on the board about different study options. I'm currently trying to decide between dropping $ for Velocity and adding in extra drilling by type, or buying the Manhattan LR and RC guides and drilling by type. It sounds like people on TLS have had good success with Velocity and get a lot of great material. Questions: Does anyone have thoughts on which choice would be better? Suggestions on something different?

My rough plan would be to focus on drilling LR and RC for the next two months. Add in a full PT once a week in month 2 to gauge progress. Spend the last month just doing PTs and reviewing. Thanks!

[LexLeon]

I highly recommend SuperPrep.

[noggo10]

I would maybe go back through the LRB but really spend a lot of time on it and dedicate yourself to it. It helped me a lot.

[sums]

I didn't use either of those 2 but I did the "drilling by type" deal. I had books of all the LR questions ever asked and all RC questions. I would just go literally spend an hour or two doing nothing but LR, then 45 min/hour of RC passages, etc. I think it helped me a lot both with endurance and with those particular questions. Also, I would see which types of LR you struggle with the most. Are they mostly flaw questions? Assumption? Strengthen/weaken? etc. I know when I started to PT I'd be around -5 on all the LR sections, and 75% of the questions I missed were either flaw or the "find the premise" type questions. It really helped me to know exactly what subcategory of LR I was missing so I could just bomb those questions during practice. On the actual test I ended up being -1 and -3 so it definitely helped.

[Clearly]

Man, combined we would make one hell of an LSAT haha. I almost always go -0 or -1 on LR, but am average at LG (so far!) I took the Feb as well and did worse then I expected, granted we'll never know the curve, the LR on that test had more tricky questions then in recent years. Granted I've always had a knack for LR my advice would be as follows

Practice. LR is just as pattern based as LG... The more you do them and review them, the easier recognizing the pattern becomes. There's only so many reasons wrong answers can be wrong and right answers right. You'll learn them with time.

Watch for any extreme wording at all and proceed with extreme caution.

The LR section has been very consistent for a long time in terms of difficulty for those proficient with it. If your swinging anywhere between -1 and -9, I suspect there's a particular question type you struggle with, and your score changes based on how many of them show up, but that's just a hunch, it's only one explanation for such varied results. The important thing to do with the lsat (and life) is find your flaws, and fix them. You're heading in the right direction, you know it's in LR, now find out what in particular is bothering you. Do a few timed sections and note the question type of each you get wrong.

Hows your timing on LR?

[TRex77]

Dude i was about to make this same thread. I am about to start studying for a re take in June and am just going to concentrate on LR and RC.

I don't think there are really any strategies to improve RC besides just reading long, dense, and boring articles and building up your stamina.

I am also trying to come up with a study plan for the next 2 months. Not really going to do much LG cause I got a -2 on that on my test in Dec. and am pretty confident in my abilities with that section.

My main problem is with the last 5 questions of LR. I averaged around -5 on my PTs (bombed and got a -8 and -11 i think on the Dec. test) but always would get about 3/5 of the last questions wrong. Don't know how to improve on those last hard questions.

I didn't use either of those 2 but I did the "drilling by type" deal. I had books of all the LR questions ever asked and all RC questions. I would just go literally spend an hour or two doing nothing but LR, then 45 min/hour of RC passages, etc. I think it helped me a lot both with endurance and with those particular questions. Also, I would see which types of LR you struggle with the most. Are they mostly flaw questions? Assumption? Strengthen/weaken? etc. I know when I started to PT I'd be around -5 on all the LR sections, and 75% of the questions I missed were either flaw or the "find the premise" type questions. It really helped me to know exactly what subcategory of LR I was missing so I could just bomb those questions during practice. On the actual test I ended up being -1 and -3 so it definitely helped.

What is the book called with all the LR by type? SOunds really nice.

[TRex77]

Man, combined we would make one hell of an LSAT haha. I almost always go -0 or -1 on LR, but am average at LG (so far!) I took the Feb as well and did worse then I expected, granted we'll never know the curve, the LR on that test had more tricky questions then in recent years. Granted I've always had a knack for LR my advice would be as follows

Practice. LR is just as pattern based as LG... The more you do them and review them, the easier recognizing the pattern becomes. There's only so many reasons wrong answers can be wrong and right answers right. You'll learn them with time.

Watch for any extreme wording at all and proceed with extreme caution.

The LR section has been very consistent for a long time in terms of difficulty for those proficient with it. If your swinging anywhere between -1 and -9, I suspect there's a particular question type you struggle with, and your score changes based on how many of them show up, but that's just a hunch, it's only one explanation for such varied results. The important thing to do with the lsat (and life) is find your flaws, and fix them. You're heading in the right direction, you know it's in LR, now find out what in particular is bothering you. Do a few timed sections and note the question type of each you get wrong.

Hows your timing on LR?

Have you checked out the Manhattan LG book? It is very very good. Quick read and it improved my LG skills drastically.

[agcl0913]

Thanks everyone! I didn't look at SuperPrep the first time, but I'm going to go through it this week.

I had tried to identify my trouble question types during my prep the first time, but it honestly seemed so all over the map that I didn't really make an effort to focus. Problematic for sure. 60% of the mistakes I had on LR were either Weaken/Strengthen, Assumption, Justify or Flaw questions. I'm going to drill everything but I'm definitely going to focus on these question types. There have been a lot of great posts on the forum recently about identifying patterns and drilling. I think I'll get the Manhattan book just to have extra help.

Hows your timing on LR?

My timing is good. I go through the first 4 pages in 15 minutes, then flip to the last page and work backwards for the last 20. That system seems to psych me out less. I usually finish with a minute to spare. When I took it in Feb though, I overthought some of the Q's in the first half of LRI, so I was rushing at the end of the section.

I had books of all the LR questions ever asked and all RC questions.

What is the book called with all the LR by type? SOunds really nice.

I second that Q. I've seen the Cambridge LR by type bundle, but that only goes up to PT 38.

[agcl0913]

Man, combined we would make one hell of an LSAT haha. I almost always go -0 or -1 on LR, but am average at LG (so far!)

Haha. That would be awesome. Maybe we should petition LSAC I actually find LG pretty fun.... (when it's not test day of course). If there are any tips I can give you on LG, let me know and I'll try my best to answer them.