JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread Forum

[griffin.811]

[quote="pinkertonrl"]I am so confused! I am taking the LSAT in June and was going to sign up for the Kaplan test prep online class, however after reading on many of these forums, I am seeing that there are better alternatives such as the Manhattan test prep courses and books. I am brand new to this whole pre law school histeria as I am coming out fo school this year with a mechanical and nucear engineering degree and just recently decided to pursue the law route. I was wondering what everyone recommends as far as test prep books and courses. Also, I see much regarding practice tests such as specific tests (i.e. 39-68). Where can I find these tests in particular so that I can continue in my studies? Thanks all.[/quote

Biggest advice you will get here...DO NOT USE KAPLAN. Most prefer either manhattan as you mentioned, or powerscores (or a combination). Personally I prefer Manhattan.

Also, if you are disciplined in your approach, I dont think you need to take a course. IMO they only help you get the basics down, but I think most people can read the books and learn these on their own. That said learning styles differ, but dont think taking a class alone is going to get you a 170. Many people on this site have dedicated upwards of 6 months prepping (some have taken a class and others haven't), but again depends on the person, you may pick this stuff up fairly quickly. If possible, save the course $, and use it to buy your books, and PT's. learn as much as you can on your own, then if need be take a course. In any event you didnt waste your money as you will need those items anyway, and you may have saved yourself $1500 or so. (This also depends on your financial position...)

[CardozoLaw09]

Due to popular demand I've got another one for you guys. This one's a classic member of the assumption family:

Company Spokesperson: Although Rotten Tomatoes magazine is written by educated and qualified critics, their claims that our movie Blue Crush II, does not contain any desirable qualities in any amounts is incorrect. This attack on the quality of our production is undermined by the reviews of the millions of Blue Crush II movie goers who are satisfied with the production.

Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

Another credible magazine that has gained widespread reputation in the movie industry has echoed similar claims as Rotten Tomatoes.


An established study confirms that movie goers' satisfaction with a particular film has no correlation with the desirable qualities of the production.

[bdeans91]

Due to popular demand I've got another one for you guys. This one's a classic member of the assumption family:

Company Spokesperson: Although Rotten Tomatoes magazine is written by educated and qualified critics, their claims that our movie Blue Crush II, does not contain any desirable qualities in any amounts is incorrect. This attack on the quality of our production is undermined by the reviews of the millions of Blue Crush II movie goers who are satisfied with the production.

Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

(1) The movie goers are tasteless individuals, uneducated and not qualified, and one must be educated and/or qualified in order to evaluate the desirable qualities in a film.
(2) It is possible for one to enjoy a movie or be satisfied with a movie in spite of that movie having no desirable qualities in any amounts.

[griffin.811]

Nice WC, completely overlooked that, but have def seen similar answer choices on actual tests.

[Daily_Double]

All great points. I'd expect something along the lines of most Blue Crush II movie goers have no way of knowing whether a movie contains any desirable qualities in any amount.

The gap here is the view of experts on desirable qualities vs. the view of millions of people related to satisfaction

So we've got a term shift, desirable qualities to satisfaction, and a potential difference in qualification, movie magazine to lay opinion.

Also I'd expect the correct answer to address the two points above instead of other magazines views, also words like could, it is possible, good points, potential answers, but we are looking for something more absolute. Also I based this off PT 66, S4, Q4, I know it's an early one, but there's not many weaken questions in PT 66, lots of flaws, very few weakens.

[Fianna13]

what a crappy day, turned out I only got 168 yesterday on PT 60. this is so demoralizing.

[rebexness]

what a crappy day, turned out I only got 168 yesterday on PT 60. this is so demoralizing.

Whining about a 90% + score isn't a good look, even on this website.

[CardozoLaw09]

what a crappy day, turned out I only got 168 yesterday on PT 60. this is so demoralizing.

That's a little over dramatic, don't you think?

[A → B ⊨ ¬B → ¬A]

what a crappy day, turned out I only got 168 yesterday on PT 60. this is so demoralizing.

lol

[CardozoLaw09]

Taking PT52 today. Deferring 66 and 67 til later just because I know for a fact I'll remember a lot of the answers for LR since I've taken 66 twice (official and practice) and reviewed 67's LR.

[bdeans91]

Is it going to be possible for me to do 3 PTs per week with review for 2 straight months? or will I be killing myself?

I am doing PithyPike's plan and have 2 months for PTs, planning on doing 20-25 in that time frame.

Warn me now if I am loading too much. I have no idea how strenuous that could be..

(But: no work or school during that time period)

[Daily_Double]

Is it going to be possible for me to do 3 PTs per week with review for 2 straight months? or will I be killing myself?

I am doing PithyPike's plan and have 2 months for PTs, planning on doing 20-25 in that time frame.

Warn me now if I am loading too much. I have no idea how strenuous that could be..

(But: no work or school during that time period)

It sounds pretty awful. I have since cut back on my schedule because I couldn't keep up with the grind. Although I do have school. Things might be different for you, depending upon your review style, among other things.

[RhymesLikeDimes]

what a crappy day, turned out I only got 168 yesterday on PT 60. this is so demoralizing.

Whining about a 90% + score isn't a good look, even on this website.

Eh, I know what they mean though. You think you're finally good for 170+, then you get bitch-slapped with a 16x. It's frustrating.

[bdeans91]

Is it going to be possible for me to do 3 PTs per week with review for 2 straight months? or will I be killing myself?

I am doing PithyPike's plan and have 2 months for PTs, planning on doing 20-25 in that time frame.

Warn me now if I am loading too much. I have no idea how strenuous that could be..

(But: no work or school during that time period)

It sounds pretty awful. I have since cut back on my schedule because I couldn't keep up with the grind. Although I do have school. Things might be different for you, depending upon your review style, among other things.

Okay so would you recommend that I do something more like giving myself a range of 2-3 per week?

I don't review as thoroughly as you. I can review every question of a PT in about as long of a period as the PT takes me.

I also am not as desperate for a 175+ as most people here, because of my GPA and the likelihood that I go to a Canadian school. I'd be elated with a 172-173, so this is kind of why I'm not as paranoid about review.

Also a quick learner lol.

[Daily_Double]

Yeah 2-3 is fine, just not 3 every week for months.

[Squintz805]

Here's a little passage from Powerscore's LRB I'm hoping a few people will get a good laugh from.

"In the majority of LSAT questions with two speakers - one male and the other female. The male makes a mistake or an error of reasoning and the female uses sound reasoning. This does not occur in every problem, but it occurs enough to be more than random. Why? The thinking goes that in order for Law Services to protect themselves against accusations that they are biased against women, they create problems where the male is clearly the one using faulty reasoning."

God Bless America.

[lsatkid007]

Hey guys
I'm currently getting my ass kicked by "organization of the passage" questions in RC. Would someone please give me some pointers.

thanks

[griffin.811]

Hey guys
I'm currently getting my ass kicked by "organization of the passage" questions in RC. Would someone please give me some pointers.

thanks

[rutgers17]

Hi everyone, I'm registered for the powerscore live online class that starts march 17th. I bought the LSAC SuperPrep book to give me a general introduction since I'm pretty new to this whole thing. I thought the explanations were great and I just took my first untimed practice test. I scored 170 on this, but the logic games section killed me time wise (i took an hour and ten minutes). I was under the 35 minutes for the other sections. Obviously the class should help, but does anyone have any quick advice on cutting down time in a major way for logic games?

Also, to anyone who has taken the powerscore online class, I know they advertise that they have official LSAT questions & practice tests. I was wondering if these are the same tests that come in the 10 Actual, Official LSAT Prep Tests books (the 5 or however many books there are) or if it would also be worth investing in those books to get more practice. I just want to make sure I don't spend the extra money and end up with the same practice tests.

Last thing - I was thinking of getting 5 tutoring hours (from Powerscore) in May. Has anyone done this? Is it even worth it to buy such few hours?

Thanks!

[objection_your_honor]

I'm sure many of you drill RC this way, but I think it is very helpful and may help some of you who are missing 5+ and are looking to refine your approach.

One of the hardest parts about improving RC is finding a way to review efficiently. A lot of this difficulty can be overcome by timing passages individually and indicate questions you struggle with by circling them (or whatever notation system you normally use for this). Stop the clock for blind review, allowing yourself to review the passage and even change your answer off to the side. Make sure you can support every answer choice you've selected. Then, after digging deep and being 100% confident in each choice you've made, check the answers for that passage only. Identify problem areas and correct your thinking accordingly. Write your time at the top of the passage, and do the same process for the remaining three passages. At the end, total your time and the number of errors and file it away in whatever way serves you best.

You should still do full RC section runs as well, as pacing and the ability to mentally shift gears is important. But this may allow you to further hone in on erroneous "blind spots" you may have.

[Guerrilla Logic]

I'm sure many of you drill RC this way, but I think it is very helpful and may help some of you who are missing 5+ and are looking to refine your approach.

One of the hardest parts about improving RC is finding a way to review efficiently. A lot of this difficulty can be overcome by timing passages individually and indicate questions you struggle with by circling them (or whatever notation system you normally use for this). Stop the clock for blind review, allowing yourself to review the passage and even change your answer off to the side. Make sure you can support every answer choice you've selected. Then, after digging deep and being 100% confident in each choice you've made, check the answers for that passage only. Identify problem areas and correct your thinking accordingly. Write your time at the top of the passage, and do the same process for the remaining three passages. At the end, total your time and the number of errors and file it away in whatever way serves you best.

You should still do full RC section runs as well, as pacing and the ability to mentally shift gears is important. But this may allow you to further hone in on erroneous "blind spots" you may have.

Thanks for the tip.

[eddyfame]

is anyone preparing in sacramento? i dont need to take any practice tests but will if you want. im mostly in need of bouncing some thought and discuss any LR topics off another person. i'm hoping there's an actual study group in my area. will travel as far as fairfield/stockton/roseville/whatever is less than an hour north, if necessary. thanks.

[rebexness]

Here's a little passage from Powerscore's LRB I'm hoping a few people will get a good laugh from.
...

God Bless America.

My personal favorite is catching the racist logic games.

[Daily_Double]

You know something that I've always wondered if they would pull, is instead of naming the elements for games with different prefixes/first letters, such as Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta, Epsilon, Zeta, Eta, Theta, Iota, Kappa, etc. if they just did words that started with the same letter, but were slightly different just to fuck with us. But that's probably just me thinking of different things that will never happen.

[rebexness]

You know something that I've always wondered if they would pull, is instead of naming the elements for games with different prefixes/first letters, such as Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta, Epsilon, Zeta, Eta, Theta, Iota, Kappa, etc. if they just did words that started with the same letter, but were slightly different just to fuck with us. But that's probably just me thinking of different things that will never happen.

Take it back. Right nao.