JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread Forum

[crazyrobin]

Welcome Feb retakers!!! I am somewhat jealous your experiences with this test. I am never a good standard test taker. So I don't know what my LSAT experience will be.

Also, this is 100 pages!!! We can make it to 200!!

[griffin.811]

I need to go grab a drink after just reading the February thread.

It has everything: excited people, devastated people, suspense!

Haha, sounds like a twilight saga

@ Rizzy you're a clown (based off your recent comments, especially the promise to deck the kid that studied 15 hrs and got a 165 or something...) Hope we end up at the same place.

Everyone take 66 yet? I was a little dissapointed with games (-3 ovrconfidence killed me) and the second LR (-8, I think I got every question after 18 wrong. Its this reason I hate PT'ing after work) oh and of coure RC struggles persist.

DD--> 180, but how'd the rest make out?

(JK DD although I hope you did)

[RhymesLikeDimes]

Got a surprise $300 tax return because Scottrade made a mistake with reporting my stock earnings last year. Finally had the money to get PTs 46-67 and the Cambridge LR PTs 21-40 drilling book, so hopefully I will be able to start actually contributing to the study effort soon.

And welcome to all Feb. re-takers! We all have bad days. Try to think of the Feb. test as being part of your June prep. It really is valuable experience to have actually taken the test at a testing center and gone through that whole process. You'll be better for it.

[A → B ⊨ ¬B → ¬A]

Page 100.

June thread killing it

[Sourrudedude]

.

[wsparker]

retaking from February, 166 first time, aiming for 170! Just registered!

[rebexness]

In for 100.

Drilled a bunch of Adv Linear LGs last night. Killed it, except for the one I had set-up fail with. Naturally, 7Sage video explanations walked me through that round of derpitude.

[Daily_Double]

Everyone take 66 yet? I was a little dissapointed with games (-3 ovrconfidence killed me) and the second LR (-8, I think I got every question after 18 wrong. Its this reason I hate PT'ing after work) oh and of coure RC struggles persist.

I'm going to take it on Saturday, then 52 on Sunday. I just received that Blueprint LG book, so I want to spend my free time today and tomorrow finishing that it and drilling RC.

[kingpack]

Began studying for the Feb. LSAT in mid-December, first time score 156. Took the Kaplan course, seemed to help, but I've ordered the Bibles and going to retake in June, while re-doing the Kaplan course

The Plan: Since I'm going to be working full-time I plan on studying around 2-3 hours a day with the Bibles, with a PrepTest every week, plus the 3-hour Kaplan courses once a week.

With less than 2 months of studying I thought a 156 was pretty solid. With 3 more months of studying/practicing I'm aiming at a next time score between 163-170.

Thoughts, comments?

[Holynorth]

.

[rebexness]

Began studying for the Feb. LSAT in mid-December, first time score 156. Took the Kaplan course, seemed to help, but I've ordered the Bibles and going to retake in June, while re-doing the Kaplan course

The Plan: Since I'm going to be working full-time I plan on studying around 2-3 hours a day with the Bibles, with a PrepTest every week, plus the 3-hour Kaplan courses once a week.

With less than 2 months of studying I thought a 156 was pretty solid. With 3 more months of studying/practicing I'm aiming at a next time score between 163-170.

Thoughts, comments?

You get to redo the Kaplan course for free, right?

Don't worry about the PTs until you have a really firm grasp on the concepts within. Figure out your weak areas and drill them until you are confident. Only then should you move to PTs.

[Daily_Double]

Began studying for the Feb. LSAT in mid-December, first time score 156. Took the Kaplan course, seemed to help, but I've ordered the Bibles and going to retake in June, while re-doing the Kaplan course

The Plan: Since I'm going to be working full-time I plan on studying around 2-3 hours a day with the Bibles, with a PrepTest every week, plus the 3-hour Kaplan courses once a week.

With less than 2 months of studying I thought a 156 was pretty solid. With 3 more months of studying/practicing I'm aiming at a next time score between 163-170.

Thoughts, comments?

Pretty ambitious plan, assuming the three hours a day won't kill you mentally, then the only issue I see is the PT every week. I'm of the opinion that one shouldn't take a PT until one is finished learning the concepts, I'd recommend Manhattan's books after you finish Powerscore, then you reread both, this should take about a month, but it will pay dividends for you. Next I'd suggest drilling, I suppose you could use old PTs, but Cambridge's bundles work very well. Then PTs, you shouldn't take them until you're ready.

[kingpack]

Yeah, the re-do is free. The problem is it's the same material just being re-presented. I'm mainly re-doing it so I can access all of the online materials, PTs, explanations, etc. Also just good I think to consistently review.

Thanks for the advice; I'll hold off on the PTs until I'm fully confident in the concepts.

Began studying for the Feb. LSAT in mid-December, first time score 156. Took the Kaplan course, seemed to help, but I've ordered the Bibles and going to retake in June, while re-doing the Kaplan course

The Plan: Since I'm going to be working full-time I plan on studying around 2-3 hours a day with the Bibles, with a PrepTest every week, plus the 3-hour Kaplan courses once a week.

With less than 2 months of studying I thought a 156 was pretty solid. With 3 more months of studying/practicing I'm aiming at a next time score between 163-170.

Thoughts, comments?

You get to redo the Kaplan course for free, right?

Don't worry about the PTs until you have a really firm grasp on the concepts within. Figure out your weak areas and drill them until you are confident. Only then should you move to PTs.

[kingpack]

Thanks for the advice, that seems to be the current response to the PTs - only tackle them after fully learning the concepts. Will do.

I'll also look into those Manhattan and Cambridge books I've been hearing about.

Ha, and 3 hours is a high-estimate; it'll probably be more around 1.5-2.

Began studying for the Feb. LSAT in mid-December, first time score 156. Took the Kaplan course, seemed to help, but I've ordered the Bibles and going to retake in June, while re-doing the Kaplan course

The Plan: Since I'm going to be working full-time I plan on studying around 2-3 hours a day with the Bibles, with a PrepTest every week, plus the 3-hour Kaplan courses once a week.

With less than 2 months of studying I thought a 156 was pretty solid. With 3 more months of studying/practicing I'm aiming at a next time score between 163-170.

Thoughts, comments?

Pretty ambitious plan, assuming the three hours a day won't kill you mentally, then the only issue I see is the PT every week. I'm of the opinion that one shouldn't take a PT until one is finished learning the concepts, I'd recommend Manhattan's books after you finish Powerscore, then you reread both, this should take about a month, but it will pay dividends for you. Next I'd suggest drilling, I suppose you could use old PTs, but Cambridge's bundles work very well. Then PTs, you shouldn't take them until you're ready.

[objection_your_honor]

I'm redoing PT sections for tests I've taken in the last few weeks. Just took a look at some of the logic game solutions that come bundled with each Cambridge PT. Definitely worth checking out and in line with MLSAT's methods.

If you have it, check out their setup for PT41, G4. I have done this game a few times and never thought to use templates.

EDIT: Actually, while the setup is great, the explanation for Q19 of this game is completely off. The hypo used is actually illegal given the question's conditions. So beware.

[Fianna13]

feels good to be back in with the group. Done with all midterms except 1 take home, then it's time for me to bond with LSAT. With a little over 90 days left, hopefully I can break 170+ by June

[rebexness]

feels good to be back in with the group. Done with all midterms except 1 take home, then it's time for me to bond with LSAT. With a little over 90 days left, hopefully I can break 170+ by June

UGH.

[Fianna13]

Would you rather have the amount of hours we have left instead? LOL. I know that feeling. Been counting down since 60 days ago. FML

[wtrc]

To the retakers here, especially the ones that just joined us from Feb:

Several of you said you were PTing much (6 or more points) higher than the final score. Wondering if you left the test thinking "wow, this was a lot harder than a PT!" or if you felt it was similar. Did you do the PT's in strictly timed conditions and (at least sometimes) 5 sections?

[CardozoLaw09]

Would you rather have the amount of hours we have left instead? LOL. I know that feeling. Been counting down since 60 days ago. FML

lol neither would probably be the most preferable. But at the same time a count down does ignite a sense of urgency which can be a good thing.

[Daily_Double]

I guess A is correct, but the extra information in the stimulus was just unusual.

I saw this question about PT 51, S3, Q12 back there, it bugged me during the test, bugged me during my review, as a result I flagged it for later review, and finally I think I got this other than process of elimination, partly due to the explanations on this thread. But judging by the relative uncertainty of your response, you're still not sold. Honestly, I'm not entirely sold either. To begin with, every answer except A is wrong due to scope, yes even D, mainly because we can't infer anything about what the the prevailing political position is, but we can infer what the stimulus most strongly supports, which is why these articles have been appearing in the papers.

As with most inference questions, there's no core in this stimulus, which is one of the reasons inference questions are tricky. Because without a core, some parts must be less important than others, or the entire stimulus is equally important, doubtful. In this case, I literally had no idea what the second part of the stimulus meant, honestly, I still don't really know what it's getting at, I have an idea now, but regardless of the second part, the answer to this question lies in Winslow's statement, and the commentator's following sentence addressing this statement.

So Winslow says that these articles aren't being published because media hates the environment but because the media likes to challenge political positions. The commentator, almost defensively, seems to agree with Winslow, then goes off on an unrelated tangent. Now if we accept that political orthodoxy is the same as the prevailing political positions, then the commentator's response basically proceeds by saying, Yeah Winslow, you're right, but (goes off on a tangent).

The real question is whether we can make the leap between prevailing political positions and political orthodoxy, based upon my understanding of the English language, political orthodoxy means the established political thought, but is that the same as what the prevailing political position is? What if the prevailing position is in fact unorthodox? It would seem that LSAC would say that it is the same, or at least that it is the most strongly supported answer, which I do agree with, however, I'm still not entirely satisfied, so I'm going to post this in BP's thread to get a second take.

[objection_your_honor]

I guess A is correct, but the extra information in the stimulus was just unusual.

I saw this question about PT 51, S3, Q12 back there, it bugged me during the test, bugged me during my review, as a result I flagged it for later review, and finally I think I got this other than process of elimination, partly due to the explanations on this thread. But judging by the relative uncertainty of your response, you're still not sold. Honestly, I'm not entirely sold either. To begin with, every answer except A is wrong due to scope, yes even D, mainly because we can't infer anything about what the the prevailing political position is, but we can infer what the stimulus most strongly supports, which is why these articles have been appearing in the papers.

As with most inference questions, there's no core in this stimulus, which is one of the reasons inference questions are tricky. Because without a core, some parts must be less important than others, or the entire stimulus is equally important, doubtful. In this case, I literally had no idea what the second part of the stimulus meant, honestly, I still don't really know what it's getting at, I have an idea now, but regardless of the second part, the answer to this question lies in Winslow's statement, and the commentator's following sentence addressing this statement.

So Winslow says that these articles aren't being published because media hates the environment but because the media likes to challenge political positions. The commentator, almost defensively, seems to agree with Winslow, then goes off on an unrelated tangent. Now if we accept that political orthodoxy is the same as the prevailing political positions, then the commentator's response basically proceeds by saying, Yeah Winslow, you're right, but (goes off on a tangent).

The real question is whether we can make the leap between prevailing political positions and political orthodoxy, based upon my understanding of the English language, political orthodoxy means the established political thought, but is that the same as what the prevailing political position is? What if the prevailing position is in fact unorthodox? It would seem that LSAC would say that it is the same, or at least that it is the most strongly supported answer, which I do agree with, however, I'm still not entirely satisfied, so I'm going to post this in BP's thread to get a second take.

- Commentator: Articles criticizing the environmental movement are appearing regularly in newspapers
- Winslow: This is because newspaper editors like to publish articles that challenge prevailing political positions
- Commentator: That's true, but serious environmentalism is not political orthodoxy. So antienvironmentalists aren't dissedents or renegades.

The commentator concedes that editors like to publish articles against orthodoxy, but points out that environmentalism is not orthodoxy.

(A) just identifies the common premise between Winslow and the commentator. (D) is actually the opposite of the commentator's position.

I'm with you that "challenging political orthodoxy" to "controversial" articles is a leap, but I think the language about dissidents and renegades at the end helps to bridge that gap.

[arcanecircle]

Nice read, objection.

"The position being attacked by critics of environmentalism."

Critics of environmentalism are attacking environmentalism. This AC could simply have said Environmentalism is actually the prevailing political position.

Think I eliminated D for the wrong reasons.

[Guerrilla Logic]

Did PT 66 today: 169

RC -2 (thats an all time best! I think I found my personal strategy, just have to refine and drill)
LR -3
LG -4 (wtf. I bubbled wrong on one, and then I spent an absurd amount of time trying to solve #10 by looking at #11's answer choices. that makes the lsat really hard , finally I read #21 to mean maximum instead of minimum)
LR -3 (forgot I skipped #7)

that makes 3 169's in a row. I'm actually excited because most mistakes are easily correctable errors and the others I got down to the right answer and the one I selected and instead of going back to the stim. I just compared the 2 choices.

[Daily_Double]

Did PT 66 today: 169

RC -2 (thats an all time best! I think I found my personal strategy, just have to refine and drill)
LR -3
LG -4 (wtf. I bubbled wrong on one, and then I spent an absurd amount of time trying to solve #10 by looking at #11's answer choices. that makes the lsat really hard , finally I read #21 to mean maximum instead of minimum)
LR -3 (forgot I skipped #7)

that makes 3 169's in a row. I'm actually excited because most mistakes are easily correctable errors and the others I got down to the right answer and the one I selected and instead of going back to the stim. I just compared the 2 choices.

Awesome work, I've been spending all day reviewing RC, some BP LG too, and refining my answer selection process, hopefully I get the same score or lower in that section when I take it Saturday.