JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread Forum

[CardozoLaw09]

My first PT 180 today. Keep fighting the good fight.

Congrats!

[052220151]

My first PT 180 today. Keep fighting the good fight.

Congrats!

[The-Specs]

My first PT 180 today. Keep fighting the good fight.

Congrats man. I hope to be joining you in the next two weeks.

[Otunga]

Took my first PT today; sort of on a whim. It basically affirmed to me that I ought to take the test in October, and do a re-take in December if necessary. But, at the moment, I am signed up for the June test and I've studied for a little over three weeks. Cold test was a 153.

PT32
Raw: 74
Scaled: 161
LR1: -7
RC: -5
LG: -7
LR2: -7

The LR is discouraging, but expected. I went into studying (prior to my diagnostic) thinking that it'd be the easiest section for me - turns out it's consistently the most difficult in studying, drilling, and now testing. I went -15 on the cold test, so to have such marginal improvement adds to the discouragement, but I guess that's the timing factor. The LG score is also discouraging. However, I have just started drilling timed LGs now that I've gotten the untimed accuracy down. And to make a further excuse - what was with how some of the rules were articulated? Language was a little loaded and vague. If it makes any difference, I've been drilling LGs from preptests 1-20. As for RC, all I've done is a few untimed sections. Can definitely get better.

Probably shouldn't have done a PT after such little studying, but I wanted to see where I was. If I'm somehow PTing in the 170s in a month, then perhaps I'll take in June. But certainly all this cramming isn't ideal. And I'm sure most of you would say to take the test in October.

[SteelPenguin]

Took my first PT today; sort of on a whim. It basically affirmed to me that I ought to take the test in October, and do a re-take in December if necessary. But, at the moment, I am signed up for the June test and I've studied for a little over three weeks. Cold test was a 153.

PT32
Raw: 74
Scaled: 161
LR1: -7
RC: -5
LG: -7
LR2: -7

The LR is discouraging, but expected. I went into studying (prior to my diagnostic) thinking that it'd be the easiest section for me - turns out it's consistently the most difficult in studying, drilling, and now testing. I went -15 on the cold test, so to have such marginal improvement adds to the discouragement, but I guess that's the timing factor. The LG score is also discouraging. However, I have just started drilling timed LGs now that I've gotten the untimed accuracy down. And to make a further excuse - what was with how some of the rules were articulated? Language was a little loaded and vague. If it makes any difference, I've been drilling LGs from preptests 1-20. As for RC, all I've done is a few untimed sections. Can definitely get better.

Probably shouldn't have done a PT after such little studying, but I wanted to see where I was. If I'm somehow PTing in the 170s in a month, then perhaps I'll take in June. But certainly all this cramming isn't ideal. And I'm sure most of you would say to take the test in October.

I'd say you're making good progress. LR will just take drilling the various games, and most people don't have a problem getting "stuck" at -7s indefinitely. RC-5 with confidence that you will improve is encouraging too. LG is the easiest to improve with practice. It's good that you're open to waiting for October if you realize you aren't where you need to be.

I have to ask based on your name, are you shooting for Harvard?

[Otunga]

Yeah. Will apply to H/Y if I have the requisite score. (LSAC GPA's 3.9ish)

Though mostly I had no other ideas for a name and I like his character.

[SteelPenguin]

Yeah. Will apply to H/Y if I have the requisite score. (LSAC GPA's 3.9ish)

Though mostly I had no other ideas for a name and I like his character.

From what's been said on TLS, Yale and Harvard both care about averaged LSATS, so keep that in mind when deciding on Yale/Harvard. As far as other usernames, I think you could have also gone with Park, Park, & Park. Otunga works too though.

I just finished reviewing PT 40 and have had trouble with a couple of questions. Would anyone be willing to help me out? Here's where I'm stuck:

LR1: 20: I was leaning towards D, but ultimately picked E, seeing flaws in both. When I read D, the word "one" seems to refer to a BSN, not just an N. I guess that is better than answer E anyway, but it still looked like it slightly deviated from the reasoning in the argument because of this.

LR2: 25: I chose A. Is this wrong because the last sentence is not pessimistic enough? Why is D correct? Unavoidable looked too strong to me.

[mindarmed]

Yeah. Will apply to H/Y if I have the requisite score. (LSAC GPA's 3.9ish)

Though mostly I had no other ideas for a name and I like his character.

From what's been said on TLS, Yale and Harvard both care about averaged LSATS, so keep that in mind when deciding on Yale/Harvard. As far as other usernames, I think you could have also gone with Park, Park, & Park. Otunga works too though.

I just finished reviewing PT 40 and have had trouble with a couple of questions. Would anyone be willing to help me out? Here's where I'm stuck:

LR1: 20: I was leaning towards D, but ultimately picked E, seeing flaws in both. When I read D, the word "one" seems to refer to a BSN, not just an N. I guess that is better than answer E anyway, but it still looked like it slightly deviated from the reasoning in the argument because of this.

LR2: 25: I chose A. Is this wrong because the last sentence is not pessimistic enough? Why is D correct? Unavoidable looked too strong to me.

PT 40, LR 1, #20

Core here is: Can make car with 2x efficiency + make car that meets safety standards for side-impact crashes -> can do both

The flaw is just because you can do either x or y doesn't necessarily mean it is possible to do both x and y.

D: Expresses that flaw accurately, gives two statements then says because each of those things could be true then both are true

PT 40, LR 2, #25

Argument: To do X, we need to do Y. But Y is very hard to do, so we won't do A.

For ans. choice A, it's a good argument but the structure is different. It's possible that all employees will cooperate thus improving safety.

For ans. choice D, the argument implies large cost overruns are unacceptable -> vehicles not as safe as they could be (X to do Y, Y wont happen, X wont happen)

[NoWorries]

Can someone explain PT 36 LRI 18? Isn't D just repeating part of the argument?

[CardozoLaw09]

Can someone explain PT 36 LRI 18? Isn't D just repeating part of the argument?

D doesn't repeat it since the stim says "IF the date reported in a recent study are correct....."

lower blood cholesterol levels ----> lowers risk of hardening arteries ----> lowers risk of arterial blockage due to blood clots (this is the conclusion)

data correct ---> moderate exercise lowers cholesterol levels

Therefore: Moderate exercise lowers the risk of blockage of arteries due to bloodclots

So D triggers the sufficient condition which in turn leads to the conclusion that moderate exercise lowers the risk of blockage of the arteries due to blood clots.

Let me know if this doesn't clear it up.

[redecember]

Averaging around 38 minutes per RC section, but getting the desired score. When I strictly time myself for 35 minutes, my RC score drops SIGNIFICANTLY, mainly because Im rushing through the last passage. Any advice/drills on reducing time?

[SteelPenguin]

Yeah. Will apply to H/Y if I have the requisite score. (LSAC GPA's 3.9ish)

Though mostly I had no other ideas for a name and I like his character.

From what's been said on TLS, Yale and Harvard both care about averaged LSATS, so keep that in mind when deciding on Yale/Harvard. As far as other usernames, I think you could have also gone with Park, Park, & Park. Otunga works too though.

I just finished reviewing PT 40 and have had trouble with a couple of questions. Would anyone be willing to help me out? Here's where I'm stuck:

LR1: 20: I was leaning towards D, but ultimately picked E, seeing flaws in both. When I read D, the word "one" seems to refer to a BSN, not just an N. I guess that is better than answer E anyway, but it still looked like it slightly deviated from the reasoning in the argument because of this.

LR2: 25: I chose A. Is this wrong because the last sentence is not pessimistic enough? Why is D correct? Unavoidable looked too strong to me.

PT 40, LR 1, #20

Core here is: Can make car with 2x efficiency + make car that meets safety standards for side-impact crashes -> can do both

The flaw is just because you can do either x or y doesn't necessarily mean it is possible to do both x and y.

D: Expresses that flaw accurately, gives two statements then says because each of those things could be true then both are true

PT 40, LR 2, #25

Argument: To do X, we need to do Y. But Y is very hard to do, so we won't do A.

For ans. choice A, it's a good argument but the structure is different. It's possible that all employees will cooperate thus improving safety.

For ans. choice D, the argument implies large cost overruns are unacceptable -> vehicles not as safe as they could be (X to do Y, Y wont happen, X wont happen)

Thank you very much. I think I let slight differences throw me off i these questions too much, and I sometimes miss the larger picture. I'll probably be doing the Cambridge Parallel Flaw and Parallel questions this week.

[mindarmed]

you got it brother

[Arielle]

Hi everyone,

I am debating whether I should take the June 2013 LSAT or the October 2013 LSAT. I will be starting a prep course with Princeton Review in May and the course will finish June 8th. Prior to this course I have not really studied for the LSAT, besides taking two practice tests in which I scored mid-150's. I plan on studying 24/7 during the month of May but I am worried that it still won't be enough to get me a 170+ on the June LSAT. I am also hesitant to take the June test because I would only have 2 days between my course and the test to study on my own.
On the other hand, I don't want to finish my course in June and then forget everything I learned by the October test date. Also, I will be starting my fourth year of undergrad in September so I am worried my courses will distract me from preparing for and doing well on the October LSAT.

Basically, I have two questions:
1. How much studying (in weeks, hours, # of practice tests, etc.) is sufficient to be prepared for the LSAT?
2. Which test date do you think is most realistic or preferable given my situation?

Thanks in advance for any replies!
-Arielle

[mindarmed]

Hi everyone,

I am debating whether I should take the June 2013 LSAT or the October 2013 LSAT. I will be starting a prep course with Princeton Review in May and the course will finish June 8th. Prior to this course I have not really studied for the LSAT, besides taking two practice tests in which I scored mid-150's. I plan on studying 24/7 during the month of May but I am worried that it still won't be enough to get me a 170+ on the June LSAT. I am also hesitant to take the June test because I would only have 2 days between my course and the test to study on my own.
On the other hand, I don't want to finish my course in June and then forget everything I learned by the October test date. Also, I will be starting my fourth year of undergrad in September so I am worried my courses will distract me from preparing for and doing well on the October LSAT.

Basically, I have two questions:
1. How much studying (in weeks, hours, # of practice tests, etc.) is sufficient to be prepared for the LSAT?
2. Which test date do you think is most realistic or preferable given my situation?

Thanks in advance for any replies!
-Arielle

Cancel your course with Princeton Review.

The amount of studying is dependent on your ability, so basically YMMV.
I would take in October and purchase all three Manhattan guides.

Take the money you would have spent on the Princeton Review class and purchase all of the LR & LG packets offered by Cambridge LSAT. Cambridge groups the question types together and provides a bundle of the different types. e.g. weaken, strengthen, flaw, necessary assumption. etc

[snapdragon25]

Hi everyone,

I am debating whether I should take the June 2013 LSAT or the October 2013 LSAT. I will be starting a prep course with Princeton Review in May and the course will finish June 8th. Prior to this course I have not really studied for the LSAT, besides taking two practice tests in which I scored mid-150's. I plan on studying 24/7 during the month of May but I am worried that it still won't be enough to get me a 170+ on the June LSAT. I am also hesitant to take the June test because I would only have 2 days between my course and the test to study on my own.
On the other hand, I don't want to finish my course in June and then forget everything I learned by the October test date. Also, I will be starting my fourth year of undergrad in September so I am worried my courses will distract me from preparing for and doing well on the October LSAT.

Basically, I have two questions:
1. How much studying (in weeks, hours, # of practice tests, etc.) is sufficient to be prepared for the LSAT?
2. Which test date do you think is most realistic or preferable given my situation?

Thanks in advance for any replies!
-Arielle

Cancel your course with Princeton Review.

The amount of studying is dependent on your ability, so basically YMMV.
I would take in October and purchase all three Manhattan guides.

Take the money you would have spent on the Princeton Review class and purchase all of the LR & LG packets offered by Cambridge LSAT. Cambridge groups the question types together and provides a bundle of the different types. e.g. weaken, strengthen, flaw, necessary assumption. etc

+1000 I took that Princeton Review course (the 6 week one) and it was definitely not enough time to let the concepts sink in. Quality studying > tons of hours/weeks IMO, but you really can't cram this type of information into 6 weeks, or at least I couldn't.

[Chambo]

I've drilled a good deal of timed sections lately. I'm consistently getting -1 on LG while finishing with time to spare. I just can't quite get it to -0!

Any advice on finally kicking that last one mistake you consistently make? Also, I'm pretty weak on making deductions and prefer a plug-and-chug method. This handicaps me on some games. Is there a good way to specifically practice getting deductions?

[SteelPenguin]

I've drilled a good deal of timed sections lately. I'm consistently getting -1 on LG while finishing with time to spare. I just can't quite get it to -0!

Any advice on finally kicking that last one mistake you consistently make? Also, I'm pretty weak on making deductions and prefer a plug-and-chug method. This handicaps me on some games. Is there a good way to specifically practice getting deductions?

To work on deductions and inferences, I've been writing out all the contrapositives when I drill. It's time consuming, and not something I plan on using during the real test if I can avoid it, but it has made it easier for me to make deductions more quickly. I've also had an easier time visualizing the contrapositives in my head, which has helped with inferences.

Sorry if these are too basic to help, but I've found that reviewing the basic foundations again has helped my understanding. For what it's worth, I'm scoring between -0 and -3 now.

[jmjm]

There seem to be many here who are scoring consistently almost perfect in RC well within 35 mins. Can you please post how you divide time between reading and ques to wrap it with a good chunk of time to spare? I am almost always going over by 5 mins in RC. If one reads a 7 question passage in 3 mins then doing the passage questions while referring to the passage takes another 6-7 minutes apparently.

[objection_your_honor]

Reading in 2-4 minutes is fine. But you should wrap up the questions in 4-6 minutes. Consider 8:45 as the standard, just like the logic games. Generally a couple of the passages will be easier and will allow you to put time in the bank.

I think a lot of the pacing of RC comes down to trusting yourself. There should always be a few questions per passage that you can answer confidently without even referring to the passage to check.

[052220151]

PT 53 - 94 Raw/175 Scaled

LR1 -1 - I thought this section destroyed me. I finished at the five minute mark
LG -0 - Finished in about 24 minutes.
LR2 -2 - I thought I did well, I did. Finished right after the five minute mark
RC -3 -I thought this section was insanely hard and that I really screwed the pooch, I was pleasantly surprised.

I was really happy with the 175, because I thought i did sub 170 work. This is 5 or so in a row in the low - mid 170s. I'm happy I'm gaining, but I'm more pleased with the consistency.

[CardozoLaw09]

PT 53 - 94 Raw/175 Scaled

LG1 -1 - I thought this section destroyed me. I finished at the five minute mark
LG -0 - Finished in about 24 minutes.
LG2 -2 - I thought I did well, I did. Finished right after the five minute mark
RC -3 -I thought this section was insanely hard and that I really screwed the pooch, I was pleasantly surprised.

I was really happy with the 175, because I thought i did sub 170 work. This is 5 or so in a row in the low - mid 170s. I'm happy I'm gaining, but I'm more pleased with the consistency.

No wonder you did so well, that PT had three LG's dawg - I can't wait to take PT53. Gonna be my first 180

[052220151]

PT 53 - 94 Raw/175 Scaled

LG1 -1 - I thought this section destroyed me. I finished at the five minute mark
LG -0 - Finished in about 24 minutes.
LG2 -2 - I thought I did well, I did. Finished right after the five minute mark
RC -3 -I thought this section was insanely hard and that I really screwed the pooch, I was pleasantly surprised.

I was really happy with the 175, because I thought i did sub 170 work. This is 5 or so in a row in the low - mid 170s. I'm happy I'm gaining, but I'm more pleased with the consistency.

No wonder you did so well, that PT had three LG's dawg - I can't wait to take PT53. Gonna be my first 180

Fuck!!!! I obviously meant LR for them, I'll edit it. I wish that the LSAT was 5 sections of LG, they could time them all and only give me 30 minutes. I would get 180 everytime.

[CardozoLaw09]

PT 53 - 94 Raw/175 Scaled

LG1 -1 - I thought this section destroyed me. I finished at the five minute mark
LG -0 - Finished in about 24 minutes.
LG2 -2 - I thought I did well, I did. Finished right after the five minute mark
RC -3 -I thought this section was insanely hard and that I really screwed the pooch, I was pleasantly surprised.

I was really happy with the 175, because I thought i did sub 170 work. This is 5 or so in a row in the low - mid 170s. I'm happy I'm gaining, but I'm more pleased with the consistency.

No wonder you did so well, that PT had three LG's dawg - I can't wait to take PT53. Gonna be my first 180

Fuck!!!! I obviously meant LR for them, I'll edit it. I wish that the LSAT was 5 sections of LG, they could time them all and only give me 30 minutes. I would get 180 everytime.

loll

[MKX]

So I've been reviewing my PSLRB and I've made incredible improvement in 2 days thanks to 2 chapters. Incredible how I was missing such simple concepts. Once it was explained to me, I laugh at the mistakes I made in earlier PTs. Even some of the questions in the books I think to myself "these cannot seriously be on the test"

But then again I look at these questions untimed for now. Timed I might be a little bit more stressed. Just really excited to see progress is all.