Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread
Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2013 2:25 am
Can't seem to find PTs 40-51 in a bundle online. Anyone know where I can purchase them?
Law School Discussion Forums
https://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/
https://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=198695
word.weathercoins wrote:Off topic, but as a lifelong Baltimorean.... tonight is a good night.
brother i did not know my name last night. props to your dedicationCardozoLaw09 wrote:Didn't drink + don't have much to do now that the game's over. Showtime.Daily_Double wrote:It's taking 100% of my mental facilities to type this. How can you take a PT tonight?CardozoLaw09 wrote:PT Sched looks good. Thinking of taking PT 40 tonight. Looking forward to the next review sesh
Cambridge has all the tests: http://www.cambridgelsat.com/preptests/4-section/redecember wrote:Can't seem to find PTs 40-51 in a bundle online. Anyone know where I can purchase them?
Here's a bundle of 41-50 you can save around 10 dollars compared to buying them individually. It's the fourth one from the bottom: http://www.cambridgelsat.com/prep-books/objection_your_honor wrote:Cambridge has all the tests: http://www.cambridgelsat.com/preptests/4-section/redecember wrote:Can't seem to find PTs 40-51 in a bundle online. Anyone know where I can purchase them?
Did about 3/4 of each packet. Saving the rest. Did them after LRB and after MLR. Took me about a month.theycallmefoes wrote:So, some of these Cambridge LR packets are huge, and, when I'm doing particularly well at a certain question type, I find myself getting restless and itching to move on to the next section (especially by the time I get to Q50 or so). I was wondering how you all are incorporating drilling into your prep. (Be warned: I overanalyze everything. Sorry. Humor me, please?)
Are you drilling as you go through MLR and/or LRB? Or are you finishing the guide(s) first?
What about those of you who are retakers and have already been through the guide(s) (at least) once?
Also, are you completely finishing a given Cambridge packet before moving to the next type? Or are you just doing enough to feel comfortable (or maybe a set number) and saving the rest to drill as necessary? Or do you do some from each level of difficulty?
Ahhh, this is part of your magic, isn't it? I haven't gotten through these books in their entirety. Hoping to get them read in their entirety within the next 3 weeks.Daily_Double wrote:Did about 3/4 of each packet. Saving the rest. Did them after LRB and after MLR. Took me about a month.theycallmefoes wrote:So, some of these Cambridge LR packets are huge, and, when I'm doing particularly well at a certain question type, I find myself getting restless and itching to move on to the next section (especially by the time I get to Q50 or so). I was wondering how you all are incorporating drilling into your prep. (Be warned: I overanalyze everything. Sorry. Humor me, please?)
Are you drilling as you go through MLR and/or LRB? Or are you finishing the guide(s) first?
What about those of you who are retakers and have already been through the guide(s) (at least) once?
Also, are you completely finishing a given Cambridge packet before moving to the next type? Or are you just doing enough to feel comfortable (or maybe a set number) and saving the rest to drill as necessary? Or do you do some from each level of difficulty?
Part, definitely not all. Most of my understanding comes from reviewing problems. Speaking of which, I didn't finish my normal review process over the weekend for PT 39, I got lazy I know, don't worry I'm stepping up my game. So I'm going to review it again today. If anyone is still unclear about something let me know, maybe I can help. Although I won't get back to you until this evening due to classes.BlaqBella wrote:Ahhh, this is part of your magic, isn't it? I haven't gotten through these books in their entirety. Hoping to get them read in their entirety within the next 3 weeks.Daily_Double wrote: Did about 3/4 of each packet. Saving the rest. Did them after LRB and after MLR. Took me about a month.
There's a guy in this thread that likes it.objection_your_honor wrote:Also, can anyone speak to 7Sage's blind review method? I have done this so far with RC sections and it seems very powerful.
Necessary, IMHO. More difficult to master than SA and I realized once necessary fell in place, SA followed.objection_your_honor wrote:Should I drill necessary or sufficient assumptions first?
How do you review? Do you write out each of the wrong questions?Daily_Double wrote:Part, definitely not all. Most of my understanding comes from reviewing problems. Speaking of which, I didn't finish my normal review process over the weekend for PT 39, I got lazy I know, don't worry I'm stepping up my game. So I'm going to review it again today. If anyone is still unclear about something let me know, maybe I can help. Although I won't get back to you until this evening due to classes.BlaqBella wrote:Ahhh, this is part of your magic, isn't it? I haven't gotten through these books in their entirety. Hoping to get them read in their entirety within the next 3 weeks.Daily_Double wrote: Did about 3/4 of each packet. Saving the rest. Did them after LRB and after MLR. Took me about a month.
I note whenever I'm unsure, I mentally note why I am unsure. Eventually I will grade it. I note that I got a question wrong. I don't note what the correct answer is. Then I go back to the problems I'm unsure about and the ones I got wrong, usually there is a large overlap between the two. I figure out why the answer I selected was not the correct answer. I write a solution to the problem, then I check my solution against answers online, Manhattan, 7sage, etc. and against the problem's credited answer.BlaqBella wrote: How do you review? Do you write out each of the wrong questions?
For now, I peruse MLSAT website and try and do self-evaluations. Also try and identify the Prem and Conc...see how that right AC works and why my chosen answer does not. Any other tips that you found helpful? I need to make some big gains in LR. Its what's holding me back for mid-160s!
I think there is an important difference. For diagnostic purposes, your answer still is what you chose in the moment. That's still your grade. But being able to reach 100% certainty either for or against every answer choice, A through E — writing out why it is 100% wrong, or 100% right — forces you to engage with the question at a level you weren't able to in the given time. You can iron out how you should have been thinking about the question, and that accuracy will inform your next timed run.BlaqBella wrote:This blind review method, how does it really help??
The fact is you incorrectly chose the answer the first time. You don't get do-overs on the real thing. Reviewing blindly to then realize a mistake seems futile to me. How does this differentiate from grading your answers and reviewing after the fact?
Sure. The only real difference is blind review allows you a second shot at bringing the whole test up to a 180 before grading. The timed test is of course your diagnostic score (revisions should be done on the side), but the ability to bring everything up to 100% certainty before grading can show you how wrong or right you are in your process.BlaqBella wrote:I grade and review incorrect questions without writing the correct answer choice. Is this what is considered blind review?
Oh wow, hmm. I will try this next time I take an exam. Thank you!objection_your_honor wrote:Sure. The only real difference is blind review allows you a second shot at bringing the whole test up to a 180 before grading. The timed test is of course your diagnostic score (revisions should be done on the side), but the ability to bring everything up to 100% certainty before grading can show you how wrong or right you are in your process.BlaqBella wrote:I grade and review incorrect questions without writing the correct answer choice. Is this what is considered blind review?
If everything is at 100% certainty and you are still missing questions, that is indicative of a serious systematic flaw in your reasoning.
So in other words, re-do the whole test again but more slowly and methodically?Daily_Double wrote:I note whenever I'm unsure, I mentally note why I am unsure. Eventually I will grade it. I note that I got a question wrong. I don't note what the correct answer is. Then I go back to the problems I'm unsure about and the ones I got wrong, usually there is a large overlap between the two. I figure out why the answer I selected was not the correct answer. I write a solution to the problem, then I check my solution against answers online, Manhattan, 7sage, etc. and against the problem's credited answer.BlaqBella wrote: How do you review? Do you write out each of the wrong questions?
For now, I peruse MLSAT website and try and do self-evaluations. Also try and identify the Prem and Conc...see how that right AC works and why my chosen answer does not. Any other tips that you found helpful? I need to make some big gains in LR. Its what's holding me back for mid-160s!
I think noting the correct answer then going back to the problem is a flawed approach. Anyone with a basic understanding of the LSAT can go back, knowing the correct answer, and give a decent reason of why that answer is correct, but it takes more to go back and figure out why you did what you did, what you should have done, and then to evaluate yourself based on what the answer actually is.