eliztudorr wrote:a question for everyone. When you are reviewing for past wrong questions what exactly do you do? thanks!
I do it pretty quickly. Usually review it fresh (within 24 hours, usually immediately), and then log the incorrect pattern of thought into a "Weak Point Analysis" file for each respective section type.
I almost never care about the specific question (because I won't see it on the LSAT I write in June), but instead the pattern of thought that screwed me over. Use it as a reference experience so that I don't use the same incorrect line of thinking again. It is absolutely unbelievable how effective this has been.
Here is an example for you:
• Process: read game while setting up diagram and variables, write down rules, plug rules into diagram, make essential inferences, do questions (and use hypotheticalfs when the questions are not initially easy via setup)
• Solid inferences end up becoming essential!! You need to always scan for if inferences are available since they end up saving time, but you can skip out on inferences if they don’t pop out, there are none to be made, or they will take too long and are too sketchy. Learn how to recognize when inferences are and aren’t possible.
o Remember that, in many cases, an extra 2 minutes of setup/inferences could save you 5 total minutes of answering questions.
o Do the inferences unless the time to do them takes longer than the time it may save
• Only make an inference if you are quite certain about it. Making a brash inference will mess you up and you will need to restart the game
• When you are initially reading the game, always be writing stuff down. Don’t sit there passively, because it could waste up to a minute. If at least be writing down the variable sets, the rules, or making inferences.
• Don’t expect inferences to do something for you. Especially on local games, sometimes you just need to do a hypothetical based on the conditions.
• Make sure you familiarize yourself well with the rules!!!
• If you do a hypothetical and it answers the question, you don’t need to double check. Just take it!
• Don’t mess up the initial rules! Good example is rule 1 of PT 1, game 2! Easy to mess that up.
• First check if you can answer the question quickly, and if not, then is the right time to diagram and do hypotheticals
• Make sure you don’t gloss over and/or miss rules (examples: PT 2, Game 2, Rule 5 and question 12… PT 15, Game 3, Rule 3 and question 16)
• Read the rules carefully (especially wording)
o For instance, PT 15 game 1 → “The speeches delivered by HJK no matter what their order, cannot form a sequence of three consecutive speeches”. This doesn’t mean JK or HK can’t be together. It is only violated if all 3 in a row.
• Read questions carefully – maybe underline key words like EXCEPT, CAN, MUST, CANNOT, etc. to etch it in your head. Sometimes you are searching for what cannot be true when they ask what can, etc.
o Don’t gloss over the questions when initially reading them
o “EXCEPT” can get you
o “ONLY” is a key word (see PT 15, game 3, question 17 – if you ignore ‘only’ it screws you over)
o Don’t confuse people’s names!!! Or letters in general!!!
o Jumping to conclusions and skipping reading the entire question can screw you over
o Example of fucking yourself over: PT 10, Game 2, Question 16 – answered it if it was asking what “CANNOT” be true, even though it asks for what CAN be true
• Speed is a little bit of a weak point.
• Don’t get lazy with diagramming “not laws”!
• Just like LR, tempting answers will be put down before the right answer. Make sure you look at them ALL! (Example: PT 23, Game 1, questions 2 and 4).
• Don’t make up rules in your head, especially for local questions!!! And for local questions, be clear on the new rules/conditionals addressed!!!
o Example of creating a general made up rule is in PT 29, game 4… on question 23 I somehow made up in my head that P had to come after O, which made no sense based on the rules!
• You can use past answers to help you fill in scenarios for later questions! Example: PT 34, game 3
• Know the difference between “exactly” and “at least” (again, read the rules carefully): J being exactly 2 groups behind G is not the same as being at least 2 groups behind G.
• Do not fuck up the initial diagram, or this will cause huge problems. You can sacrifice a little time to be careful here. Example is your initial attempt of PT 29, Game 3 (lost 2 minutes here for confusing H with G).
• Make sure you actually look back at the rules, otherwise why write them out?
• Always mini-diagram when new rules are introduced or sample ordering/grouping would help answer the question. Mini-diagram next to the question, not at the master diagram.
• Don’t just sit there waiting for your inferences to answer a question. Sometimes you have to just take action and do something. Hypothetical or what have you.
• Grouping: make a separate list for rules and inferences (one column for each). List out all of the rules first, and THEN the inferences.
o As a matter of fact, do the same for Linear as well… Always write out the initial rules and then make inferences on conditionals and such…
• General and especially Grouping/Conditionals: recycle inferences! But at the same time, there comes a point where you must ask yourself about the time/information trade-offs. If you have enough information to attack the questions, then using time for extra inferences is likely more damaging than it is good.
• If it is a Moving game, don’t try to peg down all of the slots!!! Always leads to wasted time…
• Be aware of the numerical distribution!!! Key in almost every game.