JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

User avatar
AT9
Posts: 1305
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 6:00 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby AT9 » Sun Jun 02, 2013 4:29 pm

wtrcoins3 wrote:Just made conversation with someone else studying for this at a coffee shop. He had a Barron's book. Anyway, he's been studying for over a month, so he's "as ready as he can be."

...sometimes I forget that there exist LSAT takers outside of TLS.


I spoke with a co-worker recently who's re-taking it at the same center I am. Her first go-around she scored in the low 150's. She was pissed about that because her score put her in like the 40th to 50th percentile, but one more point would have put her into the 50th-65th percentile category (didn't make sense to me, either), which would look SOOO much better when applying to law schools. Granted, she's a Cuban lesbian, so her 150 something may as well be a 160 something to me, Mr. White Male Middle Class.

Another one of my co-workers (headed to Cumberland in the fall) got something like 8 right out of the entire CR section and was proud of himself for getting something like 11 or 12 right in LG. Made me feel like an expert on the LSAT.

User avatar
sublime
Posts: 15418
Joined: Sun Mar 10, 2013 12:21 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby sublime » Sun Jun 02, 2013 4:31 pm

..

User avatar
AT9
Posts: 1305
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 6:00 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby AT9 » Sun Jun 02, 2013 4:43 pm

sublime wrote:
AT9 wrote:
wtrcoins3 wrote:Just made conversation with someone else studying for this at a coffee shop. He had a Barron's book. Anyway, he's been studying for over a month, so he's "as ready as he can be."

...sometimes I forget that there exist LSAT takers outside of TLS.


I spoke with a co-worker recently who's re-taking it at the same center I am. Her first go-around she scored in the low 150's. She was pissed about that because her score put her in like the 40th to 50th percentile, but one more point would have put her into the 50th-65th percentile category (didn't make sense to me, either), which would look SOOO much better when applying to law schools. Granted, she's a Cuban lesbian, so her 150 something may as well be a 160 something to me, Mr. White Male Middle Class.

Another one of my co-workers (headed to Cumberland in the fall) got something like 8 right out of the entire CR section and was proud of himself for getting something like 11 or 12 right in LG. Made me feel like an expert on the LSAT.



Neither cuban or lesbian are significant bumps, but yes, it must be really difficultbeing a white male.

/i'm a white male too.


Not trying to start a political discussion there or say it's difficult being a white male (it isn't). I'm was just saying when it comes to admissions, she probably doesn't need the same score I would to get into the same schools - she was fully aware of that herself.

Anyway, the point being that there are many test takers who will be happy with a 150's score, something so foreign to TLS.

User avatar
wtrc
Posts: 2057
Joined: Mon May 30, 2011 9:37 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby wtrc » Sun Jun 02, 2013 5:05 pm

CardozoLaw09 wrote:I think I'd dish out 50 bucks for a fresh PT #retakerproblems


I feel your pain. Currently in the middle of PT 67 on a break (Zones is next...) and if I had a computer on me I'd post the futurama fry meme of "NOT SURE IF IMPROVED.... OR JUST REMEMBER ANSWERS..." :P

User avatar
westjr
Posts: 42
Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2013 12:19 am

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby westjr » Sun Jun 02, 2013 5:07 pm

AT9 wrote:
sublime wrote:
AT9 wrote:
wtrcoins3 wrote:Just made conversation with someone else studying for this at a coffee shop. He had a Barron's book. Anyway, he's been studying for over a month, so he's "as ready as he can be."

...sometimes I forget that there exist LSAT takers outside of TLS.


I spoke with a co-worker recently who's re-taking it at the same center I am. Her first go-around she scored in the low 150's. She was pissed about that because her score put her in like the 40th to 50th percentile, but one more point would have put her into the 50th-65th percentile category (didn't make sense to me, either), which would look SOOO much better when applying to law schools. Granted, she's a Cuban lesbian, so her 150 something may as well be a 160 something to me, Mr. White Male Middle Class.

Another one of my co-workers (headed to Cumberland in the fall) got something like 8 right out of the entire CR section and was proud of himself for getting something like 11 or 12 right in LG. Made me feel like an expert on the LSAT.



Neither cuban or lesbian are significant bumps, but yes, it must be really difficultbeing a white male.

/i'm a white male too.


Not trying to start a political discussion there or say it's difficult being a white male (it isn't). I'm was just saying when it comes to admissions, she probably doesn't need the same score I would to get into the same schools - she was fully aware of that herself.


White male here, hoping to get in on this commiseration:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t9uZpbkpESs

User avatar
mvonh001
Posts: 581
Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2012 3:49 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby mvonh001 » Sun Jun 02, 2013 5:34 pm

wtrcoins3 wrote:
CardozoLaw09 wrote:I think I'd dish out 50 bucks for a fresh PT #retakerproblems


I feel your pain. Currently in the middle of PT 67 on a break (Zones is next...) and if I had a computer on me I'd post the futurama fry meme of "NOT SURE IF IMPROVED.... OR JUST REMEMBER ANSWERS..." :P



I just finished PT 67 - got a 163, I completely fucked up on Games, zone got my with -4, RC went well except for !Kong which gave me a total of -6 for RC, Then LR did a number on me as well, missed 2 simple layups in LR1 but went -5, and again missed 2 simple ones in LR 2, but went again -5.

I dont know what im going to do about missing these simple ones, it really infuriates me. The good news is I practiced before the test with PT59 LR1 and went -9 which blew me away.

I hate the fact that my score should have been a, RC = -3, LG = -2, LR = -3, and LR = -3. But because of simple mistakes in LR and hard ass RC and "Zones" LG my -11 total went to a -20. Granted I should just take it for what it's worth and not dwell on what could'a been, but its really hard to do that when I go to review LR and see that 4 of my -10 were correctly circled but I went with another choice; and they were all on #'s < 14. I guess I need to drill the basics more tomorrow. And work on LG, and Work on RC.

Side Note - for MBT questions do you avoid answers that restate the premise?

So tomorrow I'm going to drill Cambridge level 1's and 2's for more types, Drill complex ordering, Distributed and Undistributed grouping, and Simple Ordering (to keep it fresh), I'm also going to do PT 52 RC, and Review PT67, and maybe take PT 59 LR2 (depending how I feel, and whether or not I want to be disappointed again before going into PT on Tuesday). Then I'm going to start my Tuesday off with PT 62 LR2, PT 63, and more drilling/review/reading of LSAT Trainer (which I havent gotten a chance to do yet).

User avatar
SteelPenguin
Posts: 1090
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2012 12:37 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby SteelPenguin » Sun Jun 02, 2013 5:36 pm

PT 62 was rough.

175 / 94 (-8)
RC: -4
LR: -1
LG: -3
LR: -0

It's not that the score was out of my range, it's just that I thought LG was ridiculous and wasn't sure what the curve was. Again, this was a retake, but I haven't seen this test since Oct-Novish, so I'm happy with it. I know everyone talks about stained glass, but I thought LG 3 was much harder (-1 on LG 2, -2 on LG 3, with another two correct guesses).

User avatar
ManoftheHour
Posts: 3402
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2013 6:03 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby ManoftheHour » Sun Jun 02, 2013 5:37 pm

mvonh001 wrote:

I just finished PT 67 - got a 163, I completely fucked up on Games, zone got my with -4, RC went well except for !Kong which gave me a total of -6 for RC, Then LR did a number on me as well, missed 2 simple layups in LR1 but went -5, and again missed 2 simple ones in LR 2, but went again -5.

I dont know what im going to do about missing these simple ones, it really infuriates me. The good news is I practiced before the test with PT59 LR1 and went -9 which blew me away.

I hate the fact that my score should have been a, RC = -3, LG = -2, LR = -3, and LR = -3. But because of simple mistakes in LR and hard ass RC and "Zones" LG my -11 total went to a -20. Granted I should just take it for what it's worth and not dwell on what could'a been, but its really hard to do that when I go to review LR and see that 4 of my -10 were correctly circled but I went with another choice; and they were all on #'s < 14. I guess I need to drill the basics more tomorrow. And work on LG, and Work on RC.

Side Note - for MBT questions do you avoid answers that restate the premise?

So tomorrow I'm going to drill Cambridge level 1's and 2's for more types, Drill complex ordering, Distributed and Undistributed grouping, and Simple Ordering (to keep it fresh), I'm also going to do PT 52 RC, and Review PT67, and maybe take PT 59 LR2 (depending how I feel, and whether or not I want to be disappointed again before going into PT on Tuesday). Then I'm going to start my Tuesday off with PT 62 LR2, PT 63, and more drilling/review/reading of LSAT Trainer (which I havent gotten a chance to do yet).


It sucks getting -20 so close to the big day, but it happened to me last night as well (with PT 62 and the damn stained glass game). We just have to keep pushing. I'll be seeing that zones game everyone's talking about pretty soon.

User avatar
ManoftheHour
Posts: 3402
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2013 6:03 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby ManoftheHour » Sun Jun 02, 2013 5:39 pm

SteelPenguin wrote:PT 62 was rough.

175 / 94 (-8)
RC: -4
LR: -1
LG: -3
LR: -0

It's not that the score was out of my range, it's just that I thought LG was ridiculous and wasn't sure what the curve was. Again, this was a retake, but I haven't seen this test since Oct-Novish, so I'm happy with it. I know everyone talks about stained glass, but I thought LG 3 was much harder (-1 on LG 2, -2 on LG 3, with another two correct guesses).


LG 3 was hard because I browsed through the stimulus. A stupid rookie mistake. On the retry, it went smoothly once I figured out that the seminars were HELD IN SUCCESSIVE ORDER.

User avatar
mvonh001
Posts: 581
Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2012 3:49 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby mvonh001 » Sun Jun 02, 2013 5:42 pm

ManoftheHour wrote:
mvonh001 wrote:

I just finished PT 67 - got a 163, I completely fucked up on Games, zone got my with -4, RC went well except for !Kong which gave me a total of -6 for RC, Then LR did a number on me as well, missed 2 simple layups in LR1 but went -5, and again missed 2 simple ones in LR 2, but went again -5.

I dont know what im going to do about missing these simple ones, it really infuriates me. The good news is I practiced before the test with PT59 LR1 and went -9 which blew me away.

I hate the fact that my score should have been a, RC = -3, LG = -2, LR = -3, and LR = -3. But because of simple mistakes in LR and hard ass RC and "Zones" LG my -11 total went to a -20. Granted I should just take it for what it's worth and not dwell on what could'a been, but its really hard to do that when I go to review LR and see that 4 of my -10 were correctly circled but I went with another choice; and they were all on #'s < 14. I guess I need to drill the basics more tomorrow. And work on LG, and Work on RC.

Side Note - for MBT questions do you avoid answers that restate the premise?

So tomorrow I'm going to drill Cambridge level 1's and 2's for more types, Drill complex ordering, Distributed and Undistributed grouping, and Simple Ordering (to keep it fresh), I'm also going to do PT 52 RC, and Review PT67, and maybe take PT 59 LR2 (depending how I feel, and whether or not I want to be disappointed again before going into PT on Tuesday). Then I'm going to start my Tuesday off with PT 62 LR2, PT 63, and more drilling/review/reading of LSAT Trainer (which I havent gotten a chance to do yet).


It sucks getting -20 so close to the big day, but it happened to me last night as well (with PT 62 and the damn stained glass game). We just have to keep pushing. I'll be seeing that zones game everyone's talking about pretty soon.


It's not that it is soo difficult, it's just that the setup is kinda weird -at least to me- but you will see it soon enough.

Do you guys prefer to do Sections during drilling that you get bad scores on? Or do you prefer to go -0~-3? Obviously everyone wants to go -0, but do you guys get psyched out when you hit a -6 during a section that you are drilling?

User avatar
CardozoLaw09
Posts: 1749
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2010 1:58 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby CardozoLaw09 » Sun Jun 02, 2013 5:43 pm

mvonh001 wrote:Side Note - for MBT questions do you avoid answers that restate the premise?


Which question in particular are you referring to?

User avatar
mvonh001
Posts: 581
Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2012 3:49 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby mvonh001 » Sun Jun 02, 2013 5:44 pm

CardozoLaw09 wrote:
mvonh001 wrote:Side Note - for MBT questions do you avoid answers that restate the premise?


Which question in particular are you referring to?


I didn't really have anyone in mind specifically, and now I realize that I meant to say MBT and MSS... I can look one up if you would like... just let me know. But I am asking for a general rule.

User avatar
CardozoLaw09
Posts: 1749
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2010 1:58 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby CardozoLaw09 » Sun Jun 02, 2013 5:53 pm

mvonh001 wrote:
CardozoLaw09 wrote:
mvonh001 wrote:Side Note - for MBT questions do you avoid answers that restate the premise?


Which question in particular are you referring to?


I didn't really have anyone in mind specifically, and now I realize that I meant to say MBT and MSS... I can look one up if you would like... just let me know. But I am asking for a general rule.


Sure. It's hard to give a general rule like that because most of the times it depends on the specific question.

Also, the openness of zones actually makes it a really easy game. What's difficult about it, and DD mentioned this earlier, is the convoluted language in the prompt that could easily subject one to misinterpretation; not to mention the fact that it's the last game in the section so you may be pressed for time.

User avatar
dubster101
Posts: 87
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2012 2:43 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby dubster101 » Sun Jun 02, 2013 5:59 pm

Just got my first 180 on PT 62! Huge confidence booster in the week leading up to test day. Usually score in the 173-177 range, so this was a nice surprise. Found the RC really easy, although the games were a bit harder like others were saying, but I was able to pull through. One of the questions I missed on RC was really dumb (kind of knew it wasn't right when picking it...but you know how it goes), and I originally had the right answer on the one LR1 question I missed (decided to change last minute). Very pleased overall though.

RC -2
LR1 -1
LG -0
LR2 -0

Raw: 99, Scaled: 180

Still have PTs 61 and 63-68 to take before test day.

jmjm
Posts: 329
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 1:59 am

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby jmjm » Sun Jun 02, 2013 7:01 pm

Are cambridge books to be used for drilling only LR or others too?
So far, I've only used PS LR and LG books and manhattan RC/LR books; And while doing these I mostly left out questions that were marked to have appeared in specific LSATs to get a realistic sense of my score through PTs. For real questions i used PTs separately.

If there's a list of LSAT questions graded by difficulty for lr, lg, rc, then that could be useful. Is there such a list?

User avatar
isuperserial
Posts: 519
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2012 11:49 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby isuperserial » Sun Jun 02, 2013 7:25 pm

jmjm wrote:Are cambridge books to be used for drilling only LR or others too?
So far, I've only used PS LR and LG books and manhattan RC/LR books; And while doing these I mostly left out questions that were marked to have appeared in specific LSATs to get a realistic sense of my score through PTs. For real questions i used PTs separately.

If there's a list of LSAT questions graded by difficulty for lr, lg, rc, then that could be useful. Is there such a list?


To your last question, I don't know about overall difficulty, or how one would even quantify that. However, questions in LR and to a lesser extent LG are arranged loosely from easiest to hardest in the section.

User avatar
wtrc
Posts: 2057
Joined: Mon May 30, 2011 9:37 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby wtrc » Sun Jun 02, 2013 8:01 pm

So I retook 67 today, took it last several months ago. Regarding the stained glass vs. zones discussion earlier... stained glass really killed me on 62... that whole section did (but the -14 curve made up for it, somewhat, at least). I actually found zones to be a pretty standard game, especially considering it was the 4th in the section. The LG itself I found not bad, but potential was there for it to be really screwy. Not bad probably because I knew what was coming and had seen it before... wondering how I would have seen it if I was taking the real thing.

The main confusing part of the rules was the "no more than 3 subzones each" bit-- at first I wasn't sure if it was talking about overall or per zone. But then, whenever that rule was needed in the questions, was clear from the answer choices that it meant overall.

User avatar
dubster101
Posts: 87
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2012 2:43 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby dubster101 » Sun Jun 02, 2013 8:38 pm

wtrcoins3 wrote:So I retook 67 today, took it last several months ago. Regarding the stained glass vs. zones discussion earlier... stained glass really killed me on 62... that whole section did (but the -14 curve made up for it, somewhat, at least). I actually found zones to be a pretty standard game, especially considering it was the 4th in the section. The LG itself I found not bad, but potential was there for it to be really screwy. Not bad probably because I knew what was coming and had seen it before... wondering how I would have seen it if I was taking the real thing.

The main confusing part of the rules was the "no more than 3 subzones each" bit-- at first I wasn't sure if it was talking about overall or per zone. But then, whenever that rule was needed in the questions, was clear from the answer choices that it meant overall.


The key inference to the stained glass game is realizing that any window that has yellow in it has to have purple in it as well. This means that at least one of the windows has to have the combination of yellow/purple. If you make this inference, it reduces the difficulty significantly.
Last edited by dubster101 on Sun Jun 02, 2013 8:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
SteelPenguin
Posts: 1090
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2012 12:37 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby SteelPenguin » Sun Jun 02, 2013 8:41 pm

ManoftheHour wrote:
SteelPenguin wrote:PT 62 was rough.

175 / 94 (-8)
RC: -4
LR: -1
LG: -3
LR: -0

It's not that the score was out of my range, it's just that I thought LG was ridiculous and wasn't sure what the curve was. Again, this was a retake, but I haven't seen this test since Oct-Novish, so I'm happy with it. I know everyone talks about stained glass, but I thought LG 3 was much harder (-1 on LG 2, -2 on LG 3, with another two correct guesses).


LG 3 was hard because I browsed through the stimulus. A stupid rookie mistake. On the retry, it went smoothly once I figured out that the seminars were HELD IN SUCCESSIVE ORDER.


I realized that from the start but still really struggled. I'll go through it later tonight.

lawschoolplease1
Posts: 149
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2012 1:56 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby lawschoolplease1 » Sun Jun 02, 2013 8:50 pm

will you guys please please take a look at my post on weaken questions:

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=210509

User avatar
Pneumonia
Posts: 1644
Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2012 3:05 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby Pneumonia » Sun Jun 02, 2013 9:04 pm

back to back tests on Friday:
PT 55-178 (-3/100)
PT 56- 179 (-3/100)

back to back tests today:
PT 61- 172 (-9/101)
PT 64- 173 (-10/101)

anyone have thoughts on this? I'm a bit disconcerted by the fact that my lower scores are on the more recent tests. Are the tests from the 60's much different from those in the 50's? I was under the impression that 52-68 were all "modern" and roughly equivalent. Just looking for some insight or reinforcement. Thanks.

User avatar
SteelPenguin
Posts: 1090
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2012 12:37 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby SteelPenguin » Sun Jun 02, 2013 9:09 pm

This is frustrating. For PT 62, I interpreted game 3 as having six talks instead of 5. I thought there was a comma somewhere where there wasn't, so that's why I couldn't figure the game out.

User avatar
TheMostDangerousLG
Posts: 1547
Joined: Thu Nov 22, 2012 4:25 am

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby TheMostDangerousLG » Sun Jun 02, 2013 9:10 pm

Pneumonia wrote:anyone have thoughts on this? I'm a bit disconcerted by the fact that my lower scores are on the more recent tests. Are the tests from the 60's much different from those in the 50's? I was under the impression that 52-68 were all "modern" and roughly equivalent. Just looking for some insight or reinforcement. Thanks.


+1

User avatar
okaygo
Posts: 726
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2013 1:23 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby okaygo » Sun Jun 02, 2013 9:34 pm

PT 65 has thoroughly pissed me off. I'm doing horribly on LR for some reason and I really don't need this 7 days before my exam. Can anyone explain the answer to S4 #16?

Also can someone help me with a strategy for 'which of the following accurately expresses the conclusion' questions. Does the right answer normally include some form of the critics opinion or am I mistaken?
Last edited by okaygo on Sun Jun 02, 2013 9:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
wtrc
Posts: 2057
Joined: Mon May 30, 2011 9:37 pm

Re: JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread

Postby wtrc » Sun Jun 02, 2013 9:38 pm

Pneumonia wrote:back to back tests on Friday:
PT 55-178 (-3/100)
PT 56- 179 (-3/100)

back to back tests today:
PT 61- 172 (-9/101)
PT 64- 173 (-10/101)

anyone have thoughts on this? I'm a bit disconcerted by the fact that my lower scores are on the more recent tests. Are the tests from the 60's much different from those in the 50's? I was under the impression that 52-68 were all "modern" and roughly equivalent. Just looking for some insight or reinforcement. Thanks.


Part of it could be burnout, but I did have similar experiences with the first time I took the mid 50's (177-179s) and the first time I took the most recent tests (low 170's). I chalked it up to burnout myself, but I think you may be onto something. For the next week when I'm not working I'm concentrating exclusively on the tests from 60 onward, with the exception of 51.5 that I just haven't seen yet.




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 34iplaw, Alexandros, Baidu [Spider], earldasquirel, Greenteachurro, The_Pluviophile and 8 guests