retaking old material Forum

[alexrodriguez]

Is it an unfair or a biased score if I'm retaking individual logic game sections and using my success as progress.

I just did a section and had -2. I finished at the 30 minute mark or 5 minutes left mark.

However, Ive done all the games within this section 3 times each or so.

I don't really remember the individual answers, but the general set up up the game is somewhat familiar.

Either way... -2 with 5 minutes to spare and I have another 10 months to study is pretty kick ass. I'm scoring a 170+ easily.

I've been working hard!

Logical Reasoning here I come.

[Otunga]

Depends. How much time is passing between the three times you're taking the games? If it's less than a month, then the score's probably fairly tainted. But progress is still progress. After all, you're doing what you're supposed to do and getting better at the games with more attempts. It's like beating the teams at .500 or below in sports. You're not playoff-bound (170+) yet but you're still inching closer.

[malleus discentium]

Is it an unfair or a biased score if I'm retaking individual logic game sections and using my success as progress.

I just did a section and had -2. I finished at the 30 minute mark or 5 minutes left mark.

However, Ive done all the games within this section 3 times each or so.

I don't really remember the individual answers, but the general set up up the game is somewhat familiar.

Either way... -2 with 5 minutes to spare and I have another 10 months to study is pretty kick ass. I'm scoring a 170+ easily.

I've been working hard!

Logical Reasoning here I come.

If I read this right, you're interpreting that, given that you have 10 more months of study, a -2 with 5 minutes left means you'll score a 170+. If so, then yes, that -2 is unfair and biased. Whether you remember specific questions isn't necessary to have a nonindicative LG: you're likely to remember some core characteristics, such as a particular inference, or the setup if it's strange or complex. So the score is possibly inflated, especially since you've done them three times, and you can't draw anything but the most general conclusions from it. That said, it's obviously appropriate to do games multiple times and doing better on repeated games does indicate general improvement. But it indicates direction, not distance.

[Clearly]

also, lol at the concept of "easy 170", followed by "LR here I come". Thats half the test brother.

[ThetaX]

also, lol at the concept of "easy 170", followed by "LR here I come". Thats half the test brother.

Not to mention the behemoth that is the modern RC section.

[Otunga]

Is it an unfair or a biased score if I'm retaking individual logic game sections and using my success as progress.

I just did a section and had -2. I finished at the 30 minute mark or 5 minutes left mark.

However, Ive done all the games within this section 3 times each or so.

I don't really remember the individual answers, but the general set up up the game is somewhat familiar.

Either way... -2 with 5 minutes to spare and I have another 10 months to study is pretty kick ass. I'm scoring a 170+ easily.

I've been working hard!

Logical Reasoning here I come.

If I read this right, you're interpreting that, given that you have 10 more months of study, a -2 with 5 minutes left means you'll score a 170+. If so, then yes, that -2 is unfair and biased. Whether you remember specific questions isn't necessary to have a nonindicative LG: you're likely to remember some core characteristics, such as a particular inference, or the setup if it's strange or complex. So the score is possibly inflated, especially since you've done them three times, and you can't draw anything but the most general conclusions from it. That said, it's obviously appropriate to do games multiple times and doing better on repeated games does indicate general improvement. But it indicates direction, not distance.

Good point. Early in my prep, I had a legit -1 on a section with games I never saw before. After getting that, I thought I was set with games. It turns out that I wasn't even close and ended up hitting mostly -5s/-6s on other timed sections, if of course I even finished them on time.

[SteelPenguin]

Is it an unfair or a biased score if I'm retaking individual logic game sections and using my success as progress.

I just did a section and had -2. I finished at the 30 minute mark or 5 minutes left mark.

However, Ive done all the games within this section 3 times each or so.

I don't really remember the individual answers, but the general set up up the game is somewhat familiar.

Either way... -2 with 5 minutes to spare and I have another 10 months to study is pretty kick ass. I'm scoring a 170+ easily.

I've been working hard!

Logical Reasoning here I come.

As someone who's been reusing old material for the past 5ish months, all you can do is keep shooting for -0. You're score is probably going to be inflated by a small amount, but that's not the important part. The important thing is to keep learning from your mistakes and finding ways to improve. Another thing to keep in mind, which it looks like you already are, is that you're speed will likely be artificially quicker than a fresh section will be.

[ThetaX]

I feel like redoing sections/test is what really allowed me to improve past 164/5 into 170land.

The disadvantage is the material is not novel
The advantage is once you've seen a game, RC passage, LR stim before you actually start to look at them differently. Its like you stop looking at the content as much and more at the structure. With games, you get better at saving precious time on setup and get a better understanding of the inferences a game can have, in RC changes in tone and things like the main point become obvious, same sort of thing with LR.

You might think "well yeah, its the second time you saw it". True but there's not too many variations on any of these concepts, remember their testing the same skills in ever test and once you can see something for its structure and not its content it becomes easier to see novel content in that same way.

Most of the people I know who scored 178+ talk about how they didnt even really even think about the content it was always about the structure of the puzzle presented by the LR/LG/RC problem/stim.

I believe what you are describing is essentially pattern recognition which is essential to a high score. It allows to use less cognitive power to come up with the answer and saves you time.