Top Law Schools

melodygreenleaf wrote:

OVOXO wrote:you guys got any thoughts/comments on SPB? Just took it. That one rule in the in/out game was really weird ( in terms of seeing a rule like that for the first time).

SPB? Is that the June 2007 one LSAC offers for free?

It's PrepTest B in the SuperPrep book.

Cambridge LSAT wrote:

melodygreenleaf wrote:

OVOXO wrote:you guys got any thoughts/comments on SPB? Just took it. That one rule in the in/out game was really weird ( in terms of seeing a rule like that for the first time).

SPB? Is that the June 2007 one LSAC offers for free?

It's PrepTest B in the SuperPrep book.

I can't believe this is the first time I've heard of these tests. Thank you! Placed my order just now

.

melodygreenleaf wrote:

OVOXO wrote:you guys got any thoughts/comments on SPB? Just took it. That one rule in the in/out game was really weird ( in terms of seeing a rule like that for the first time).

SPB? Is that the June 2007 one LSAC offers for free?

Nah, SuperPrep B (February 1999)

Work has been crazy and I haven't touched a single PT or drill packet in two days. I fighting the (strong) urge to skip Thanksgiving to study all day next Thursday.

bee wrote:PT 53, LR/RC entirely fresh

LR1: -1
LR2: -0
RC: -1 (BR -0)
LG: -0

Raw: 98/100, Scaled: 180

DID ANYONE ELSE FIND PASSAGE 4 WEIRD AF?!?! I can't be the only one. It was the one about mites vs. predators, and some of the questions were incredibly vague. I guess I've become too used to 60s style tests, because I had the same issues with LR--some of them were pretty imprecise.

I did the LG section in mid-Augustish and pulled out my old work to compare to today's results. I went -0 back then as well but completed the section in 27 minutes (as compared to today, when I fucked up a rule in G2 and barely finished in time). Seems like the new Velocity LG strategy isn't working so well for me Or maybe I'm just out of practice...

You PT at 180 with an essentially fresh test (LG inflation is not a thing for me and others, and you're probably included in the others), which makes me envious.

OK need help with another one. PT 45 S4 Q18. I have read the entire discussion on MLSATS board about this question and it still isn't clicking properly. Here is my diagram

D= decentralization
FA= function autonomously
MRP= more relistic planning.
SEI= strongly encourages innovation.


D-->FA-->MRP+SEI

(leaving out the rest because it's not really important)

Can someone help explain this one to me in a very broken down way?

bee wrote:PT 53, LR/RC entirely fresh

LR1: -1
LR2: -0
RC: -1 (BR -0)
LG: -0

Raw: 98/100, Scaled: 180

DID ANYONE ELSE FIND PASSAGE 4 WEIRD AF?!?! I can't be the only one. It was the one about mites vs. predators, and some of the questions were incredibly vague. I guess I've become too used to 60s style tests, because I had the same issues with LR--some of them were pretty imprecise.

I did the LG section in mid-Augustish and pulled out my old work to compare to today's results. I went -0 back then as well but completed the section in 27 minutes (as compared to today, when I fucked up a rule in G2 and barely finished in time). Seems like the new Velocity LG strategy isn't working so well for me Or maybe I'm just out of practice...

Seeee nothing to worry. I think the LR is way more indicative of your skill/improvement. LG is a consistency/carelessness section, so I definitely wouldn't be worrying about that one. Yeah, a bit out of practice is worst case scenario....you're golden So awesome.

PourMeTea wrote:

BFlanagan wrote:

bee wrote:

kobe1020 wrote:haven't got enough courage to retake PT70 yet....will do it on Thursday...maybe I'm the only one here have already applied to some schools...have to say that a safety school admission does calm me down a bit...a little..

i wouldve applied to safety schools but my ps isnt done yet

You're good, Bee. Take your time. No stressing allowed.

Besides, worrying makes you look fat

Play nice, friend. Let's pretend for a second you aren't a complete misogynist, yeah?

Wow, strong hate for me.

PourMeTea wrote:

BFlanagan wrote:

bee wrote:

kobe1020 wrote:haven't got enough courage to retake PT70 yet....will do it on Thursday...maybe I'm the only one here have already applied to some schools...have to say that a safety school admission does calm me down a bit...a little..

i wouldve applied to safety schools but my ps isnt done yet

You're good, Bee. Take your time. No stressing allowed.

Besides, worrying makes you look fat

Play nice, friend. Let's pretend for a second you aren't a complete misogynist, yeah?

ilu t

scoobers wrote:

PourMeTea wrote:

BFlanagan wrote:

kobe1020 wrote:
You're good, Bee. Take your time. No stressing allowed.

Besides, worrying makes you look fat

Play nice, friend. Let's pretend for a second you aren't a complete misogynist, yeah?

ilu t

lbh worrying totally does make you fat. im living proof right now. been carbloading like a marathon runner for no reason. But I guess the LSAT kind of is a marathon though....

agglomeration wrote:OK need help with another one. PT 45 S4 Q18. I have read the entire discussion on MLSATS board about this question and it still isn't clicking properly. Here is my diagram

Can someone help explain this one to me in a very broken down way?

Ah I had trouble explaining this, but hope this helps.

Think of this scenario. "If you go to Bakery A, you will always get two more pastries." Thus if you don't go to Bakery A, you haven't maximized the number of pastries you have. Whether you already have 2 or 100 pastries, you can always get two more by going to Bakery A, so you haven't hit your maximum #.

So if you apply this same concept to the question, large institutions whose divisions do not function autonomously don't have planning that is maximally realistic because they can always have more realistic planning by enabling divisions to function autonomously.

bee wrote:PT 53, LR/RC entirely fresh

LR1: -1
LR2: -0
RC: -1 (BR -0)
LG: -0

Raw: 98/100, Scaled: 180

DID ANYONE ELSE FIND PASSAGE 4 WEIRD AF?!?! I can't be the only one. It was the one about mites vs. predators, and some of the questions were incredibly vague. I guess I've become too used to 60s style tests, because I had the same issues with LR--some of them were pretty imprecise.

I did the LG section in mid-Augustish and pulled out my old work to compare to today's results. I went -0 back then as well but completed the section in 27 minutes (as compared to today, when I fucked up a rule in G2 and barely finished in time). Seems like the new Velocity LG strategy isn't working so well for me Or maybe I'm just out of practice...

Yeah, the passage about mites on strawberry plants was pretty out there. I did that RC yesterday as a drill and just thought to myself WTF is happening. It seemed like something very bad was going to come as the fourth passage because the first and third ones were so easy, and those strawberry mites did not disappoint. I usually enjoy the science passages, but that one was just difficult to follow.

If anyone wants to review some L4 assumption family qs from the packets, let me know and we could do them through PM. I've been drilling those here and there and some review always helps.

I took P53 fresh too, and I had a weird (terrible) experience. One section was WAY lower than it usually is, and I'm pretty concerned.

PT 53

LR 1 -8 WHAT? I was shocked when I checked this. I didn't feel great about it, but I was expecting a -4 at the worst. UGH.
LG -2 Typical. I was through it early. As long as I watch my time, I'm fine with LG. This is by far my favorite section. (-2 is good enough for me)
EXP RC -2 This is encouraging. Nice to see improvement on RC. Ideally, this is what I'd be getting on test day.
LR2 -2 This is what I don't get. How do I do so badly (way lower than diagnostic) on one section and so well on another? I'm going to review and try to find answers
RC -4 This is acceptable, but not my best. Its good to see this go from the 4-6 error range to the 2-4 error range. RC has been my hardest section and I'm starting to make some progress.

Score: I don't want to talk about it.

I have no answers for why I got -8 on that one section. A -4 on that one section would have put me at a 169 (my new PT average). A -2 would have put me at 171. Ugh. I'm gonna figure out what went wrong and fix it. This is my lowest PT LR section ever. And completely out of the blue. My past PT LR scores had been -4s at worst.

That -8 ruined my PT score. Everything else was acceptable or good. Time to drill some LR.

.

Pretty disappointing result with a fresh PT today. I am eating my feelings right now. I will review this more thoroughly after doing dishes and calming the **** down.

PT 59
LR1 -6 (I have NO IDEA how this happened, since i was feeling pretty good about this section)
LR2 -1 (strange because I did not feel very good about this section)
LG -2 (a bit annoyed)
RC -4 (I probably could've done better but my eyes were glazed by this point and just wanted to eat)

Score: 88/101 (170)

Not happy at all. I've been scoring mid-high 170s on retakes and was REALLY hoping that I had improved, but alas, apparently not.... (171 average during PT last October)

.

bee wrote:

Otunga wrote:

bee wrote:PT 53, LR/RC entirely fresh

LR1: -1
LR2: -0
RC: -1 (BR -0)
LG: -0

Raw: 98/100, Scaled: 180

DID ANYONE ELSE FIND PASSAGE 4 WEIRD AF?!?! I can't be the only one. It was the one about mites vs. predators, and some of the questions were incredibly vague. I guess I've become too used to 60s style tests, because I had the same issues with LR--some of them were pretty imprecise.

I did the LG section in mid-Augustish and pulled out my old work to compare to today's results. I went -0 back then as well but completed the section in 27 minutes (as compared to today, when I fucked up a rule in G2 and barely finished in time). Seems like the new Velocity LG strategy isn't working so well for me Or maybe I'm just out of practice...

You PT at 180 with an essentially fresh test (LG inflation is not a thing for me and others, and you're probably included in the others), which makes me envious.

you know what makes me envious? your gpa *crying forever*

Honestly, to me a non 3.9 GPA proves you are non-aspie in real life...but no offense to bros who grinded out ugrad. We're all very jealous

p.s. did you miss 19 in lr1? that's the one i missed can't believe they got me with that q

Yeah I got that one wrong...and 20 and 21 after it. I have this weird thing where most of my wrong answers come in clumps. Anyone get this/know how to fix it?

Finished up L4 Weaken qs. 31/35 isn't bad, but missing that many is still discouraging. I guess if you look at it this way - getting 88% right is like getting 22/25 on a full section of L4 qs - it's comforting.

BFlanagan wrote:

bee wrote:

Otunga wrote:

bee wrote:PT 53, LR/RC entirely fresh

LR1: -1
LR2: -0
RC: -1 (BR -0)
LG: -0

Raw: 98/100, Scaled: 180

DID ANYONE ELSE FIND PASSAGE 4 WEIRD AF?!?! I can't be the only one. It was the one about mites vs. predators, and some of the questions were incredibly vague. I guess I've become too used to 60s style tests, because I had the same issues with LR--some of them were pretty imprecise.

I did the LG section in mid-Augustish and pulled out my old work to compare to today's results. I went -0 back then as well but completed the section in 27 minutes (as compared to today, when I fucked up a rule in G2 and barely finished in time). Seems like the new Velocity LG strategy isn't working so well for me Or maybe I'm just out of practice...

You PT at 180 with an essentially fresh test (LG inflation is not a thing for me and others, and you're probably included in the others), which makes me envious.

you know what makes me envious? your gpa *crying forever*

Honestly, to me a non 3.9 GPA proves you are non-aspie in real life...but no offense to bros who grinded out ugrad. We're all very jealous

Yeah, and it's just tough to really judge a GPA in general unless it's astronomically bad and implies no effort (a sub 2.0, say), given someone in college can make their degree as easy or hard as they want it to be. It makes a lot of sense to me that LSAT score is weighed more heavily.

Anyone starting to feel a little burned out? I've been going through ups and downs this past week and a half. Some days I'm pumped up and doing really well. Other days, most notably yesterday and part of today, I'm feeling mehhhh. I know I could've been so much more productive but the rain over here just made me want to curl up and sleep.

ljoandc wrote:Anyone starting to feel a little burned out? I've been going through ups and downs this past week and a half. Some days I'm pumped up and doing really well. Other days, most notably yesterday and part of today, I'm feeling mehhhh. I know I could've been so much more productive but the rain over here just made me want to curl up and sleep.

Yeah, I think this is totally natural. Some days a workout feels great, sometimes it feels like everything is a lot harder. If you are legitimately burned out though, don't automatically combat it with pushing harder.