Going from low 170s to high 170s

User avatar
OVOXO
Posts: 180
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2013 1:01 pm

Going from low 170s to high 170s

Postby OVOXO » Fri Nov 15, 2013 7:11 pm

My PT average is 173.2 over 13 tests with a high of 176 and a low of 169 (at the beginning). It seems like no matter what I do — drilling Cambridge packs, redoing old tough games, thoroughly and intensively reviewing PTs — I can’t crack the 176 ceiling and get in the high 170s. With the Dec LSAT 22 days away, what can I do to improve? [note: I take PTs in realistic conditions with the Kaplan LSAT proctor w/distractions, water bottle under the desk, same watch, experimental, bubble sheet. Only exception is I haven’t taken them at 9:00 am which will change starting tomorrow]

I usually go −0/-1 LG, −1 to −3 on RC, and −2/-3 PER LR.

I understand there’s diminishing returns with studying, but I’m open to any good advice. Thanks!

Thorcogan
Posts: 101
Joined: Wed Oct 30, 2013 12:50 pm

Re: Going from low 170s to high 170s

Postby Thorcogan » Fri Nov 15, 2013 7:23 pm

OVOXO wrote:My PT average is 173.2 over 13 tests with a high of 176 and a low of 169 (at the beginning). It seems like no matter what I do — drilling Cambridge packs, redoing old tough games, thoroughly and intensively reviewing PTs — I can’t crack the 176 ceiling and get in the high 170s. With the Dec LSAT 22 days away, what can I do to improve? [note: I take PTs in realistic conditions with the Kaplan LSAT proctor w/distractions, water bottle under the desk, same watch, experimental, bubble sheet. Only exception is I haven’t taken them at 9:00 am which will change starting tomorrow]

I usually go −0/-1 LG, −1 to −3 on RC, and −2/-3 PER LR.

I understand there’s diminishing returns with studying, but I’m open to any good advice. Thanks!


Looks like your biggest weakness (if u can call -2/3 per section a weakness) is LR. My guess would also be that u probably get the first 16 or 17 right every time, and miss a couple of the really hard LR problems. Try using practice tests that you haven't done yet, and just drill questions 15-25(26).

With the scores you are getting it's pretty obvious you understand all the principles and how the tests works, and sometimes u just get tripped up by the hardest questions. Work on that degree of difficulty should help. The only true plateau is 180. GL

User avatar
OVOXO
Posts: 180
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2013 1:01 pm

Re: Going from low 170s to high 170s

Postby OVOXO » Fri Nov 15, 2013 7:30 pm

Thorcogan wrote:The only true plateau is 180. GL


YES.

I get some early LR qs wrong too (Q10 on the last PT) which tells me timing/rushing/haste is an issue as well. Rhythm on LR is so imp. Getting tripped up on Q3 or Q8 is just not acceptable if one wants a high 170 score.

Thorcogan
Posts: 101
Joined: Wed Oct 30, 2013 12:50 pm

Re: Going from low 170s to high 170s

Postby Thorcogan » Fri Nov 15, 2013 7:39 pm

OVOXO wrote:
Thorcogan wrote:The only true plateau is 180. GL


YES.

I get some early LR qs wrong too (Q10 on the last PT) which tells me timing/rushing/haste is an issue as well. Rhythm on LR is so imp. Getting tripped up on Q3 or Q8 is just not acceptable if one wants a high 170 score.


While that is 100% true, recent tests have had relatively difficult questions fairly early. I think questions 8, 10, 11, and 13 in different sections of recent PTs have been hard questions.

User avatar
SecondWind
Posts: 132
Joined: Sun Jun 09, 2013 10:06 pm

Re: Going from low 170s to high 170s

Postby SecondWind » Fri Nov 15, 2013 10:02 pm

Thorcogan wrote:
OVOXO wrote:
Thorcogan wrote:The only true plateau is 180. GL


YES.

I get some early LR qs wrong too (Q10 on the last PT) which tells me timing/rushing/haste is an issue as well. Rhythm on LR is so imp. Getting tripped up on Q3 or Q8 is just not acceptable if one wants a high 170 score.


While that is 100% true, recent tests have had relatively difficult questions fairly early. I think questions 8, 10, 11, and 13 in different sections of recent PTs have been hard questions.


The way to figure out how hard a question is is to go and see how many views the explanation has on MLSAT relative to the other questions. I.e. I'm checking it right now and it's clear that on PT 69 LR1 Q18,19,21,22 were all difficult because they have 550+ views. On the older 1-38 PTs, 1,000 views is the threshold for me to consider it difficult.

Daily_Double
Posts: 1035
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2012 8:45 pm

Re: Going from low 170s to high 170s

Postby Daily_Double » Fri Nov 15, 2013 10:14 pm

.
Last edited by Daily_Double on Fri Dec 13, 2013 6:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
bobtheblob916
Posts: 49
Joined: Fri Sep 06, 2013 12:50 pm

Re: Going from low 170s to high 170s

Postby bobtheblob916 » Sat Nov 16, 2013 6:16 am

Seconding the advice on drilling just the last 10 questions of LR sections. Put three of those 10-question packs together and do them as one within 40 minutes. Qs 8-10 are also difficult, as someone mentioned, but it's annoying to sift through them, though by all means go ahead if you want to be completely comprehensive.




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bob loblaw law blog, Tazewell, xtremenite and 6 guests