And I'm sure that you should be. It's unrealistic for most of us to expect a score of 175+. And that's fine. With a strong enough GPA, it's just not necessary.flash21 wrote:I'm sorry but you got demolished? and RC was a shit show? Some of you guys would die if you were scoring like me ( but I'm proud of my score)smccgrey wrote:Guys I just got demolished by PT 62. Worst PT in a LONG time! I managed to go -5 on LG.... LG!!! That's NEVER happened, not even in my diagnostic. And it was just a bunch of WTF mistakes that I don't even know how I made.
RC was a shit show too. Thank god for the curve and the fact that LR is 50% of the exam
RC -4
LG -5
LR -1
173 - Not bad... obviously I shouldn't be throwing a pity party, but
The Official September 2014 Study Group Forum
- sfoglia
- Posts: 1767
- Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2014 1:30 pm
Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group
- schmelling
- Posts: 1091
- Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 12:15 am
Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group
.
Last edited by schmelling on Sat Feb 28, 2015 4:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 39
- Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2014 8:18 pm
Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group
.
Last edited by gavaga1 on Thu Dec 04, 2014 11:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- boris09
- Posts: 78
- Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2013 11:48 pm
Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group
Had done four individual sections from PT 53 over the course of several days almost two weeks ago, but finally finished off the final RC section just now. I know it's not technically a timed test since i didn't do it all at once, but I did do each section under timed conditions and stayed within the 35 minute limit.
LR1: 18/25
LG: 21/23
LR2: 19/25
RC: 21/27 (-0, -2, -0, -4 ...that bloody science passage)
162.
Obviously not happy about my LR sections, as I've been sort of neglecting drilling them lately. However, the -6 is actually the highest I've scored on RC thus far which I guess is somewhat pleasing. I do worry slightly that my score may be a little skewed since I've seen some of the LR questions over the course of doing the LSAT Trainer. Furthermore, I feel as if I did the RC passage before, but I'm trying to maintain the idea that 'thinking you've seen the question before makes you question what you remember the answer to be, moreso than actually remembering the answer'. As an aside, I'm aiming for a 167-169 on test day (i know, i know, 'aim for 180', but at my current stage I'm just hoping I get a score that will give me a great shot at my desired schools).
ANYWAYS, going to write an actual, timed, 4-section PT as soon as I'm done with this post. Hopefully will return with positive results
LR1: 18/25
LG: 21/23
LR2: 19/25
RC: 21/27 (-0, -2, -0, -4 ...that bloody science passage)
162.
Obviously not happy about my LR sections, as I've been sort of neglecting drilling them lately. However, the -6 is actually the highest I've scored on RC thus far which I guess is somewhat pleasing. I do worry slightly that my score may be a little skewed since I've seen some of the LR questions over the course of doing the LSAT Trainer. Furthermore, I feel as if I did the RC passage before, but I'm trying to maintain the idea that 'thinking you've seen the question before makes you question what you remember the answer to be, moreso than actually remembering the answer'. As an aside, I'm aiming for a 167-169 on test day (i know, i know, 'aim for 180', but at my current stage I'm just hoping I get a score that will give me a great shot at my desired schools).
ANYWAYS, going to write an actual, timed, 4-section PT as soon as I'm done with this post. Hopefully will return with positive results
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
- flash21
- Posts: 1536
- Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2013 8:56 pm
Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group
when will you guys begin 5 section PT's? Let say I'm writing in December, when I PT, when should I add a fifth section? and if I do 4 section PT's , do I just do 3 in a row, break for 10 minutes then go again?
-
- Posts: 90
- Joined: Tue Dec 17, 2013 5:46 pm
Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group
.
Last edited by Pau.C. on Sun Jul 17, 2016 6:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 1307
- Joined: Wed Nov 06, 2013 8:45 pm
Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group
I started 5 section PTs this weekend after starting Scantron PTs last weekend. I'll bump up to 6 section PTs in two weekends.flash21 wrote:when will you guys begin 5 section PT's? Let say I'm writing in December, when I PT, when should I add a fifth section? and if I do 4 section PT's , do I just do 3 in a row, break for 10 minutes then go again?
- hillz
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 1:41 pm
Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group
In June, I could access mine the week before. But the room changed at the last minute so scoping it out wouldn't have worked for me.Pau.C. wrote:Hey, sorry to ask a random question, but does anyone know when we will get our Admission Tickets with the room numbers for our test location?
I really want to scope out my room and maybe take a PT in it if I can. Just so I can get the nerves out before the real deal. Thanks!
-
- Posts: 1307
- Joined: Wed Nov 06, 2013 8:45 pm
Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group
I missed 20, 22, and 23. Oddly enough, I understood the game pretty well. I skipped G3 when I hit #15 and saw G4 was a linear game, so rushed through it as quickly as possible. I guess ultimately that was my undoing, because when going through BR I saw my mistakes in moments. I thought G3 was a bitch, but got lucky on some half-guesses and vague inferences.smccgrey wrote:It was all spread out... 6, 10, 11, 15 and 22. All of them were just seriously dumb mistakes too. I was rushing through it for no good reason.HRomanus wrote: Which questions did you miss on LG?
- vracovino
- Posts: 153
- Joined: Fri Jun 07, 2013 2:46 pm
Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group
My badgavaga1 wrote:They're actually past administered tests (February). The explanations are pretty helpful though.schmelling wrote:vracovino wrote:http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/097930506 ... 275&sr=8-1schmelling wrote:Does anyone know what the "Superprep" Pt's correspond to, and if they are made available to anyone else? I found somewhere that they are three february exams, and since Testmasters told me they aren't usually licensed february exams, that would make the superprep preptests an untapped source of material, which I would love to get my hands on.
However, if they are licensed out to other prep companies, I imagine testmasters gets them as well, which makes them less worth my time/money, since I'll encounter them on an experimental or HW anyway. Anyone with any info please help!
They are three tests published by LSAC which have not been administered, and LSAC provides detailed explanations to every question in the tests, as well as general strategies for each section. It's a great resource.
Ordering immediately. Thanks.
- schmelling
- Posts: 1091
- Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 12:15 am
Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group
.
Last edited by schmelling on Sat Feb 28, 2015 4:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 1307
- Joined: Wed Nov 06, 2013 8:45 pm
Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group
It's six weeks - there's so much material it's hard to "waste" material or cover it twice. Go full throttle with everything you've got.schmelling wrote:decided that since I don't want to use any materials before it is time in our course, I am going back through all the games we have covered and rediagramming all of them, plus checking for inferences. Hoping to hone the process of working through a game since it is clearly coming least natural to me.
I am doing this so as to not waste all of my material with 6 weeks left til the exam. Whats everyone's opinion: waste of time, or valuable exercise?
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 367
- Joined: Thu Dec 26, 2013 12:50 pm
Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group
pt 53, common law passage…what the actual fuck..
- schmelling
- Posts: 1091
- Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 12:15 am
Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group
.
Last edited by schmelling on Sat Feb 28, 2015 4:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- LeeAllen
- Posts: 208
- Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2014 2:22 pm
Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group
PT 38
LG -0
RC -2
LR -1
for a 179!! I haven't taken a full PT in about 8-10 days because I really needed to drill LR. I got and went through MLSAT (fantastic resource) and I went from averaging -2/3 per section to averaging -0/1 per section. The time I spent going through that combined with drilling from Cambridge definitely paid off.
I'm guessing that the score is somewhat inflated due to the fact that I've drilled some of those questions before when doing the Cambridge packets, but at least it is a good morale booster. PT 42 tomorrow.
LG -0
RC -2
LR -1
for a 179!! I haven't taken a full PT in about 8-10 days because I really needed to drill LR. I got and went through MLSAT (fantastic resource) and I went from averaging -2/3 per section to averaging -0/1 per section. The time I spent going through that combined with drilling from Cambridge definitely paid off.
I'm guessing that the score is somewhat inflated due to the fact that I've drilled some of those questions before when doing the Cambridge packets, but at least it is a good morale booster. PT 42 tomorrow.
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 1307
- Joined: Wed Nov 06, 2013 8:45 pm
Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group
That is wonderful! Congratulations! Definitely a testament to the power of drilling versus PTs.LeeAllen wrote:PT 38
LG -0
RC -2
LR -1
for a 179!! I haven't taken a full PT in about 8-10 days because I really needed to drill LR. I got and went through MLSAT (fantastic resource) and I went from averaging -2/3 per section to averaging -0/1 per section. The time I spent going through that combined with drilling from Cambridge definitely paid off.
I'm guessing that the score is somewhat inflated due to the fact that I've drilled some of those questions before when doing the Cambridge packets, but at least it is a good morale booster. PT 42 tomorrow.
- boris09
- Posts: 78
- Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2013 11:48 pm
Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group
As promised, I am back after writing my first, fully-timed prep-test, and boy am I surprised in many different areas.
PT 66:
RC: 16/27 (-2, -4 jesus christ this one was difficult, -3, -2)
LR: 23/25
LG: 21/23 (stupid, stupid mistakes)
LR: 17/26 (three of the wrong answer choices I had it down to two [one being the right, the other being the wrong] and chose the wrong choice)
SCORE: 161
Okay so...RC was quite tough, I usually average around -8, so I guess this isn't too far off, but I'm really annoyed with how long the second passage took, which could have changed how I approached the last two.
LR1....what the heck lol...the lowest I've ever gotten on an individual section was -5, so this was a pleasant surprise. But then...LR2???? I've never gotten more than 6 wrong in a section. Please tell me i'm not the only one that found the second LR ten times harder than the first?? Either way, I know that I can't neglect LR any more.
LG seems quite consistent now. If I could just improve my LR to a bit more consistent and better range, I feel as if I have a good shot at 165+
anybody else take 66 that might have any opinions on the RC, LR, or test in general?
PT 66:
RC: 16/27 (-2, -4 jesus christ this one was difficult, -3, -2)
LR: 23/25
LG: 21/23 (stupid, stupid mistakes)
LR: 17/26 (three of the wrong answer choices I had it down to two [one being the right, the other being the wrong] and chose the wrong choice)
SCORE: 161
Okay so...RC was quite tough, I usually average around -8, so I guess this isn't too far off, but I'm really annoyed with how long the second passage took, which could have changed how I approached the last two.
LR1....what the heck lol...the lowest I've ever gotten on an individual section was -5, so this was a pleasant surprise. But then...LR2???? I've never gotten more than 6 wrong in a section. Please tell me i'm not the only one that found the second LR ten times harder than the first?? Either way, I know that I can't neglect LR any more.
LG seems quite consistent now. If I could just improve my LR to a bit more consistent and better range, I feel as if I have a good shot at 165+
anybody else take 66 that might have any opinions on the RC, LR, or test in general?
- schmelling
- Posts: 1091
- Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 12:15 am
Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group
.
Last edited by schmelling on Sat Feb 28, 2015 4:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- boris09
- Posts: 78
- Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2013 11:48 pm
Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group
Yeah I figured it had to do with LSAC balancing the logical reasoning sections out, but I was curious if that was truly the case of LR2 being significantly harder, or if it was just me losing stamina or something and messing up on questions I should have gotten rightschmelling wrote:
Oftentimes the two LR sections balance off each other, one being easier and the other being harder, this difference can be significant. Last week on a PT I went -1 on the first LR with a minute to spare, and didn't even get to look at the last 5 on the second. I don't know about that particular test, but it is not uncommon.
Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.
Register now, it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 11
- Joined: Fri Dec 27, 2013 10:04 pm
Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group
boris09 wrote:As promised, I am back after writing my first, fully-timed prep-test, and boy am I surprised in many different areas.
PT 66:
RC: 16/27 (-2, -4 jesus christ this one was difficult, -3, -2)
LR: 23/25
LG: 21/23 (stupid, stupid mistakes)
LR: 17/26 (three of the wrong answer choices I had it down to two [one being the right, the other being the wrong] and chose the wrong choice)
SCORE: 161
Okay so...RC was quite tough, I usually average around -8, so I guess this isn't too far off, but I'm really annoyed with how long the second passage took, which could have changed how I approached the last two.
LR1....what the heck lol...the lowest I've ever gotten on an individual section was -5, so this was a pleasant surprise. But then...LR2???? I've never gotten more than 6 wrong in a section. Please tell me i'm not the only one that found the second LR ten times harder than the first?? Either way, I know that I can't neglect LR any more.
LG seems quite consistent now. If I could just improve my LR to a bit more consistent and better range, I feel as if I have a good shot at 165+
anybody else take 66 that might have any opinions on the RC, LR, or test in general?
I took PT 66 today too. I got -5 on the first LR section, but -0 (for the first time in LR!) on the second section. I usually get around -3 per LR section so I guess it was the balancing effect for me too… except in the opposite direction.
All of the RC passages seemed pretty similar in difficulty for me. I'm glad that last passage only had 5 questions though because I was definitely running low on time.
-
- Posts: 42
- Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 11:15 pm
Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group
yup, just got wrecked by that when drillingcavalier2015 wrote:pt 53, common law passage…what the actual fuck..
- Toby Ziegler
- Posts: 701
- Joined: Thu May 09, 2013 2:59 pm
Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group
Going to try and do 100 questions from the Flaw packet today and drill grouping games. What technique have you good folks found works the best for grouping games? I have put off LG drilling in order to really nail LR/RC, so I have basic and advanced linear down pretty solid, but still need to drill the other types.
-
- Posts: 1016
- Joined: Mon Feb 17, 2014 9:33 pm
Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group
Flaw for me too today. Took another PT the other day Flaw got me again.Toby Ziegler wrote:Going to try and do 100 questions from the Flaw packet today and drill grouping games. What technique have you good folks found works the best for grouping games? I have put off LG drilling in order to really nail LR/RC, so I have basic and advanced linear down pretty solid, but still need to drill the other types.
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login