The Official September 2014 Study Group

ilikebaseball
Posts: 4103
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2014 3:04 am

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby ilikebaseball » Sat Jul 26, 2014 11:40 pm

the ones about the minorities always get me. Like the chinese american authors or the japanese american scuptors, or the native american poets. Its never like a black baseball player or something actually remotely interesting.

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

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby jmjm » Sat Jul 26, 2014 11:50 pm

MtnGinger wrote:To me difficult is very subjective and depends on the person. Wondering if anyone has any experience with the packets and advice on what I should get. I'm running out of money. I got a 166 on the June LSAT my 1st take and I went -8 RC so I need help :cry:


Agree that RC difficulty is highly subjective. Arts/Lit passages are tough for me e.g. willa cather's impressionism, Noguchi, Kung. English lit majors may have had a different experience but Noguchi and Kung were I think more difficult in that they were easy to read but had insanely hard questions.

User avatar
MtnGinger
Posts: 154
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 1:30 am

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby MtnGinger » Sat Jul 26, 2014 11:59 pm

I agree with all of you. I think I'll just do the 20 difficult because it is a mix of types even if I don't find all of them difficult it will let me not focus too hard on one type. For some reason I find humanities the easiest because it seems like there is actually a story, even if it is a bad one about irrelevant boring topics but all that scientific vocab.. I just can't get through it to understand. Plus I like Cambridge because I can reprint,. I have PT40-71 but most of them have been used, in a non erasable way... I should've planned a little better.

User avatar
valen
Posts: 380
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 3:31 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby valen » Sun Jul 27, 2014 12:23 am

Glad to see I'm not the only one working on lsat junk on a Saturday night. Also 9 weeks!

User avatar
Gray
Posts: 5991
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2014 1:02 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby Gray » Sun Jul 27, 2014 8:57 am

choward014 wrote:the ones about the minorities always get me. Like the chinese american authors or the japanese american scuptors, or the native american poets. Its never like a black baseball player or something actually remotely interesting.


YES. I find these the hardest!

mickey_mouse
Posts: 136
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2013 12:12 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby mickey_mouse » Sun Jul 27, 2014 11:39 am

All right guys, two months to go!

I just quite my summer job and don't start my "real job" until after the LSAT. Two months of full time studying. I've been pushing my way through the Trainer- on about Ch. 32 now, doing all his 16-week study plan drills with it and throwing in practice sections. How hard do I need to work to catch up to you all?

Retaking a mid-160s from last Oct., hoping to break that 170 threshold.

User avatar
Louis1127
Posts: 817
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2013 9:12 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby Louis1127 » Sun Jul 27, 2014 11:58 am

choward014 wrote:the ones about the minorities always get me. Like the chinese american authors or the japanese american scuptors, or the native american poets. Its never like a black baseball player or something actually remotely interesting.


Hmmmm... I seem to eat those up. It's the science passages that get me.

For some reason, if the passage is about Native Americans, I am going to go -0 on that passage. and if it's science, I'll be luck to go less than -2 taking 10 minutes.

User avatar
Colonel_funkadunk
Posts: 2791
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 11:03 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby Colonel_funkadunk » Sun Jul 27, 2014 12:48 pm

BillPackets wrote:
Colonel_funkadunk wrote:Checking into this thread. I had a 163 on the December 2011 test. Took a couple years off and worked.

Took my first PT today since I started studying again. PT 40

I scored a 166.
LR1: -4
LG: -2
LR2: -4
RC: -5

4 of the 8 LR I missed were sufficient assumption questions so I need to figure out what my issue is there. Hope everyone's studying is going well.


Way to go colonel. You're well on your way to a 172+. What's your uGPA?


Good evening bill. It's 3.9xxx.

User avatar
gnomgnomuch
Posts: 539
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 11:34 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby gnomgnomuch » Sun Jul 27, 2014 1:08 pm

Just took PT 43.

RC -4, 2 wrong on 2 diff passages, 2 perfect sections.
LR #1 -3.
LR #2 -5.
LG -7, RAGE QUIT.

Went -19 overall, got a 165. For comparisons sake, that -7 that I got on LG, would've gave me a 170.

User avatar
bondja
Posts: 60
Joined: Sat May 12, 2012 9:42 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby bondja » Sun Jul 27, 2014 1:43 pm

gnomgnomuch wrote:Just took PT 43.

RC -4, 2 wrong on 2 diff passages, 2 perfect sections.
LR #1 -3.
LR #2 -5.
LG -7, RAGE QUIT.

Went -19 overall, got a 165. For comparisons sake, that -7 that I got on LG, would've gave me a 170.


I lol'd at the rage quit. I completely understand that. There was one PT I took where I just threw my pencil down and said, "Eff it. I'm gonna play some madden."

What do you normally score on the LG sections? Was there any peculiar games on 43?

User avatar
BillPackets
Posts: 2159
Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2014 5:56 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby BillPackets » Sun Jul 27, 2014 1:53 pm

gnomgnomuch wrote:Just took PT 43.

RC -4, 2 wrong on 2 diff passages, 2 perfect sections.
LR #1 -3.
LR #2 -5.
LG -7, RAGE QUIT.

Went -19 overall, got a 165. For comparisons sake, that -7 that I got on LG, would've gave me a 170.


I also HATE going perfect on 2-3 sections then missing 2-4 on one or two passages. It's like wtf are u doing!?

User avatar
vracovino
Posts: 153
Joined: Fri Jun 07, 2013 2:46 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby vracovino » Sun Jul 27, 2014 2:06 pm

BillPackets wrote:
gnomgnomuch wrote:Just took PT 43.

RC -4, 2 wrong on 2 diff passages, 2 perfect sections.
LR #1 -3.
LR #2 -5.
LG -7, RAGE QUIT.

Went -19 overall, got a 165. For comparisons sake, that -7 that I got on LG, would've gave me a 170.


I also HATE going perfect on 2-3 sections then missing 2-4 on one or two passages. It's like wtf are u doing!?


I agree but that's sort of the thing that differentiates RC from other sections in my opinion. You can have complete understanding of the passage, but some questions will have answer choices that are so frustratingly obtuse and reliant on subtle details that its hardly matters.

User avatar
vracovino
Posts: 153
Joined: Fri Jun 07, 2013 2:46 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby vracovino » Sun Jul 27, 2014 2:08 pm

gnomgnomuch wrote:Just took PT 43.

RC -4, 2 wrong on 2 diff passages, 2 perfect sections.
LR #1 -3.
LR #2 -5.
LG -7, RAGE QUIT.

Went -19 overall, got a 165. For comparisons sake, that -7 that I got on LG, would've gave me a 170.


I wouldn't be too pissed about it, if the curve was -19 for a 165 it must have been pretty tough! Still a good score also.

User avatar
BillPackets
Posts: 2159
Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2014 5:56 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby BillPackets » Sun Jul 27, 2014 2:20 pm

Just curious...when is it generally considered that RC gets more difficult? I feel like I've started to feel that around the mid 50s...some question types I haven't really seen before, and just more difficult questions in general.

User avatar
Gray
Posts: 5991
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2014 1:02 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby Gray » Sun Jul 27, 2014 2:37 pm

GUYS!!! Best day ever!!!! I took PT 59 and went:
LG -0
LR1 - 2
LR2 -1
RC - 1

...For a very exciting 179! :D Definitely broke through the plateau, though I think on most tests a -4 wouldn't give quite a high scaled score.

The best part is going -1 on RC, which I've really been focusing on lately (with Manhattan RC). Let's just hope the actual exam goes this well...

I also want to recommend something to anyone out there struggling with timing on logic games: I started out with a good understanding of logic games, but the time killed me. I didn't like powerscore because I wanted to use my own way of figuring the games out, and trying to wrap my head around their method seemed counterproductive.

There are books of games grouped by type on amazon, with no explantations or frills or anything (I think they are published by traciela). I have the book with all LG 1-20, and I'm definitely getting the book with 21-40 once it's done. I found that doing games of the same type back to back to back really helped me build speed, to the point that I almost always go -0 on LG with a few extra minutes. I almost always have 15 minutes or more for the last game. (plus you get to tackle the super weird old games)

I'm doing the same thing with RC, but I needed manhattan to improve my strategy first.

Also, regarding this:
choward014 wrote:the ones about the minorities always get me. Like the chinese american authors or the japanese american scuptors, or the native american poets. Its never like a black baseball player or something actually remotely interesting.

choward014, the question I got wrong on RC today was about that Japanese sculptor... goddamnit arts and literature.

User avatar
gnomgnomuch
Posts: 539
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 11:34 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby gnomgnomuch » Sun Jul 27, 2014 3:12 pm

bondja wrote:
gnomgnomuch wrote:Just took PT 43.

RC -4, 2 wrong on 2 diff passages, 2 perfect sections.
LR #1 -3.
LR #2 -5.
LG -7, RAGE QUIT.

Went -19 overall, got a 165. For comparisons sake, that -7 that I got on LG, would've gave me a 170.


I lol'd at the rage quit. I completely understand that. There was one PT I took where I just threw my pencil down and said, "Eff it. I'm gonna play some madden."

What do you normally score on the LG sections? Was there any peculiar games on 43?


Alas no, its the opposite, I just mess up on LG. -7 is right around my average. It just seems that I need to break that LG barrier, and I'll be scoring in the high 160's low 170's with ~2 months to get to 175+.

Instead of madden I play 2k14.... =D

User avatar
gnomgnomuch
Posts: 539
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 11:34 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby gnomgnomuch » Sun Jul 27, 2014 3:15 pm

vracovino wrote:
gnomgnomuch wrote:Just took PT 43.

RC -4, 2 wrong on 2 diff passages, 2 perfect sections.
LR #1 -3.
LR #2 -5.
LG -7, RAGE QUIT.

Went -19 overall, got a 165. For comparisons sake, that -7 that I got on LG, would've gave me a 170.


I wouldn't be too pissed about it, if the curve was -19 for a 165 it must have been pretty tough! Still a good score also.


I mean the 170 was a -12, I thought that was pretty average, no?

ilikebaseball
Posts: 4103
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2014 3:04 am

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby ilikebaseball » Sun Jul 27, 2014 3:29 pm

smccgrey wrote:GUYS!!! Best day ever!!!! I took PT 59 and went:
LG -0
LR1 - 2
LR2 -1
RC - 1

...For a very exciting 179! :D Definitely broke through the plateau, though I think on most tests a -4 wouldn't give quite a high scaled score.

The best part is going -1 on RC, which I've really been focusing on lately (with Manhattan RC). Let's just hope the actual exam goes this well...

I also want to recommend something to anyone out there struggling with timing on logic games: I started out with a good understanding of logic games, but the time killed me. I didn't like powerscore because I wanted to use my own way of figuring the games out, and trying to wrap my head around their method seemed counterproductive.

There are books of games grouped by type on amazon, with no explantations or frills or anything (I think they are published by traciela). I have the book with all LG 1-20, and I'm definitely getting the book with 21-40 once it's done. I found that doing games of the same type back to back to back really helped me build speed, to the point that I almost always go -0 on LG with a few extra minutes. I almost always have 15 minutes or more for the last game. (plus you get to tackle the super weird old games)

I'm doing the same thing with RC, but I needed manhattan to improve my strategy first.

Also, regarding this:
choward014 wrote:the ones about the minorities always get me. Like the chinese american authors or the japanese american scuptors, or the native american poets. Its never like a black baseball player or something actually remotely interesting.

choward014, the question I got wrong on RC today was about that Japanese sculptor... goddamnit arts and literature.


This one?

User avatar
chimera
Posts: 133
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2014 10:22 am

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby chimera » Sun Jul 27, 2014 3:40 pm

Took 42 today and got a 163 :( LG -6, LR -6/-7, RC -2. I admit that I've been neglecting games recently, so I wasn't all that surprised. My LR scores have been seriously depressing me though. I've been drilling question types and reviewing old questions for a couple weeks and really wasn't expecting -13 combined for arguments. Luckily my RC is consistent... but the discrepancy between LR and RC is so frustrating.

Could anyone here who scores well on LR, or who has seen a lot of improvement on LR, give me an idea of what habits or study methods worked for you? Clearly whatever I'm doing is not working.

User avatar
valen
Posts: 380
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 3:31 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby valen » Sun Jul 27, 2014 3:44 pm

smccgrey wrote:GUYS!!! Best day ever!!!! I took PT 59 and went:
LG -0
LR1 - 2
LR2 -1
RC - 1

...For a very exciting 179! :D Definitely broke through the plateau, though I think on most tests a -4 wouldn't give quite a high scaled score.

The best part is going -1 on RC, which I've really been focusing on lately (with Manhattan RC). Let's just hope the actual exam goes this well...

I also want to recommend something to anyone out there struggling with timing on logic games: I started out with a good understanding of logic games, but the time killed me. I didn't like powerscore because I wanted to use my own way of figuring the games out, and trying to wrap my head around their method seemed counterproductive.

There are books of games grouped by type on amazon, with no explantations or frills or anything (I think they are published by traciela). I have the book with all LG 1-20, and I'm definitely getting the book with 21-40 once it's done. I found that doing games of the same type back to back to back really helped me build speed, to the point that I almost always go -0 on LG with a few extra minutes. I almost always have 15 minutes or more for the last game. (plus you get to tackle the super weird old games)

I'm doing the same thing with RC, but I needed manhattan to improve my strategy first.


Awesome job!! This just motivated me to power through some more Trainer drills for LG.

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

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby jmjm » Sun Jul 27, 2014 4:36 pm

smccgrey wrote:GUYS!!! Best day ever!!!! I took PT 59 and went:
LG -0
LR1 - 2
LR2 -1
RC - 1

...For a very exciting 179! :D Definitely broke through the plateau, though I think on most tests a -4 wouldn't give quite a high scaled score.

The best part is going -1 on RC, which I've really been focusing on lately (with Manhattan RC). Let's just hope the actual exam goes this well...

I also want to recommend something to anyone out there struggling with timing on logic games: I started out with a good understanding of logic games, but the time killed me. I didn't like powerscore because I wanted to use my own way of figuring the games out, and trying to wrap my head around their method seemed counterproductive.

There are books of games grouped by type on amazon, with no explantations or frills or anything (I think they are published by traciela). I have the book with all LG 1-20, and I'm definitely getting the book with 21-40 once it's done. I found that doing games of the same type back to back to back really helped me build speed, to the point that I almost always go -0 on LG with a few extra minutes. I almost always have 15 minutes or more for the last game. (plus you get to tackle the super weird old games)

I'm doing the same thing with RC, but I needed manhattan to improve my strategy first.


wow on the score! is this fresh PT? Was your RC always so good? The RC of this PT IIRC was very tough.

User avatar
Gray
Posts: 5991
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2014 1:02 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby Gray » Sun Jul 27, 2014 6:00 pm

valen wrote:Awesome job!! This just motivated me to power through some more Trainer drills for LG.


Yes! Glad I could help :P

jmjm wrote:wow on the score! is this fresh PT? Was your RC always so good? The RC of this PT IIRC was very tough.


Thank you! I'm excited! Still chasing the 180 unicorn though...

Yes, it was a fresh PT. And no, RC hasn't been awesome since the beginning - not bad, but pretty inconsistent (-0 to -6). But I just started going through Manhattan RC and using some of their strategies, particularly identifying the two arguments, how they are balanced and where the author's opinion falls (reading for scale, they call it), and I have noticed that it makes RC a bit easier.

TBH, I actually found this RC easier than usual? I found the LR a bit harder - not harder questions, just fewer easy questions.


edit: effed up quoting

User avatar
mornincounselor
Posts: 1220
Joined: Sun Apr 21, 2013 1:37 am

Post removed.

Postby mornincounselor » Sun Jul 27, 2014 6:50 pm

Post removed.
Last edited by mornincounselor on Mon Nov 09, 2015 1:35 pm, edited 3 times in total.

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

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby jmjm » Sun Jul 27, 2014 6:51 pm

smccgrey wrote:
jmjm wrote:wow on the score! is this fresh PT? Was your RC always so good? The RC of this PT IIRC was very tough.


Thank you! I'm excited! Still chasing the 180 unicorn though...

Yes, it was a fresh PT. And no, RC hasn't been awesome since the beginning - not bad, but pretty inconsistent (-0 to -6). But I just started going through Manhattan RC and using some of their strategies, particularly identifying the two arguments, how they are balanced and where the author's opinion falls (reading for scale, they call it), and I have noticed that it makes RC a bit easier.

TBH, I actually found this RC easier than usual? I found the LR a bit harder - not harder questions, just fewer easy questions.

you'd get there soon as you are near perfect in both lg and rc. many can do perfect in one of these sections but the combination is rare. Somehow if i focus on MLSAT approach of scale and identifying the two arguments/viewpoints and author's opinion in the passage, i get lost in the structure and retain little of any details. I think i got -7 in this RC fresh. It's the one with the noguchi passage? While reading that passage was easy, the questions had me reread parts of the passage so many times that I must have taken 11-12 minutes on that passage and still missed several on that alone.

ilikebaseball
Posts: 4103
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2014 3:04 am

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby ilikebaseball » Sun Jul 27, 2014 9:07 pm





Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 6 guests