The Official September 2014 Study Group

User avatar
sfoglia
Posts: 1758
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2014 1:30 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby sfoglia » Tue Aug 19, 2014 12:24 pm

schmelling wrote:Am I the only one here who can study over 5 hours and still feel like it was a day wasted?


Yes! Particularly if I start to tire towards the end and make silly mistakes that compound one another. But, I usually just call it a day at that point and promise myself that I will return to whatever it is the next day, with the goal of going for -0. That's the test, I think: Can you return to whatever you studied the day previous and put everything into practice, both with greater speed and accuracy?

User avatar
sfoglia
Posts: 1758
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2014 1:30 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby sfoglia » Tue Aug 19, 2014 1:01 pm

cavalier2015 wrote:can someone help me understand PT54.Section2.Question6.

I got this right because of POE but i am going through all the LR questions and typing up notes on them and am unsure how to break this one down.

Is it because the conclusion is a conditional and with no conditional chains. Thus, when this happens we want to protect the necessary condition (not sure what this even means but remember reading it somewhere in the powerscore bible)

EDIT: can someone double check my analysis on this question?

T: Necessary Assumption
C: If writing paper made from recycled paper replaces other types of writing paper → need to use more filler
Thoughts: This is an Assumption question with a conditional conclusion AND with no conditional premises. Therefore, we want to look for an answer choice that protects the necessary condition
AC:
A. Negation version does not destroy the argument
B. Out of scope to core
C. Correct because if grayish paper will be acceptable alternative to white paper than there is no need to use more filler (more filler = more white).
D. Premise booster. When negated this tells us more filler = more white. No effect on conclusion
E. Out of scope to core.


The terminology! Simplify! Here is how I would approach the question, from beginning to end. I hope this helps and doesn't confuse you...

Okay, so this is a necessary assumption question. For NA questions, I'm looking for the assumption that is required for the argument to hold. That's it. That simple. So, I'd break down the argument into conclusion and support.

Conclusion: If recycled paper replaces all other papers, then paper manufacturers will need to use more filler to whiten. (THE WHAT)
Support: Recycled paper requires more filler to whiten it than does non-recycled paper. (THE WHY)

In my opinion, the question is only confusing because the stimulus provides a pretty sound argument, in which two necessary assumptions are already acknowledged. The author concedes to possible criticism in part; he removes the possibility of two potential counter-arguments that can be made to protest his conclusion: (1.) "What if a better filler were developed that produced the same effect with less?" and (2.) "What if we found a way to whiten without using fillers at all?" Those two ideas are, essentially, necessary assumptions. If (1.) better filler is developed, then the conclusion does not hold. If (2.) new, non-filler whiteners are invented, then the conclusion also does not hold. Hence the author's use of the word "barring."

But there is one more assumption that is necessary for the argument: (3.) That manufacturers cannot just produce grey-ish paper and call it a day. I mean, if grey-ish recycled paper is fine, no more filler is needed to whiten, and the conclusion once again crumbles.

(Note that interpreting the above two counter-arguments is completely unnecessary to answer this question correctly. You don't need to understand them at all. They are not a part of the conclusion, they do not provide support, and so they are irrelevant to your task. Push them aside. All that is important is that you recognize that they are unimportant.)

Again, I hope this helps. I studied LR using Manhattan and The Trainer, so my approach specifically mimics theirs.

User avatar
sashafierce
Posts: 454
Joined: Sun Aug 04, 2013 11:44 am

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby sashafierce » Tue Aug 19, 2014 1:08 pm

Been working on my RC lately, just completed two RC section PT23 (-4) and PT 27 (-7), forcing myself to just "Keep It Moving" during RC is really paying off. I am actually at the point where I am finishing sections with extra time. I am hoping that with some greater effort I can get RC down to the -3 to -4 range by September. :D

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

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby vracovino » Tue Aug 19, 2014 3:32 pm

Scored a 159 on June 07 today.

I have somehow gone from a first PT score of 167 on 45 and gotten progressively worse by a few points on each test since.

There must be something fundamentally wrong with my studying.

GreenTee
Posts: 1364
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2014 3:15 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby GreenTee » Tue Aug 19, 2014 4:43 pm

Lurker here! Decided to come out of the shadows and join the party.

Last five PTs were 166, 168, 172, 173, 165. Shooting for mid 170s. Right now I'm drilling RC heavily, since I have had some trouble with timing.

Question:

I have not been drilling timed sections during the week. I'm just doing individual passages back-to-back, and saving full sections for my experimentals in my weekend practice tests. Do you think I should be doing timed sections exclusively? I think drilling individual passages improves my accuracy, but I don't know if it's helping with timing issues.

Thanks!

cpamom
Posts: 40
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2012 11:48 am

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby cpamom » Tue Aug 19, 2014 4:49 pm

I am so excited! After 5 preptests of 170 I got 176 on preptest 65!!! I am overjoyed and can only hope that I'd be able to do it again. I am a non-native speaker and sometimes it takes me longer to get a hold of the argument than I'd like, and after shameful 159 on October 2013 I was so devastated, I thought I'd never recover, lol.

This morning I read your study schedules for motivation. I applaud those of you who do several preptests a week. I only do 1 a week, I feel that I don't learn as much by doing the actual test. Drilling works, though.

User avatar
flash21
Posts: 1536
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2013 8:56 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby flash21 » Tue Aug 19, 2014 5:21 pm

cpamom wrote:I am so excited! After 5 preptests of 170 I got 176 on preptest 65!!! I am overjoyed and can only hope that I'd be able to do it again. I am a non-native speaker and sometimes it takes me longer to get a hold of the argument than I'd like, and after shameful 159 on October 2013 I was so devastated, I thought I'd never recover, lol.

This morning I read your study schedules for motivation. I applaud those of you who do several preptests a week. I only do 1 a week, I feel that I don't learn as much by doing the actual test. Drilling works, though.


what did you do from october to now? curious

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

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby BillPackets » Tue Aug 19, 2014 5:30 pm

Colonel_funkadunk wrote:
bound wrote:Does anyone have any suggestions (other than Manhattan) for RC? Trying to go less than -3 is gonna make me go crazy. Think I need to read another source for a different prespective.


I was referred to the following thread before and it seems to be pretty solid.

http://top-law-schools.com/forums/viewt ... 6&t=234382


I referred the above poster ("colonel_fuckaduck") to said thread. It's legit.

Also, I thought the trainer was the best resource for RC, and I also tried Manhattan.

cpamom
Posts: 40
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2012 11:48 am

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby cpamom » Tue Aug 19, 2014 6:02 pm

I attribute my improvement mostly to quitting my full-time job, honestly. Even though my four kids stayed home in summer, I still had more energy than I used to. I got 159 when I was unable to do a single preptest for 6 months because of having a new baby :)

My score jumped 5 points after I quit my job. I only manage to study 15-20 hours a week, though, but it's my third try (166 October 2012).

User avatar
Toby Ziegler
Posts: 701
Joined: Thu May 09, 2013 2:59 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby Toby Ziegler » Tue Aug 19, 2014 6:07 pm

Please tell me that questions like #161 in the "flaw" packet are super rare. Flaw questions have come pretty easy to me, but this one was a real a-hole.

Learn_Live_Hope
Posts: 1016
Joined: Mon Feb 17, 2014 9:33 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby Learn_Live_Hope » Tue Aug 19, 2014 6:27 pm

vracovino wrote:Scored a 159 on June 07 today.

I have somehow gone from a first PT score of 167 on 45 and gotten progressively worse by a few points on each test since.

There must be something fundamentally wrong with my studying.


I think that June 07 test is pretty difficult.

How did you do on the second LR?

I took in couple of days ago and didn't do well either.

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

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby BillPackets » Tue Aug 19, 2014 6:41 pm

Toby Ziegler wrote:Please tell me that questions like #161 in the "flaw" packet are super rare. Flaw questions have come pretty easy to me, but this one was a real a-hole.


I don't have the packet in front of me Toby. What's the gist of the question?

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

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby Colonel_funkadunk » Tue Aug 19, 2014 7:19 pm

Toby Ziegler wrote:Please tell me that questions like #161 in the "flaw" packet are super rare. Flaw questions have come pretty easy to me, but this one was a real a-hole.


If you are referring to the question about Hana's birthday party- I think it's a pretty common tactic for LSAC to force you to describe the flaw in a very general way. Instead of it being "overlooks the fact that her brothers aren't the only ppl who could give her the recording" it says it as "fails to establish that something true of some ppl is only true of those people" which is just another way of rephrasing the former.

User avatar
axel.foley
Posts: 76
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2012 11:44 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby axel.foley » Tue Aug 19, 2014 7:49 pm

Hey all,

Question regarding PT 30 S4 Q9. The stimulus uses the term “generally.” I translated this into a most statement (Manu by FTA -M-> ~Serious Attn.) But in the the 7Sage explanation (link for those who have the course is below), J.Y. takes generally as the same as ALL Xs are Ys (X --> Y). Is this something we can do on every question? How do you diagram generally, usually, likely etc. conditionally? Thanks.

http://7sage.com/lesson/first-time-auth ... esson=1130

BJS
Posts: 291
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2014 7:30 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby BJS » Tue Aug 19, 2014 8:36 pm

I've been working on LG recently. Two questions relating to them:

1. Is it even worthwhile to time yourself at 8:45 like the Powerscore LG Bible suggests? If you take 8:45 for each game you won't have time to bubble the Scantron. What's the best time to use during drilling then?

2. How worthwhile is it to study weird old games like the word/sentence game from PT10? It just seems like a waste of time at this point when there's so much to study for - so many RC passages, so many LR questions, and so many LG games.

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

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby BillPackets » Tue Aug 19, 2014 8:39 pm

BJS wrote:I've been working on LG recently. Two questions relating to them:

1. Is it even worthwhile to time yourself at 8:45 like the Powerscore LG Bible suggests? If you take 8:45 for each game you won't have time to bubble the Scantron. What's the best time to use during drilling then?

2. How worthwhile is it to study weird old games like the word/sentence game from PT10? It just seems like a waste of time at this point when there's so much to study for - so many RC passages, so many LR questions, and so many LG games.


You'll blow thru some games and spend more time on others. 8:45 is just an average.

Don't worry about really weird old games, just keep in mind that some games revolve around geometrical shapes, so keep that in mind.

User avatar
sfoglia
Posts: 1758
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2014 1:30 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby sfoglia » Tue Aug 19, 2014 9:00 pm

vracovino wrote:Scored a 159 on June 07 today.

I have somehow gone from a first PT score of 167 on 45 and gotten progressively worse by a few points on each test since.

There must be something fundamentally wrong with my studying.


Sending you a PM. Don't despair.

User avatar
lsatkillah
Posts: 77
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2014 1:09 am

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby lsatkillah » Tue Aug 19, 2014 9:19 pm

PT66: 169
RC: -6
LR: -3
LG: -2

HELP PLEASE WITH MY WORSENING RC! PLEASE SHARE YOUR BEST RC TIPS. I'm spending ~3 minutes on the passage and still find myself spending way too much time looking back for more reads on questions that don't have line references.

User avatar
flash21
Posts: 1536
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2013 8:56 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby flash21 » Tue Aug 19, 2014 9:23 pm

Killah, take my advice with a grain of salt because me and you are scoring about the same on RC but did you consider spending even a bit more time on the passage than 3 minutes? I think I saw MLSAT Christine say that she spends 4-4:30 on the passage and it helps with the issue of referring back.

Hopefully someone better at RC can chime in though. I'd be interested in hearing.

User avatar
Gray
Posts: 5986
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2014 1:02 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby Gray » Tue Aug 19, 2014 9:27 pm

lsatkillah wrote:PT66: 169
RC: -6
LR: -3
LG: -2

HELP PLEASE WITH MY WORSENING RC! PLEASE SHARE YOUR BEST RC TIPS. I'm spending ~3 minutes on the passage and still find myself spending way too much time looking back for more reads on questions that don't have line references.


How do you feel when you're reading? I have the same issue when I'm tired or mentally distracted while going through the passage. The only tip I can give is read the passage thinking about how you would WRITE questions about it. There have been a few times that I circled something I thought would make a good LSAT question, and, surprise surprise, it was used in one of the questions. Doing this helps me stay focused and pay attention to more relevant information in the passages.

I was going -1 for a couple of PTs, but then effed it up on Sunday, and it was definitely because I was totally distracted and not reading effectively.

Adrian Monk
Posts: 120
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 7:32 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby Adrian Monk » Tue Aug 19, 2014 9:37 pm

sfoglia wrote:
vracovino wrote:Scored a 159 on June 07 today.

I have somehow gone from a first PT score of 167 on 45 and gotten progressively worse by a few points on each test since.

There must be something fundamentally wrong with my studying.


Sending you a PM. Don't despair.


do you have any general tips that you can share with me? specifically on logical resoining assumption family q's? thank you!

User avatar
rwe13
Posts: 66
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2014 2:23 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby rwe13 » Tue Aug 19, 2014 9:44 pm

First time ever getting back to back PTs over 170 (174,171). I'm hoping that is my new range. For some reason, I act like the dumbest kid in the world when I start logic games which stopped me from answering 2 questions in each of those sections, but that will be easy to fix. Hoping RC stays strong, since I've been pretty consistent in the -2,-1 range recently. LR needs to be more consistent, but that has been improving. Overall, confidence is slowly growing.

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

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby Colonel_funkadunk » Tue Aug 19, 2014 9:49 pm

BJS wrote:I've been working on LG recently. Two questions relating to them:

1. Is it even worthwhile to time yourself at 8:45 like the Powerscore LG Bible suggests? If you take 8:45 for each game you won't have time to bubble the Scantron. What's the best time to use during drilling then?

2. How worthwhile is it to study weird old games like the word/sentence game from PT10? It just seems like a waste of time at this point when there's so much to study for - so many RC passages, so many LR questions, and so many LG games.



I shoot for 5 min for level 1 and 2 games, 7 min level 3, and level 4 can be a crapshoot if you get snakes and lizards or something. But you buy yourself extra time by blowing through the easy games. And that 8:45 assumes you're bubbling as you go.

User avatar
flash21
Posts: 1536
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2013 8:56 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby flash21 » Tue Aug 19, 2014 9:51 pm

man that logic game from pt 40 is such a massive bitch, the connections one with vancouver, toronto, philidelphia, etc.

Probably sat there for 45 minutes in BR going over it and still got like 2-3 wrong. Hardest game Ive seen potentially

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

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby Colonel_funkadunk » Tue Aug 19, 2014 9:52 pm

Adrian Monk wrote:
sfoglia wrote:
vracovino wrote:Scored a 159 on June 07 today.

I have somehow gone from a first PT score of 167 on 45 and gotten progressively worse by a few points on each test since.

There must be something fundamentally wrong with my studying.


Sending you a PM. Don't despair.


do you have any general tips that you can share with me? specifically on logical resoining assumption family q's? thank you!


That's a very broad question. But the most important thing is having a clear idea of what the premise and conclusion are. Bc w assumption fam questions you are focusing on the reasoning that makes the jump from the premises to the main point. So if you don't have that correct a really tempting wrong answer choice will often get you.




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], Bing [Bot], ladymew, lmnope and 12 guests