Top Law Schools

Toby Ziegler wrote:

santoki wrote:

BillPackets wrote:

Toby Ziegler wrote:Yeah I grabbed the wrong "10 LSAT" book, so I took a way old test. There was also a game in there that was weird AF. Every single LR question I missed I narrowed down to 2 and selected the wrong answer, yet when I reviewed, it was obvious why the wrong one was wrong and why the right one was right, so I am really trying to train myself to see that during the test. I also have this nasty problem of going down the line of answer choices and seeing one that I think is right and then not reading the remaining answer choices with as much precision.

Yeah I know what you mean. I think when it comes down to it, at least for flaw questions, there will be two attractive answer choices (at least in more difficult questions), but one will just be way too weak to be the right answer. I think this is esp common in principle justify, strengthen, and weaken, where they will write one or more answer choices that seem attractive, but the stimulus actually leaves room for those answer choices.

i have that problem too- where i see an answer choice A or B that looks like the ONE...and then end up skimming past the rest of the choices and inadvertently missing the real one. i've gotten in the habit of just ticking off next to the choices that seem to be candidates, even if im almost POSITIVE that a choice is right. having a tick mark next to a choice as opposed to having a choice circled does wonders psychologically as far as reading the rest of the choices intently.

I am going to try that. Has it worked well for you?

GreenTee wrote:On the timing issue:

I'm terrible at finishing sections under time. It's a really good day if I can finish under 34. Usually, I'm right down to the wire, within a few seconds of 35:00. But here's the thing: My accuracy is solid, and I trust in my process.

The only way I think I could finish a section in 30 mins, at this point, is if I took shortcuts and sacrificed a thorough POE -- basically just grabbing at correct answers as soon as I see them, and racing through RC passages just to get the "gist." My fear is that if I start gunning to finish sections well under time, I'm going to develop shitty testing habits, which will affect my accuracy overall.

Do you guys think it's worth it to take that risk?

GreenTee wrote:On the timing issue:

I'm terrible at finishing sections under time. It's a really good day if I can finish under 34. Usually, I'm right down to the wire, within a few seconds of 35:00. But here's the thing: My accuracy is solid, and I trust in my process.

The only way I think I could finish a section in 30 mins, at this point, is if I took shortcuts and sacrificed a thorough POE -- basically just grabbing at correct answers as soon as I see them, and racing through RC passages just to get the "gist." My fear is that if I start gunning to finish sections well under time, I'm going to develop shitty testing habits, which will affect my accuracy overall.

Do you guys think it's worth it to take that risk?

GreenTee wrote:On the timing issue:

I'm terrible at finishing sections under time. It's a really good day if I can finish under 34. Usually, I'm right down to the wire, within a few seconds of 35:00. But here's the thing: My accuracy is solid, and I trust in my process.

The only way I think I could finish a section in 30 mins, at this point, is if I took shortcuts and sacrificed a thorough POE -- basically just grabbing at correct answers as soon as I see them, and racing through RC passages just to get the "gist." My fear is that if I start gunning to finish sections well under time, I'm going to develop shitty testing habits, which will affect my accuracy overall.

Do you guys think it's worth it to take that risk?

Superstaranonymous wrote:

santoki wrote:

GreenTee wrote:On the timing issue:

I'm terrible at finishing sections under time. It's a really good day if I can finish under 34. Usually, I'm right down to the wire, within a few seconds of 35:00. But here's the thing: My accuracy is solid, and I trust in my process.

The only way I think I could finish a section in 30 mins, at this point, is if I took shortcuts and sacrificed a thorough POE -- basically just grabbing at correct answers as soon as I see them, and racing through RC passages just to get the "gist." My fear is that if I start gunning to finish sections well under time, I'm going to develop shitty testing habits, which will affect my accuracy overall.

Do you guys think it's worth it to take that risk?

id say its worth the risk, especially since you are still practicing for the real thing. these PTs dont mean much-they are simply a tool for you to improve for the actual test. who knows what might pop up during the test that might throw you off your usual timing that prevents you from answering a couple of questions?

+1 I'm constantly afraid that the actual test will be the time they decide to throw a curve ball at us with some new element that they'll claim is just a variant of what the LSAT has already been testing for. Maybe it's irrational but at least it's motivating for me.

smccgrey wrote:

GreenTee wrote:On the timing issue:
Do you guys think it's worth it to take that risk?

Yes, but don't jump from 35 to 30. You still have a month, and probably a lot of PTs to do. Do 34 minutes for your next couple, then 33, etc.

My 180 friend actually only recommended 32 minute sections. Not 30. 5 minutes is a long time.

ilikebaseball wrote:

jmjm wrote:

ilikebaseball wrote: Let me just say that its not a bad concept. I remember playing baseball (pitched in college) whenever we had scrimmages, the coach would put runners on 1st and 2nd with no outs to start the inning. Our job was to pitch out of it. All the while he had the other half of the team and himself in the dugout yelling at every moment. The thing he was trying to accomplish was to make a practice environment much more pressure packed than a game environment.

Similar with the LSAT. Of course, when we are PTing, its hard to say in our minds "okay, getting these last 5 answers will put me in law school." So you have to find other ways to make your practice environment more pressure. Common ways are to sit in an area full of distractions, have 30 question sections, have 30 minute sections, etc. Anyway you can make your PT environment a little more stressful will only make it seem easier and more calming on game day.

there was a post sometime ago about baseball doughnut analogy iirc. you practice on much harder questions and the real thing feels easy. i think many would agree that after doing lsat rc, any other standardized tests' rc would be cake, which wouldn't have seemed possible before being exposed to lsat rc.

are there any extremely hard rc/lr exercises or tests anywhere or in books or law school curriculum that one could point to?

tls advise is against doing princeton review/barron tests that have fake questions but there are clear examples where some 180ers began with princeton review tests which are harder and fake and the real lsat questions seemed easy to them after.

Cambridge has "Most Difficult Passages" that you can buy

hereisonehand wrote:

Colonel_funkadunk wrote:

smccgrey wrote:

GreenTee wrote:On the timing issue:
Do you guys think it's worth it to take that risk?

Yes, but don't jump from 35 to 30. You still have a month, and probably a lot of PTs to do. Do 34 minutes for your next couple, then 33, etc.

My 180 friend actually only recommended 32 minute sections. Not 30. 5 minutes is a long time.

If I could finish the problems before hearing the "5 minutes left" that would be 180

I think what most distracted me when I took the actual test was hearing the 5 min. warning and not being done (or at least almost done). It's really worth it to aim to be done with a few minutes to spare, as stressing over whether you're gonna get to every question is not going to do your focus any favors.

smccgrey wrote:My 180 friend

smccgrey wrote:

BillPackets wrote:

smccgrey wrote:My 180 friend

He is 180 in a number of ways.

Colonel_funkadunk wrote:

smccgrey wrote:

BillPackets wrote:

smccgrey wrote:My 180 friend

He is 180 in a number of ways.

Whenever someone pisses me off I'm gonna start calling them my 145 friend.

smccgrey wrote:I have to stop myself from using 180 to describe things IRL.

Superstaranonymous wrote:On another note I took PT 37 and I'm definitely a little worried now

RC -7
LR -8
LG -1

Raw: 85
Scaled: 166

I think the curve may have been a little tough as I've gotten the same raw score before and had a 168 but I I'm starting to see a recurring trend.

RC: It's kicking my ass and I cannot stay below -5. There is always one particular passage that I get through and can't determine the scope concretely enough. I usually have go to the next passage and come back and answer the global questions so I don't miss out on easy points from other passages. I've tried drilling difficult passages but I'm starting to think it's my process that's hurting me.

LR: I like to skip the parallel reasoning because they tend to be lengthy and require a lot of timely reading and I wasn't able to get back to one. Three misses were due to the infamous narrow down to two and chose incorrectly. One miss was due to a scantron transfer error. The last three were ones during blind review that I easily recognized the correct answer. I'm a sucker for shell game answers sometimes and I'm really working on that.

LG: It was a grouping game and when I diagrammed all the possible hypotheticals, I forgot one that cost me.

I think I can iron out the LR and LG mistakes but my RC may need some more serious work. I guess I can't complain too much as I've only been studying for two months but I don't know if my RC problems will go away so easily.

Anyone else still having these RC issues?

JerryLundegard wrote:

Superstaranonymous wrote: The hour is drawing near..

smccgrey wrote:

Toby Ziegler wrote:

JerryLundegard wrote:

Superstaranonymous wrote: The hour is drawing near..

This so much.

I'm excited!