The Official September 2014 Study Group

User avatar
NotASpecialSnowflake
Posts: 458
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 3:15 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby NotASpecialSnowflake » Fri Jun 27, 2014 11:11 pm

Checking in. I've taken the LSAT twice before, so this is my last chance.

My #s for my last one


167
Section 1 LG -1
Section 2 LR -3
EXP.
Section 3 RC -8 (This was when the girl next to me called the proctors over to talk with me about how I was "sharpening my pencil too loudly" The proctors apologized after the test and said she was out of line. I had a -6 RC on my diagnostic and was PTing at a -3)
Section 4 LR -6 (-6 was my diagnostic and I was PTing at a -3).

So yeah, pretty much explains why I have to take it again.

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

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby cpamom » Fri Jun 27, 2014 11:20 pm

This is going to be my third take (166, 159) and I'm pretty good with games. I loose agility somewhat if I don't practice for a week or two, but I'm usually able to get back on track after several hours.

I found it absolutely ineffective to learn from the book. I found books (pretty much each one that was mentioned on TLS, yeah I spent lots of money on test prep) hard to follow and extremely boring, so I signed up for Velocity, which was the hype of TLS at the time. Dave advocates a minimum- deduction approach and taught me to get right to the game and not waste any time making inferences that are not readily available, helpful tactics that served me well under time pressure of the real test. I credit his method for -0 on Zones. ( got -3 on another game, but that's whole other story)
After taking a second test without studying and getting punished for my arrogance I needed to learn the games and did not feel like paying for velocity again. So I purchased Cambridge packets and went to 7Sage for explanations. I feel that their deduction-heavy methods complimented Dave's approach. After drilling through packets inferences often jump right at you, and in case they're not I am always ready to dive in ang figure them out as I go.

That being said, I had a traumatizing experience today with preptest 52.
LG -1
LR -7
RC -9 !!!!!

I never in my worst dreams got -9 on RC, usually it's -5, and the irony is that this past week I went through Manhattan RC ( again) and felt that I actually learned something. I was so devastated by results that I did not even look at the questions I got wrong. Yet. I'm still digesting the fact that after spending countless of hours on RC my result is worse than what I got on cold diagnostics.

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

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby cpamom » Fri Jun 27, 2014 11:30 pm

Oh, and I'd like to thank you guys for the idea of making flash cards out of difficult LR questions. I always felt wasteful throwing away old prep material.

I quit my job to stay home with kids during summer and study for the test, so TLS is now my only place for an adult conversation in English (I am a non-native speaker).
Last edited by cpamom on Sat Jun 28, 2014 12:14 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Clyde Frog
Posts: 7130
Joined: Sun May 26, 2013 2:27 am

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby Clyde Frog » Fri Jun 27, 2014 11:53 pm

cpamom wrote:This is going to be my third take (166, 159) and I'm pretty good with games. I loose agility somewhat if I don't practice for a week or two, but I'm usually able to get back on track after several hours.

I found it absolutely ineffective to learn from the book. I found books (pretty much each one that was mentioned on TLS, yeah I spent lots of money on test prep) hard to follow and extremely boring, so I signed up for Velocity, which was the hype of TLS at the time. Dave advocates a minimum- deduction approach and taught me to get right to the game and not waste any time making inferences that are not readily available, helpful tactics that served me well under time pressure of the real test. I credit his method for -0 on Zones. ( got -3 on another game, but that's whole other story)
After taking a second test without studying and getting punished for my arrogance I needed to learn the games and did not feel like paying for velocity again. So I purchased Cambridge packets and went to 7Sage for explanations. I feel that their deduction-heavy methods complimented Dave's approach. After drilling through packets inferences often jump right at you, and in case they're not I am always ready to dive in ang figure them out as I go.

That being said, I had a traumatizing experience today with preptest 52.
LG -1
LR -7
RC -9 !!!!!

I never in my worst dreams got -9 on RC, usually it's -5, and the irony is that this past week I went through Manhattan RC ( again) and felt that I actually learned something. I was so devastated by results that I did not even look at the questions I got wrong. Yet. I'm still digesting the fact that after spending countless of hours on RC my result is worse than what I got on cold diagnostics.



Shit happens. Anyone can have an off day. What are your weaknesses in LR?

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

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby cpamom » Sat Jun 28, 2014 12:06 am

All over the place, I haven't discovered a pattern yet, honestly. I've only done three timed preptests so far and no matter which Cambridge packet I'm working on, these level 4s always make my brain itch.

I want to emphasize again, for everyone who is still struggling with logic games: Velocity is no longer a preferred method here, but Dave's approach is extremely straightforward and helpful. He shows how to use your prior work effectively and attack games that do not welcome inferences. It's not prohibitively expensive ( I wouldn't use them for anything but games) and worth looking into. At least check out some of their free videos to get a taste of their strategy.

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

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby ilikebaseball » Sat Jun 28, 2014 3:42 am

I got a 168 in June. Taking it again in September! Studying with a tutor twice a week. My logical reasoning is just god awful for some reason. I seriously need help with it. Just bought the bible for it online so maybe that'll help.

My games are almost perfect and my reading comp is okay (could probably be a bit better) but for whatever reason my logical reasoning is just plain awful and if i could get that to be as good as my reading comp or better then I'd probably get a 172 or better. However, I've heard how some of the LR is just natural... like you either have it or you don't. People tell me there isn't really a way to get better at it other then just reading the questions over and over and getting more used to them. So lets say (this isnt actual but im using an example) I miss 15 out of 50 LR questions on average. If I studied for 3 straight months on it, then people say I can only marginally get better, like 11 or 12 out of 50....

However, with my games I started out missing 8/23 and now I'm pretty consistently missing 1 or 2/23. So those have gotten much better, but has any experienced people had the same issues with LR that I have and have gotten better? How?! Thanks

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

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby cpamom » Sat Jun 28, 2014 7:26 am

choward014 wrote:
However, with my games I started out missing 8/23 and now I'm pretty consistently missing 1 or 2/23. So those have gotten much better, but has any experienced people had the same issues with LR that I have and have gotten better? How?! Thanks


If I were you, I would start writing my own explanations on why the wrong answers are wrong and right ones are right. That's so strange, never heard on anyone struggling so hard on LR but not RC

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

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby Louis1127 » Sat Jun 28, 2014 9:02 am

cpamom wrote:
choward014 wrote:
However, with my games I started out missing 8/23 and now I'm pretty consistently missing 1 or 2/23. So those have gotten much better, but has any experienced people had the same issues with LR that I have and have gotten better? How?! Thanks


If I were you, I would start writing my own explanations on why the wrong answers are wrong and right ones are right. That's so strange, never heard on anyone struggling so hard on LR but not RC


I am a huge fan of the bolded. I am doing this as well. I went from not even understanding how all the answer choices were different on my diagnostic to now missing on average between 5-6 on each LR section. While that is still way too high, I improved by doing this and will continue to improve.

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

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby Gray » Sat Jun 28, 2014 10:31 am

cpamom wrote:
That being said, I had a traumatizing experience today with preptest 52.
LG -1
LR -7
RC -9 !!!!!

I never in my worst dreams got -9 on RC, usually it's -5, and the irony is that this past week I went through Manhattan RC ( again) and felt that I actually learned something. I was so devastated by results that I did not even look at the questions I got wrong. Yet. I'm still digesting the fact that after spending countless of hours on RC my result is worse than what I got on cold diagnostics.


PT 52 has been my worst test so far. It was 5 points lower than my average, and it was the RC that got me too. Fortunately I wrote it a while ago, and haven't had a similarly traumatizing experience since! I hope that is at least mildly reassuring.

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

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby cpamom » Sat Jun 28, 2014 10:59 am

smccgrey wrote: I hope that is at least mildly reassuring.


It is, thank you.

Another way I work on my LR is after I'm done with the preptest or Cambridge packet instead of filing it away in my recycle bin, I cut out the questions that gave me trouble and glance over them at my downtime. It does not feel like real study, does not take much effort and adds some value to my prep. At least I'd like to think so.

thesigmaprodigy
Posts: 1
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2014 12:15 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby thesigmaprodigy » Sat Jun 28, 2014 12:21 pm

Hey everyone!

I'm so happy to have come across a discussion group like this and I'm hoping this will be a great resource as I begin my studying. This will be my 2nd time taking the LSAT and I'm curious if anyone can direct me to the best test prep materials. I've seen many people discussing so many different resources and I'm not sure which ones I should invest in. My weakest section is LR. Any help is gladly appreciated!

User avatar
NotASpecialSnowflake
Posts: 458
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 3:15 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby NotASpecialSnowflake » Sat Jun 28, 2014 12:40 pm

thesigmaprodigy wrote:Hey everyone!

I'm so happy to have come across a discussion group like this and I'm hoping this will be a great resource as I begin my studying. This will be my 2nd time taking the LSAT and I'm curious if anyone can direct me to the best test prep materials. I've seen many people discussing so many different resources and I'm not sure which ones I should invest in. My weakest section is LR. Any help is gladly appreciated!


I can't speak for everyone, but what worked for me was the LSAT trainer for LR (I think its best for LR) and RC and Powerscore for LG (Which seems to be top choice on this site).

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

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby ilikebaseball » Sat Jun 28, 2014 1:08 pm

Can you go into more about the "LSAT Trainer"? Never heard of it but I need to get better with my LR. If I do then I'll easily have above a 170!

User avatar
hetookmetoamovie
Posts: 620
Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2014 12:03 am

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby hetookmetoamovie » Sat Jun 28, 2014 1:45 pm

ilawsxhool1 wrote:
hetookmetoamovie wrote:Sorry if this is a dumb/obvious question, but is the right answer to a question ever given in the form of its contrapositive?


Yes! I wouldn't say it happens a lot, but it happens. It's just another way they can disguise the right answer.


Thanks! Ugh. One more thing to worry about.

Clyde Frog wrote:Pretty sure your lsat report only shows tests from past five years.


Ah, yes, my bad. Those years were a blur. The test I failed to show up for was June 2009 :oops: That won't look too, too bad on an application, right? I mean, they'll already know I'm older than your average applicant and haven't taken the most direct route to law school. Heh.

So my original plan was to just do a bunch of PTs, but it seems like I should be drilling and saving PTs for timing practice. I'm looking at buying the Cambridge packets by question type. I suspect that it's better to buy the bundle from exams 1-40 rather than ones from the later tests?

Also, have any of you had experience with Kindle versions of the Manhattan guides? I am attracted to their lower prices (like 1/3 of the paperback version) and not having to lug around a 50-lb bag of books everywhere I go, but I don't want to be blinded by my cheapness and lack of muscle.

Thanks again, everyone!

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

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby chimera » Sat Jun 28, 2014 1:56 pm

Took yesterday off and went to the beach... Now I continue through RC packets this weekend, then Monday I plan on taking a PT. Drilling RC has been going great so far. I've seen massive improvements and usually score anywhere -3 to -0 every four-passage section. We'll see how it goes next PT though. Besides the Manhattan RC strategies, I think my "outside" reading has contributed to my improvements as well.

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

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby ilikebaseball » Sat Jun 28, 2014 2:02 pm

Do you read stuff like "the economist" to help with RC? Does any article on the website apply? I always go to the website but once I get there I don't really know where to go from there to get a good article to read

User avatar
NotASpecialSnowflake
Posts: 458
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 3:15 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby NotASpecialSnowflake » Sat Jun 28, 2014 2:16 pm

choward014 wrote:Can you go into more about the "LSAT Trainer"? Never heard of it but I need to get better with my LR. If I do then I'll easily have above a 170!


http://www.amazon.com/LSAT-Trainer-rema ... AT+Trainer

It helped me improve in LR and RC more in two months than my six month powerscore online class did. And it costs a whole lot less. If I had to do it again, I'd get the powerscore LG bible and the trainer. For under $100, you can get better instruction than Kaplan most prep courses.

On another note, I took a PT today. I've seen it before so its a little high, but it was in November and I didn't recall many questions. Its also a big improvement from my "diagnostic" (I've take the LSAT twice, this was after a 6 month break) of 166.

PT 59 92/101 174

Section #1 LG -2

Section #2 LR -2

Section #3 LR -1

Section #4 LR (Exp.) -4 (Shows I still have some work to do on LR)

Section #5 RC -4 (I'm rusty on this, I haven't practiced much, but I'll take a -4 on test day)

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

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby chimera » Sat Jun 28, 2014 2:57 pm

choward014 wrote:Do you read stuff like "the economist" to help with RC? Does any article on the website apply? I always go to the website but once I get there I don't really know where to go from there to get a good article to read


Yep, I have a subscription. First and foremost, though, I read to relax and unwind. Don't worry so much about the subject, just go with an article or book that sounds interesting to you. You want to just relax and read something cool for a couple hours. Decompressing while enhancing your focus/endurance is the point. Personally, I read more from books than The Economist. I recently finished David Foster Wallace's Oblivion and am now reading Dancing Wu Li Masters, a book about physics, by Gary Zukov.

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

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby Louis1127 » Sat Jun 28, 2014 4:54 pm

MorninCounselor,

I know that when you get an LR argument that gets you in trouble you cut it out to look over it in the future.

Do you cut out the answer choices as well? There were a couple of LR questions where I identified the flaw/assumption correctly but did not see how the correct answer choice related to the flaw I found.

User avatar
WaltGrace83
Posts: 719
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2013 5:55 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby WaltGrace83 » Sat Jun 28, 2014 5:48 pm

Louis1127 wrote:MorninCounselor,

I know that when you get an LR argument that gets you in trouble you cut it out to look over it in the future.

Do you cut out the answer choices as well? There were a couple of LR questions where I identified the flaw/assumption correctly but did not see how the correct answer choice related to the flaw I found.


I feel like the answer choices are actually MUCH more important than the stimulus. I would!

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

Post removed.

Postby mornincounselor » Sat Jun 28, 2014 6:06 pm

Post removed.
Last edited by mornincounselor on Mon Nov 09, 2015 1:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.

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

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby Louis1127 » Sat Jun 28, 2014 11:49 pm

Walt and Mornin, y'all have convinced me- I'm going to cut out the answers choices, too, in order to go over why each is wrong and why the right one is right. Thanks for your help! I probably wouldn't have included the answer choices if it weren't for you guys!

User avatar
chicharon
Posts: 1162
Joined: Sun Mar 31, 2013 8:57 pm

Post removed...

Postby chicharon » Sun Jun 29, 2014 3:10 am

Post removed...
Last edited by chicharon on Wed Dec 30, 2015 5:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Clyde Frog
Posts: 7130
Joined: Sun May 26, 2013 2:27 am

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby Clyde Frog » Sun Jun 29, 2014 3:19 am

hetookmetoamovie wrote:
ilawsxhool1 wrote:
hetookmetoamovie wrote:Sorry if this is a dumb/obvious question, but is the right answer to a question ever given in the form of its contrapositive?


Yes! I wouldn't say it happens a lot, but it happens. It's just another way they can disguise the right answer.


Thanks! Ugh. One more thing to worry about.

Clyde Frog wrote:Pretty sure your lsat report only shows tests from past five years.


Ah, yes, my bad. Those years were a blur. The test I failed to show up for was June 2009 :oops: That won't look too, too bad on an application, right? I mean, they'll already know I'm older than your average applicant and haven't taken the most direct route to law school. Heh.

So my original plan was to just do a bunch of PTs, but it seems like I should be drilling and saving PTs for timing practice. I'm looking at buying the Cambridge packets by question type. I suspect that it's better to buy the bundle from exams 1-40 rather than ones from the later tests?

Also, have any of you had experience with Kindle versions of the Manhattan guides? I am attracted to their lower prices (like 1/3 of the paperback version) and not having to lug around a 50-lb bag of books everywhere I go, but I don't want to be blinded by my cheapness and lack of muscle.

Thanks again, everyone!


It shouldn't show on your report since it was over five years ago. You shouldn't be worrying about it. Even if it did show up as an absent it's really not a big deal.

User avatar
Clyde Frog
Posts: 7130
Joined: Sun May 26, 2013 2:27 am

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby Clyde Frog » Sun Jun 29, 2014 3:19 am

chicharon wrote:Hey guys what's that website where you can enter your PT scores and it will tell you which ones are your weakest question types?


Lsatqa.com




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], DumbHollywoodActor, Greenteachurro, VMars and 14 guests