Falling into trap?

ket310
Posts: 44
Joined: Mon Apr 01, 2013 11:08 pm

Falling into trap?

Postby ket310 » Mon Feb 17, 2014 10:57 am

Hi, TLS gurus, 0L trying to get 170+ on DEC LSAT here, need some help. I'll be applying in fall 2015 (currently in service).

Since the post is slightly long, long story short (for people who don't have time to read the whole thing), need some advice in LR drill (cambridge). I struggle with question lv 3-4, eliminate 3 wrong answers choices and usually picks the trick answer choice, not the right answer. If anyone was able to resolve this, I would love to hear your insight.!



Here's the full story.

So far, I've studied manhattan series, bible series and the trainer. Now, I'm doing cambridge drills. My last diagnostic I took was 160 about two weeks ago (it was 147 when I began).

With LR, on the level 1-2, I get most of them right (about 95%) with most of the times eliminating 4 wrong answers.

With level 3-4, I am really struggling. It's not an issue with specific question type, just with difficulty level. Most times, I am able to eliminate at least 2-3 answers, but when I'm stuck with the last two choices, I pick the trap answer choice out of the two about 7~80% of the time.

To fix this issue, I just began writing the wrong question/answers, thinking why the answer choice I picked was wrong, thinking why the choices that I couldn't eliminate are wrong, and trying to understand and implement how the explanation thinks. Will this improve me in the long run? Am I doing the right thing? With LR I feel so confident when I do level 1-2 so I feel like I am almost there but always mess up the last step with level 3-4. If anybody was in similar situation and resolved it, if you share your story, it would be awesome.!

User avatar
mirroroferised7
Posts: 615
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2013 2:35 pm

Re: Falling into trap?

Postby mirroroferised7 » Mon Feb 17, 2014 1:11 pm

ket310 wrote:Hi, TLS gurus, 0L trying to get 170+ on DEC LSAT here, need some help. I'll be applying in fall 2015 (currently in service).

Since the post is slightly long, long story short (for people who don't have time to read the whole thing), need some advice in LR drill (cambridge). I struggle with question lv 3-4, eliminate 3 wrong answers choices and usually picks the trick answer choice, not the right answer. If anyone was able to resolve this, I would love to hear your insight.!



Here's the full story.

So far, I've studied manhattan series, bible series and the trainer. Now, I'm doing cambridge drills. My last diagnostic I took was 160 about two weeks ago (it was 147 when I began).

With LR, on the level 1-2, I get most of them right (about 95%) with most of the times eliminating 4 wrong answers.

With level 3-4, I am really struggling. It's not an issue with specific question type, just with difficulty level. Most times, I am able to eliminate at least 2-3 answers, but when I'm stuck with the last two choices, I pick the trap answer choice out of the two about 7~80% of the time.

To fix this issue, I just began writing the wrong question/answers, thinking why the answer choice I picked was wrong, thinking why the choices that I couldn't eliminate are wrong, and trying to understand and implement how the explanation thinks. Will this improve me in the long run? Am I doing the right thing? With LR I feel so confident when I do level 1-2 so I feel like I am almost there but always mess up the last step with level 3-4. If anybody was in similar situation and resolved it, if you share your story, it would be awesome.!


Okay, I'm not super solid on LR, but I'll try to throw my hat into the ring on this one:

1) Are you doing PT's? I'm not sure what lvls 1,2,3etc. are for LR's. But what's your average on LR's for actually tests?

2) Are you using lsatqa? This helps you REALLY target the exact type of questions you're having difficulty with, finding out exactly which question types are costing you the most points. I would start there. Once you get it down to a certain question family, you can start memorizing the tricks of that specific question type.

Talking in terms of a specific review system isn't really helpful in relation to the actual test, from what I've gathered. I'd like to see some actual test results, and work from there.

ket310
Posts: 44
Joined: Mon Apr 01, 2013 11:08 pm

Re: Falling into trap?

Postby ket310 » Mon Feb 17, 2014 2:27 pm

1. No, I'm drilling right now. Cambridge drill series has all the different types of questions separated into specific categories. So, I'm doing one specific question at all times. The difficulty of the question is specified as well. So, lv 1 being the easiest and lv 4 being the hardest.

2. I haven't gathered all the data yet. Once I'm done with all sets, I'll figure out where I suck the most and improve one specific type at a time.

User avatar
Jeffort
Posts: 1896
Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2008 4:43 pm

Re: Falling into trap?

Postby Jeffort » Mon Feb 17, 2014 7:38 pm

What you describe strongly indicates that you are not figuring out and focusing on the main flawed assumption(s)/flawed method of reasoning underlying the arguments for assumption family questions (strengthen, weaken, flawed method of reasoning, necc assumption, suff assumption, etc.). The correct answer for those question types always gives you something that addresses the flawed assumption in the core of the argument in a way responsive to the requirement of the question type (strengthens the assumption for strengthen questions, attacks the assumption for weaken questions, etc.). When you haven't properly determined the flaw/flawed assumption of the argument, you usually won't recognize the correct answer as being significant and understand that it satisfies the question stem because you don't see how it relates to the core of the reasoning of the argument. Correct answers for level 3 & 4 assumption family questions rarely stand out as being correct to people that don't understand the core reasoning and see the main flawed assumption(s).

For the other non-flawed argument based question types (MBT, MSS, explain/resolve, etc.) there are different types of common issues that make the level 3 & 4 ones much more difficult, mainly stuff involving forming valid inferences from evidence so we would need more detailed information to help figure out where you are going wrong with those.

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

Re: Falling into trap?

Postby Louis1127 » Mon Feb 17, 2014 8:57 pm

OP- I think the following question will help you (and me, haha), so I am asking it in your thread.

Jeffort- I am in a VERY similar situation to OP. Like identical. My question to you is: what about identifying the flaw on Nec Assumption questions? A Nec Assumption can really be anything, and oftentimes I will think of multiple necessary assumptions that are necessary to make the argument work, and then sometimes the correct AC is something else that is a necessary assumption.

Also, on questions that are Strengthen and Weaken, the correct AC may strengthen a part of the support that has nothing to do with the flaw that I identify (please correct me if this is a faulty observation). Thus, should I identify the flaw if the strengthener/weakener may strengthen/weaken a different part of the support, and thus the argument? The strengthener/weakener may not get at the flaw I identify!

OP- good question. I feel like we have hit a plateau here (maybe we could call it the 160 plateau). I also feel like it's conquerable, we're just going to have to reach down to a deeper level than we have to get to this point. We gotta GROW. Thanks for asking this great question.

ket310
Posts: 44
Joined: Mon Apr 01, 2013 11:08 pm

Re: Falling into trap?

Postby ket310 » Tue Feb 18, 2014 1:05 am

Jeffort - Thank you for the insight. Today, I realized that I missed a lot of questions due to not paying full attention on describing words (ex. some, all, most likely) which falls me into trap. Also, I have trouble with abstract sentences, which I need to work on.

I guess you're right on my problem, that I have hard time figuring out the core with lv 3.4 questions. I really do. I'll work on it. Thanks.


Louis1127 - Yeah, I guess we're stuck at 160 range now. Let's move one more step up. I remember my cold, getting not even half of LR right. Hard work and critical thinking got me up to now and will get us to 170+!!!

User avatar
Jeffort
Posts: 1896
Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2008 4:43 pm

Re: Falling into trap?

Postby Jeffort » Wed Feb 19, 2014 2:25 am

Louis1127 wrote:OP- I think the following question will help you (and me, haha), so I am asking it in your thread.

Jeffort- I am in a VERY similar situation to OP. Like identical. My question to you is: what about identifying the flaw on Nec Assumption questions? A Nec Assumption can really be anything, and oftentimes I will think of multiple necessary assumptions that are necessary to make the argument work, and then sometimes the correct AC is something else that is a necessary assumption.

Also, on questions that are Strengthen and Weaken, the correct AC may strengthen a part of the support that has nothing to do with the flaw that I identify (please correct me if this is a faulty observation). Thus, should I identify the flaw if the strengthener/weakener may strengthen/weaken a different part of the support, and thus the argument? The strengthener/weakener may not get at the flaw I identify!

OP- good question. I feel like we have hit a plateau here (maybe we could call it the 160 plateau). I also feel like it's conquerable, we're just going to have to reach down to a deeper level than we have to get to this point. We gotta GROW. Thanks for asking this great question.


Labeling it "The 160 plateau" is perfect since that's roughly the highest score you can get without developing the deeper LR analysis skills needed for consistently getting the higher difficulty questions correct. LR sections are intentionally designed to include a large enough proportion of higher difficulty level questions to create that and other skill level plateaus on the scale.

This is a topic worthy of more detailed discussion. If you post references to particular LR questions you struggled with due to the issues you described we can dig into this 'deeper analysis' for assumptions to avoid traps idea in more detail.




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Instrumental and 9 guests