The Official September 2017 Study Group

Prepare for the LSAT or discuss it with others in this forum.

Are you ready for tomorrow?!?!?!

FUCK YES
20
44%
Yeah, kind of
8
18%
Ehh, hoping for the best
6
13%
Not prepared but screw it
3
7%
HAHAHA I'M NOT EVEN TAKING THE LSAT, SUCKS FOR YOU GUYS
8
18%
 
Total votes: 45

User avatar
TedBuckland

Bronze
Posts: 109
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2017 3:25 am

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby TedBuckland » Thu May 04, 2017 2:21 pm

Alexandros wrote:
Lalalsat96 wrote:How does one get better at Logical reasoning? I thought i had a natural aptitude for this after working through the Powerscore book clearly not. I suck. Haha help please because I don't think drilling is working :?

Last person that should be giving LR advice but drilling by question type is helpful. I never used PS but MH LR was very good if you want another book.


On this point, what is the best way to split LR by type? Especially without access to the Cambridge PDFs.

ngogirl12

Silver
Posts: 803
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2014 8:05 am

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby ngogirl12 » Thu May 04, 2017 3:06 pm

Alexandros wrote:
ngogirl12 wrote:Do you guys think going through the Manhattan LR guide is really important? This month I'm redoing the 7sage curriculum/reading Trainer and drilling. I have the Manhattan LR guide but only went through a few chapters before I jumped ship for 7Sage. Is it really worth it?

I think the most important thing is just to have something that explains each question type in depth, in a way you can understand.


Oh, ok thanks! I was worrying for a little bit with all the rave reviews..

ngogirl12

Silver
Posts: 803
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2014 8:05 am

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby ngogirl12 » Thu May 04, 2017 3:08 pm

TedBuckland wrote:
Alexandros wrote:
Lalalsat96 wrote:How does one get better at Logical reasoning? I thought i had a natural aptitude for this after working through the Powerscore book clearly not. I suck. Haha help please because I don't think drilling is working :?

Last person that should be giving LR advice but drilling by question type is helpful. I never used PS but MH LR was very good if you want another book.


On this point, what is the best way to split LR by type? Especially without access to the Cambridge PDFs.


You can purchase books where they separate the lR questions by type on the Amazon or Manhattan/powerscore websites. Otherwise I think someone has a post somewhere where they post all the different question types in all the PTs that exist,

Alexandros

Platinum
Posts: 6478
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2016 4:46 am

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby Alexandros » Thu May 04, 2017 3:09 pm

TedBuckland wrote:
Alexandros wrote:
Lalalsat96 wrote:How does one get better at Logical reasoning? I thought i had a natural aptitude for this after working through the Powerscore book clearly not. I suck. Haha help please because I don't think drilling is working :?

Last person that should be giving LR advice but drilling by question type is helpful. I never used PS but MH LR was very good if you want another book.


On this point, what is the best way to split LR by type? Especially without access to the Cambridge PDFs.

If you feel like doing it yourself there are guides online that list the questions by type.
If you want to use something that has the questions grouped by type - Manhattan has one for the 40s (https://www.amazon.com/Real-LSATs-Group ... 937707784/ ) There might be others out there as well.

User avatar
twiix

Silver
Posts: 858
Joined: Mon Feb 01, 2016 12:41 pm

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby twiix » Thu May 04, 2017 3:15 pm

ngogirl12 wrote:
Alexandros wrote:
ngogirl12 wrote:Do you guys think going through the Manhattan LR guide is really important? This month I'm redoing the 7sage curriculum/reading Trainer and drilling. I have the Manhattan LR guide but only went through a few chapters before I jumped ship for 7Sage. Is it really worth it?

I think the most important thing is just to have something that explains each question type in depth, in a way you can understand.


Oh, ok thanks! I was worrying for a little bit with all the rave reviews..


I'm doing the 7sage cc again as well. I like to use the MH book for additional explanation/context about questions that I have weaknesses in. So once you go through the CC and start drilling and figure out that you suck at NA/SA questions, it's helpful to have another resource with different verbiage to help get you over the roadbump.

User avatar
TedBuckland

Bronze
Posts: 109
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2017 3:25 am

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby TedBuckland » Thu May 04, 2017 3:48 pm

Alexandros wrote:
TedBuckland wrote:
Alexandros wrote:
Lalalsat96 wrote:How does one get better at Logical reasoning? I thought i had a natural aptitude for this after working through the Powerscore book clearly not. I suck. Haha help please because I don't think drilling is working :?

Last person that should be giving LR advice but drilling by question type is helpful. I never used PS but MH LR was very good if you want another book.


On this point, what is the best way to split LR by type? Especially without access to the Cambridge PDFs.

If you feel like doing it yourself there are guides online that list the questions by type.
If you want to use something that has the questions grouped by type - Manhattan has one for the 40s (https://www.amazon.com/Real-LSATs-Group ... 937707784/ ) There might be others out there as well.


Yeah I was trying to avoid having to do them manually. Oh well, who needs weekends anyway

User avatar
TedBuckland

Bronze
Posts: 109
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2017 3:25 am

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby TedBuckland » Thu May 04, 2017 3:52 pm

Theory (need to get my post count up): Thinking that the decline of 170+ scores in recent years can be at least partially attributed to the PDF's like Cambridge being outlawed.

Thoughts?

Alexandros

Platinum
Posts: 6478
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2016 4:46 am

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby Alexandros » Thu May 04, 2017 3:55 pm

TedBuckland wrote:Theory (need to get my post count up): Thinking that the decline of 170+ scores in recent years can be at least partially attributed to the PDF's like Cambridge being outlawed.

Thoughts?

No, because the curve remains the same - The same % of test takers will receive high scores. It has to be because of an overall decline in test-takers.

Alexandros

Platinum
Posts: 6478
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2016 4:46 am

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby Alexandros » Thu May 04, 2017 3:55 pm

TedBuckland wrote:
Alexandros wrote:
TedBuckland wrote:
Alexandros wrote:
Lalalsat96 wrote:How does one get better at Logical reasoning? I thought i had a natural aptitude for this after working through the Powerscore book clearly not. I suck. Haha help please because I don't think drilling is working :?

Last person that should be giving LR advice but drilling by question type is helpful. I never used PS but MH LR was very good if you want another book.


On this point, what is the best way to split LR by type? Especially without access to the Cambridge PDFs.

If you feel like doing it yourself there are guides online that list the questions by type.
If you want to use something that has the questions grouped by type - Manhattan has one for the 40s (https://www.amazon.com/Real-LSATs-Group ... 937707784/ ) There might be others out there as well.


Yeah I was trying to avoid having to do them manually. Oh well, who needs weekends anyway

In that case, I'd get a book like the Manhattan one (I used that one but there are probably others.)

dj9i27

Gold
Posts: 4367
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2016 2:37 pm

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby dj9i27 » Thu May 04, 2017 3:58 pm

Alexandros wrote:
TedBuckland wrote:Theory (need to get my post count up): Thinking that the decline of 170+ scores in recent years can be at least partially attributed to the PDF's like Cambridge being outlawed.

Thoughts?

No, because the curve remains the same - The same % of test takers will receive high scores. It has to be because of an overall decline in test-takers.

What is the story about the packets being outlawed?

User avatar
TedBuckland

Bronze
Posts: 109
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2017 3:25 am

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby TedBuckland » Thu May 04, 2017 4:08 pm

Alexandros wrote:
TedBuckland wrote:Theory (need to get my post count up): Thinking that the decline of 170+ scores in recent years can be at least partially attributed to the PDF's like Cambridge being outlawed.

Thoughts?

No, because the curve remains the same - The same % of test takers will receive high scores. It has to be because of an overall decline in test-takers.


But wouldn't the curve still work the same way, regardless of the numbers? It wouldn't matter if there were 100 people or 1000 people taking, because if 1% are going to score in the highest tier, then you'd have 1 or 10, but it's still 1%. The raw numbers themselves would drop but that wouldn't have any effect on percentages.

Alexandros

Platinum
Posts: 6478
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2016 4:46 am

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby Alexandros » Thu May 04, 2017 4:09 pm

dj9i27 wrote:
Alexandros wrote:
TedBuckland wrote:Theory (need to get my post count up): Thinking that the decline of 170+ scores in recent years can be at least partially attributed to the PDF's like Cambridge being outlawed.

Thoughts?

No, because the curve remains the same - The same % of test takers will receive high scores. It has to be because of an overall decline in test-takers.

What is the story about the packets being outlawed?

The packets were discontinued. And I think LSAC (probably Susan) decided they don't want PDFs.

Alexandros

Platinum
Posts: 6478
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2016 4:46 am

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby Alexandros » Thu May 04, 2017 4:12 pm

TedBuckland wrote:
Alexandros wrote:
TedBuckland wrote:Theory (need to get my post count up): Thinking that the decline of 170+ scores in recent years can be at least partially attributed to the PDF's like Cambridge being outlawed.

Thoughts?

No, because the curve remains the same - The same % of test takers will receive high scores. It has to be because of an overall decline in test-takers.


But wouldn't the curve still work the same way, regardless of the numbers? It wouldn't matter if there were 100 people or 1000 people taking, because if 1% are going to score in the highest tier, then you'd have 1 or 10, but it's still 1%. The raw numbers themselves would drop but that wouldn't have any effect on percentages.

That's what I'm saying. A lower amount of 170+ scores would have to be attributable to a decline in test-takers, not to the test getting "harder" or people struggling with it more.

Although they could be indirectly related - Because of no more PDFs, less people take the test or something like that.

Alexandros

Platinum
Posts: 6478
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2016 4:46 am

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby Alexandros » Thu May 04, 2017 4:17 pm

Need to buy a blender so I can start making some smoothies. 8)
so I stop spending $10 for a single smoothie for lunch.

dj9i27

Gold
Posts: 4367
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2016 2:37 pm

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby dj9i27 » Thu May 04, 2017 4:23 pm

Alexandros wrote:
dj9i27 wrote:
Alexandros wrote:
TedBuckland wrote:Theory (need to get my post count up): Thinking that the decline of 170+ scores in recent years can be at least partially attributed to the PDF's like Cambridge being outlawed.

Thoughts?

No, because the curve remains the same - The same % of test takers will receive high scores. It has to be because of an overall decline in test-takers.

What is the story about the packets being outlawed?

The packets were discontinued. And I think LSAC (probably Susan) decided they don't want PDFs.

... doesn't the LSAC sell PDF? I wonder if this is why H is doing what they are doing

Alexandros

Platinum
Posts: 6478
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2016 4:46 am

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby Alexandros » Thu May 04, 2017 4:30 pm

dj9i27 wrote:
Alexandros wrote:
dj9i27 wrote:
Alexandros wrote:
TedBuckland wrote:Theory (need to get my post count up): Thinking that the decline of 170+ scores in recent years can be at least partially attributed to the PDF's like Cambridge being outlawed.

Thoughts?

No, because the curve remains the same - The same % of test takers will receive high scores. It has to be because of an overall decline in test-takers.

What is the story about the packets being outlawed?

The packets were discontinued. And I think LSAC (probably Susan) decided they don't want PDFs.

... doesn't the LSAC sell PDF? I wonder if this is why H is doing what they are doing

No, they used to but I'm pretty sure they don't anymore (unless they started again.)
Mayhaps this is somehow the explanation for everything.

How is ur pneumonia? Are you still alive?

dj9i27

Gold
Posts: 4367
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2016 2:37 pm

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby dj9i27 » Thu May 04, 2017 4:33 pm

Alexandros wrote:
dj9i27 wrote:
Alexandros wrote:
dj9i27 wrote:
Alexandros wrote:
TedBuckland wrote:Theory (need to get my post count up): Thinking that the decline of 170+ scores in recent years can be at least partially attributed to the PDF's like Cambridge being outlawed.

Thoughts?

No, because the curve remains the same - The same % of test takers will receive high scores. It has to be because of an overall decline in test-takers.

What is the story about the packets being outlawed?

The packets were discontinued. And I think LSAC (probably Susan) decided they don't want PDFs.

... doesn't the LSAC sell PDF? I wonder if this is why H is doing what they are doing

No, they used to but I'm pretty sure they don't anymore (unless they started again.)
Mayhaps this is somehow the explanation for everything.

How is ur pneumonia? Are you still alive?

it was probably just a kindle deal, so strange they throw the hammer down on Cambridge and PDFs like that.

Antibodies are doing their job, shout out to modern medicine. Wondering if this is now a preexisting condition for healthcare tho.

User avatar
TedBuckland

Bronze
Posts: 109
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2017 3:25 am

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby TedBuckland » Thu May 04, 2017 4:35 pm

Alexandros wrote:
TedBuckland wrote:
Alexandros wrote:
TedBuckland wrote:Theory (need to get my post count up): Thinking that the decline of 170+ scores in recent years can be at least partially attributed to the PDF's like Cambridge being outlawed.

Thoughts?

No, because the curve remains the same - The same % of test takers will receive high scores. It has to be because of an overall decline in test-takers.


But wouldn't the curve still work the same way, regardless of the numbers? It wouldn't matter if there were 100 people or 1000 people taking, because if 1% are going to score in the highest tier, then you'd have 1 or 10, but it's still 1%. The raw numbers themselves would drop but that wouldn't have any effect on percentages.

That's what I'm saying. A lower amount of 170+ scores would have to be attributable to a decline in test-takers, not to the test getting "harder" or people struggling with it more.

Although they could be indirectly related - Because of no more PDFs, less people take the test or something like that.


You're right, I retract my argument. Lol

User avatar
TedBuckland

Bronze
Posts: 109
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2017 3:25 am

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby TedBuckland » Thu May 04, 2017 4:36 pm

Alexandros wrote:
TedBuckland wrote:
Alexandros wrote:
TedBuckland wrote:
Alexandros wrote:
Lalalsat96 wrote:How does one get better at Logical reasoning? I thought i had a natural aptitude for this after working through the Powerscore book clearly not. I suck. Haha help please because I don't think drilling is working :?

Last person that should be giving LR advice but drilling by question type is helpful. I never used PS but MH LR was very good if you want another book.


On this point, what is the best way to split LR by type? Especially without access to the Cambridge PDFs.

If you feel like doing it yourself there are guides online that list the questions by type.
If you want to use something that has the questions grouped by type - Manhattan has one for the 40s (https://www.amazon.com/Real-LSATs-Group ... 937707784/ ) There might be others out there as well.


Yeah I was trying to avoid having to do them manually. Oh well, who needs weekends anyway

In that case, I'd get a book like the Manhattan one (I used that one but there are probably others.)


Looks like manhattan only offers the one book.

Alexandros

Platinum
Posts: 6478
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2016 4:46 am

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby Alexandros » Thu May 04, 2017 4:41 pm

dj9i27 wrote:
Alexandros wrote:
dj9i27 wrote:
Alexandros wrote:
dj9i27 wrote:
Alexandros wrote:
TedBuckland wrote:Theory (need to get my post count up): Thinking that the decline of 170+ scores in recent years can be at least partially attributed to the PDF's like Cambridge being outlawed.

Thoughts?

No, because the curve remains the same - The same % of test takers will receive high scores. It has to be because of an overall decline in test-takers.

What is the story about the packets being outlawed?

The packets were discontinued. And I think LSAC (probably Susan) decided they don't want PDFs.

... doesn't the LSAC sell PDF? I wonder if this is why H is doing what they are doing

No, they used to but I'm pretty sure they don't anymore (unless they started again.)
Mayhaps this is somehow the explanation for everything.

How is ur pneumonia? Are you still alive?

it was probably just a kindle deal, so strange they throw the hammer down on Cambridge and PDFs like that.

Antibodies are doing their job, shout out to modern medicine. Wondering if this is now a preexisting condition for healthcare tho.

Probably because of copyright stuff with PDFs floating around blahbahblah. I hope they bring them back tho.

Good! preexisting conditions are lots of fun and I will now die immediately when I return to 'Murica. I can't imagine that would count tho, so I think you're in the clear.

dj9i27

Gold
Posts: 4367
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2016 2:37 pm

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby dj9i27 » Thu May 04, 2017 4:51 pm

Alexandros wrote:Probably because of copyright stuff with PDFs floating around blahbahblah. I hope they bring them back tho.

Good! preexisting conditions are lots of fun and I will now die immediately when I return to 'Murica. I can't imagine that would count tho, so I think you're in the clear.

some real bad hombres have those PDFs, tiffany didn't even study and got a 178.

I imagine only the heads of the Super PACs will have control of health-care, money, water, etc.

At this point I want to go to law school so I can become Judge Dredd in 16 years.

User avatar
twiix

Silver
Posts: 858
Joined: Mon Feb 01, 2016 12:41 pm

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby twiix » Thu May 04, 2017 5:10 pm

dj9i27 wrote:
Alexandros wrote:Probably because of copyright stuff with PDFs floating around blahbahblah. I hope they bring them back tho.

Good! preexisting conditions are lots of fun and I will now die immediately when I return to 'Murica. I can't imagine that would count tho, so I think you're in the clear.

some real bad hombres have those PDFs, tiffany didn't even study and got a 178.

I imagine only the heads of the Super PACs will have control of health-care, money, water, etc.

At this point I want to go to law school so I can become Judge Dredd in 16 years.


lol noobs, i has pdfs. $4000 kthx

User avatar
TedBuckland

Bronze
Posts: 109
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2017 3:25 am

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby TedBuckland » Thu May 04, 2017 5:22 pm

TWiiX wrote:
dj9i27 wrote:
Alexandros wrote:Probably because of copyright stuff with PDFs floating around blahbahblah. I hope they bring them back tho.

Good! preexisting conditions are lots of fun and I will now die immediately when I return to 'Murica. I can't imagine that would count tho, so I think you're in the clear.

some real bad hombres have those PDFs, tiffany didn't even study and got a 178.

I imagine only the heads of the Super PACs will have control of health-care, money, water, etc.

At this point I want to go to law school so I can become Judge Dredd in 16 years.


lol noobs, i has pdfs. $4000 kthx


I don't have enough posts for a picture but imagine the meme of patrick saying he has $3 being here. kthx

Alexandros

Platinum
Posts: 6478
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2016 4:46 am

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby Alexandros » Thu May 04, 2017 5:24 pm

dj9i27 wrote:
Alexandros wrote:Probably because of copyright stuff with PDFs floating around blahbahblah. I hope they bring them back tho.

Good! preexisting conditions are lots of fun and I will now die immediately when I return to 'Murica. I can't imagine that would count tho, so I think you're in the clear.

some real bad hombres have those PDFs, tiffany didn't even study and got a 178.

I imagine only the heads of the Super PACs will have control of health-care, money, water, etc.

At this point I want to go to law school so I can become Judge Dredd in 16 years.

I heard Tiffany got a 187 actually.

and I think u should incorporate that into ur PS Faye told me she would love it.

Alexandros

Platinum
Posts: 6478
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2016 4:46 am

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby Alexandros » Thu May 04, 2017 5:28 pm

Also dumb me is seriously considering postponing graduating to get my GPA higher.



Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests