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
43%
Yeah, kind of
8
17%
Ehh, hoping for the best
7
15%
Not prepared but screw it
3
6%
HAHAHA I'M NOT EVEN TAKING THE LSAT, SUCKS FOR YOU GUYS
9
19%
 
Total votes: 47

User avatar
Experiment626

Silver
Posts: 811
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2017 9:43 am

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby Experiment626 » Fri Jul 07, 2017 4:08 pm

littlewing67 wrote:
Csupo wrote:
Mikey wrote:
Csupo wrote:What do people think is the best method for formal logic? 7sage or PowerScore (Some and Most Train)?

I like 7sage. they have a whole section in their curriculum just for formal logic.

Yeah, I agree. I went through PowerScore's method and it seemed overly complicated for a mnemonic to me. I did like the Logic Ladder thing, but I think I'll stick with 7Sage's method for just memorizing the Formal Logic combinations.

Question for anybody in this thread: I've read some people say that they've taken a PT with "five sections." Just wondering what this means? Is the fifth section experimental? How do people have access to experimental sections?


I believe most people mean including an experimental. Basically taking a section from another test and slipping it in as one of the sections. Obviously you loose the surprise factor when you do this. I believe Kaplan had some mastery books with PTs and they put the expiermental in there for you so you won't know. I have one of the Kaplan books that does this not sure which one though.

Also rg. formal logic, I haven't done 7 sage to be able to contribute, but I believe the trainer is not sufficient (see what I did there heh) for the other unusual types of formal logic (some, most). LGB has a phenomenal chapter on this that I think is a must read.


This, it's so that they can train for the mental exhaustion that comes with the actual test. Only 4 sections are scored but you have to do all 5 because you don't know which of the extra sections was the experimental, and even if you magically figured it out and decided to snooze and mark all the same or some weird predictable grouping of answers, they would cancel your test score. If you PT with only 4 sections your brain probably will not have the stamina for actual test day and there definitely is a 4th/5th section slump that most have to battle through depending on your individual stamina.

Take 1 test out of 5, use one section as the "experimental" in the other 4. The surprise effect is gone but you should still do your best on it to be able get analysis of your strengths and weaknesses by question type for the cost of using up a good test. Some people, dunno if I would recommend it, treat it in theory that after 4 tests it can count as a 5th PT score because you took it under PT conditions. I wouldn't do that for score purposes but it still will provide valuable feedback on your performance in that section type if you attack it like a regular scored section.

User avatar
digitality

New
Posts: 16
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2017 5:29 pm

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby digitality » Fri Jul 07, 2017 5:19 pm

thanks for the positivity, guys. so last night i played game 2 from PT31 in 20 minutes, which, ughh. i was so bummed I quit for the night and put Titanic on. get on 7sage today to look at the explanation, it turns out that game is notoriously hard, so much so that J.Y. jokes about finishing in 12 hours being solid, which was nice to hear. also Titanic still totally rules.

User avatar
tapenade

New
Posts: 50
Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2015 4:05 pm

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby tapenade » Sat Jul 08, 2017 10:07 am

PT50. Timed, but needed an extra 5 minutes for LG :\. I'm planning on doing blind review to see where I went wrong. I really hope a 165+ is possible by September! Don't want to give up on Berkeley~

RC: -4
LR: -6
LG: -9
LR: -13

This is the first time I've done four sections in a row in quite a while. Hopefully that has something to do with the poor performance!

Should I keep doing full-length tests like these to build endurance or start drilling LG/LR more often? Those two are consistently my worst sections.

bigflaw_ruleofjaw

New
Posts: 85
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2017 11:35 am

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby bigflaw_ruleofjaw » Sat Jul 08, 2017 10:53 am

Experiment626 wrote:
littlewing67 wrote:Am I the only who marks RC passages heavily? I find if I don't underline and mark it out I don't fully obsorb the context, but at the same time I need to clean it up more because i believe it's making me take longer without added accuracy. And recently I've been scribbling short notes to summarize the paragraph to get the structure. Like bg for background and then like crit vs. pro for opposing views. But I think my note taking is sucking up time as well. Sigh...


You're not alone. Right now the best method I've come across that has helped me is literally taking each normal length paragraph and writing a 4-6 word summary of what's in it. If a paragraph is super long breaking it into sections based on the contents. Although it doesn't really add more than like 30-45 seconds to my reading of the passage and gives me the signposts I need when referring back to the passage to answer a question.


I also find it helpful to bracket the start of any sentence that begins with "but," "nevertheless," etc. to remind myself that the argument of the passage changes at that point.

bigflaw_ruleofjaw

New
Posts: 85
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2017 11:35 am

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby bigflaw_ruleofjaw » Sat Jul 08, 2017 10:55 am

tapenade wrote:PT50. Timed, but needed an extra 5 minutes for LG :\. I'm planning on doing blind review to see where I went wrong. I really hope a 165+ is possible by September! Don't want to give up on Berkeley~

RC: -4
LR: -6
LG: -9
LR: -13

This is the first time I've done four sections in a row in quite a while. Hopefully that has something to do with the poor performance!

Should I keep doing full-length tests like these to build endurance or start drilling LG/LR more often? Those two are consistently my worst sections.


Looking at those scores, I would recommend drilling LG/LR as the most efficient way to improve. Particularly LR. Do a LR section, and then review each question you got wrong. Write out why the correct answer was correct and also write out the flaw in your answer. Rinse and repeat.

Ntp73821

Silver
Posts: 612
Joined: Sat May 27, 2017 7:53 pm

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby Ntp73821 » Sat Jul 08, 2017 11:11 am

bigflaw_ruleofjaw wrote:
tapenade wrote:PT50. Timed, but needed an extra 5 minutes for LG :\. I'm planning on doing blind review to see where I went wrong. I really hope a 165+ is possible by September! Don't want to give up on Berkeley~

RC: -4
LR: -6
LG: -9
LR: -13

This is the first time I've done four sections in a row in quite a while. Hopefully that has something to do with the poor performance!

Should I keep doing full-length tests like these to build endurance or start drilling LG/LR more often? Those two are consistently my worst sections.


Looking at those scores, I would recommend drilling LG/LR as the most efficient way to improve. Particularly LR. Do a LR section, and then review each question you got wrong. Write out why the correct answer was correct and also write out the flaw in your answer. Rinse and repeat.


+180

Continuing to do PTs without drilling to find/fix your weaknesses would be a waste of PTs.
Keep working at it, you still have time to get to your 165+!
Last edited by Ntp73821 on Mon Jan 29, 2018 2:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.

CottonHarvest

Bronze
Posts: 222
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2016 11:49 pm

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby CottonHarvest » Sat Jul 08, 2017 11:53 am

I got rocked by PT 59 yesterday. I ran out of time on RC and I usually have 3-4 minutes to spare. I felt like the test wasn't going well the whole time. Maybe I was fatigued.

User avatar
tapenade

New
Posts: 50
Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2015 4:05 pm

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby tapenade » Sat Jul 08, 2017 1:11 pm

Ntp73821 wrote:
bigflaw_ruleofjaw wrote:
tapenade wrote:PT50. Timed, but needed an extra 5 minutes for LG :\. I'm planning on doing blind review to see where I went wrong. I really hope a 165+ is possible by September! Don't want to give up on Berkeley~

RC: -4
LR: -6
LG: -9
LR: -13

This is the first time I've done four sections in a row in quite a while. Hopefully that has something to do with the poor performance!

Should I keep doing full-length tests like these to build endurance or start drilling LG/LR more often? Those two are consistently my worst sections.


Looking at those scores, I would recommend drilling LG/LR as the most efficient way to improve. Particularly LR. Do a LR section, and then review each question you got wrong. Write out why the correct answer was correct and also write out the flaw in your answer. Rinse and repeat.


+180

Continuing to do PTs without drilling to find/fix your weaknesses would be a waste of PTs.
Keep working at it, you still have time to get to your 165+!


Thanks for the advice!! Would pulling LR/LG sections from tests I haven't done yet be alright, or is buying pre-made bundles recommended?

User avatar
AvatarMeelo

Silver
Posts: 515
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2016 1:58 pm

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby AvatarMeelo » Sat Jul 08, 2017 1:53 pm

digitality wrote:thanks for the positivity, guys. so last night i played game 2 from PT31 in 20 minutes, which, ughh. i was so bummed I quit for the night and put Titanic on. get on 7sage today to look at the explanation, it turns out that game is notoriously hard, so much so that J.Y. jokes about finishing in 12 hours being solid, which was nice to hear. also Titanic still totally rules.


This is the used/old CD one right? Yeah, I remember it took me more than ten minutes to do it the first time. I did it in the Trainer because it was a part of the mastery challenge. I liked the Trainer explanation a lot and ended up learning a lot from this game alone. The good news though is that there doesn't seem to be too many games with compound conditionals!!

User avatar
hushpuppy

New
Posts: 62
Joined: Tue May 16, 2017 2:47 pm

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby hushpuppy » Sat Jul 08, 2017 3:30 pm

Hey guys. I hope you're all doing well! With a new job, I absolutely fell off the trend of studying for the past two months and have been set back to December. :( Basically starting from zero ... still!

Dumb(?) question: Is there a thread for Dec 2017? I can't seem to see one ... ?

User avatar
Impressionist

Bronze
Posts: 111
Joined: Wed May 03, 2017 10:24 pm

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby Impressionist » Sat Jul 08, 2017 3:42 pm

hushpuppy wrote:Hey guys. I hope you're all doing well! With a new job, I absolutely fell off the trend of studying for the past two months and have been set back to December. :( Basically starting from zero ... still!

Dumb(?) question: Is there a thread for Dec 2017? I can't seem to see one ... ?


?? It's like 6 spots under this thread in the LSAT forum page? Still only 1 page tho.

User avatar
Jack_Kelly

Silver
Posts: 900
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 12:52 am

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby Jack_Kelly » Sat Jul 08, 2017 7:11 pm

Checking in.

Going to be a gunner for the first time in my life and retake a 171. Or the fact that if I can stop missing LG I'm at a 176 will haunt me forever.

User avatar
Impressionist

Bronze
Posts: 111
Joined: Wed May 03, 2017 10:24 pm

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby Impressionist » Sat Jul 08, 2017 11:05 pm

Well i got my as kicked today but I'm still optimistic. Got a 169 on PT47 (-4LR, -5RC, -2LR, -0LG). The test wasn't particularly hard but I was mentally not in it. I'm optimistic for two reasons.

First, I feel like I've more or less solved games. Have gone -0 on the last 3 PTs in games, with 10+ min to spare twice. Also in the last couple weeks on the 60 or so practice games I've done I've missed maybe 2 questions due to misreading something. Most in under 7min.

Second, LR really stands alone as the obstacle between me and a 99th percentile score (have given up on getting RC to a -0/-1 lol, plus I'll still do plenty with PTs). Right now I'm way too slow and not accurate enough to feel any mastery. This is good to know because I can now spend 99% of my non-PT time on LR; drilling for time and mastery. With 10 weeks im confident I can get there. If necc, ill also have the months of Oct and Nov.

Knowing that I can focus everything into one section is kinda a relief.

Barry grandpapy

Bronze
Posts: 445
Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2016 12:04 am

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby Barry grandpapy » Sun Jul 09, 2017 4:02 am

hushpuppy wrote:Hey guys. I hope you're all doing well! With a new job, I absolutely fell off the trend of studying for the past two months and have been set back to December. :( Basically starting from zero ... still!

Dumb(?) question: Is there a thread for Dec 2017? I can't seem to see one ... ?


This is my new favorite avatar.

User avatar
tapenade

New
Posts: 50
Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2015 4:05 pm

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby tapenade » Sun Jul 09, 2017 7:02 am

Blind review is so fun, but so exhausting. Any opinions on whether blind reviewing correct answers is useful? I want to BR every question to cement my understanding, but I'm not sure if it's sustainable considering how many PTs there are to take before September.

User avatar
HesusChrist

New
Posts: 61
Joined: Thu May 04, 2017 8:02 pm

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby HesusChrist » Sun Jul 09, 2017 10:18 am

tapenade wrote:Blind review is so fun, but so exhausting. Any opinions on whether blind reviewing correct answers is useful? I want to BR every question to cement my understanding, but I'm not sure if it's sustainable considering how many PTs there are to take before September.


That is useful, but its not BR. During your PT, circle the questions that you are not 100% percent on. These are then blind reviewed. Then grade your test and identify questions that fooled you - ones that you did not circle but got wrong nonetheless. This identifies weaknesses that you were unaware of. Going over all the question for logic, structure etc is helpful, but not strictly speaking BR.

Alexandros

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

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby Alexandros » Sun Jul 09, 2017 1:48 pm

.
Last edited by Alexandros on Tue Jul 11, 2017 5:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
abujabal

Bronze
Posts: 291
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2016 1:32 pm

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby abujabal » Sun Jul 09, 2017 4:50 pm

Alexandros wrote:
HesusChrist wrote:
tapenade wrote:Blind review is so fun, but so exhausting. Any opinions on whether blind reviewing correct answers is useful? I want to BR every question to cement my understanding, but I'm not sure if it's sustainable considering how many PTs there are to take before September.


That is useful, but its not BR. During your PT, circle the questions that you are not 100% percent on. These are then blind reviewed. Then grade your test and identify questions that fooled you - ones that you did not circle but got wrong nonetheless. This identifies weaknesses that you were unaware of. Going over all the question for logic, structure etc is helpful, but not strictly speaking BR.

Unless I'm mistaken, BR is going through the entire test again, untimed, prior to marking.


I've always done just the ones I was uncertain of, but I can imagine doing the entire test would be worth it, if exhausting.

Alexandros

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

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby Alexandros » Sun Jul 09, 2017 5:16 pm

.
Last edited by Alexandros on Tue Jul 11, 2017 5:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.

CottonHarvest

Bronze
Posts: 222
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2016 11:49 pm

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby CottonHarvest » Sun Jul 09, 2017 5:28 pm

PT 60:
LR1 -2
LG -0
LR2 -0
RC -1
-3, 179

Mikey

Platinum
Posts: 8047
Joined: Sat Nov 28, 2015 5:24 pm

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby Mikey » Sun Jul 09, 2017 5:31 pm

CottonHarvest wrote:PT 60:
LR1 -2
LG -0
LR2 -0
RC -1
-3, 179

how

User avatar
HesusChrist

New
Posts: 61
Joined: Thu May 04, 2017 8:02 pm

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby HesusChrist » Sun Jul 09, 2017 5:59 pm

PT 72 did not go too well. Starting to get a little discouraged. Scored 172: RC (-2), LR1 (-4) LR2 (-2), LG (-2). Ran out of time on LG and guessed E, picked up an few extra points. Would have probably scored 170 if I did not get lucky. My LR consistency is just not were it needs to be at this point.

User avatar
abujabal

Bronze
Posts: 291
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2016 1:32 pm

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby abujabal » Sun Jul 09, 2017 6:50 pm

HesusChrist wrote:PT 72 did not go too well. Starting to get a little discouraged. Scored 172: RC (-2), LR1 (-4) LR2 (-2), LG (-2). Ran out of time on LG and guessed E, picked up an few extra points. Would have probably scored 170 if I did not get lucky. My LR consistency is just not were it needs to be at this point.


Homie you take a lot of PTs - I'd maybe do like 3-4 straight sessions of LR only drills. Is it a stamina thing? Or do you have any data on what you miss?

CottonHarvest

Bronze
Posts: 222
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2016 11:49 pm

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby CottonHarvest » Sun Jul 09, 2017 7:01 pm

HesusChrist wrote:PT 72 did not go too well. Starting to get a little discouraged. Scored 172: RC (-2), LR1 (-4) LR2 (-2), LG (-2). Ran out of time on LG and guessed E, picked up an few extra points. Would have probably scored 170 if I did not get lucky. My LR consistency is just not were it needs to be at this point.

If 172 is not doing well for you, don't get discouraged. I had a bad test for me on my last PT (PT 59, 173) and bounced back today with a 179 on PT 60. We are still over two months out; you'll figure it out.

User avatar
creed

Bronze
Posts: 130
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2017 3:08 pm

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby creed » Sun Jul 09, 2017 8:56 pm

I mark today as my first LSAT Day of Ambivalence

Took PT A from Superprep. When I saw it was a -9 curve, I felt a kernel of what you Juners must of felt, and my empathy significantly increased.

PT A: 170

LR: -1
RC: -1
LG: -6
LR: -1

Bad news:

-- A 170 is not improvement on my testing from the past month or so, though it is up 6 points from my diagnostic about 2.5/3 weeks ago. But the rational person in me recognizes that this isn't the point of PT's this far out.

-- -6 in LG. Four of the misses came from an excruciating linear game. The other two also came from a type of LG I haven't studied yet, and frankly, it was miraculous that I only missed 2 on that. But after spending a few weeks on linear, it was deflating to see a 2/6, regardless of how hard the game was.

-- very gunnery, but the one i missed on rc was a dumb one to miss

Good news:

-- -2 combined on LR is a solid improvement, and I could feel myself more confidently reaching answers because I'm getting oriented with some LR strategies. This week is also going to be almost all LR question drilling, so I'm hoping to solidify this improvement.

-- The two other LG's that I had studied I nailed in very little time and aced (probably what allowed me the time to brute force my way through the last one).

-- -1 on RC is my best yet, and I'm getting a better feel for primary passage questions.

-- Hopefully another month of drilling every LG pre test 40 under the sun will get that score where I want it (175+)



Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 2 guests