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

littlewing67

Silver
Posts: 772
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2016 7:08 pm

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby littlewing67 » Tue Aug 01, 2017 5:57 pm

.
Last edited by littlewing67 on Tue Aug 08, 2017 1:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Mikey

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

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby Mikey » Tue Aug 01, 2017 6:38 pm

littlewing67 wrote:
Mikey wrote:
littlewing67 wrote:Ugh I am jealous as I sit in XXXXXX crying for this cycle to be over and it hasn't even began :cry:

When I go pick up my diploma and do transcript BS, we should totally do a study day after :mrgreen:


We outtt

YAY!!!

French vanilla coffee from the small cafe on me :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

is it weird that I SLIGHTLY miss that place.... lol

User avatar
ThatOneAfrican

New
Posts: 78
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2016 8:49 pm

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby ThatOneAfrican » Tue Aug 01, 2017 7:22 pm

Could someone help me with this flaw question? It's PT2 S4 Q6 (or no.5 in the Cambridge Flaw book). Would've posted the question here but dunno if I'm allowed to.

So the answer's B apparently. I understand why the other answers are wrong (I guess) but how does B make sense? Shouldn't it be "fails to include an alternative explanation for the observed effect"?

User avatar
HesusChrist

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

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby HesusChrist » Tue Aug 01, 2017 8:05 pm

ThatOneAfrican wrote:Could someone help me with this flaw question? It's PT2 S4 Q6 (or no.5 in the Cambridge Flaw book). Would've posted the question here but dunno if I'm allowed to.

So the answer's B apparently. I understand why the other answers are wrong (I guess) but how does B make sense? Shouldn't it be "fails to include an alternative explanation for the observed effect"?


"Fails to Exclude" = takes for granted, assumes etc. The author assumes that the box is correctly labeled. Thus the author "fails to to exclude" the possibility that there is acid in the bottle but no soda in the box.

User avatar
ThatOneAfrican

New
Posts: 78
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2016 8:49 pm

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby ThatOneAfrican » Tue Aug 01, 2017 8:15 pm

HesusChrist wrote:
ThatOneAfrican wrote:Could someone help me with this flaw question? It's PT2 S4 Q6 (or no.5 in the Cambridge Flaw book). Would've posted the question here but dunno if I'm allowed to.

So the answer's B apparently. I understand why the other answers are wrong (I guess) but how does B make sense? Shouldn't it be "fails to include an alternative explanation for the observed effect"?


"Fails to Exclude" = takes for granted, assumes etc. The author assumes that the box is correctly labeled. Thus the author "fails to to exclude" the possibility that there is acid in the bottle but no soda in the box.


Ooh ok I think I get it. Thanks. Thought it was a typo at first but it makes sense this way.

User avatar
caramelizedgod

New
Posts: 96
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 3:17 am

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby caramelizedgod » Tue Aug 01, 2017 9:56 pm

Mikey wrote:
littlewing67 wrote:
jagerbom79 wrote:
Mikey wrote:
littlewing67 wrote:
Mikey wrote:good shit :mrgreen:


Hehe thanks u better be killing it too

haven't done LSAT shit, in a diff country atm but I still check TLS when I get a chance :mrgreen:

you're beating me for sure though. my last PT was a 170


!!!!! 8)


Oh snap where u at??? I was thinking of moving to Australia for a few months after I finish apps lol

El Salvador. I don't drink everyday but I do drink every other day. Today is one of those days that I'll be drinking :mrgreen:


If ur not drinking everyday then how r u dealing with the hangovers ;)

User avatar
creed

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

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby creed » Tue Aug 01, 2017 9:58 pm

I have a cross-country flight tomorrow. I was tempted to take a PT to see how I'd perform when fighting distraction, but I think it'd be pointless at the end of the day, so I'm just going to load up on RC and LR practice questions.

Also, turns out lugging a ton of LSAT study materials across a continent takes up quite a lot of suitcase space.

mnbv9876

New
Posts: 7
Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2017 6:56 pm

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby mnbv9876 » Tue Aug 01, 2017 10:00 pm

HesusChrist wrote:
Drill LG. It's affecting your confidence and is an easy way to improve. You don't have to completely neglect LR either, do some sections to maintain. But getting into the 170s without 20+ on LG is very difficult.


Thanks :) will do. have PTd at 170 4 times now so its within reach, hopefully *fingers crossed, positive thoughts*.... i can't believe how much LG ive had to study its been like 9 months nonstop. but i started at -14 so at least theres been improvement. wish i could just be a genius :'(

Mikey

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

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby Mikey » Tue Aug 01, 2017 10:45 pm

caramelizedgod wrote:If ur not drinking everyday then how r u dealing with the hangovers ;)

I deal with them by hating myself

User avatar
creed

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

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby creed » Tue Aug 01, 2017 10:47 pm

Mikey wrote:
caramelizedgod wrote:If ur not drinking everyday then how r u dealing with the hangovers ;)

I deal with them by hating myself


I also deal with them that way, if by "hating yourself" you mean "making early morning bloody marys as soon as humanly possible."

User avatar
Gluteus

Bronze
Posts: 112
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2015 1:37 pm

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby Gluteus » Wed Aug 02, 2017 1:42 am

I'm excited to begin some LR preparation tomorrow. I haven't touched LR in over a year, but when I first began studying for the LSAT, LR was the first section I worked on. It's my favourite section in terms of content and seems to be the area where I'm most naturally talented.

A strong performance on LR during the real LSAT 43-44+/50 would almost guarantee I score high enough to get into the law schools I want to. Luckily, such a score is only slightly above where I was averaging for timed sections when I was practising last.

My study plan to get re-acquainted with LR is to read through Manhattan LR again. After I finish a chapter on a given question type I will drill and review 25-75 questions of that type from the Cambridge packets.

After I'm done getting re-acquainted, LR preparation will consist of timed sections from newer tests + full practice tests + targeted drilling of weaknesses + blind review

User avatar
Rupert Pupkin

Gold
Posts: 2170
Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2016 12:21 am

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby Rupert Pupkin » Wed Aug 02, 2017 1:15 pm

Gluteus wrote:I'm excited to begin some LR preparation tomorrow. I haven't touched LR in over a year, but when I first began studying for the LSAT, LR was the first section I worked on. It's my favourite section in terms of content and seems to be the area where I'm most naturally talented.

A strong performance on LR during the real LSAT 43-44+/50 would almost guarantee I score high enough to get into the law schools I want to. Luckily, such a score is only slightly above where I was averaging for timed sections when I was practising last.

My study plan to get re-acquainted with LR is to read through Manhattan LR again. After I finish a chapter on a given question type I will drill and review 25-75 questions of that type from the Cambridge packets.

After I'm done getting re-acquainted, LR preparation will consist of timed sections from newer tests + full practice tests + targeted drilling of weaknesses + blind review


Nice! You already completely finished drilling (Fool-proof) all the LG Cambridge packets again?

User avatar
dm1683

Silver
Posts: 744
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2016 9:57 pm

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby dm1683 » Wed Aug 02, 2017 3:43 pm

Just used a toll road today. Mad flashbacks.

I was thinking of joking with the attendant "why don't you just increase the sales tax?" although God knows illinois' is high enough.

mmart207

Bronze
Posts: 222
Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2017 4:40 pm

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby mmart207 » Wed Aug 02, 2017 3:56 pm

dm1683 wrote:Just used a toll road today. Mad flashbacks.

I was thinking of joking with the attendant "why don't you just increase the sales tax?" although God knows illinois' is high enough.


Yeah that's the last thing we need right now :oops:

User avatar
Rupert Pupkin

Gold
Posts: 2170
Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2016 12:21 am

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby Rupert Pupkin » Wed Aug 02, 2017 5:12 pm

7Sage Fool Proof Drilling gets so monotonous, but I've definitely improved so much on games from doing this (I believe its from specifically this)

Csupo

New
Posts: 24
Joined: Thu May 18, 2017 10:11 pm

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby Csupo » Wed Aug 02, 2017 5:35 pm

jagerbom79 wrote:7Sage Fool Proof Drilling gets so monotonous, but I've definitely improved so much on games from doing this (I believe its from specifically this)

I've also been foolproofing using the 7sage method (PT 1-35). I feel like I've only made small gains though. I'm at PT 20 right now and I still don't feel that confident when doing a completely new game. At what point did you find that you were finally making progress?

User avatar
Rupert Pupkin

Gold
Posts: 2170
Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2016 12:21 am

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby Rupert Pupkin » Wed Aug 02, 2017 6:39 pm

Csupo wrote:
jagerbom79 wrote:7Sage Fool Proof Drilling gets so monotonous, but I've definitely improved so much on games from doing this (I believe its from specifically this)

I've also been foolproofing using the 7sage method (PT 1-35). I feel like I've only made small gains though. I'm at PT 20 right now and I still don't feel that confident when doing a completely new game. At what point did you find that you were finally making progress?


I did it based on Game type not PT (Although its allthe games from PT 1-38), thats prob why. When you do this method coupled with arranging similar games you are making similar inferences over and over again and then your brain will naturally be able to start picking up this inferences when starting a new game. Thus, I dont think the fool-proof method is as powerful if you dont drill by game type. I Havent done a game up to 10 x either though like the method suggests. usually somewhere between 3-5, and that already takes up a lot of time.

So far I have done it this way for the Simple ORdering, Complex Ordering, Grouping (Distribution) and almost done with IN/OUT atm.

User avatar
abujabal

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

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby abujabal » Wed Aug 02, 2017 8:22 pm

The 70s continue to be the bane of my existence, but it seems like I'm narrowing in on the problem.

PT 71

LR1: -3 (-3 BR)
LRExperimental: -1 (PT 51.1)
LG: -3 (No BR)
Break
LR2: -7 (-6 BR)
RC: -6 (-6 BR)

Total: 167

--

I'm frustratingly unable to consistently stay above 170, at least because of the 70s, it seems. I'm somewhat disregarding this RC because it was a monster, and normally I'm -1/-3 on it. That said, what tips do people have for break management? I'm hearing protein bars as opposed to granola.

Hoping to break 170 at least three times in a row before next month...

Edit:

Here's my LR thing from 7Sage. Any thoughts on what specific things I should be doing to improve this?

Image

User avatar
Rupert Pupkin

Gold
Posts: 2170
Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2016 12:21 am

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby Rupert Pupkin » Wed Aug 02, 2017 10:17 pm

abujabal wrote:The 70s continue to be the bane of my existence, but it seems like I'm narrowing in on the problem.

PT 71

LR1: -3 (-3 BR)
LRExperimental: -1 (PT 51.1)
LG: -3 (No BR)
Break
LR2: -7 (-6 BR)
RC: -6 (-6 BR)

Total: 167

--

I'm frustratingly unable to consistently stay above 170, at least because of the 70s, it seems. I'm somewhat disregarding this RC because it was a monster, and normally I'm -1/-3 on it. That said, what tips do people have for break management? I'm hearing protein bars as opposed to granola.

Hoping to break 170 at least three times in a row before next month...

Edit:

Here's my LR thing from 7Sage. Any thoughts on what specific things I should be doing to improve this?

Image


Youll get over the hump--just keep grinding. That 168-170 hump is the hardest. Idk just keep reviewing and drilling. Looks like its the Assumption family throwing you off. we are the opposite lol in LR. Im scoring around the same as you, but I keep getting Inference Questions (Mainly Most Strongly Supp) wrong

In my break, I had a protein bar and trail mix.

Csupo

New
Posts: 24
Joined: Thu May 18, 2017 10:11 pm

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby Csupo » Wed Aug 02, 2017 10:20 pm

jagerbom79 wrote:
Csupo wrote:
jagerbom79 wrote:7Sage Fool Proof Drilling gets so monotonous, but I've definitely improved so much on games from doing this (I believe its from specifically this)

I've also been foolproofing using the 7sage method (PT 1-35). I feel like I've only made small gains though. I'm at PT 20 right now and I still don't feel that confident when doing a completely new game. At what point did you find that you were finally making progress?


I did it based on Game type not PT (Although its allthe games from PT 1-38), thats prob why. When you do this method coupled with arranging similar games you are making similar inferences over and over again and then your brain will naturally be able to start picking up this inferences when starting a new game. Thus, I dont think the fool-proof method is as powerful if you dont drill by game type. I Havent done a game up to 10 x either though like the method suggests. usually somewhere between 3-5, and that already takes up a lot of time.

So far I have done it this way for the Simple ORdering, Complex Ordering, Grouping (Distribution) and almost done with IN/OUT atm.

Thanks for the input! I'll definitely try drilling based on game type. How do you handle Miscellaneous games? Do you find that the skills from the other types transfer over? I think there's about 30 Misc. games from PTs 1-35 that aren't categorizable to the traditional game types. I always freeze when I do these.

User avatar
creed

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

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby creed » Wed Aug 02, 2017 10:28 pm

abujabal wrote:The 70s continue to be the bane of my existence, but it seems like I'm narrowing in on the problem.

PT 71

LR1: -3 (-3 BR)
LRExperimental: -1 (PT 51.1)
LG: -3 (No BR)
Break
LR2: -7 (-6 BR)
RC: -6 (-6 BR)

Total: 167

--

I'm frustratingly unable to consistently stay above 170, at least because of the 70s, it seems. I'm somewhat disregarding this RC because it was a monster, and normally I'm -1/-3 on it. That said, what tips do people have for break management? I'm hearing protein bars as opposed to granola.

Hoping to break 170 at least three times in a row before next month...

Edit:

Here's my LR thing from 7Sage. Any thoughts on what specific things I should be doing to improve this?



I've managed to pin LR down pretty well in the last month or so doing the following:

Reading the Bible-- especially for assumption questions. The negation technique is extremely useful for me.

Marking up your stimuli-- there's no real standardized way to do this, but I like underlining every 1) variable and 2) variable relationship descriptor. It helps me internalize the way the reasoning is structured

Drilling questions from the PS workbook-- ordered this after I was feeling stuck on LR and it's helped a ton.

Thinking clearly-- one of the best pieces of advice I heard about the LSAT applies best to LR: there is no such thing as a 50/50 question. If you think two answers both seem kinda right, you're misreading or misunderstanding. This sounds small, but it made a big difference for me. I think it'll help you too. Having your BR + real scores be basically the same means that something isn't clicking. (I've come to believe this is actually preferable to being stuck with really low BR and meh real scores but I can't really justify that)

Overall, I knew I was getting comfortable when I had the number of questions I found difficult down to 3-4 MAX per test. Right now, I go -0/-1 about half the time, and I think I'm still missing 2-3 the other half because of focus and stamina (missing an operative word or not closely reading the answer choices). If I manage to get LR down to a consistent -0/-1 I'll update any strategy I used.

Best of luck!

User avatar
creed

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

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby creed » Wed Aug 02, 2017 10:30 pm

Also, one bit that should give you some hope: I really think that assumption and flaw questions are the most learnable behind the parallel reasoning questions.


--


I'm going to PT tomorrow and for some reason I'm a little stressed about it. I feel like I'm in this weird ~173 area where I keep missing 2-3 a test that I really shouldn't be missing.

User avatar
Rupert Pupkin

Gold
Posts: 2170
Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2016 12:21 am

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby Rupert Pupkin » Wed Aug 02, 2017 10:33 pm

Csupo wrote:
jagerbom79 wrote:
Csupo wrote:
jagerbom79 wrote:7Sage Fool Proof Drilling gets so monotonous, but I've definitely improved so much on games from doing this (I believe its from specifically this)

I've also been foolproofing using the 7sage method (PT 1-35). I feel like I've only made small gains though. I'm at PT 20 right now and I still don't feel that confident when doing a completely new game. At what point did you find that you were finally making progress?


I did it based on Game type not PT (Although its allthe games from PT 1-38), thats prob why. When you do this method coupled with arranging similar games you are making similar inferences over and over again and then your brain will naturally be able to start picking up this inferences when starting a new game. Thus, I dont think the fool-proof method is as powerful if you dont drill by game type. I Havent done a game up to 10 x either though like the method suggests. usually somewhere between 3-5, and that already takes up a lot of time.

So far I have done it this way for the Simple ORdering, Complex Ordering, Grouping (Distribution) and almost done with IN/OUT atm.

Thanks for the input! I'll definitely try drilling based on game type. How do you handle Miscellaneous games? Do you find that the skills from the other types transfer over? I think there's about 30 Misc. games from PTs 1-35 that aren't categorizable to the traditional game types. I always freeze when I do these.


Np! I haven't done them yet, but as soon as I finish the In/Out packet, I am going to do those. Im going to drill them the same way and see where that gets me. I can usually figure them out if I have enough time, but as of now Im not comfortable with them either

User avatar
Rupert Pupkin

Gold
Posts: 2170
Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2016 12:21 am

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby Rupert Pupkin » Wed Aug 02, 2017 10:35 pm

creed wrote:
abujabal wrote:The 70s continue to be the bane of my existence, but it seems like I'm narrowing in on the problem.

PT 71

LR1: -3 (-3 BR)
LRExperimental: -1 (PT 51.1)
LG: -3 (No BR)
Break
LR2: -7 (-6 BR)
RC: -6 (-6 BR)

Total: 167

--

I'm frustratingly unable to consistently stay above 170, at least because of the 70s, it seems. I'm somewhat disregarding this RC because it was a monster, and normally I'm -1/-3 on it. That said, what tips do people have for break management? I'm hearing protein bars as opposed to granola.

Hoping to break 170 at least three times in a row before next month...

Edit:

Here's my LR thing from 7Sage. Any thoughts on what specific things I should be doing to improve this?



I've managed to pin LR down pretty well in the last month or so doing the following:

Reading the Bible-- especially for assumption questions. The negation technique is extremely useful for me.

Marking up your stimuli-- there's no real standardized way to do this, but I like underlining every 1) variable and 2) variable relationship descriptor. It helps me internalize the way the reasoning is structured

Drilling questions from the PS workbook-- ordered this after I was feeling stuck on LR and it's helped a ton.

Thinking clearly-- one of the best pieces of advice I heard about the LSAT applies best to LR: there is no such thing as a 50/50 question. If you think two answers both seem kinda right, you're misreading or misunderstanding. This sounds small, but it made a big difference for me. I think it'll help you too. Having your BR + real scores be basically the same means that something isn't clicking. (I've come to believe this is actually preferable to being stuck with really low BR and meh real scores but I can't really justify that)

Overall, I knew I was getting comfortable when I had the number of questions I found difficult down to 3-4 MAX per test. Right now, I go -0/-1 about half the time, and I think I'm still missing 2-3 the other half because of focus and stamina (missing an operative word or not closely reading the answer choices). If I manage to get LR down to a consistent -0/-1 I'll update any strategy I used.

Best of luck!


Great advice! This should help me out too. I am at that -3-4 point right now. Yeah I was getting like 3 Assumption Fam questions wrong on avg and then I drilled them by type for like 3-4 days while intensely reviewing the material in the LR Bible and the MH LR book and I havent gotten any wrong since. Of course, there is that crazy one that comes out of nowhere but for the most part I feel extremely comfortable with them

Barry grandpapy

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

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby Barry grandpapy » Wed Aug 02, 2017 11:06 pm

PT 28

LR1:-0
LG: -1
LR2:-2
RC: -3

176

I tried a new RC strategy and might stick with it for the next few PTs. I read the passages in ~1.5min without annotating or trying to memorize details. I finished way under time and should have gone back to review the harder questions but was feeling lazy. I usually annotate but that makes me cut the time fairly close, so I might play with this strategy a bit more.



Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests