The Official December 2017 Study Group

We all want a 180. What's the lowest score you'll take?

Sub 160
4
4%
160-163
12
11%
164-167
26
23%
167-169
18
16%
170
13
12%
171-172
12
11%
172-174
9
8%
175
6
5%
176-179
5
4%
180
7
6%
 
Total votes: 112

User avatar
Mikey
Posts: 7690
Joined: Sat Nov 28, 2015 5:24 pm

Re: The Official December 2017 Study Group

Postby Mikey » Thu Nov 16, 2017 9:00 pm

But it's staring me in the eyes while smiling

User avatar
Rupert Pupkin
Posts: 2131
Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2016 12:21 am

Re: The Official December 2017 Study Group

Postby Rupert Pupkin » Thu Nov 16, 2017 9:16 pm

Mikey wrote:prob doing a PT tomorrow. idk which one. I have 76, 77, 79 (retake), 81 (retake) and 82 I wanna get done before dec.

I can't even find a shit to give anymore, ugh. prob gonna do 81 tmrw or 77


id just alternate new/retake & older/newer till the test unless you dont think youd get through all of them by then..

User avatar
Mikey
Posts: 7690
Joined: Sat Nov 28, 2015 5:24 pm

Re: The Official December 2017 Study Group

Postby Mikey » Thu Nov 16, 2017 9:46 pm

Rupert Pupkin wrote:
Mikey wrote:prob doing a PT tomorrow. idk which one. I have 76, 77, 79 (retake), 81 (retake) and 82 I wanna get done before dec.

I can't even find a shit to give anymore, ugh. prob gonna do 81 tmrw or 77


id just alternate new/retake & older/newer till the test unless you dont think youd get through all of them by then..

Nah I will. I scheduled them all accordingly :P

User avatar
Rupert Pupkin
Posts: 2131
Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2016 12:21 am

Re: The Official December 2017 Study Group

Postby Rupert Pupkin » Thu Nov 16, 2017 11:16 pm

Mikey wrote:
Rupert Pupkin wrote:
Mikey wrote:prob doing a PT tomorrow. idk which one. I have 76, 77, 79 (retake), 81 (retake) and 82 I wanna get done before dec.

I can't even find a shit to give anymore, ugh. prob gonna do 81 tmrw or 77


id just alternate new/retake & older/newer till the test unless you dont think youd get through all of them by then..

Nah I will. I scheduled them all accordingly :P


figured...ytm

peege
Posts: 36
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2017 3:21 pm

Re: The Official December 2017 Study Group

Postby peege » Thu Nov 16, 2017 11:22 pm

My LR score like SUPER regressed over my last two PTs. Ugh it may be time for a break but we're so close to test day.

paperworkjim
Posts: 52
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2016 9:18 am

Re: The Official December 2017 Study Group

Postby paperworkjim » Fri Nov 17, 2017 12:50 am

PT 78
LR1 -0
RC -0
LR2 -3
LG -2
175

Still can't get LG down to -0 and have no chance of doing so before the test. Thinking about postponing to maximize LG score and be comfortably into the 175+ range.

Anyone have any tactics for tackling Eval questions? I seem to get even the basic ones wrong (#8 on LR2, for example). Also has anyone noticed that the MSS questions have almost no support anymore...? (Looking more like RC questions). I'm thinking about #7 on LR2... it is literally a causation-correlation flaw as a MSS. lol Missed one 2 star and 1 3 star, would've gotten me to a 177.

lemon_lyman
Posts: 26
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 1:00 pm

Re: The Official December 2017 Study Group

Postby lemon_lyman » Fri Nov 17, 2017 1:43 am

What're your guys' thoughts on redoing RC passages?

User avatar
Experiment626
Posts: 658
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2017 9:43 am

Re: The Official December 2017 Study Group

Postby Experiment626 » Fri Nov 17, 2017 10:13 am

lemon_lyman wrote:What're your guys' thoughts on redoing RC passages?


I'm redoing the ones from tests I took 4+ months ago. While some of them seem familiar, I don't usually remember the answer as I start reading the question. If I do, I go through the same process of proving it right that I would have on a fresh test to try and use the same time.

User avatar
Mikey
Posts: 7690
Joined: Sat Nov 28, 2015 5:24 pm

Re: The Official December 2017 Study Group

Postby Mikey » Fri Nov 17, 2017 10:24 am

lemon_lyman wrote:What're your guys' thoughts on redoing RC passages?

can't hurt

just make sure you justify everything and don't just circle the right AC because you know it's right

User avatar
Mikey
Posts: 7690
Joined: Sat Nov 28, 2015 5:24 pm

Re: The Official December 2017 Study Group

Postby Mikey » Fri Nov 17, 2017 10:26 am

PT 81 today. it''s a retake so I'm expecting an inflated score but I don't think I remember the LR tbh, RC I do and LG I just remember it was easy.

User avatar
Experiment626
Posts: 658
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2017 9:43 am

Re: The Official December 2017 Study Group

Postby Experiment626 » Fri Nov 17, 2017 10:32 am

paperworkjim wrote:PT 78
LR1 -0
RC -0
LR2 -3
LG -2
175

Still can't get LG down to -0 and have no chance of doing so before the test. Thinking about postponing to maximize LG score and be comfortably into the 175+ range.

Anyone have any tactics for tackling Eval questions? I seem to get even the basic ones wrong (#8 on LR2, for example). Also has anyone noticed that the MSS questions have almost no support anymore...? (Looking more like RC questions). I'm thinking about #7 on LR2... it is literally a causation-correlation flaw as a MSS. lol Missed one 2 star and 1 3 star, would've gotten me to a 177.



MSS- Sometimes you get there via POE. That's how I got to the answer for that one because I didn't feel like I could 100% say that like I normally can with MSS. It makes sense based on the ACs but if I was to be given the stim and that AC and be asked is this correct, I would hesitate to say 100% yes. There's definitely support for it in the stim.

Eval questions- This is a newer question type that appeared in the 70s and there are so few of these that I haven't created a perfect system yet. Disclaimer- this may not be the right way to do it but what I do is look at the evidence and conclusion to see which AC give a question which either strengthen or weakens the argument. For this type of question evaluating the argument doesn't tell you which way to. You could say yes, this is right or No, this is not right because X. That's how I was able to get the question right. I'll try and remember to ask my tutor this weekend and follow-back up.

How I approached the question.
[+] Spoiler
Evidence- Because Judges prescreen evidence to determine if it's allowed
Conclusion- Juries find scientific evidence more credible in trials than IRL

A. Yes, this strengthens or weakens depending on the answer. If they know the judge does this, that's why they trust it. If they don't know, then the conclusion is wrong

B. Reactions being influenced have nothing to do with the Judge prescreening evidence

C. While tempting, how the jury determines the credibility of the expert has nothing to do with the evidence of judges prescreening

D. Like C, has nothing to do with the evidence of the judge prescreening being the reason

E. The argument is about accepting a scientific fact not about resolving conflicting information which is why this is not correct.

User avatar
Experiment626
Posts: 658
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2017 9:43 am

Re: The Official December 2017 Study Group

Postby Experiment626 » Fri Nov 17, 2017 10:33 am

Mikey wrote:PT 81 today. it''s a retake so I'm expecting an inflated score but I don't think I remember the LR tbh, RC I do and LG I just remember it was easy.


Doing mine tomorrow. Even with the probable inflation of score, the -9 curve still scares the shit out of me.

Also, HOW CAN YOU FORGET ABOUT ORANGUTANS and ISOTOPES?!?!

User avatar
Mikey
Posts: 7690
Joined: Sat Nov 28, 2015 5:24 pm

Re: The Official December 2017 Study Group

Postby Mikey » Fri Nov 17, 2017 10:34 am

Experiment626 wrote:
Mikey wrote:PT 81 today. it''s a retake so I'm expecting an inflated score but I don't think I remember the LR tbh, RC I do and LG I just remember it was easy.


Doing mine tomorrow. Even with the probable inflation of score, the -9 curve still scares the shit out of me.

Also, HOW CAN YOU FORGET ABOUT ORANGUTANS and ISOTOPES?!?!

no idea lol. isotopes rings a bell, but I don't remember what it was exactly

User avatar
Experiment626
Posts: 658
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2017 9:43 am

Re: The Official December 2017 Study Group

Postby Experiment626 » Fri Nov 17, 2017 10:42 am

Mikey wrote:
Experiment626 wrote:
Mikey wrote:PT 81 today. it''s a retake so I'm expecting an inflated score but I don't think I remember the LR tbh, RC I do and LG I just remember it was easy.


Doing mine tomorrow. Even with the probable inflation of score, the -9 curve still scares the shit out of me.

Also, HOW CAN YOU FORGET ABOUT ORANGUTANS and ISOTOPES?!?!

no idea lol. isotopes rings a bell, but I don't remember what it was exactly



Dead to the June waiter's thread family... :-p

User avatar
Mikey
Posts: 7690
Joined: Sat Nov 28, 2015 5:24 pm

Re: The Official December 2017 Study Group

Postby Mikey » Fri Nov 17, 2017 10:44 am

Experiment626 wrote:
Mikey wrote:
Experiment626 wrote:
Mikey wrote:PT 81 today. it''s a retake so I'm expecting an inflated score but I don't think I remember the LR tbh, RC I do and LG I just remember it was easy.


Doing mine tomorrow. Even with the probable inflation of score, the -9 curve still scares the shit out of me.

Also, HOW CAN YOU FORGET ABOUT ORANGUTANS and ISOTOPES?!?!

no idea lol. isotopes rings a bell, but I don't remember what it was exactly



Dead to the June waiter's thread family... :-p

inb4 my -9 RC alone on this test!!!

preemptively going to say: there goes my score :P

User avatar
Mikey
Posts: 7690
Joined: Sat Nov 28, 2015 5:24 pm

Re: The Official December 2017 Study Group

Postby Mikey » Fri Nov 17, 2017 1:28 pm

PT 81

167

LR: -3/-3
LG: -0
RC: -7

User avatar
littlewing67
Posts: 657
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2016 7:08 pm

Re: The Official December 2017 Study Group

Postby littlewing67 » Fri Nov 17, 2017 3:31 pm

.
Last edited by littlewing67 on Mon Nov 20, 2017 7:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Mikey
Posts: 7690
Joined: Sat Nov 28, 2015 5:24 pm

Re: The Official December 2017 Study Group

Postby Mikey » Fri Nov 17, 2017 3:35 pm

littlewing67 wrote:Just did 5 RC sections as a PT.

PT 20 -1
PT 26 -0
PT 27 -2
PT 28 -2
PT 36 -4

For an average of 1.8

PT 36 has hard af science passage and liberal arts passage and I was getting fatigued but yeah. Lol I wish today's RC was the same as the earlier tests SMH.

DAMN good shit!

you're crazy tho!! most RC sections I've done in a day was I think 3 lol

paperworkjim
Posts: 52
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2016 9:18 am

Re: The Official December 2017 Study Group

Postby paperworkjim » Fri Nov 17, 2017 3:36 pm

Experiment626 wrote:
paperworkjim wrote:PT 78
LR1 -0
RC -0
LR2 -3
LG -2
175

Still can't get LG down to -0 and have no chance of doing so before the test. Thinking about postponing to maximize LG score and be comfortably into the 175+ range.

Anyone have any tactics for tackling Eval questions? I seem to get even the basic ones wrong (#8 on LR2, for example). Also has anyone noticed that the MSS questions have almost no support anymore...? (Looking more like RC questions). I'm thinking about #7 on LR2... it is literally a causation-correlation flaw as a MSS. lol Missed one 2 star and 1 3 star, would've gotten me to a 177.



MSS- Sometimes you get there via POE. That's how I got to the answer for that one because I didn't feel like I could 100% say that like I normally can with MSS. It makes sense based on the ACs but if I was to be given the stim and that AC and be asked is this correct, I would hesitate to say 100% yes. There's definitely support for it in the stim.

Eval questions- This is a newer question type that appeared in the 70s and there are so few of these that I haven't created a perfect system yet. Disclaimer- this may not be the right way to do it but what I do is look at the evidence and conclusion to see which AC give a question which either strengthen or weakens the argument. For this type of question evaluating the argument doesn't tell you which way to. You could say yes, this is right or No, this is not right because X. That's how I was able to get the question right. I'll try and remember to ask my tutor this weekend and follow-back up.

How I approached the question.
[+] Spoiler
Evidence- Because Judges prescreen evidence to determine if it's allowed
Conclusion- Juries find scientific evidence more credible in trials than IRL

A. Yes, this strengthens or weakens depending on the answer. If they know the judge does this, that's why they trust it. If they don't know, then the conclusion is wrong

B. Reactions being influenced have nothing to do with the Judge prescreening evidence

C. While tempting, how the jury determines the credibility of the expert has nothing to do with the evidence of judges prescreening

D. Like C, has nothing to do with the evidence of the judge prescreening being the reason

E. The argument is about accepting a scientific fact not about resolving conflicting information which is why this is not correct.


Thanks man, for breaking that down. This is super useful.

I was wondering what you thought about me postponing until Feb. I am gunning hard for Yale, and I know they hate retakes -- I have a good GPA, but would love to max out my score (I am aiming for a 175+) -- last three prep tests were 173, 176, 175 (all in the 70s). I just feel like if I can perfect that LG I can get into the 177 range. -2 is REALLY good for me on LG, usually i'll get 3-4 wrong.

User avatar
MercW07
Posts: 201
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2017 9:25 pm

Re: The Official December 2017 Study Group

Postby MercW07 » Fri Nov 17, 2017 3:37 pm

littlewing67 wrote:Just did 5 RC sections as a PT.

PT 20 -1
PT 26 -0
PT 27 -2
PT 28 -2
PT 36 -4

For an average of 1.8

PT 36 has hard af science passage and liberal arts passage and I was getting fatigued but yeah. Lol I wish today's RC was the same as the earlier tests SMH.


I honestly believe 5 RC sections in a row like this could be used as an effective torture method.

User avatar
littlewing67
Posts: 657
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2016 7:08 pm

Re: The Official December 2017 Study Group

Postby littlewing67 » Fri Nov 17, 2017 3:40 pm

.
Last edited by littlewing67 on Mon Nov 20, 2017 7:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
littlewing67
Posts: 657
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2016 7:08 pm

Re: The Official December 2017 Study Group

Postby littlewing67 » Fri Nov 17, 2017 3:44 pm

.
Last edited by littlewing67 on Mon Nov 20, 2017 7:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Experiment626
Posts: 658
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2017 9:43 am

Re: The Official December 2017 Study Group

Postby Experiment626 » Fri Nov 17, 2017 4:22 pm

paperworkjim wrote:
Thanks man, for breaking that down. This is super useful.

I was wondering what you thought about me postponing until Feb. I am gunning hard for Yale, and I know they hate retakes -- I have a good GPA, but would love to max out my score (I am aiming for a 175+) -- last three prep tests were 173, 176, 175 (all in the 70s). I just feel like if I can perfect that LG I can get into the 177 range. -2 is REALLY good for me on LG, usually i'll get 3-4 wrong.


I sure hope you're applying for fall 19...

Without knowing what your issue is with LG, I really can't say.
LG is my strongest section.

Depending on what else you're dealing with it's possible to nail down LG over the next 2.5 weeks...

User avatar
PhiladelphiaCollins
Posts: 228
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2015 1:31 am

Re: The Official December 2017 Study Group

Postby PhiladelphiaCollins » Fri Nov 17, 2017 4:40 pm

172 on PT77...FINALLY a 170 in the 70 PTs thank God. This was a re-take but whatever. Definitely burnt out after the past week, I’ll be taking Saturday off for sure

User avatar
Mikey
Posts: 7690
Joined: Sat Nov 28, 2015 5:24 pm

Re: The Official December 2017 Study Group

Postby Mikey » Fri Nov 17, 2017 4:49 pm

started downsizing my stretched ears today, sigh.

they aren't that big but I want to get rid of them anyways bc of law school, esp. if I do any interviews in a few months.

had them since high school, goodbye sweet babies </3




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests