The Official December 2017 Study Group

About Us- Age

18-21
8
17%
22-25
27
59%
26-29
8
17%
30-35
2
4%
36-40
0
No votes
40+
1
2%
 
Total votes: 46

Haburo
Posts: 28
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 9:56 am

Re: The Official December 2017 Study Group

Postby Haburo » Sun Sep 24, 2017 7:06 am

Starting back tomorrow! Exciting.

User avatar
Tape Dog
Posts: 28
Joined: Sun Jun 18, 2017 10:19 pm

Re: The Official December 2017 Study Group

Postby Tape Dog » Sun Sep 24, 2017 5:48 pm

Recovering from September test...

ksparkley
Posts: 14
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2017 7:32 pm

Re: The Official December 2017 Study Group

Postby ksparkley » Sun Sep 24, 2017 8:17 pm

Hey study buddies,

I was about to take the september test, but I felt failure in my bones so I decided to postpone. December will be my first time taking. Have any of your guys used Manhattan or LSAT trainer bec I'm low-key struggling with LR weaken, strengthen & assumption Q's. Currently, I managed to increase my score to a 158-162 from a 145 after 3 months of studying and I usually get -12-16 wrong on LR, -6-8 wrong on RC and 3-6 wrong on LG. Any of your guys recommend tutoring or nah?

User avatar
Tape Dog
Posts: 28
Joined: Sun Jun 18, 2017 10:19 pm

Re: The Official December 2017 Study Group

Postby Tape Dog » Sun Sep 24, 2017 9:13 pm

ksparkley wrote:Hey study buddies,

I was about to take the september test, but I felt failure in my bones so I decided to postpone. December will be my first time taking. Have any of your guys used Manhattan or LSAT trainer bec I'm low-key struggling with LR weaken, strengthen & assumption Q's. Currently, I managed to increase my score to a 158-162 from a 145 after 3 months of studying and I usually get -12-16 wrong on LR, -6-8 wrong on RC and 3-6 wrong on LG. Any of your guys recommend tutoring or nah?


I went with a high-end tutor and it made all the difference.

ksparkley
Posts: 14
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2017 7:32 pm

Re: The Official December 2017 Study Group

Postby ksparkley » Sun Sep 24, 2017 9:41 pm

Tape Dog wrote:
ksparkley wrote:Hey study buddies,

I was about to take the september test, but I felt failure in my bones so I decided to postpone. December will be my first time taking. Have any of your guys used Manhattan or LSAT trainer bec I'm low-key struggling with LR weaken, strengthen & assumption Q's. Currently, I managed to increase my score to a 158-162 from a 145 after 3 months of studying and I usually get -12-16 wrong on LR, -6-8 wrong on RC and 3-6 wrong on LG. Any of your guys recommend tutoring or nah?


I went with a high-end tutor and it made all the difference.


For sure, I definitely will look into 7sage/Blueprint/Manhattan bec I know those companies usually get great reviews. I'm really aiming for that 170 or higher for the schools I want to get into. I hope your studying is going great as well!

User avatar
littlewing67
Posts: 481
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2016 7:08 pm

Re: The Official December 2017 Study Group

Postby littlewing67 » Sun Sep 24, 2017 11:17 pm

.
Last edited by littlewing67 on Tue Sep 26, 2017 1:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
twiix
Posts: 852
Joined: Mon Feb 01, 2016 12:41 pm

Re: The Official December 2017 Study Group

Postby twiix » Mon Sep 25, 2017 9:13 am

littlewing67 wrote:10 weeks out, and I'm planning my study schedule now.

I have basically already done every PT except for 3, but I haven't done all the material in PTS 1-38ish because I was doing them in the cambridge packets, and I never finished the packets, so there are new questions scattered in those tests for me. Think I am going to start with early PTs, and also review/refresh up on Trainer and Bibles.

And I plan on finishing all other parts of my application before Sept. scores come out in case there is some sort of miracle and I got my target score. But I have a pretty good feeling I didn't..... so the grind goes on :roll:


fwiw (and there is no merit to my opinions), I'm going to hold off on PT's until maybe the month before the exam. I'm going to spend the first month or two doing exclusively drilling and working on the fundamentals to really try to build up a comprehensive understanding even further. I think having this foundation is incredibly important for the most recent tests, as they seem to be including more misc/nontraditional LR questions (at least more compared to older tests - pre 75). I also never really managed to get my blind review scores up into the high 170s, so that should probably be a goal. I probably could have gotten there if I spent more time BRing, but I'm incredibly lazy.

User avatar
Bartlet4President
Posts: 45
Joined: Wed May 17, 2017 8:27 pm

Re: The Official December 2017 Study Group

Postby Bartlet4President » Mon Sep 25, 2017 3:51 pm

ksparkley wrote:Hey study buddies,

I was about to take the september test, but I felt failure in my bones so I decided to postpone. December will be my first time taking. Have any of your guys used Manhattan or LSAT trainer bec I'm low-key struggling with LR weaken, strengthen & assumption Q's. Currently, I managed to increase my score to a 158-162 from a 145 after 3 months of studying and I usually get -12-16 wrong on LR, -6-8 wrong on RC and 3-6 wrong on LG. Any of your guys recommend tutoring or nah?



At a 158 - 162 you will not benefit from a tutor for the cost. You need more work on fundmanentals. Take a timed section and circle any q you weren't 100% certain on. Take a good amount of time to blind review. If you can make an analogy of the reason and see if your answer still holds weight. I went from 144 to my last couple PT over 175 with no class and no tutor. Absorb everything. Review. Read a lot. Get in the habit of reading hard things and making summaries. If you're missing 12-16 consistently then you should really work on understanding the passage taking that extra second to make sure you have the reasoning with a strong grasp, work on pre-phrase answers, attack.

... or you can spend thousands on a tutor

User avatar
Experiment626
Posts: 480
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2017 9:43 am

Re: The Official December 2017 Study Group

Postby Experiment626 » Mon Sep 25, 2017 4:32 pm

Bartlet4President wrote:
ksparkley wrote:Hey study buddies,

I was about to take the september test, but I felt failure in my bones so I decided to postpone. December will be my first time taking. Have any of your guys used Manhattan or LSAT trainer bec I'm low-key struggling with LR weaken, strengthen & assumption Q's. Currently, I managed to increase my score to a 158-162 from a 145 after 3 months of studying and I usually get -12-16 wrong on LR, -6-8 wrong on RC and 3-6 wrong on LG. Any of your guys recommend tutoring or nah?



At a 158 - 162 you will not benefit from a tutor for the cost. You need more work on fundmanentals. Take a timed section and circle any q you weren't 100% certain on. Take a good amount of time to blind review. If you can make an analogy of the reason and see if your answer still holds weight. I went from 144 to my last couple PT over 175 with no class and no tutor. Absorb everything. Review. Read a lot. Get in the habit of reading hard things and making summaries. If you're missing 12-16 consistently then you should really work on understanding the passage taking that extra second to make sure you have the reasoning with a strong grasp, work on pre-phrase answers, attack.

... or you can spend thousands on a tutor


So I mostly agree with what's being said here, it's solid advice and most people are able to figure out what's going wrong, but if you are having trouble seeing why you're missing those questions then a tutor could help you frame things in a way that works for you. I was in the low 160's and I kept missing the same two question types in LR on top of a couple careless errors. A few hours with a tutor focusing on just those question types talking through my through process with them and having them push back, even if I had the right answer, before I knew if I had the right answer or not helped me crack what I was doing wrong. That helped me get to the upper 160's/low 170's for like $350 which was basically 10 more LR questions right per test. Cost of $35 per additional question right with my averages. Well worth it IMO. Just make sure that if you use a tutor you go in with knowing what types of problems you need to work on or else you could spend thousands having them lead you through the dark. All depends on how much you can spend.

User avatar
Bartlet4President
Posts: 45
Joined: Wed May 17, 2017 8:27 pm

Re: The Official December 2017 Study Group

Postby Bartlet4President » Mon Sep 25, 2017 7:00 pm

Experiment626 wrote:
Bartlet4President wrote:
ksparkley wrote:Hey study buddies,

I was about to take the september test, but I felt failure in my bones so I decided to postpone. December will be my first time taking. Have any of your guys used Manhattan or LSAT trainer bec I'm low-key struggling with LR weaken, strengthen & assumption Q's. Currently, I managed to increase my score to a 158-162 from a 145 after 3 months of studying and I usually get -12-16 wrong on LR, -6-8 wrong on RC and 3-6 wrong on LG. Any of your guys recommend tutoring or nah?



At a 158 - 162 you will not benefit from a tutor for the cost. You need more work on fundmanentals. Take a timed section and circle any q you weren't 100% certain on. Take a good amount of time to blind review. If you can make an analogy of the reason and see if your answer still holds weight. I went from 144 to my last couple PT over 175 with no class and no tutor. Absorb everything. Review. Read a lot. Get in the habit of reading hard things and making summaries. If you're missing 12-16 consistently then you should really work on understanding the passage taking that extra second to make sure you have the reasoning with a strong grasp, work on pre-phrase answers, attack.

... or you can spend thousands on a tutor


So I mostly agree with what's being said here, it's solid advice and most people are able to figure out what's going wrong, but if you are having trouble seeing why you're missing those questions then a tutor could help you frame things in a way that works for you. I was in the low 160's and I kept missing the same two question types in LR on top of a couple careless errors. A few hours with a tutor focusing on just those question types talking through my through process with them and having them push back, even if I had the right answer, before I knew if I had the right answer or not helped me crack what I was doing wrong. That helped me get to the upper 160's/low 170's for like $350 which was basically 10 more LR questions right per test. Cost of $35 per additional question right with my averages. Well worth it IMO. Just make sure that if you use a tutor you go in with knowing what types of problems you need to work on or else you could spend thousands having them lead you through the dark. All depends on how much you can spend.







I 100% agree with this, but I also think that if possible you could put a shoutout on here for a blind review partner and you will find one. I have done this a few times now and have had at least one really good consistent work partner that I did blind review with 4-6 days a week. He was scoring lower 170's when we started and after 8 weeks was hitting 178 consistently while I was upper 160's and now hitting lower-mid to upper-mid 170's.

My point I guess is:
Tutoring may be sufficient for you, but it is certainly not necessary.

User avatar
Experiment626
Posts: 480
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2017 9:43 am

Re: The Official December 2017 Study Group

Postby Experiment626 » Mon Sep 25, 2017 8:01 pm

Bartlet4President wrote:
Experiment626 wrote:
So I mostly agree with what's being said here, it's solid advice and most people are able to figure out what's going wrong, but if you are having trouble seeing why you're missing those questions then a tutor could help you frame things in a way that works for you. I was in the low 160's and I kept missing the same two question types in LR on top of a couple careless errors. A few hours with a tutor focusing on just those question types talking through my through process with them and having them push back, even if I had the right answer, before I knew if I had the right answer or not helped me crack what I was doing wrong. That helped me get to the upper 160's/low 170's for like $350 which was basically 10 more LR questions right per test. Cost of $35 per additional question right with my averages. Well worth it IMO. Just make sure that if you use a tutor you go in with knowing what types of problems you need to work on or else you could spend thousands having them lead you through the dark. All depends on how much you can spend.







I 100% agree with this, but I also think that if possible you could put a shoutout on here for a blind review partner and you will find one. I have done this a few times now and have had at least one really good consistent work partner that I did blind review with 4-6 days a week. He was scoring lower 170's when we started and after 8 weeks was hitting 178 consistently while I was upper 160's and now hitting lower-mid to upper-mid 170's.

My point I guess is:
Tutoring may be sufficient for you, but it is certainly not necessary.


+180 since that is kinda the intent of this and all study threads. Use your free resources first before paying for the tutor. I did my tutor before the June test but have just been asking friends from the June Retakers group when I can't figure out a question and they haven't failed me yet. If not from here, you can also use the study buddy finder via 7sage. I've met with a couple people to BR tests and that's been great as well. Just remember to look at their trend data after accepting the request to see where they're falling to make sure you're not the "tutor".

ksparkley
Posts: 14
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2017 7:32 pm

Re: The Official December 2017 Study Group

Postby ksparkley » Tue Sep 26, 2017 3:22 am

Experiment626 wrote:
Bartlet4President wrote:
ksparkley wrote:Hey study buddies,

I was about to take the september test, but I felt failure in my bones so I decided to postpone. December will be my first time taking. Have any of your guys used Manhattan or LSAT trainer bec I'm low-key struggling with LR weaken, strengthen & assumption Q's. Currently, I managed to increase my score to a 158-162 from a 145 after 3 months of studying and I usually get -12-16 wrong on LR, -6-8 wrong on RC and 3-6 wrong on LG. Any of your guys recommend tutoring or nah?



At a 158 - 162 you will not benefit from a tutor for the cost. You need more work on fundmanentals. Take a timed section and circle any q you weren't 100% certain on. Take a good amount of time to blind review. If you can make an analogy of the reason and see if your answer still holds weight. I went from 144 to my last couple PT over 175 with no class and no tutor. Absorb everything. Review. Read a lot. Get in the habit of reading hard things and making summaries. If you're missing 12-16 consistently then you should really work on understanding the passage taking that extra second to make sure you have the reasoning with a strong grasp, work on pre-phrase answers, attack.

... or you can spend thousands on a tutor


So I mostly agree with what's being said here, it's solid advice and most people are able to figure out what's going wrong, but if you are having trouble seeing why you're missing those questions then a tutor could help you frame things in a way that works for you. I was in the low 160's and I kept missing the same two question types in LR on top of a couple careless errors. A few hours with a tutor focusing on just those question types talking through my through process with them and having them push back, even if I had the right answer, before I knew if I had the right answer or not helped me crack what I was doing wrong. That helped me get to the upper 160's/low 170's for like $350 which was basically 10 more LR questions right per test. Cost of $35 per additional question right with my averages. Well worth it IMO. Just make sure that if you use a tutor you go in with knowing what types of problems you need to work on or else you could spend thousands having them lead you through the dark. All depends on how much you can spend.


Hey experiment626,

The username and profile are amazing! :) I really appreciate your advice. I think you're right about the tutor thing, I've noticed that I've had consistent trouble with weaken/strength and assumption questions on LR and LG ordering games trip me up and RC is meh haha.. so I would need a tutor for these issues, but I'm switching to a new method with Manhattan to see if it helps with my understanding of LR cuz that still a bit messy. I'm thinking of getting the LSAT Trainer too but not sure about it?!

ksparkley
Posts: 14
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2017 7:32 pm

Re: The Official December 2017 Study Group

Postby ksparkley » Tue Sep 26, 2017 3:29 am

Bartlet4President wrote:
Experiment626 wrote:
Bartlet4President wrote:
ksparkley wrote:Hey study buddies,

I was about to take the september test, but I felt failure in my bones so I decided to postpone. December will be my first time taking. Have any of your guys used Manhattan or LSAT trainer bec I'm low-key struggling with LR weaken, strengthen & assumption Q's. Currently, I managed to increase my score to a 158-162 from a 145 after 3 months of studying and I usually get -12-16 wrong on LR, -6-8 wrong on RC and 3-6 wrong on LG. Any of your guys recommend tutoring or nah?


Hey, yah I completely agree about study buddies. I definitely will make use of this before I spend thousands on a tutor, which hey I'm a broke college student so I'm trying to stay away from that route haha.. I will try to connect on 7sage and on here for a study partner bec I'm definitely trying to get better at weaken/strengthen and assumption since that's like at least 10% of LR I heard.


At a 158 - 162 you will not benefit from a tutor for the cost. You need more work on fundmanentals. Take a timed section and circle any q you weren't 100% certain on. Take a good amount of time to blind review. If you can make an analogy of the reason and see if your answer still holds weight. I went from 144 to my last couple PT over 175 with no class and no tutor. Absorb everything. Review. Read a lot. Get in the habit of reading hard things and making summaries. If you're missing 12-16 consistently then you should really work on understanding the passage taking that extra second to make sure you have the reasoning with a strong grasp, work on pre-phrase answers, attack.

... or you can spend thousands on a tutor


So I mostly agree with what's being said here, it's solid advice and most people are able to figure out what's going wrong, but if you are having trouble seeing why you're missing those questions then a tutor could help you frame things in a way that works for you. I was in the low 160's and I kept missing the same two question types in LR on top of a couple careless errors. A few hours with a tutor focusing on just those question types talking through my through process with them and having them push back, even if I had the right answer, before I knew if I had the right answer or not helped me crack what I was doing wrong. That helped me get to the upper 160's/low 170's for like $350 which was basically 10 more LR questions right per test. Cost of $35 per additional question right with my averages. Well worth it IMO. Just make sure that if you use a tutor you go in with knowing what types of problems you need to work on or else you could spend thousands having them lead you through the dark. All depends on how much you can spend.







I 100% agree with this, but I also think that if possible you could put a shoutout on here for a blind review partner and you will find one. I have done this a few times now and have had at least one really good consistent work partner that I did blind review with 4-6 days a week. He was scoring lower 170's when we started and after 8 weeks was hitting 178 consistently while I was upper 160's and now hitting lower-mid to upper-mid 170's.

My point I guess is:
Tutoring may be sufficient for you, but it is certainly not necessary.

User avatar
Experiment626
Posts: 480
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2017 9:43 am

Re: The Official December 2017 Study Group

Postby Experiment626 » Tue Sep 26, 2017 7:47 am

ksparkley wrote:
Hey experiment626,

The username and profile are amazing! :) I really appreciate your advice. I think you're right about the tutor thing, I've noticed that I've had consistent trouble with weaken/strength and assumption questions on LR and LG ordering games trip me up and RC is meh haha.. so I would need a tutor for these issues, but I'm switching to a new method with Manhattan to see if it helps with my understanding of LR cuz that still a bit messy. I'm thinking of getting the LSAT Trainer too but not sure about it?!


So, just wondering, have you finished the coursework/prep material you have on those areas? I've read through most of the trainer to get a second perspective and it had a lot of the same stuff that I got through the prep course I used for June which is good stuff. I can't speak to how it compares to Manhattan since I didn't use their material. Also, would still strongly advise seeing if you can get help here via the study thread. I'm one of us could help you with the games portion to save the money. What seems to be the issue you're having with that one?

User avatar
clueless801
Posts: 317
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2016 1:58 pm

Re: The Official December 2017 Study Group

Postby clueless801 » Tue Sep 26, 2017 8:05 am

Experiment626 wrote:+180 since that is kinda the intent of this and all study threads. Use your free resources first before paying for the tutor. I did my tutor before the June test but have just been asking friends from the June Retakers group when I can't figure out a question and they haven't failed me yet. If not from here, you can also use the study buddy finder via 7sage. I've met with a couple people to BR tests and that's been great as well. Just remember to look at their trend data after accepting the request to see where they're falling to make sure you're not the "tutor".


I’ve always wondered about the study buddy option on 7Sage - never used it bc I’m an awkward human being. How effective was it for you? Did you have to bounce around before finding a good partner?

User avatar
Experiment626
Posts: 480
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2017 9:43 am

Re: The Official December 2017 Study Group

Postby Experiment626 » Tue Sep 26, 2017 8:12 am

clueless801 wrote:
Experiment626 wrote:+180 since that is kinda the intent of this and all study threads. Use your free resources first before paying for the tutor. I did my tutor before the June test but have just been asking friends from the June Retakers group when I can't figure out a question and they haven't failed me yet. If not from here, you can also use the study buddy finder via 7sage. I've met with a couple people to BR tests and that's been great as well. Just remember to look at their trend data after accepting the request to see where they're falling to make sure you're not the "tutor".


I’ve always wondered about the study buddy option on 7Sage - never used it bc I’m an awkward human being. How effective was it for you? Did you have to bounce around before finding a good partner?


Hard to tell, most of the people I met with were studying for September and reached out to me the last few weeks so we only did a couple PTs. But each session was great with reviewing sections together and arguing over the questions we did not have the same answer for. Having to justify and convince someone else why you think your answer is correct or getting convinced that you picked the wrong answer is a great way to work on the skills needed for the test. It's a little time consuming tho. I think it usually took 2-2.5 hours to go through a test.

ksparkley
Posts: 14
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2017 7:32 pm

Re: The Official December 2017 Study Group

Postby ksparkley » Tue Sep 26, 2017 1:39 pm

Hey experiment626,

So heres the thing: I was with blueprint for a while. They have definitely helped me on games and helped me compartmentalize some RC passages. However, I am still weak on ordering and combo games. They made LR enjoyable, but I'm still lacking on how to do those assumption and weaken/strengthen question. Now, I'm starting over with Manhattan particularly for LR. There must be something I'm missing that need gaps filled in, so hopefully Manhattan can do that. I will definitely start a new thread maybe to ask for some help after I go thru a little bit more of the material. I'm thinking of going thru the material now, drilling in about two weeks on weakness and then taking PT, hopefully that strategy works?

Experiment626 wrote:
ksparkley wrote:
Hey experiment626,

The username and profile are amazing! :) I really appreciate your advice. I think you're right about the tutor thing, I've noticed that I've had consistent trouble with weaken/strength and assumption questions on LR and LG ordering games trip me up and RC is meh haha.. so I would need a tutor for these issues, but I'm switching to a new method with Manhattan to see if it helps with my understanding of LR cuz that still a bit messy. I'm thinking of getting the LSAT Trainer too but not sure about it?!


So, just wondering, have you finished the coursework/prep material you have on those areas? I've read through most of the trainer to get a second perspective and it had a lot of the same stuff that I got through the prep course I used for June which is good stuff. I can't speak to how it compares to Manhattan since I didn't use their material. Also, would still strongly advise seeing if you can get help here via the study thread. I'm one of us could help you with the games portion to save the money. What seems to be the issue you're having with that one?

User avatar
Experiment626
Posts: 480
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2017 9:43 am

Re: The Official December 2017 Study Group

Postby Experiment626 » Tue Sep 26, 2017 2:21 pm

ksparkley wrote:Hey experiment626,

So heres the thing: I was with blueprint for a while. They have definitely helped me on games and helped me compartmentalize some RC passages. However, I am still weak on ordering and combo games. They made LR enjoyable, but I'm still lacking on how to do those assumption and weaken/strengthen question. Now, I'm starting over with Manhattan particularly for LR. There must be something I'm missing that need gaps filled in, so hopefully Manhattan can do that. I will definitely start a new thread maybe to ask for some help after I go thru a little bit more of the material. I'm thinking of going thru the material now, drilling in about two weeks on weakness and then taking PT, hopefully that strategy works?

Experiment626 wrote:
ksparkley wrote:
Hey experiment626,

The username and profile are amazing! :) I really appreciate your advice. I think you're right about the tutor thing, I've noticed that I've had consistent trouble with weaken/strength and assumption questions on LR and LG ordering games trip me up and RC is meh haha.. so I would need a tutor for these issues, but I'm switching to a new method with Manhattan to see if it helps with my understanding of LR cuz that still a bit messy. I'm thinking of getting the LSAT Trainer too but not sure about it?!


So, just wondering, have you finished the coursework/prep material you have on those areas? I've read through most of the trainer to get a second perspective and it had a lot of the same stuff that I got through the prep course I used for June which is good stuff. I can't speak to how it compares to Manhattan since I didn't use their material. Also, would still strongly advise seeing if you can get help here via the study thread. I'm one of us could help you with the games portion to save the money. What seems to be the issue you're having with that one?


Sounds like a good plan.

I'm also being superstitious here but I would say ask your questions in this thread too. We're all studying and I'm sure those of us that see something will be willing to help. Plus it helps up our post count for the TLS superstition with study group thread page counts and chances at 180. I will say as a June taker, we didn't hit 180 pages in that thread and it was a murder for scores. Lots of people that were testing above 170 scored below 170 and there were no 180's. ;-)

I'm definitely happy to help you with games. Ordering games, or lollipop games as I've learned call them, are one of my favorites.

Plus if you post in here it others who are lurking and having the same issues might see and learn from the discussion.

User avatar
littlewing67
Posts: 481
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2016 7:08 pm

Re: The Official December 2017 Study Group

Postby littlewing67 » Tue Sep 26, 2017 4:39 pm

.
Last edited by littlewing67 on Fri Sep 29, 2017 11:02 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
MercW07
Posts: 123
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2017 9:25 pm

Re: The Official December 2017 Study Group

Postby MercW07 » Tue Sep 26, 2017 8:13 pm

Experiment626 wrote:
ksparkley wrote:Hey experiment626,

So heres the thing: I was with blueprint for a while. They have definitely helped me on games and helped me compartmentalize some RC passages. However, I am still weak on ordering and combo games. They made LR enjoyable, but I'm still lacking on how to do those assumption and weaken/strengthen question. Now, I'm starting over with Manhattan particularly for LR. There must be something I'm missing that need gaps filled in, so hopefully Manhattan can do that. I will definitely start a new thread maybe to ask for some help after I go thru a little bit more of the material. I'm thinking of going thru the material now, drilling in about two weeks on weakness and then taking PT, hopefully that strategy works?

Experiment626 wrote:
ksparkley wrote:
Hey experiment626,

The username and profile are amazing! :) I really appreciate your advice. I think you're right about the tutor thing, I've noticed that I've had consistent trouble with weaken/strength and assumption questions on LR and LG ordering games trip me up and RC is meh haha.. so I would need a tutor for these issues, but I'm switching to a new method with Manhattan to see if it helps with my understanding of LR cuz that still a bit messy. I'm thinking of getting the LSAT Trainer too but not sure about it?!


So, just wondering, have you finished the coursework/prep material you have on those areas? I've read through most of the trainer to get a second perspective and it had a lot of the same stuff that I got through the prep course I used for June which is good stuff. I can't speak to how it compares to Manhattan since I didn't use their material. Also, would still strongly advise seeing if you can get help here via the study thread. I'm one of us could help you with the games portion to save the money. What seems to be the issue you're having with that one?


Sounds like a good plan.

I'm also being superstitious here but I would say ask your questions in this thread too. We're all studying and I'm sure those of us that see something will be willing to help. Plus it helps up our post count for the TLS superstition with study group thread page counts and chances at 180. I will say as a June taker, we didn't hit 180 pages in that thread and it was a murder for scores. Lots of people that were testing above 170 scored below 170 and there were no 180's. ;-)

I'm definitely happy to help you with games. Ordering games, or lollipop games as I've learned call them, are one of my favorites.

Plus if you post in here it others who are lurking and having the same issues might see and learn from the discussion.


I like this idea as well. Boosting the page count and creating a nice little ongoing study group ITT sounds like a win win to me!

ksparkley
Posts: 14
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2017 7:32 pm

Re: The Official December 2017 Study Group

Postby ksparkley » Tue Sep 26, 2017 8:14 pm

haha you said superstition.. Hey well I'm happy to help.. anything to get us closer to that 180.. Cool, I'm post some questions from LR and LG when I flag them down! Thanks for all the help guys!

Experiment626 wrote:
ksparkley wrote:Hey experiment626,

So heres the thing: I was with blueprint for a while. They have definitely helped me on games and helped me compartmentalize some RC passages. However, I am still weak on ordering and combo games. They made LR enjoyable, but I'm still lacking on how to do those assumption and weaken/strengthen question. Now, I'm starting over with Manhattan particularly for LR. There must be something I'm missing that need gaps filled in, so hopefully Manhattan can do that. I will definitely start a new thread maybe to ask for some help after I go thru a little bit more of the material. I'm thinking of going thru the material now, drilling in about two weeks on weakness and then taking PT, hopefully that strategy works?

Experiment626 wrote:
ksparkley wrote:
Hey experiment626,

The username and profile are amazing! :) I really appreciate your advice. I think you're right about the tutor thing, I've noticed that I've had consistent trouble with weaken/strength and assumption questions on LR and LG ordering games trip me up and RC is meh haha.. so I would need a tutor for these issues, but I'm switching to a new method with Manhattan to see if it helps with my understanding of LR cuz that still a bit messy. I'm thinking of getting the LSAT Trainer too but not sure about it?!


So, just wondering, have you finished the coursework/prep material you have on those areas? I've read through most of the trainer to get a second perspective and it had a lot of the same stuff that I got through the prep course I used for June which is good stuff. I can't speak to how it compares to Manhattan since I didn't use their material. Also, would still strongly advise seeing if you can get help here via the study thread. I'm one of us could help you with the games portion to save the money. What seems to be the issue you're having with that one?


Sounds like a good plan.

I'm also being superstitious here but I would say ask your questions in this thread too. We're all studying and I'm sure those of us that see something will be willing to help. Plus it helps up our post count for the TLS superstition with study group thread page counts and chances at 180. I will say as a June taker, we didn't hit 180 pages in that thread and it was a murder for scores. Lots of people that were testing above 170 scored below 170 and there were no 180's. ;-)

I'm definitely happy to help you with games. Ordering games, or lollipop games as I've learned call them, are one of my favorites.

Plus if you post in here it others who are lurking and having the same issues might see and learn from the discussion.

User avatar
GnarMarBinx
Posts: 106
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2017 3:21 pm

Re: The Official December 2017 Study Group

Postby GnarMarBinx » Tue Sep 26, 2017 9:11 pm

Hey everyone,

I just posted in the Sept waiters thread because it's more active (and I'm waiting for my Sept score) but figured I should post here as well. I am just wondering how people drill LR question types in an efficient manner. I want to drill flaw questions and parallel reasoning questions but don't know a better way to do it other than printing finding pages in tests with those question types and printing those off, ignoring the other LR questions on those pages. However, that would waste a lot of time and ink, so I am trying to think of a better method.

It's a lot easier to drill game types and RC passage types since they span over 1 or 2 pages, but since LR questions are sort of strewn all over the place in sections seems pretty difficult to drill them by type.

Anyone who doesn't pay for 7sage have any idea how to do this?

Thanks for any responses anyone can give!

User avatar
Experiment626
Posts: 480
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2017 9:43 am

Re: The Official December 2017 Study Group

Postby Experiment626 » Tue Sep 26, 2017 10:56 pm

GnarMarBinx wrote:Hey everyone,

I just posted in the Sept waiters thread because it's more active (and I'm waiting for my Sept score) but figured I should post here as well. I am just wondering how people drill LR question types in an efficient manner. I want to drill flaw questions and parallel reasoning questions but don't know a better way to do it other than printing finding pages in tests with those question types and printing those off, ignoring the other LR questions on those pages. However, that would waste a lot of time and ink, so I am trying to think of a better method.

It's a lot easier to drill game types and RC passage types since they span over 1 or 2 pages, but since LR questions are sort of strewn all over the place in sections seems pretty difficult to drill them by type.

Anyone who doesn't pay for 7sage have any idea how to do this?

Thanks for any responses anyone can give!


If you're lucky and are able to find the Cambridge packets that's usually the golden way to go. If you've got the money, PowerScore has a workbook with questions by type. They are from tests so you do risk seeing questions on a test. I don't remember which tests they're from. You might be able to see that information online and plan your actual PTs around that depending on how many you want to do.

User avatar
GnarMarBinx
Posts: 106
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2017 3:21 pm

Re: The Official December 2017 Study Group

Postby GnarMarBinx » Tue Sep 26, 2017 11:09 pm

Experiment626 wrote:
GnarMarBinx wrote:Hey everyone,

I just posted in the Sept waiters thread because it's more active (and I'm waiting for my Sept score) but figured I should post here as well. I am just wondering how people drill LR question types in an efficient manner. I want to drill flaw questions and parallel reasoning questions but don't know a better way to do it other than printing finding pages in tests with those question types and printing those off, ignoring the other LR questions on those pages. However, that would waste a lot of time and ink, so I am trying to think of a better method.

It's a lot easier to drill game types and RC passage types since they span over 1 or 2 pages, but since LR questions are sort of strewn all over the place in sections seems pretty difficult to drill them by type.

Anyone who doesn't pay for 7sage have any idea how to do this?

Thanks for any responses anyone can give!


If you're lucky and are able to find the Cambridge packets that's usually the golden way to go. If you've got the money, PowerScore has a workbook with questions by type. They are from tests so you do risk seeing questions on a test. I don't remember which tests they're from. You might be able to see that information online and plan your actual PTs around that depending on how many you want to do.


Thanks! I have heard of the Cambridge packets but I know they're super hard to find. I actually just bought the Nathan Fox LR book because someone from here recommended it to me and I read good reviews. I will go through it along with the LR bible and hopefully that will help me solidify the question types I am struggling more with. The Nathan Fox book has 550 questions, and if they're all grouped by type, that seems like a pretty good prep.

LR was always my best section, so I don't think I put enough emphasis on it before going into the Sept test. Hoping to change that in prep for December.

Thanks a lot!

User avatar
Bartlet4President
Posts: 45
Joined: Wed May 17, 2017 8:27 pm

Re: The Official December 2017 Study Group

Postby Bartlet4President » Wed Sep 27, 2017 11:25 am

GnarMarBinx wrote:
Experiment626 wrote:
GnarMarBinx wrote:Hey everyone,

I just posted in the Sept waiters thread because it's more active (and I'm waiting for my Sept score) but figured I should post here as well. I am just wondering how people drill LR question types in an efficient manner. I want to drill flaw questions and parallel reasoning questions but don't know a better way to do it other than printing finding pages in tests with those question types and printing those off, ignoring the other LR questions on those pages. However, that would waste a lot of time and ink, so I am trying to think of a better method.

It's a lot easier to drill game types and RC passage types since they span over 1 or 2 pages, but since LR questions are sort of strewn all over the place in sections seems pretty difficult to drill them by type.

Anyone who doesn't pay for 7sage have any idea how to do this?

Thanks for any responses anyone can give!


If you're lucky and are able to find the Cambridge packets that's usually the golden way to go. If you've got the money, PowerScore has a workbook with questions by type. They are from tests so you do risk seeing questions on a test. I don't remember which tests they're from. You might be able to see that information online and plan your actual PTs around that depending on how many you want to do.


Thanks! I have heard of the Cambridge packets but I know they're super hard to find. I actually just bought the Nathan Fox LR book because someone from here recommended it to me and I read good reviews. I will go through it along with the LR bible and hopefully that will help me solidify the question types I am struggling more with. The Nathan Fox book has 550 questions, and if they're all grouped by type, that seems like a pretty good prep.

LR was always my best section, so I don't think I put enough emphasis on it before going into the Sept test. Hoping to change that in prep for December.

Thanks a lot!



You're probably good with that.




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider] and 3 guests