Winning Strategy for 4th Take

Prepare for the LSAT or discuss it with others in this forum.
User avatar
Rupert Pupkin

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

Winning Strategy for 4th Take

Postby Rupert Pupkin » Mon Dec 25, 2017 6:43 pm

Hello Everyone,

Unfortunately, I didn't do well in Sept or Dec and need to retake for the schools I want to go to. I scored ~10 pts off my PT average twice in a row.

My very first-take Sept 2016 which i studied part-time for 3 mo I used the PS Books. I really didnt spend enough time this take and it was rushed. Should have def post-poned but was trying to throw a hail mary to get into the app cycle that yr.

For my second and third take (the first really focused full time i prepped) i used the Trainer and the MH books, cambridge packets and 7sage videos. I felt like i liked the MH books much more than PS (felt less gimmicky). is this misguided?

The only section I have managed to crush on test-day like my PTs is LG (-1) and attribute my success 100% to 7sage LG videos.

Right now, I have evaluated the situation deeply and it isnt nerves or anxiety that i can identify(i.e I felt great during my last take unlike the first two and wasnt nervous), however, burn out could have been a factor since I was studying full time like an animal for 6 mo and i think i could have been overconfident or was overthinking during the exam. for some reason it seems like LR under the gun of the real thing I throw my strategies out the window and shoot from the hip. I think this is also because the fundamentals arent fully-engrained in my head where in a pressured situation i can use them flawlessly. I think throughout both tests i didnt spend enough time on the fundamentals and rushed to drilling and PTs in Mass quantity creating weaknesses in my foundation along the way.

This has brought me back to the drawing board and moving forward i plan to take June 2018 with a WINNING STRATEGY to a 170+.

I really liked the 7sage LG videos and all the study strategies and useful material JY has put out so i think my best course of action is to take the online course Ultimate+. I feel like learning from such videos and explanations as provided by the 7sage curriculum are in line with my learning style.

Since i do have 6 mo (although I will now be working full-time) I think i will have enough time to utilize 7sage ultimate and revisit a book. I think i will def revisit the trainer and was wondering if I should manhattan after finishing 7sage? or maybe PS or another book? In Dec thread people talked about the FOX book? Im not familiar with this. Any thoughts on this

In sum, my question for you all, is this a good plan, what should I add to the strategy and what advice does anyone have whose been in my position or just some hindsight LSAT advice?

Thanks so much in advance! This community along my journey to becoming a LSAT Warrior is more than appreciated and I am so thankful for you all. Happy Holidays !

Cheers.
Last edited by Rupert Pupkin on Tue Dec 26, 2017 12:03 am, edited 1 time in total.

damask_rain

New
Posts: 79
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2017 4:14 pm

Re: Winning Strategy for 4th Take

Postby damask_rain » Mon Dec 25, 2017 11:01 pm

Super motivated after seeing this as I didn't hit my target score either. Keep it up! :D

User avatar
Rupert Pupkin

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

Re: Winning Strategy for 4th Take

Postby Rupert Pupkin » Mon Dec 25, 2017 11:01 pm

damask_rain wrote:Super motivated after seeing this as I didn't hit my target score either. Keep it up! :D


Haha thanks! What are you doing for the retake?

damask_rain

New
Posts: 79
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2017 4:14 pm

Re: Winning Strategy for 4th Take

Postby damask_rain » Mon Dec 25, 2017 11:08 pm

Rupert Pupkin wrote:
damask_rain wrote:Super motivated after seeing this as I didn't hit my target score either. Keep it up! :D


Haha thanks! What are you doing for the retake?


I think I am going to redo ALL the Logic Games using the 7sage method. I got -4 if I am not mistaken. I am also going to work on stress, meditation, and timing. I panicked at the very beginning of the test (first 15 mins) and missed 6 questions of LR from the first 12. I have never experienced anything like that on my PTs. I usually finish the first 15 questions in the first 8-10 mins and get -0. I'll work full time and redo all the PTs.I hope to do an hour of studying a day. I feel like studying too much is just going to be counterproductive at this point.

User avatar
Rupert Pupkin

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

Re: Winning Strategy for 4th Take

Postby Rupert Pupkin » Mon Dec 25, 2017 11:14 pm

damask_rain wrote:
Rupert Pupkin wrote:
damask_rain wrote:Super motivated after seeing this as I didn't hit my target score either. Keep it up! :D


Haha thanks! What are you doing for the retake?


I think I am going to redo ALL the Logic Games using the 7sage method. I got -4 if I am not mistaken. I am also going to work on stress, meditation, and timing. I panicked at the very beginning of the test (first 15 mins) and missed 6 questions of LR from the first 12. I have never experienced anything like that on my PTs. I usually finish the first 15 questions in the first 8-10 mins and get -0. I'll work full time and redo all the PTs.I hope to do an hour of studying a day. I feel like studying too much is just going to be counterproductive at this point.


Solid. Yeah I hear that. I think studying too much without days off actually screwed me in the end. I think during the test I had slight underconfidence as well due to burn out possibly. I just want to make sure my foundation is super solid and progress consistently. I think working full time is going to actually help me. keep me from "over-doing" it haha. Well see. Best of luck!

beancounter15

New
Posts: 33
Joined: Mon May 30, 2016 8:09 am

Re: Winning Strategy for 4th Take

Postby beancounter15 » Tue Dec 26, 2017 1:29 am

Try to stay as motivated as possible and blind review! Also would recommend 6 section tests. I scored roughly the same on my first 3 tests and finally got a 5 point increase on this last one. Don't give up!

User avatar
olympia

New
Posts: 85
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2017 1:49 pm

Re: Winning Strategy for 4th Take

Postby olympia » Wed Dec 27, 2017 12:22 am

It sounds like you have bad test anxiety come test-day; I do, too. I’m taking the June test as well (for the first time), and I’m scared that my test anxiety will kick in as soon as the test is handed to me. Have you done PTs in public? I hear that helps. I’ll be doing that many times when I am ready to do PTs.

User avatar
somethingElse

Gold
Posts: 4007
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 1:09 pm

Re: Winning Strategy for 4th Take

Postby somethingElse » Wed Dec 27, 2017 1:20 pm

Pumpkin! Sorry to hear that December didn't go as well as it should have :(

I think that since you scored so far below your PT average, that could point to either nerves (maybe at a subconscious level, by the sounds of it) and/or just not having your strategies engrained to the point where they are second-nature.

Since you have a good amount of time until June, I'd probably take a couple weeks off from studying to let your motivation and pre-conceived notions reset, if that makes any sense. That way, once you start studying again you'll be fresh and can maybe evaluate things from a new perspective.

I'd also make sure you are making your PTs as close to the real thing as possible (i.e. take them at the exact same time as the test, same pre-test routine, same break times, same location if possible, etc).

It sounds like you've got LG down as well, so I probably wouldn't change anything up there once you start studying again. I personally only used Blueprint and the Cambridge packets when I studied and I liked their stuff quite a bit - but I can't speak to the Trainer or Manhattan books. If you can afford it, the Blueprint online course was pretty good I thought, especially for LR (and LG, but like I said I would just stick with 7sage for that in your case). For RC, I personally kind of did my own thing in the end (no notating at all, for example), but I did use some of their strategies to an extent. I also read a lot of denser-than-LSAT stuff for RC and thought that helped quite a bit. The last thing that I think helped me a lot was BRing so much to the point where I'd kind of do a pseudo-BR in a live test situation - crossing off each incorrect answer for a concrete reason and selecting TCR for a concrete reason as well. This is how you will know your strategies are second-nature because you'll be able to do this even within the time constraints.

I also post this often but really do believe in it - meditation. If you start now, and are consistent/serious with your practice, you can really see some strong benefits from meditation by June IMO.

User avatar
olympia

New
Posts: 85
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2017 1:49 pm

Re: Winning Strategy for 4th Take

Postby olympia » Wed Dec 27, 2017 1:29 pm

somethingElse wrote:Pumpkin! Sorry to hear that December didn't go as well as it should have :(

I think that since you scored so far below your PT average, that could point to either nerves (maybe at a subconscious level, by the sounds of it) and/or just not having your strategies engrained to the point where they are second-nature.

Since you have a good amount of time until June, I'd probably take a couple weeks off from studying to let your motivation and pre-conceived notions reset, if that makes any sense. That way, once you start studying again you'll be fresh and can maybe evaluate things from a new perspective.

I'd also make sure you are making your PTs as close to the real thing as possible (i.e. take them at the exact same time as the test, same pre-test routine, same break times, same location if possible, etc).

It sounds like you've got LG down as well, so I probably wouldn't change anything up there once you start studying again. I personally only used Blueprint and the Cambridge packets when I studied and I liked their stuff quite a bit - but I can't speak to the Trainer or Manhattan books. If you can afford it, the Blueprint online course was pretty good I thought, especially for LR (and LG, but like I said I would just stick with 7sage for that in your case). For RC, I personally kind of did my own thing in the end (no notating at all, for example), but I did use some of their strategies to an extent. I also read a lot of denser-than-LSAT stuff for RC and thought that helped quite a bit. The last thing that I think helped me a lot was BRing so much to the point where I'd kind of do a pseudo-BR in a live test situation - crossing off each incorrect answer for a concrete reason and selecting TCR for a concrete reason as well. This is how you will know your strategies are second-nature because you'll be able to do this even within the time constraints.

I also post this often but really do believe in it - meditation. If you start now, and are consistent/serious with your practice, you can really see some strong benefits from meditation by June IMO.

This is great advice, especially the pseudo-BR bit.

“I also read a lot of denser-than-LSAT stuff for RC and thought that helped quite a bit.”

Do you have any reading suggestions besides the Economist? I read the Economist daily as well as other academic publications, but I can’t see how this will help me with RC. I really struggle with reading for structure.

User avatar
somethingElse

Gold
Posts: 4007
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 1:09 pm

Re: Winning Strategy for 4th Take

Postby somethingElse » Wed Dec 27, 2017 9:35 pm

olympia wrote:This is great advice, especially the pseudo-BR bit.

“I also read a lot of denser-than-LSAT stuff for RC and thought that helped quite a bit.”

Do you have any reading suggestions besides the Economist? I read the Economist daily as well as other academic publications, but I can’t see how this will help me with RC. I really struggle with reading for structure.


I personally just read Infinite Jest as my dense material. Not only was it definitely denser than the LSAT but it was a really really good book too. It also was a nice break from the, IMO, usually bland lsat passages. I think that (i.e. a dense fiction book) is one way you could go.

Considering you're looking to improve your reading for structure most of all, you may look into a book about some topic in philosophy. I was a philosophy major in college and I think that the stuff I read helped prepare me for RC really well.

User avatar
olympia

New
Posts: 85
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2017 1:49 pm

Re: Winning Strategy for 4th Take

Postby olympia » Thu Dec 28, 2017 12:01 pm

somethingElse wrote:
olympia wrote:This is great advice, especially the pseudo-BR bit.

“I also read a lot of denser-than-LSAT stuff for RC and thought that helped quite a bit.”

Do you have any reading suggestions besides the Economist? I read the Economist daily as well as other academic publications, but I can’t see how this will help me with RC. I really struggle with reading for structure.


I personally just read Infinite Jest as my dense material. Not only was it definitely denser than the LSAT but it was a really really good book too. It also was a nice break from the, IMO, usually bland lsat passages. I think that (i.e. a dense fiction book) is one way you could go.

Considering you're looking to improve your reading for structure most of all, you may look into a book about some topic in philosophy. I was a philosophy major in college and I think that the stuff I read helped prepare me for RC really well.

Thank you.

Do you have any good philosophy book recommendations?

Blougram

New
Posts: 33
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2017 9:49 am

Re: Winning Strategy for 4th Take

Postby Blougram » Thu Dec 28, 2017 3:52 pm

You can always take a look at the bibliography/acknowledgments from old tests, and read assorted articles from the sources used by LSAC for -- as you say -- structure. The list is pretty eclectic (including fringe-/pseudo-science journals), but The Atlantic and Scientific American tend to crop up a lot. Many of the comp passages are based on law review articles.

I would normally never argue against eclectic reading habits in general (from "Beowulf ... to the backs of cornflakes packets," as the novelist David Lodge once put it) but for LSAT purposes, I am not sure. The problem is that LSAC often "adapt" the texts, abridge, remove metaphors and stylistic flourishes, proper nouns, etc., remove the flesh and sort of boil them down to their skeletal structure. I am not a fan of this, but that's why the best practice is probably old RC passages.

Take a look at this (I hope this short LSAT snippet -- part of an RC paragraph -- constitutes fair use; if not, I would be happy to remove it:

[+] Spoiler
Original:

Yet we are frightened of our perplexity. The popular vogue for chaos theory is a sign of this. (If chaos can be theorized, it is not really chaos at all.) We no longer believe in any particular narrative, but we long for narrative as such. We have what Bernstein calls "a nostalgia for determinism." The habit of thinking of our century apocalyptically is well-entrenched--seeing it as the worst century in recorded history and predicting worse to come, as in certain strains of environmentalism or the current fashion of viewing our times as a return to the Dark Ages, with our civilization being overrun by barbarians, variously perceived as the ethnic nationalists without or the so- called underclass within. The habit shows that we prefer stories to no story, even when the story scares us half to death. There is an intoxication in the apocalyptic, as Bernstein reminds us, and there is comfort in the coherence of catastrophe.

This leaves us in a curious state of intellectual denudation. For theories of the past are always maps of a possible future. Now we are walking backward into the future, and without maps.


LSAT version:

Despite the decline of grand theories, people have what one scholar calls “a nostalgia for determinism.”
The attraction of grand theories was the sense they conveyed that history is logical and proceeds (35) according to certain universal laws; in discarding these theories, we seem to have lost faith in historical determinism. But while we no longer believe in the deterministic explanations of history offered by grand theories, we still long for the cognitive satisfaction (40) provided by a belief in historical inevitability. This leaves us in a curious state of intellectual discomfort.


Ugh. Changing "denudation" to "discomfort" (the former being a pretty awesome Emperor's-new-Clothes metaphor) makes me cringe, but it is the way it is.

User avatar
somethingElse

Gold
Posts: 4007
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 1:09 pm

Re: Winning Strategy for 4th Take

Postby somethingElse » Thu Dec 28, 2017 7:30 pm

olympia wrote:
somethingElse wrote:
olympia wrote:This is great advice, especially the pseudo-BR bit.

“I also read a lot of denser-than-LSAT stuff for RC and thought that helped quite a bit.”

Do you have any reading suggestions besides the Economist? I read the Economist daily as well as other academic publications, but I can’t see how this will help me with RC. I really struggle with reading for structure.


I personally just read Infinite Jest as my dense material. Not only was it definitely denser than the LSAT but it was a really really good book too. It also was a nice break from the, IMO, usually bland lsat passages. I think that (i.e. a dense fiction book) is one way you could go.

Considering you're looking to improve your reading for structure most of all, you may look into a book about some topic in philosophy. I was a philosophy major in college and I think that the stuff I read helped prepare me for RC really well.

Thank you.

Do you have any good philosophy book recommendations?


That will depend on how familiar you are with philosophy/what you are interested in. The Reddit philosophy page has a good recommended list: https://www.reddit.com/r/philosophy/wiki/readinglist

I think that if you aren't familiar with philosophy, Problems of Philosophy by Bertrand Russell would be a good one. If you are more familiar, I'd pick a topic that interests you and then choose something from that recommended list - looking through it, they are pretty solid choices. Personally I though epistemology was really interesting and I liked reading David Hume, so you might also choose something by him.

A Critique of Pure Reason by Kant is one that I'd only recommend if you're familiar with philosophy as well. It will be WAY more dense than anything the LSAT throws at you, so it has that going for it, but it's translated and the writing style is very different from what you will see on the LSAT, to the point where I'm kind of on the fence as to whether it will be helpful. That's the main book that comes to mind, for me, as far as something insanely dense that will make the LSAT seem like cake.

User avatar
goldenflash19

Silver
Posts: 524
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 11:15 pm

Re: Winning Strategy for 4th Take

Postby goldenflash19 » Thu Dec 28, 2017 8:26 pm

I followed the noodlyone’s guide on here to the letter on my fourth take and it helped me break through. Would highly recommend. Good luck!!

mdelacruz

New
Posts: 38
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2017 11:41 pm

Re: Winning Strategy for 4th Take

Postby mdelacruz » Fri Dec 29, 2017 4:39 pm

olympia wrote:
somethingElse wrote:
olympia wrote:This is great advice, especially the pseudo-BR bit.

“I also read a lot of denser-than-LSAT stuff for RC and thought that helped quite a bit.”

Do you have any reading suggestions besides the Economist? I read the Economist daily as well as other academic publications, but I can’t see how this will help me with RC. I really struggle with reading for structure.


I personally just read Infinite Jest as my dense material. Not only was it definitely denser than the LSAT but it was a really really good book too. It also was a nice break from the, IMO, usually bland lsat passages. I think that (i.e. a dense fiction book) is one way you could go.

Considering you're looking to improve your reading for structure most of all, you may look into a book about some topic in philosophy. I was a philosophy major in college and I think that the stuff I read helped prepare me for RC really well.

Thank you.

Do you have any good philosophy book recommendations?



Being a philosophy major myself, I personally would not recommend Kant's Critique of Pure Reason (CPR) if you're not at least somewhat familiar with some of the history/background/context of the work. Simply diving in will likely be a monumental waste of time. It's one of the densest and most convoluted texts I've ever read, and I needed the professional help of my professors to have even a moderate grasp of the passages we were assigned. The CPR isn't even assigned as a stand alone text until graduate school. Ditto for Kant's two other critiques (Judgement and Practical Reason) If you really wanna tackle Kant, I'd recommend his Anthropology. Significantly easier to read.

My personal recommendation would be Levinas' Totality and Infinity Much easier to read and understand than Kant in my view, yet dense enough to provide some good practice for RC.

User avatar
somethingElse

Gold
Posts: 4007
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 1:09 pm

Re: Winning Strategy for 4th Take

Postby somethingElse » Fri Dec 29, 2017 4:44 pm

mdelacruz wrote:
olympia wrote:
somethingElse wrote:
olympia wrote:This is great advice, especially the pseudo-BR bit.

“I also read a lot of denser-than-LSAT stuff for RC and thought that helped quite a bit.”

Do you have any reading suggestions besides the Economist? I read the Economist daily as well as other academic publications, but I can’t see how this will help me with RC. I really struggle with reading for structure.


I personally just read Infinite Jest as my dense material. Not only was it definitely denser than the LSAT but it was a really really good book too. It also was a nice break from the, IMO, usually bland lsat passages. I think that (i.e. a dense fiction book) is one way you could go.

Considering you're looking to improve your reading for structure most of all, you may look into a book about some topic in philosophy. I was a philosophy major in college and I think that the stuff I read helped prepare me for RC really well.

Thank you.

Do you have any good philosophy book recommendations?



Being a philosophy major myself, I personally would not recommend Kant's Critique of Pure Reason (CPR) if you're not at least somewhat familiar with some of the history/background/context of the work. Simply diving in will likely be a monumental waste of time. It's one of the densest and most convoluted texts I've ever read, and I needed the professional help of my professors to have even a moderate grasp of the passages we were assigned. The CPR isn't even assigned as a stand alone text until graduate school. Ditto for Kant's two other critiques (Judgement and Practical Reason) If you really wanna tackle Kant, I'd recommend his Anthropology. Significantly easier to read.

My personal recommendation would be Levinas' Totality and Infinity Much easier to read and understand than Kant in my view, yet dense enough to provide some good practice for RC.


Good points - Olympia, please disregard my mention of CPR.

User avatar
olympia

New
Posts: 85
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2017 1:49 pm

Re: Winning Strategy for 4th Take

Postby olympia » Fri Dec 29, 2017 5:24 pm

somethingElse wrote:
mdelacruz wrote:
olympia wrote:
somethingElse wrote:
olympia wrote:This is great advice, especially the pseudo-BR bit.

“I also read a lot of denser-than-LSAT stuff for RC and thought that helped quite a bit.”

Do you have any reading suggestions besides the Economist? I read the Economist daily as well as other academic publications, but I can’t see how this will help me with RC. I really struggle with reading for structure.


I personally just read Infinite Jest as my dense material. Not only was it definitely denser than the LSAT but it was a really really good book too. It also was a nice break from the, IMO, usually bland lsat passages. I think that (i.e. a dense fiction book) is one way you could go.

Considering you're looking to improve your reading for structure most of all, you may look into a book about some topic in philosophy. I was a philosophy major in college and I think that the stuff I read helped prepare me for RC really well.

Thank you.

Do you have any good philosophy book recommendations?



Being a philosophy major myself, I personally would not recommend Kant's Critique of Pure Reason (CPR) if you're not at least somewhat familiar with some of the history/background/context of the work. Simply diving in will likely be a monumental waste of time. It's one of the densest and most convoluted texts I've ever read, and I needed the professional help of my professors to have even a moderate grasp of the passages we were assigned. The CPR isn't even assigned as a stand alone text until graduate school. Ditto for Kant's two other critiques (Judgement and Practical Reason) If you really wanna tackle Kant, I'd recommend his Anthropology. Significantly easier to read.

My personal recommendation would be Levinas' Totality and Infinity Much easier to read and understand than Kant in my view, yet dense enough to provide some good practice for RC.


Good points - Olympia, please disregard my mention of CPR.

No worries.

Thank you to the both of you for recommendations and your suggestions. Each has been duly noted.



Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Anon-e-miss, Google [Bot] and 8 guests