2010 February Study Group

User avatar
TheTopBloke
Posts: 486
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 7:29 pm

Re: 2010 February Study Group

Postby TheTopBloke » Thu Jan 21, 2010 2:32 am

Anybody out there have any other good vids or tutorials on logic? Not basic stuff, but more complex stuff, that might help me with the more complex or subtle formal logic in LR sections or setups in LG sections? Please post links if u got 'em. I've been through the Powerscore LG Bible and it was good but I dont have it with me at the moment.

User avatar
hobbsey
Posts: 28
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 12:28 pm

Re: 2010 February Study Group

Postby hobbsey » Thu Jan 21, 2010 3:57 pm

My last big issue to work on is LG timing. I know I am capable of answering all the questions correctly, so I tend to get bogged down on questions and lose track of the big picture of time. On the last test I took last night I focused on just trusting my first answer and moving on. I got a few more wrong than I would have liked, but finished with a minute or so to spare. Just perfecting that happy medium between speed and accuracy before test day is stressing me out. The good news is that LG and RC are holding around my goal score.

User avatar
TheTopBloke
Posts: 486
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 7:29 pm

Re: 2010 February Study Group

Postby TheTopBloke » Fri Jan 22, 2010 4:13 am

hobbsey wrote:My last big issue to work on is LG timing. I know I am capable of answering all the questions correctly, so I tend to get bogged down on questions and lose track of the big picture of time. On the last test I took last night I focused on just trusting my first answer and moving on. I got a few more wrong than I would have liked, but finished with a minute or so to spare. Just perfecting that happy medium between speed and accuracy before test day is stressing me out. The good news is that LG and RC are holding around my goal score.


IMHO, only in LG can you trust your answer, as long as you trust your setup. I find as long as you stay current on your LG, do at least one section every day, then you'll be just fine. Time them of course, but understanding the rules, and getting the setup right is more important than the timing.

User avatar
TheTopBloke
Posts: 486
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 7:29 pm

Re: 2010 February Study Group

Postby TheTopBloke » Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:16 pm

OK, PT #35 Sec #4 Q #23

I have improved dramatically my ability to answer this question type, but this has me puzzled.

Someone please help me to understand why A is incorrect. I was torn between A and D. I'm missing something here, because I cannot see why A is less correct than D.

User avatar
Intraining
Posts: 128
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 4:58 pm

Re: 2010 February Study Group

Postby Intraining » Fri Jan 22, 2010 10:30 pm

Almost 14 days...

missinglink
Posts: 946
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 12:49 am

Re: 2010 February Study Group

Postby missinglink » Sat Jan 23, 2010 4:27 pm

Ready to retake it, soon if possible. :D

Most recent PT was a bit of a breakthrough - PT 52. Came back with a raw score of 89 and a scaled score of 170. If but for some stupid (and easily avoidable) mistakes that I made in reading a rule in the first game, it would have been a 174. Everything seemed to click. I was seeing all the right answers, and breezing through my LG setups.

Woke up nice and early and took it this morning, as well.

I should be able to improve on December's 159. Hopefully it's not too late to make a difference at some schools. Hard to waste a good GPA (3.80) on such a bad test score.

vivecan005
Posts: 27
Joined: Sun Dec 20, 2009 8:27 pm

Re: 2010 February Study Group

Postby vivecan005 » Sun Jan 24, 2010 3:56 am

missinglink:

You seem to be confident enough with a "smile" symbol in earlier post. Also claiming that you have GPA 3.8 and it will be wasted if you apply with 159 LSAT score? Even If you get 180 this time and average LSAT will be 169.5 and there will NOT be "17" in the whole number and still you will be deprived from top schools regardless of your 3.8 GPA.
Limitation of my arguement:
You know a school where average will not be used but the recent score and that is one of your target school

Do you have a such school in your target list?

lawduder
Posts: 483
Joined: Sun Jun 28, 2009 10:56 am

Re: 2010 February Study Group

Postby lawduder » Sun Jan 24, 2010 12:11 pm

vivecan005 wrote:missinglink:

You seem to be confident enough with a "smile" symbol in earlier post. Also claiming that you have GPA 3.8 and it will be wasted if you apply with 159 LSAT score? Even If you get 180 this time and average LSAT will be 169.5 and there will NOT be "17" in the whole number and still you will be deprived from top schools regardless of your 3.8 GPA.
Limitation of my arguement:
You know a school where average will not be used but the recent score and that is one of your target school

Do you have a such school in your target list?

someone's going to ban you if you don't stop with that stupid font (and retarded posts)

vivecan005
Posts: 27
Joined: Sun Dec 20, 2009 8:27 pm

Re: 2010 February Study Group

Postby vivecan005 » Sun Jan 24, 2010 12:28 pm

someone's going to ban me if I don't stop with this stupid font (and retarded posts) relax....relax.
Get some fuck. Don't just be Tim Geithner or Ben Bernanke.

watch and enjoy
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PK7xF1RGCQY

missinglink
Posts: 946
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 12:49 am

Re: 2010 February Study Group

Postby missinglink » Sun Jan 24, 2010 3:33 pm

Actually, none of the schools that I am applying to average LSAT scores. They also accept Feb. LSATs. But of course, with rolling admissions, I'm at a disadvantage relative to those who applied earlier in the cycle.

In any case, for the schools I want to go to, a 164 would be enough to get me in, if past admissions cycles are any indication. I'd take an average of 169.5 any day of the week :) .

vivecan005
Posts: 27
Joined: Sun Dec 20, 2009 8:27 pm

Re: 2010 February Study Group

Postby vivecan005 » Sun Jan 24, 2010 5:02 pm

missinglink wrote:Actually, none of the schools that I am applying to average LSAT scores. They also accept Feb. LSATs. But of course, with rolling admissions, I'm at a disadvantage relative to those who applied earlier in the cycle.

In any case, for the schools I want to go to, a 164 would be enough to get me in, if past admissions cycles are any indication. I'd take an average of 169.5 any day of the week :) .



But probability doesn't allow you to consider 180 this time because you don't seem to go beyond 173

missinglink
Posts: 946
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 12:49 am

Re: 2010 February Study Group

Postby missinglink » Sun Jan 24, 2010 5:57 pm

Don't know where you got the idea that I'm considering a 180. That came from you, not me.

Anyways, this is really taking the discussion off-topic, and it is less than productive, so I'll refrain from any more replies on this tangent.

User avatar
TheTopBloke
Posts: 486
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 7:29 pm

Re: 2010 February Study Group

Postby TheTopBloke » Thu Feb 04, 2010 8:16 pm

On Q's where "..., if true, most strongly support which one of the following?"

Is it safe to choose an answer that:

implies?
infers?


This is not exactly finding a conclusion to the stimulus correct?

Example: PT 55, Sec 1, Q 8.

A - too extreme
B - implies too much
C - assumes too much
D - I think is a reasonable answer
E - implies too much

I don't know what the answer is. Hoping someone can help me to understand this new question type before I look. I just know I cannot definitively choose what is correct as opposed to what is incorrect, and want to make sure I understand what the question is asking me to look for before I move on.

kacee
Posts: 45
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 2:01 pm

Re: 2010 February Study Group

Postby kacee » Thu Feb 04, 2010 9:17 pm

@TheTopBloke: You have it perfectly right. D is the answer, and it's just the same as "what is most implied/inferred from this passage". So, as you pointed out, all the other ones AREN'T implied/inferred from the passage, because for different reasons they are inferring something not mentioned or that is out of scope of the passage. Since all the others can be eliminated for that reason, and D cannot (and sounds reasonable) then that is the answer! The first 10 LR questions don't tend to be too tricky. It can be just as quick (and more accurate) to answer by process of elimination than by actively seeking the right answer... do both. If the right answer jumps out you can stop eliminating (though sometimes skimming the rest of the answers is a good idea, I've found, since they put tricky decoys in there and hide the MORE correct one at the end).

Being a fast reader helps with this. In practice tests if I have the time, for accuracy's sake, I tend to make sure I can eliminate EVERY wrong answer for all questions past 16-18.

PS - LAST day for studying. As per the advice of just about everybody, I'm taking tomorrow completely off for R&R. Gonna try to crunch in another PT or two tonight, review the answers thoroughly and then shake it off, except to check out the test site tomorrow. Is everybody ready?? I could use another week, I think, to perfect my RC strategy and figure out why I keep making stupid mistakes that keep me from getting -1 or -2 instead of -0 in LG/LR, but alas, I do not have such luxury. In South Carolina they will not be closing any test centers. Luckily, the closer I get to the LSAT the less I want to go to Law School, so I have a lot of pressure lifted off my back that I'm hoping will work in my advantage.

Cheers!!

User avatar
s0ph1e2007
Posts: 1054
Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2009 10:37 pm

Re: 2010 February Study Group

Postby s0ph1e2007 » Thu Feb 04, 2010 9:42 pm

kacee wrote:
PS - LAST day for studying. As per the advice of just about everybody, I'm taking tomorrow completely off for R&R. Gonna try to crunch in another PT or two tonight, review the answers thoroughly and then shake it off, except to check out the test site tomorrow. Is everybody ready?? I could use another week, I think, to perfect my RC strategy and figure out why I keep making stupid mistakes that keep me from getting -1 or -2 instead of -0 in LG/LR, but alas, I do not have such luxury. In South Carolina they will not be closing any test centers. Luckily, the closer I get to the LSAT the less I want to go to Law School, so I have a lot of pressure lifted off my back that I'm hoping will work in my advantage.

Cheers!!


I'm finally ready!!
had a weird day yesterday taking 55 since the last LG was the only LG i've ever taken where i was sooo lost.

But in reply to you kacee, I was in a similar situation getting -0 on LR, LR and LG and then -2 or -3 on RC. But then about 5 tests ago I decided I would try a new strategy. I underlined almost nothing, boxed only very very key terms and read very slowly so that I looked back at the passage at most twice for 5 seconds after I got to the questions. Ever since then I'm -0 across the board (with usually one question messed up somewhere becuase of mis bubblin :/)

hope this helps, try it out tonight if you can

User avatar
TheTopBloke
Posts: 486
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 7:29 pm

Re: 2010 February Study Group

Postby TheTopBloke » Thu Feb 04, 2010 9:53 pm

Thank you. Yes I review each answer choice and try to determine why it's right and why it's wrong.

As for that RC, I found that no highlighting is just as bad as too much. A little highlighting, maybe six items at most, and I'm getting my best results, which is around -3. I'm just a slow reader. Other than that, I'd probably have a very high score.

User avatar
s0ph1e2007
Posts: 1054
Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2009 10:37 pm

Re: 2010 February Study Group

Postby s0ph1e2007 » Thu Feb 04, 2010 10:00 pm

TheTopBloke wrote:Thank you. Yes I review each answer choice and try to determine why it's right and why it's wrong.

As for that RC, I found that no highlighting is just as bad as too much. A little highlighting, maybe six items at most, and I'm getting my best results, which is around -3. I'm just a slow reader. Other than that, I'd probably have a very high score.


well a little highlighting was what I was suggesting, just dont underline or box too much.
reading slowly is good, just get yourself into it. Pretend you're learning information that is essential to your first law case, or essential to you in some way.

Good luck
take a break and own on saturday

User avatar
TheTopBloke
Posts: 486
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 7:29 pm

Re: 2010 February Study Group

Postby TheTopBloke » Thu Feb 04, 2010 10:44 pm

PT 55 Sec 1 Q 25

Here's another interesting one. I normally get these correct, but in this case two things are throwing me off. The EXCEPT requirement, and "All great art involves original ideas,"

How would you diagram this? Are the original ideas within great art, the other way around, or is there a third way to digram this?

keg411
Posts: 5935
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2009 9:10 pm

Re: 2010 February Study Group

Postby keg411 » Thu Feb 04, 2010 10:48 pm

TheTopBloke wrote:PT 55 Sec 1 Q 25

Here's another interesting one. I normally get these correct, but in this case two things are throwing me off. The EXCEPT requirement, and "All great art involves original ideas,"

How would you diagram this? Are the original ideas within great art, the other way around, or is there a third way to digram this?


If you diagram that way, "original ideas" are within "great art". In other words, what they are saying is that "original ideas" are necessary for "great art" but not sufficient.

kacee
Posts: 45
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 2:01 pm

Re: 2010 February Study Group

Postby kacee » Fri Feb 05, 2010 3:40 am

Actually, unless the main conclusion jumps out and waves its arms at me, I have gotten used to doing pretty much no underlining or boxing at all. I have pretty good natural reading comprehension, and tend to read quickly, re-reading sentences that have compact information or don't make sense to me, so that by the time I'm done with the passage I have a pretty solid grasp of most of what is talked about. I do typically need to refer back every time specific lines are mentioned in questions, but I find this makes me more quickly able to pinpoint the correct answer anyway.

One RC question type I always seem to get wrong is the "Pick the appropriate title for this piece" or the like. Very confusing...

nikkei325i
Posts: 60
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 8:45 am

Re: 2010 February Study Group

Postby nikkei325i » Fri Feb 05, 2010 7:52 am

keg411 wrote:If you diagram that way, "original ideas" are within "great art". In other words, what they are saying is that "original ideas" are necessary for "great art" but not sufficient.


I think you meant to say that "original ideas" are sufficient for "great art" but not necessary since it says "all great art involves original ideas..."

kacee wrote:One RC question type I always seem to get wrong is the "Pick the appropriate title for this piece" or the like. Very confusing...


I absolutely despise those question types...

keg411
Posts: 5935
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2009 9:10 pm

Re: 2010 February Study Group

Postby keg411 » Fri Feb 05, 2010 9:17 am

nikkei325i wrote:
keg411 wrote:If you diagram that way, "original ideas" are within "great art". In other words, what they are saying is that "original ideas" are necessary for "great art" but not sufficient.


I think you meant to say that "original ideas" are sufficient for "great art" but not necessary since it says "all great art involves original ideas..."

kacee wrote:One RC question type I always seem to get wrong is the "Pick the appropriate title for this piece" or the like. Very confusing...


I absolutely despise those question types...


All great art involves original ideas = necessary, not sufficient. Sufficient would mean that all great art needs to be considered great art is original ideas (which we wouldn't know from just the two sentences -- maybe it needs "original ideas" and something else). Necessary means that art needs original ideas to be considered great art (aka "all great art involves original ideas"). Unless I'm getting the two terms mixed up, which is certainly possible.

nikkei325i
Posts: 60
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 8:45 am

Re: 2010 February Study Group

Postby nikkei325i » Fri Feb 05, 2010 9:56 pm

Ah, nevermind. I had no idea that involve means that you include something as a necessary part or result. Throughout my whole life I took the word "involve" as something sufficient to bring something about. So when I looked at that question I took it as original ideas are a part of all great art, but they are not necessary to make it great art (there are many other factors that can contribute to a piece being considered "great art.") Wow, I feel like an idiot for thinking this haha. I do not know where I got this idea where I mistook involved as being a synonym for enough/plenty/ample etc. rather than required/mandatory/obligatory/essential etc. I am an idiot.

keg411 wrote:
nikkei325i wrote:
keg411 wrote:If you diagram that way, "original ideas" are within "great art". In other words, what they are saying is that "original ideas" are necessary for "great art" but not sufficient.


I think you meant to say that "original ideas" are sufficient for "great art" but not necessary since it says "all great art involves original ideas..."

kacee wrote:One RC question type I always seem to get wrong is the "Pick the appropriate title for this piece" or the like. Very confusing...


I absolutely despise those question types...


All great art involves original ideas = necessary, not sufficient. Sufficient would mean that all great art needs to be considered great art is original ideas (which we wouldn't know from just the two sentences -- maybe it needs "original ideas" and something else). Necessary means that art needs original ideas to be considered great art (aka "all great art involves original ideas"). Unless I'm getting the two terms mixed up, which is certainly possible.

nikkei325i
Posts: 60
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 8:45 am

Re: 2010 February Study Group

Postby nikkei325i » Sat Feb 06, 2010 6:27 pm

The LG section got to me this time around...

kacee
Posts: 45
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 2:01 pm

Re: 2010 February Study Group

Postby kacee » Sat Feb 06, 2010 6:32 pm

None of those stupid "Pick the title for this passage" questions in the RC. YAY!




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests