Top Law Schools

I just can't figure this test out. I guess it frustrates me since in all my other classes I grasp concepts pretty easily, unlike this one. I'm usually -2 or 3 on LG and just shit up a storm on LR and RC. I taken the Testmasters course and my score barely went up.

Any help? Sorry for the rant

.

99.9luft wrote:Go through the bibles, do dozens of PTs, only then you should hear some major clicking. Good luck!

Would you suggest going through some PT's really slow and try to understand every question I come across?

.

I was always very good with LR but sucked at LG and wasn't great at RC. These are my theories:

LR: take a formal logic class or buy a intro to logic textbook. I never understood powerscore's bs behind it. A good understanding of logic is way more important. Missed 1 on Oct test

RC: Eventually, with enough practice tests you will start to see what the test makers look for. You also have to learn to see the big picture as well as the details in RC. Shit like "what is the authors main point" is difficult because, unlike any normal passage, the author doesn't come out and say it. The RC bible helped me a lot. Missed 3 on oct test

Lafakad wrote:

99.9luft wrote:Go through the bibles, do dozens of PTs, only then you should hear some major clicking. Good luck!

Would you suggest going through some PT's really slow and try to understand every question I come across?

I took Testmasters and the key for me was taking the homework very seriously. Once I stopped rushing through to "finish" and started taking my time with each question until I was confident in an answer, I saw a huge jump. I also went through each test after I took it and analyzed each question I "marked" including the ones I got right. Again, I think this made a huge difference.

Hope this helps!

For LR, I think a problem with a lot of the test prep strategies is that they don't really ever focus on the stimulus. Everything revolves around question type and how to find "the right answers" to such question types. While I agree that you should memorize all question types and have them be second nature (or it will be almost impossible to finish on time), you cannot get a good score unless you can read and understand the details of a stimulus and answer choices. And for people that get 170+ while using the question type strategy, they were naturally already able to read the details. So for me, it was when I realized that and started looking for mind numbingly specific details in the stimulus did my LR score start skyrocketting. Even after the test prep stuff, I was missing 5 PER LR sections, so i was losing a total of 10 raw points on LR alone. And on my actual test, i missed 3 total on LR. Just shocked.


For RC - lol what can i say? you either have it or you don't.

Edit: I wanted to clarify a little bit on what I mean by details. I mean just really focusing on the key words that are used - for example, the difference between can and will and how that affects the stimulus. you'll start seeing patterns in the stimulus and answer choices once you start doing this too.

Retake (in the event of failure).

Accuracy-->Speed-->Endurance.

I recommend the lsatblog study plans. They follow this sequence, and they build your understand as well as your confidence.

Eugenie Danglars wrote:Accuracy-->Speed-->Endurance.

I recommend the lsatblog study plans. They follow this sequence, and they build your understand as well as your confidence.

This. I sucked and then I started doing PT's with no time for accuracy, then timed PT's for speed. I also noticed that my clicking still hasn't fully occured, but I have had one initial click after about my 20th PT. Serious LSAT preppers will do at minimum 40 Preptests.

I'm on about 32-33 and I see some stuff really starting to come together. I did the LR of PT 45 this morning before work and missed 1 - my best score on a LR section to date.

gambelda wrote:

Eugenie Danglars wrote:Accuracy-->Speed-->Endurance.

I recommend the lsatblog study plans. They follow this sequence, and they build your understand as well as your confidence.

This. I sucked and then I started doing PT's with no time for accuracy, then timed PT's for speed. I also noticed that my clicking still hasn't fully occured, but I have had one initial click after about my 20th PT. Serious LSAT preppers will do at minimum 40 Preptests.

I'm on about 32-33 and I see some stuff really starting to come together. I did the LR of PT 45 this morning before work and missed 1 - my best score on a LR section to date.

+/-0 on the lsatblog study plans, I don't know what those are.

+1 on studying untimed if you are having problems, especially with logic games. If you are getting frustrated, you need to go for a run, have a brandy alexander, and do something else for the rest of the day. Come back, and start doing them untimed, for comprehension. Do not come back to doing them timed until you really feel pretty "fluid" with them.

I never took any of these classes or anything, so I don't know if they tell you this or not. But one thing I think is important is to realize you actually can brute force the logic games. Some of the games are so unconstrained that it is nearly impossible to diagram them, or it will take you a very long time. You only have 30 or so options to test, just cram them through the test parameters and do it that way - sometimes it's faster.

ahduth wrote:
+/-0 on the lsatblog study plans, I don't know what those are.

http://lsatblog.blogspot.com/p/month-ls ... plans.html

leeronalda wrote:While I agree that you should memorize all question types and have them be second nature (or it will be almost impossible to finish on time), you cannot get a good score unless you can read and understand the details of a stimulus and answer choices.

Not necessarily. I did no formal study or prep (just PTs), have never taken a prep course or had any training in formal logic, and I definitely don't know the question types. Got -2 and -4 on my LRs in Oct 2010, with 10+ minutes to spare in each section except LG. 171 total.

Obviously I'm an example of someone who just kinda 'gets' it, but not everyone needs to go through the formal study. Maybe if I had, I would've gotten a few more right, but I'm lazy.

rinkrat19 wrote:

leeronalda wrote:While I agree that you should memorize all question types and have them be second nature (or it will be almost impossible to finish on time), you cannot get a good score unless you can read and understand the details of a stimulus and answer choices.

Not necessarily. I did no formal study or prep (just PTs), have never taken a prep course or had any training in formal logic, and I definitely don't know the question types. Got -2 and -4 on my LRs in Oct 2010, with 10+ minutes to spare in each section except LG. 171 total.

Obviously I'm an example of someone who just kinda 'gets' it, but not everyone needs to go through the formal study. Maybe if I had, I would've gotten a few more right, but I'm lazy.

So you're one of THOSE people......... I tend to hate those people. The people who just understand things. I hate you because I'm envious of your inherent ability to outperform.

rinkrat19 wrote:

leeronalda wrote:While I agree that you should memorize all question types and have them be second nature (or it will be almost impossible to finish on time), you cannot get a good score unless you can read and understand the details of a stimulus and answer choices.

Not necessarily. I did no formal study or prep (just PTs), have never taken a prep course or had any training in formal logic, and I definitely don't know the question types. Got -2 and -4 on my LRs in Oct 2010, with 10+ minutes to spare in each section except LG. 171 total.

Obviously I'm an example of someone who just kinda 'gets' it, but not everyone needs to go through the formal study. Maybe if I had, I would've gotten a few more right, but I'm lazy.

Yeah, this is kind of ridiculous - there are question types? I also don't understand what is meant by "stimulus and answer choices." Sometimes I think you guys are just making this stuff up lol.

gambelda wrote:

rinkrat19 wrote:

leeronalda wrote:While I agree that you should memorize all question types and have them be second nature (or it will be almost impossible to finish on time), you cannot get a good score unless you can read and understand the details of a stimulus and answer choices.

Not necessarily. I did no formal study or prep (just PTs), have never taken a prep course or had any training in formal logic, and I definitely don't know the question types. Got -2 and -4 on my LRs in Oct 2010, with 10+ minutes to spare in each section except LG. 171 total.

If you did enough PTs you would subconsciously recognize the question types, even if you didn't know the PowerScore[tm] name[tm] for each type.

Just doing PTs has worked for many. I suspect many more have, however, been helped by using books to learn the types of questions that can be asked together with strategies for answering them.

You guys are really making me wish I'd studied more.

This Saturday, I am retaking a 170. I basically could not study at all due to work load IRL, but then again, my theory always has been that LSAT, after you familiarize yourself with the questions is not a test to study for. (Yes, you can basically practice each question type to the point of automotion and score really high, but I cba)

nullisecundus wrote:This Saturday, I am retaking a 170. I basically could not study at all due to work load IRL, but then again, my theory always has been that LSAT, after you familiarize yourself with the questions is not a test to study for. (Yes, you can basically practice each question type to the point of automotion and score really high, but I cba)

I'm probably going to retake a 173 in February for WL/scholarship type shit.

But I would vociferously disagree with your proposition that it is not a test to study for. Can you be taught reading comprehension if you don't already know it? Of course not within the context of this test. Can you train to be faster? It's like running - sure, you know how to run already. But you can train to run faster.

rinkrat19 wrote:

leeronalda wrote:While I agree that you should memorize all question types and have them be second nature (or it will be almost impossible to finish on time), you cannot get a good score unless you can read and understand the details of a stimulus and answer choices.

Not necessarily. I did no formal study or prep (just PTs), have never taken a prep course or had any training in formal logic, and I definitely don't know the question types. Got -2 and -4 on my LRs in Oct 2010, with 10+ minutes to spare in each section except LG. 171 total.

Obviously I'm an example of someone who just kinda 'gets' it, but not everyone needs to go through the formal study. Maybe if I had, I would've gotten a few more right, but I'm lazy.

+1 on everything he said except I didn't have 10 minutes to spare. No timed tests and no formal studies. I just went thorough 5-10 questions of mixed type per day for a couple of months. Did not really focus on RC, I can read through it and understand it close to 100%, I actually read about the same pace as I read everything, I guess I read boring stuff a lot IRL. LG was just getting faster, which came with practice. LR was the most difficult to improve, but with time and practice I started to "get" most of the questions and started to spot the fallacies. I think if I went ahead and prepped for a whole year doing what I did I can score much higher. Didn't/don't have the time though.

Lafakad wrote:

99.9luft wrote:Go through the bibles, do dozens of PTs, only then you should hear some major clicking. Good luck!

Would you suggest going through some PT's really slow and try to understand every question I come across?

If you have time...here is what i did:

I would do a timed PT (dont score)...then, i would do the same PT untimed.

Compare your mistakes. Then, go over each questions, perticulary LR if you dont want to waste time on RC...

I improved my score greatly.