JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread Forum

[redecember]

Can't seem to find PTs 40-51 in a bundle online. Anyone know where I can purchase them?

[pineapple57]

Off topic, but as a lifelong Baltimorean.... tonight is a good night.

word.

[CardozoLaw09]

PT 40 --

Raw: 83
Scaled: 164

5 minute break after section 3

LR1: -4
LG: -4, 4 mistakes too many - game 3 was tough
LR2: -6, not good
RC: -4

[mindarmed]

PT Sched looks good. Thinking of taking PT 40 tonight. Looking forward to the next review sesh

It's taking 100% of my mental facilities to type this. How can you take a PT tonight?

Didn't drink + don't have much to do now that the game's over. Showtime.

brother i did not know my name last night. props to your dedication

[objection_your_honor]

Can't seem to find PTs 40-51 in a bundle online. Anyone know where I can purchase them?

Cambridge has all the tests: http://www.cambridgelsat.com/preptests/4-section/

EDIT: See post below for bundle.

[myoung7189]

Can't seem to find PTs 40-51 in a bundle online. Anyone know where I can purchase them?

Cambridge has all the tests: http://www.cambridgelsat.com/preptests/4-section/

Here's a bundle of 41-50 you can save around 10 dollars compared to buying them individually. It's the fourth one from the bottom: http://www.cambridgelsat.com/prep-books/

It looks like it is an actual book, but they really just email you a pdf with the tests.

[theycallmefoes]

So, some of these Cambridge LR packets are huge, and, when I'm doing particularly well at a certain question type, I find myself getting restless and itching to move on to the next section (especially by the time I get to Q50 or so). I was wondering how you all are incorporating drilling into your prep. (Be warned: I overanalyze everything. Sorry. Humor me, please?)

Are you drilling as you go through MLR and/or LRB? Or are you finishing the guide(s) first?

What about those of you who are retakers and have already been through the guide(s) (at least) once?

Also, are you completely finishing a given Cambridge packet before moving to the next type? Or are you just doing enough to feel comfortable (or maybe a set number) and saving the rest to drill as necessary? Or do you do some from each level of difficulty?

[Daily_Double]

So, some of these Cambridge LR packets are huge, and, when I'm doing particularly well at a certain question type, I find myself getting restless and itching to move on to the next section (especially by the time I get to Q50 or so). I was wondering how you all are incorporating drilling into your prep. (Be warned: I overanalyze everything. Sorry. Humor me, please?)

Are you drilling as you go through MLR and/or LRB? Or are you finishing the guide(s) first?

What about those of you who are retakers and have already been through the guide(s) (at least) once?

Also, are you completely finishing a given Cambridge packet before moving to the next type? Or are you just doing enough to feel comfortable (or maybe a set number) and saving the rest to drill as necessary? Or do you do some from each level of difficulty?

Did about 3/4 of each packet. Saving the rest. Did them after LRB and after MLR. Took me about a month.

[BlaqBella]

So, some of these Cambridge LR packets are huge, and, when I'm doing particularly well at a certain question type, I find myself getting restless and itching to move on to the next section (especially by the time I get to Q50 or so). I was wondering how you all are incorporating drilling into your prep. (Be warned: I overanalyze everything. Sorry. Humor me, please?)

Are you drilling as you go through MLR and/or LRB? Or are you finishing the guide(s) first?

What about those of you who are retakers and have already been through the guide(s) (at least) once?

Also, are you completely finishing a given Cambridge packet before moving to the next type? Or are you just doing enough to feel comfortable (or maybe a set number) and saving the rest to drill as necessary? Or do you do some from each level of difficulty?

Did about 3/4 of each packet. Saving the rest. Did them after LRB and after MLR. Took me about a month.

Ahhh, this is part of your magic, isn't it? I haven't gotten through these books in their entirety. Hoping to get them read in their entirety within the next 3 weeks.

[Daily_Double]

Did about 3/4 of each packet. Saving the rest. Did them after LRB and after MLR. Took me about a month.

Ahhh, this is part of your magic, isn't it? I haven't gotten through these books in their entirety. Hoping to get them read in their entirety within the next 3 weeks.

Part, definitely not all. Most of my understanding comes from reviewing problems. Speaking of which, I didn't finish my normal review process over the weekend for PT 39, I got lazy I know, don't worry I'm stepping up my game. So I'm going to review it again today. If anyone is still unclear about something let me know, maybe I can help. Although I won't get back to you until this evening due to classes.

[objection_your_honor]

Should I drill necessary or sufficient assumptions first?

[objection_your_honor]

Also, can anyone speak to 7Sage's blind review method? I have done this so far with RC sections and it seems very powerful.

[A → B ⊨ ¬B → ¬A]

Also, can anyone speak to 7Sage's blind review method? I have done this so far with RC sections and it seems very powerful.

There's a guy in this thread that likes it.

[BlaqBella]

This blind review method, how does it really help??

The fact is you incorrectly chose the answer the first time. You don't get do-overs on the real thing. Reviewing blindly to then realize a mistake seems futile to me. How does this differentiate from grading your answers and reviewing after the fact?

[BlaqBella]

Should I drill necessary or sufficient assumptions first?

Necessary, IMHO. More difficult to master than SA and I realized once necessary fell in place, SA followed.

[BlaqBella]

Did about 3/4 of each packet. Saving the rest. Did them after LRB and after MLR. Took me about a month.

Ahhh, this is part of your magic, isn't it? I haven't gotten through these books in their entirety. Hoping to get them read in their entirety within the next 3 weeks.

Part, definitely not all. Most of my understanding comes from reviewing problems. Speaking of which, I didn't finish my normal review process over the weekend for PT 39, I got lazy I know, don't worry I'm stepping up my game. So I'm going to review it again today. If anyone is still unclear about something let me know, maybe I can help. Although I won't get back to you until this evening due to classes.

How do you review? Do you write out each of the wrong questions?

For now, I peruse MLSAT website and try and do self-evaluations. Also try and identify the Prem and Conc...see how that right AC works and why my chosen answer does not. Any other tips that you found helpful? I need to make some big gains in LR. Its what's holding me back for mid-160s!

[Daily_Double]

How do you review? Do you write out each of the wrong questions?

For now, I peruse MLSAT website and try and do self-evaluations. Also try and identify the Prem and Conc...see how that right AC works and why my chosen answer does not. Any other tips that you found helpful? I need to make some big gains in LR. Its what's holding me back for mid-160s!

I note whenever I'm unsure, I mentally note why I am unsure. Eventually I will grade it. I note that I got a question wrong. I don't note what the correct answer is. Then I go back to the problems I'm unsure about and the ones I got wrong, usually there is a large overlap between the two. I figure out why the answer I selected was not the correct answer. I write a solution to the problem, then I check my solution against answers online, Manhattan, 7sage, etc. and against the problem's credited answer.

I think noting the correct answer then going back to the problem is a flawed approach. Anyone with a basic understanding of the LSAT can go back, knowing the correct answer, and give a decent reason of why that answer is correct, but it takes more to go back and figure out why you did what you did, what you should have done, and then to evaluate yourself based on what the answer actually is.

[rebexness]

[objection_your_honor]

This blind review method, how does it really help??

The fact is you incorrectly chose the answer the first time. You don't get do-overs on the real thing. Reviewing blindly to then realize a mistake seems futile to me. How does this differentiate from grading your answers and reviewing after the fact?

I think there is an important difference. For diagnostic purposes, your answer still is what you chose in the moment. That's still your grade. But being able to reach 100% certainty either for or against every answer choice, A through E — writing out why it is 100% wrong, or 100% right — forces you to engage with the question at a level you weren't able to in the given time. You can iron out how you should have been thinking about the question, and that accuracy will inform your next timed run.

Let's say you write out an explanation for your selected answer choice. When taking the test, you were 70% certain it was correct. After blind review, you are 100% certain it is correct, and you are 100% certain all of the other options are 100% incorrect. You go to grade it and, guess what — you were wrong. You can now analyze how you were incorrectly thinking about that question on a much deeper level, because you have considered it for well beyond the 1:20 given during a timed section and written a reasoned explanation for your selection and each elimination.

This may differ person to person, but I find there is also a psychological advantage. When you're reviewing a question already knowing the credited response it is easy to give less time, a less rigorous analysis, after-the-fact justification, and more "ah - this was just a stupid mistake." Reviewing before you see the answer reveals systematic errors in the process.

[BlaqBella]

I grade and review incorrect questions without writing the correct answer choice. Is this what is considered blind review?

[052220151]

I have jury duty tomorrow, which is the perfect excuse for drilling for 8 hours. I have been slacking hard, but I'm hoping PT 39 on Wednesday will snap me out of it.

Armed, Wednesday is still the plan right?

[objection_your_honor]

I grade and review incorrect questions without writing the correct answer choice. Is this what is considered blind review?

Sure. The only real difference is blind review allows you a second shot at bringing the whole test up to a 180 before grading. The timed test is of course your diagnostic score (revisions should be done on the side), but the ability to bring everything up to 100% certainty before grading can show you how wrong or right you are in your process.

If everything is at 100% certainty and you are still missing questions, that is indicative of a serious systematic flaw in your reasoning.

[BlaqBella]

I grade and review incorrect questions without writing the correct answer choice. Is this what is considered blind review?

Sure. The only real difference is blind review allows you a second shot at bringing the whole test up to a 180 before grading. The timed test is of course your diagnostic score (revisions should be done on the side), but the ability to bring everything up to 100% certainty before grading can show you how wrong or right you are in your process.

If everything is at 100% certainty and you are still missing questions, that is indicative of a serious systematic flaw in your reasoning.

Oh wow, hmm. I will try this next time I take an exam. Thank you!

[BlaqBella]

How do you review? Do you write out each of the wrong questions?

For now, I peruse MLSAT website and try and do self-evaluations. Also try and identify the Prem and Conc...see how that right AC works and why my chosen answer does not. Any other tips that you found helpful? I need to make some big gains in LR. Its what's holding me back for mid-160s!

I note whenever I'm unsure, I mentally note why I am unsure. Eventually I will grade it. I note that I got a question wrong. I don't note what the correct answer is. Then I go back to the problems I'm unsure about and the ones I got wrong, usually there is a large overlap between the two. I figure out why the answer I selected was not the correct answer. I write a solution to the problem, then I check my solution against answers online, Manhattan, 7sage, etc. and against the problem's credited answer.

I think noting the correct answer then going back to the problem is a flawed approach. Anyone with a basic understanding of the LSAT can go back, knowing the correct answer, and give a decent reason of why that answer is correct, but it takes more to go back and figure out why you did what you did, what you should have done, and then to evaluate yourself based on what the answer actually is.

So in other words, re-do the whole test again but more slowly and methodically?

Looks like this will require a lot of patience and extra time.

[rebexness]