The Official June 2016 Study Group Forum

[Mikey]

K

[Maximus717]

I've been working through the powerscore logic games and prep test 77 what books do you guys and girls recommend next

[ngogirl12]

I've been working through the powerscore logic games and prep test 77 what books do you guys and girls recommend next

Cambridge LR/LG bundle 1-38 for drilling.
7Sage
LSAT Trainer

[New_Spice180]

Hey guys just joining you all after getting back into my studying. I found the assumption questions are the most frustrating LR type for me. Does anyone have a trick to bridge the gap between the new information in the premise and conclusion? I just ran through a drill with the Cambridge books and I didn't do so hot. Thanks.

My explanations might not be the best so bear with me lol.
For necessary assumption questions, the answer choice must be something that the argument DEPENDS on, and when the answer choice is negated, the argument falls apart and won't make sense.

For sufficient assumption questions, the way I understand it is that the answer choice is the "taken out premise". The answer, when put into the argument, will be sufficient (ya don't say haha) enough for the conclusion to be valid.

Thanks for that! I think it's a matter of seeing more of them and getting a feel for the "missing premise" in the stimulus. Did you feel as though you had a problem with this the first time you started out? When I read the explanations from Manhattan or even Sage, I feel like they have a way of explaining things that makes seems as though I'm just missing something fundamental with these questions.

I'll keep attempting them and hopefully with exposure, be able to quickly arrive to the answer.

[CPAlawHopefu]

Hey guys just joining you all after getting back into my studying. I found the assumption questions are the most frustrating LR type for me. Does anyone have a trick to bridge the gap between the new information in the premise and conclusion? I just ran through a drill with the Cambridge books and I didn't do so hot. Thanks.

My explanations might not be the best so bear with me lol.
For necessary assumption questions, the answer choice must be something that the argument DEPENDS on, and when the answer choice is negated, the argument falls apart and won't make sense.

For sufficient assumption questions, the way I understand it is that the answer choice is the "taken out premise". The answer, when put into the argument, will be sufficient (ya don't say haha) enough for the conclusion to be valid.

Thanks for that! I think it's a matter of seeing more of them and getting a feel for the "missing premise" in the stimulus. Did you feel as though you had a problem with this the first time you started out? When I read the explanations from Manhattan or even Sage, I feel like they have a way of explaining things that makes seems as though I'm just missing something fundamental with these questions.

I'll keep attempting them and hopefully with exposure, be able to quickly arrive to the answer.

Most sufficient assumption questions involve conditional statements and formal logic. You might need to make conditional diagram and "connect the missing chain" to get to the right answer. Answers are predictable and strong words are preferred. The correct answer is basically a "super strengthener" in that it uses strong words (most vs some, always vs sometimes) and will make the argument so strong that it becomes flawless.

Most necessary assumption questions are unpredictable and are generally tougher. Weak words are preferred. As opposed to the sufficient assumption questions, you might find it very time inefficient to try to connect the missing chain. This is because there are too many possobiliies for the right answer. Best approach is by Negating answer choices to check and see if it will invalidate the argument.

[spencerhastings]

Checking in...

[Mikey]

Checking in...

Welcome!

[guppiesbaby]

Hey folks, are y'all reviewing a certain PT together this Sunday? I couldn't join last time but I'd be up for it this time. Cheers

[midwestkid06]

For people who have used the powerscore books did you just purchase the powerscore bible or did you use the workbook as well?

[New_Spice180]

For people who have used the powerscore books did you just purchase the powerscore bible or did you use the workbook as well?

I found the Bibles to be sufficient. If you're planning on buying books such as Cambridge's 1-38 classified sections, then I don't see the need for the extra workbooks.

[New_Spice180]

Hey guys just joining you all after getting back into my studying. I found the assumption questions are the most frustrating LR type for me. Does anyone have a trick to bridge the gap between the new information in the premise and conclusion? I just ran through a drill with the Cambridge books and I didn't do so hot. Thanks.

My explanations might not be the best so bear with me lol.
For necessary assumption questions, the answer choice must be something that the argument DEPENDS on, and when the answer choice is negated, the argument falls apart and won't make sense.

For sufficient assumption questions, the way I understand it is that the answer choice is the "taken out premise". The answer, when put into the argument, will be sufficient (ya don't say haha) enough for the conclusion to be valid.

Thanks for that! I think it's a matter of seeing more of them and getting a feel for the "missing premise" in the stimulus. Did you feel as though you had a problem with this the first time you started out? When I read the explanations from Manhattan or even Sage, I feel like they have a way of explaining things that makes seems as though I'm just missing something fundamental with these questions.

I'll keep attempting them and hopefully with exposure, be able to quickly arrive to the answer.

Most sufficient assumption questions involve conditional statements and formal logic. You might need to make conditional diagram and "connect the missing chain" to get to the right answer. Answers are predictable and strong words are preferred. The correct answer is basically a "super strengthener" in that it uses strong words (most vs some, always vs sometimes) and will make the argument so strong that it becomes flawless.

Most necessary assumption questions are unpredictable and are generally tougher. Weak words are preferred. As opposed to the sufficient assumption questions, you might find it very time inefficient to try to connect the missing chain. This is because there are too many possobiliies for the right answer. Best approach is by Negating answer choices to check and see if it will invalidate the argument.

The Negation technique is definitely helpful for sure; however, it is time consuming negating every answer choice. Understandably, when one has two answer choices left this is a good technique to use, but with fairly dense stimuluses and Answer choices that are similar makes negating answer a bit tedious. Or am I just inexperienced at this right now and I need to progress before I see substantial increase in my ability to do this quickly?

[Mikey]

Hey guys just joining you all after getting back into my studying. I found the assumption questions are the most frustrating LR type for me. Does anyone have a trick to bridge the gap between the new information in the premise and conclusion? I just ran through a drill with the Cambridge books and I didn't do so hot. Thanks.

My explanations might not be the best so bear with me lol.
For necessary assumption questions, the answer choice must be something that the argument DEPENDS on, and when the answer choice is negated, the argument falls apart and won't make sense.

For sufficient assumption questions, the way I understand it is that the answer choice is the "taken out premise". The answer, when put into the argument, will be sufficient (ya don't say haha) enough for the conclusion to be valid.

Thanks for that! I think it's a matter of seeing more of them and getting a feel for the "missing premise" in the stimulus. Did you feel as though you had a problem with this the first time you started out? When I read the explanations from Manhattan or even Sage, I feel like they have a way of explaining things that makes seems as though I'm just missing something fundamental with these questions.

I'll keep attempting them and hopefully with exposure, be able to quickly arrive to the answer.

Most sufficient assumption questions involve conditional statements and formal logic. You might need to make conditional diagram and "connect the missing chain" to get to the right answer. Answers are predictable and strong words are preferred. The correct answer is basically a "super strengthener" in that it uses strong words (most vs some, always vs sometimes) and will make the argument so strong that it becomes flawless.

Most necessary assumption questions are unpredictable and are generally tougher. Weak words are preferred. As opposed to the sufficient assumption questions, you might find it very time inefficient to try to connect the missing chain. This is because there are too many possobiliies for the right answer. Best approach is by Negating answer choices to check and see if it will invalidate the argument.

The Negation technique is definitely helpful for sure; however, it is time consuming negating every answer choice. Understandably, when one has two answer choices left this is a good technique to use, but with fairly dense stimuluses and Answer choices that are similar makes negating answer a bit tedious. Or am I just inexperienced at this right now and I need to progress before I see substantial increase in my ability to do this quickly?

With time and practice you will get faster. Necessary assumption questions I think were the first type of LR question type I learned (from what I remember). I'm fairly decent at getting N.A questions correct now and I tend to negate every answer choice, unless the answer choice doesn't make any sense to me from the start. So just give it time and you will get better

[appind]

when did you last take lsat? the test has changed a bit over the years and there seems to be a subtle shift in lr and rc.

I took the official exam in 2005, but I have been tutoring the exam fairly consistently ever since and have taken all the PrepTests through December 2015. While there are subtle shifts in question types from test to test, I have found the changes in the LSAT tend to be more cyclical than linear. You might see a question type pop up frequently for a few years in a row, then disappear almost entirely for 3 or 4 years, and then suddenly reemerge for a few years.

Of course there are some real shifts like Comparative Reading and the more spacious Logic Games layout. There are also subtle but significant shifts like the relative infrequency of rare game types in Analytical Reasoning over the past 15 years. However, these are usually either clearly announced or well documented in most prep materials.

Is there a particular shift in LR or RC that you've noticed and have questions about?

one of the shifts that i've noticed in LR is that test writers are taking a little more leeway with answer choices in that a choice that could be considered wrong in older tests could be deemed much more gray now as the logic has shifted from clear cut formal logic for some questions. in so doing there seems to be a bit extra liberty test writers have taken in justifying some credited choices in new tests and newer ones seem to use logic that doesn't appear in older tests.
e.g. 76.lr2.21 stim refers to a study in which children showed increased achievement after undergoing a program. from this correlation, the stim concludes that it's likely there is a causation. since the causation is only likely, a choice that weakens the causation for some children is fully compatible with the conclusion and shouldn't weaken it. afaik there is not one question in older lsats where such a choice would weaken a "likely" conclusion. if the conclusion were about causation and not just likely causation, then i agree a choice such as C, which is credited, would weaken. but for a likely causation of the type given in the stim, a choice should have been about at least "most" children for it to weaken.

[ayylmao]

What're all your PT schedules like? I was planning on 1 per week till the test, with maybe a few more thrown in during the last couple weeks. I have about 24 of the most recent LSATs in reserve. I've already taken about 23, but my last one was like 6 weeks ago. Thoughts?

[CPAlawHopefu]

What're all your PT schedules like? I was planning on 1 per week till the test, with maybe a few more thrown in during the last couple weeks. I have about 24 of the most recent LSATs in reserve. I've already taken about 23, but my last one was like 6 weeks ago. Thoughts?

Currently taking 1 per week (starting from PT 39), but will gradually increase that number to 3 per week as the d-day approaches. Will definitely be hitting 3 per week by April for sure.

[aicampa]

.

[patttt]

Currently deciding whether or not to retake in June. Sat in on the Dec LSAT.

For those who are retaking:

when do you plan on starting to study?
What will your study schedule look like?

I think most of us already started studying and have been for quite some time. For me, since I was pretty much ready when I sat for the December test, I've been primarily drilling reading comp every day (since its the only section I really underperformed on) and have been doing random LG and LR sections at random times just to stay sharp.

Ill start taking full timed tests again when I feel like my RC is ready, and ill do that intermittently until the test.

[aghassemi91]

Hey folks, are y'all reviewing a certain PT together this Sunday? I couldn't join last time but I'd be up for it this time. Cheers

Hey there,

I'm going to be reviewing PT #52 with a few other people on Saturday around 2:30 PST if you'd like to join.

[aghassemi91]

Currently deciding whether or not to retake in June. Sat in on the Dec LSAT.

For those who are retaking:

when do you plan on starting to study?
What will your study schedule look like?

I started studying pretty much the day after I got my score back. Up until now, I've been drilling specific question types for LR & doing mixed RC & LG sections. For the last two weeks I've started to incorporate one PT a week just to get in the groove of things; this week I've done two just b/c I wanted to add a little more pressure to get myself going. I'll be starting mixed LR, LG, & RC drills next week and will be focusing on getting my timing right with LG and my accuracy up with RC. At this point, I'll probably be doing one PT/week for a while and eventually will start doing 2.

[Hennessy]

Checking in from my office desk!

[potus]

Currently deciding whether or not to retake in June. Sat in on the Dec LSAT.

For those who are retaking:

when do you plan on starting to study?
What will your study schedule look like?

Sat in last Dec. 2015. I took time off since I've been studying for a long time. Still looking to break 170, but had been burned out and severely lacking motivation -- so I decided to buy a new book, Manhattan Prep's LR, and working through it while 1 PT each weekend.

What're all your PT schedules like? I was planning on 1 per week till the test, with maybe a few more thrown in during the last couple weeks. I have about 24 of the most recent LSATs in reserve. I've already taken about 23, but my last one was like 6 weeks ago. Thoughts?

6 weeks ago is pretty far off. I'd use one of them now. While it is important to conserve PTs, you shouldn't be too afraid to tap into that resource but strategically spread them out starting now until your test.

[Don Draper]

Checking in! Nervous about the June LSAT, hope all goes well. Also wanted to ask you guys, how much weight does a resume hold in the admissions process? Would working on a national political campaign in NYC over the summer help at all??

[lawyerinlouboutins]

Checking in! Ready to kick some ass.... hopefully, I don't get my ass kicked.

[aicampa]

Checking in! Nervous about the June LSAT, hope all goes well. Also wanted to ask you guys, how much weight does a resume hold in the admissions process? Would working on a national political campaign in NYC over the summer help at all??

Resume is considered a soft along with LORs and PS. It's important of course that you make it the best it can be, but unless you won a Nobel Peace Prize or started an NGO don't expect admissions to be wowed. Definitely include the campaign though, admissions seem to like any sort of job just as long as your working and keeping yourself busy.

There are probably other forums that can help you more with this question.

[MAPP]

Currently deciding whether or not to retake in June. Sat in on the Dec LSAT.

For those who are retaking:

when do you plan on starting to study?
What will your study schedule look like?

I started studying pretty much the day after I got my score back. Up until now, I've been drilling specific question types for LR & doing mixed RC & LG sections. For the last two weeks I've started to incorporate one PT a week just to get in the groove of things; this week I've done two just b/c I wanted to add a little more pressure to get myself going. I'll be starting mixed LR, LG, & RC drills next week and will be focusing on getting my timing right with LG and my accuracy up with RC. At this point, I'll probably be doing one PT/week for a while and eventually will start doing 2.

What are you using to drill RC?