The Official June 2016 Study Group Forum

[sephora_addict]

Wow. So I was sick for almost 2 weeks. And then this past week and a half I was just all kinds of lazy. So basically 3.5 weeks I went without studying. Not good. Back at it today. Wish me luck

Good to see you're better now!

Thank you!!!!!!

[CottonHarvest]

I am starting RC, anyone know which PTs are still relevant to drill? I've heard the later ones are easier and different, whereas the more modern ones are harder. Time really isn't an issue. I have time to review PT 7-18, 19-28, etc.. I just don't want to be reviewing something that has no benefit whatsoever. Thanks in advance.

I'm just a long time lurker, so you can take my advice with a grain of salt. I am under the understanding that the changes are not that significant, and the main difference is that the newest tests have one comparative reading passage. The skills for these passages are similar to those of all other passages, so it is okay to use old tests. If you have plenty of time, I think it would be best to start at the lowest prep test and work your way up. I don't think anything from an official LSAT would be a waste of time.

[R. Jeeves]

I don't think anything from an official LSAT would be a waste of time.

+1

[kkilambi]

How is it that everyone is scoring into the 170's. I am still struggling to complete the entire section in 35 minutes. -4 on LR's, RC's around -3 or -4 and LG scores(-4 to -6) are crashing into the netherlands. It feels a little hopeless as opposed to inspiring every time I read this thread . Will I be able to see light at the end of the tunnel and score above 173 by June ?

[Lapp03]

Hey guys!

LONGGGGG time lurker finally checking in!

Looking for some advice also. I'm about to start drilling LR and I'm wondering what is the best way/LR topic(s) to start with. I've done most of the background reading and also have the Cambridge packets. Ideally I want to spend about six weeks on LR before I start PT's for the last five weeks.

I've done a lot of work on LG & RC and managed to get to around -3 and -5 respectively but it's time now to focus more on LR.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated!

Welcome fellow forum user. Can I ask why you're planning on waiting so long before you start PTing? If you wait until 5 weeks out then you'd be able to squeeze in maybe 10-15 PTS before test day, which is on the low side. I think most people here would recommend tackling at least a test every week or two just to really familiarize yourself with what to expect. It's also important to build up your stamina, which I think a lot of people underestimate. Taking a 3.5-hour test takes a bit of getting used to.

Hey, thanks for the response! At the moment I feel like it's a bit of a waste of PT's if I haven't got my accuracy and timing down, so my plan is to work on those things first before I dive primarily into PT's. I do a PT once every 2 weeks just to monitor myself and get a good indication of my weaknesses but mostly its just drilling and review for the time being. My plan is to do 4 PT's per week, taking 2 at a time (with breaks) for building endurance and review/drill weaknesses on my off days. I've burnt through quite a lot of PT's already so only have from 55-76 to work with. If you have any better advice i'm definitely open to suggestions!

[railyard]

I am starting RC, anyone know which PTs are still relevant to drill? I've heard the later ones are easier and different, whereas the more modern ones are harder. Time really isn't an issue. I have time to review PT 7-18, 19-28, etc.. I just don't want to be reviewing something that has no benefit whatsoever. Thanks in advance.

I'm just a long time lurker, so you can take my advice with a grain of salt. I am under the understanding that the changes are not that significant, and the main difference is that the newest tests have one comparative reading passage. The skills for these passages are similar to those of all other passages, so it is okay to use old tests. If you have plenty of time, I think it would be best to start at the lowest prep test and work your way up. I don't think anything from an official LSAT would be a waste of time.

Thank you

[Pozzo]

How is it that everyone is scoring into the 170's. I am still struggling to complete the entire section in 35 minutes. -4 on LR's, RC's around -3 or -4 and LG scores(-4 to -6) are crashing into the netherlands. It feels a little hopeless as opposed to inspiring every time I read this thread . Will I be able to see light at the end of the tunnel and score above 173 by June ?

Not everyone is scoring in the 170's. Are you seeing improvement over time? If you are, then stick with it. If not, then maybe reevaluate your study strategy. But either way, no need to freak out if you're not hitting 170 yet.

[R. Jeeves]

How is it that everyone is scoring into the 170's. I am still struggling to complete the entire section in 35 minutes. -4 on LR's, RC's around -3 or -4 and LG scores(-4 to -6) are crashing into the netherlands. It feels a little hopeless as opposed to inspiring every time I read this thread . Will I be able to see light at the end of the tunnel and score above 173 by June ?

Not everyone is scoring in the 170's.

Yeah even if everyone in this thread was reporting their PT scores, it wouldn't be a representative sample. TLSers score higher on the LSAT than the average takers because they are dorkish (as evidenced by them posting on a law school admissions chat board).But also its not even like everyone in this thread is PTing at or above 170. Those people are probably more likely to post about their PT scores and also you prob just notice those scores more (saliency bias or whatever).

I felt the same way when I was prepping for my 1st take; you'll be fine. How long have you been prepping?

[kkilambi]

How is it that everyone is scoring into the 170's. I am still struggling to complete the entire section in 35 minutes. -4 on LR's, RC's around -3 or -4 and LG scores(-4 to -6) are crashing into the netherlands. It feels a little hopeless as opposed to inspiring every time I read this thread . Will I be able to see light at the end of the tunnel and score above 173 by June ?

Not everyone is scoring in the 170's. Are you seeing improvement over time? If you are, then stick with it. If not, then maybe reevaluate your study strategy. But either way, no need to freak out if you're not hitting 170 yet.

I have definitely been improving my scores as I practice more. But I see that I am not improving on LG. The strategy I am using is to practice say,Linear games in the first 40 prep tests thoroughly, inside-out, but when I encounter a new linear game, I take around 6-10 minutes. I want to be able to finish it in less than 6 minutes. Am I asking for too much?

[kkilambi]

How is it that everyone is scoring into the 170's. I am still struggling to complete the entire section in 35 minutes. -4 on LR's, RC's around -3 or -4 and LG scores(-4 to -6) are crashing into the netherlands. It feels a little hopeless as opposed to inspiring every time I read this thread . Will I be able to see light at the end of the tunnel and score above 173 by June ?

Not everyone is scoring in the 170's.

Yeah even if everyone in this thread was reporting their PT scores, it wouldn't be a representative sample. TLSers score higher on the LSAT than the average takers because they are dorkish (as evidenced by them posting on a law school admissions chat board).But also its not even like everyone in this thread is PTing at or above 170. Those people are probably more likely to post about their PT scores and also you prob just notice those scores more (saliency bias or whatever).

I felt the same way when I was prepping for my 1st take; you'll be fine. How long have you been prepping?

Thanks....I have been prepping for close to 2 years now, but it is only in the last 2 months that I got serious and consistent with my preparation.

[Hennessy]

I am starting RC, anyone know which PTs are still relevant to drill? I've heard the later ones are easier and different, whereas the more modern ones are harder. Time really isn't an issue. I have time to review PT 7-18, 19-28, etc.. I just don't want to be reviewing something that has no benefit whatsoever. Thanks in advance.

I can't make specific recommendations as to RC drills - however, for those struggling with RC, I think this very short guide (particularly points 1 and 4) covers all the things you need to know about RC.

http://lsathacks.com/guide/faq/how-to-g ... rehension/

Sometimes you'll read a passage and you'll be the wtf could i possibly gain from reading this.

But if you attempt to read each passage as a conversation, or an intriguing book, rather another game you have to play through, you'll read faster and comprehend more. It's a short speech, it's a piece of mail from the bank, it's a movie review, etc.

I feel like RC passages aren't any more complex than a magazine article - but you need to be able to contextualize each one back to back, even if it means taking 15 seconds between passages to completely clear your mind and prepare to really delve.

[ayylmao]

Just took PT 57. Holy shit the dinosaurs!

Trying to break out of my LG funk and get LR more consistent. I thought I got LG down but slipped back to -4 to -5 territory. Maybe more drilling? I'm struggling with the one really tough game per section.

LR killed me on PT 57. I had gotten -2 on my previous 2 PTs but -6 this time. I got most right on blind review though, so that's good. I keep trying to tell myself there's a few months left, but I'm such a perfectionist it's tough to accept that I don't have to be where I need to be right now.

I also hit my target score 2 weeks ago and slipped back considerably, so that's annoying.

[Hennessy]

Just took PT 57. Holy shit the dinosaurs!

Trying to break out of my LG funk and get LR more consistent. I thought I got LG down but slipped back to -4 to -5 territory. Maybe more drilling? I'm struggling with the one really tough game per section.

LR killed me on PT 57. I had gotten -2 on my previous 2 PTs but -6 this time. I got most right on blind review though, so that's good. I keep trying to tell myself there's a few months left, but I'm such a perfectionist it's tough to accept that I don't have to be where I need to be right now.

I also hit my target score 2 weeks ago and slipped back considerably, so that's annoying.

If you want an LG that's harder than the dinosaurs, try PT27 Pt. II, Q. 7-12

[Helioze]

Checking in.

fark


Took the feb test. Got an objectively good score that falls short of what i wanted. I would really have liked to know what it was i got wrong on the real thing. I had a lot of variance on which sections i would miss on my pt's

Been doing nothing productive for like a week.

I know I have to do this, but i really don't want to.


screw it here we go.

[tvu]

Does anybody know where to get those bundles by section, that increase by question difficulty?

[ayylmao]

If you want an LG that's harder than the dinosaurs, try PT27 Pt. II, Q. 7-12

Lizards and snakes actually isn't that bad if you grasp that it's all about the spatial distribution of the game pieces. It killed me at first because I don't think spatially, but if you can move the pieces around in your mind it's a relatively quick game.

[Mikey]

Does anybody know where to get those bundles by section, that increase by question difficulty?

I would say Cambridge but they stopped selling them Even on Amazon people are selling Cambridge's by type books for like double the price they used to be. Luckily I got mine beforehand..

[tvu]

I would say Cambridge but they stopped selling them Even on Amazon people are selling Cambridge's by type books for like double the price they used to be. Luckily I got mine beforehand..

Nooooooooo, that sucks. It was such a good way to study.....

I guess I'm just going to have to buy the individual 10 test books and then try to split them up

[Hennessy]

If you want an LG that's harder than the dinosaurs, try PT27 Pt. II, Q. 7-12

Lizards and snakes actually isn't that bad if you grasp that it's all about the spatial distribution of the game pieces. It killed me at first because I don't think spatially, but if you can move the pieces around in your mind it's a relatively quick game.

i didn't grasp any of it
I thought hmm male/female snake/lizard how hard can it be
my diagram looked like this

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ MMMFFFF
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ SSLLLLL
1 2 3 4 5 6 7

useless approach

[Rigo]

22 PT's between now and D-day.

[Hennessy]

I would say Cambridge but they stopped selling them Even on Amazon people are selling Cambridge's by type books for like double the price they used to be. Luckily I got mine beforehand..

Nooooooooo, that sucks. It was such a good way to study.....

I guess I'm just going to have to buy the individual 10 test books and then try to split them up

both of you PM me

[ayylmao]

If you want an LG that's harder than the dinosaurs, try PT27 Pt. II, Q. 7-12

Lizards and snakes actually isn't that bad if you grasp that it's all about the spatial distribution of the game pieces. It killed me at first because I don't think spatially, but if you can move the pieces around in your mind it's a relatively quick game.

i didn't grasp any of it
I thought hmm male/female snake/lizard how hard can it be
my diagram looked like this

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ MMMFFFF
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ SSLLLLL
1 2 3 4 5 6 7

useless approach

Yup, the better way to do it is to use subscripts and set the game up as a single-layered sequencing game. It's very open-ended.

[Hennessy]

If you want an LG that's harder than the dinosaurs, try PT27 Pt. II, Q. 7-12

Lizards and snakes actually isn't that bad if you grasp that it's all about the spatial distribution of the game pieces. It killed me at first because I don't think spatially, but if you can move the pieces around in your mind it's a relatively quick game.

i didn't grasp any of it
I thought hmm male/female snake/lizard how hard can it be
my diagram looked like this

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ MMMFFFF
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ SSLLLLL
1 2 3 4 5 6 7

useless approach

Yup, the better way to do it is to use subscripts and set the game up as a single-layered sequencing game. It's very open-ended.

a.k.a.
_._ _._ _._ _._ _._ _._ _._ (where _._ could be m.s or f.l)?


that's where i ended up after trying it for a second time

[ayylmao]

a.k.a.
_._ _._ _._ _._ _._ _._ _._ (where _._ could be m.s or f.l)?


that's where i ended up after trying it for a second time

This is going off memory, but:

_ _ _ _ _ Five slots that correspond to the five areas they're in. LLLSSSS are the animals. mmfffff are the genders. "Sf," for example, is one piece and can stack with other pieces in the slots.

No matter what, there's gonna be an Lf. Now, if you ever see an Lm, you know it'll have to be buffered from an Sf by either a blank space, an Lf, or an Sm. So the closer an Lm gets to the center of the row, the more restrictive the game is.

[Pozzo]

Finally entering the modern era. Picked up PTs 52-71 and 73 today. How's everyone else doing? How are you distributing the more recent PTs?