February 2017 LSAT Thread Forum

[Rigo]

Speaking of this, if anybody is looking to form an online study group to BR/go over hard questions/PT together/get more motivated PM me. Currently in the high 160's/low 170's shooting for mid 170s come feb.

I'd be down potentially if we can link schedules somewhat.

I PT weekly and am very flexible with what test I take. We could BR?

Give me a week or two to get up to speed since I just started studying (retaker from 2014 so not starting from scratch)

By the end of prep I want to do at least the 25 most modern PT's. I'll probably end up PT's more than once a week but Im down to sync up with you once a week.

What day do you normally PT?

Feel free to PM too.

[blackmamba8]

Decided to start drilling 5 games a day from the Cambridge packets and then watch their 7sage videos. I was going to do 5 of the same type each day, but I think doing 5 different types a day will help me get get better at transitioning from one type to another. I've struggled with that at times on full sections so I'm hoping this approach will help me improve.

Nice! I did something similar which has helped me a lot!

Did you bundle the games together as sections and give yourself a certain amount of time or would you time each game individually and review before moving on to the next one?

I just am working through the packets in order.

However, I am doing each section from 1-35 times and fool proofing them.

It seems to be working pretty well even if most of the games are repeats. Also, I just make sure I do them in the recommended amount of time that is listed in 7sage.

Ah okay nice! What do you mean by fool proofing them? I've seen it mentioned a few times on here but I'm not really sure how to do it

[EmelyM23]

heyy All! Im taking the Febuary 4th exam. This is my first time taking it and I know I am a pretty bad test taker. I plan to dedicate full 3 months to studying close to 30 hrs a week. I have a easy desk job and am able to study more. So far Ive purchased Powerscore bibles, Lsat trainer + Kaplan book Lsat. Im following the schedule on Powerscore mainly. I live in NYC and Princeton has several proctored exams under timed "real" conditions. I signed up for 4 in decemberr. I will supplement this with my own Lsat exams (I have a lsac Book with 10 test). Ive decided not to take a diagnostic until 2-3 weeks after just because I dont want to be discouraged. Im not a naturally gifted test take as some people I see score at 160 and over with 2 days of studying. I opened the book and thoughht "WTH". Im OKAY with working extra hard for this! My question is there anything else anyone can suggest !???

[RED&BLACK]

Hey, all! I'm writing in February as well, using 7sage at the moment; love it!

7Sage is the shit!

Hell yeah! I'm supplementing it with the bibles.

[Deardevil]

heyy All! Im taking the Febuary 4th exam. This is my first time taking it and I know I am a pretty bad test taker. I plan to dedicate full 3 months to studying close to 30 hrs a week. I have a easy desk job and am able to study more. So far Ive purchased Powerscore bibles, Lsat trainer + Kaplan book Lsat. Im following the schedule on Powerscore mainly. I live in NYC and Princeton has several proctored exams under timed "real" conditions. I signed up for 4 in decemberr. I will supplement this with my own Lsat exams (I have a lsac Book with 10 test). Ive decided not to take a diagnostic until 2-3 weeks after just because I dont want to be discouraged. Im not a naturally gifted test take as some people I see score at 160 and over with 2 days of studying. I opened the book and thoughht "WTH". Im OKAY with working extra hard for this! My question is there anything else anyone can suggest !???

Hey, Emely.

You pretty much have the right materials to start out with.
I personally recommend Manhattan over PowerScore, but supplementing certainly does not hurt.

If I can give one piece of advice, though, it's to consider postponing.
Seen a lot of people just cramming or feeling that they're entirely ready when they're not, resulting in bombing the actual test.
There is no need to rush. Take this exam seriously when you are 1000% ready. It's basically "three strikes and yerrrrrrrrrrrrr out!"

I say this because I don't believe three months is a good amount of time to study,
especially with a job and/or other duties weighing in. Maybe you can slay the exam with ease with little to no prep.
No one can assess your ability besides yourself, but really consider postponing if you don't think you're hitting your target before it's too late.

The choice is yours, and I'm sure you'll make the right one. Best of luck.

[O.J.]

I'm going to disagree, Deardevil. I've been asking around and met a lot of 170+ takers that spent exactly 3 months on study and nailed it. I spoke to an excellent Blueprint instructor too who said 3 months was completely acceptable. In fact, LSATTrainer has a 3-month program, as does Blueprint online.

I'm not saying it's ideal, but 3 months is totally do-able, from all the research I did. it's not the amount of time as much as what you do with that time and what methods you use.

[Barack O'Drama]

I'm going to disagree, Deardevil. I've been asking around and met a lot of 170+ takers that spent exactly 3 months on study and nailed it. I spoke to an excellent Blueprint instructor too who said 3 months was completely acceptable. In fact, LSATTrainer has a 3-month program, as does Blueprint online.

I'm not saying it's ideal, but 3 months is totally do-able, from all the research I did. it's not the amount of time as much as what you do with that time and what methods you use.

Most 170s+ test takers study for longer than 3 months. The people who score 170+ after only 3 months usually had very high diagnostic scores compared to the average test taker.

Blueprint has a vested interest in convincing students a 3-month plan is the right way to go because that is their business model. Shorter classes = more students = more profit. You'll find that all the test prep companies (aside from 7Sage) try to convince students 3-4 months is optimal.

The LSAT Trainer's 3-month program is great, doubt about it. But even Mike Kim admits it isn't optimal for everyone. He also has a 4-week study guide, but I don't think anyone is going to advocate that being enough time for the average test taker.

Like Deardevil says, it is going to be contingent on the individual. For some, 3 months is enough. However, from my experience on these forums and other LSAT-oriented forums, somewhere closer to 6-9 months seems to be a good amount of time for the average test taker to hit the 170s. I've pretty much followed every cycle on here since 2012 and that seems to be the case. Every time I've spoken to someone whose hit 170+ within 3-months, it turns out their diagnostic was a 160+

The most important takeaway is that there is no "right amount" for LSAT prep that is universal. The best way is just to take it when you're confident like DearDevil says.

[EmelyM23]

I'm going to disagree, Deardevil. I've been asking around and met a lot of 170+ takers that spent exactly 3 months on study and nailed it. I spoke to an excellent Blueprint instructor too who said 3 months was completely acceptable. In fact, LSATTrainer has a 3-month program, as does Blueprint online.

I'm not saying it's ideal, but 3 months is totally do-able, from all the research I did. it's not the amount of time as much as what you do with that time and what methods you use.

Most 170s+ test takers study for longer than 3 months. The people who score 170+ after only 3 months usually had very high diagnostic scores compared to the average test taker.

Blueprint has a vested interest in convincing students a 3-month plan is the right way to go because that is their business model. Shorter classes = more students = more profit. You'll find that all the test prep companies (aside from 7Sage) try to convince students 3-4 months is optimal.

The LSAT Trainer's 3-month program is great, doubt about it. But even Mike Kim admits it isn't optimal for everyone. He also has a 4-week study guide, but I don't think anyone is going to advocate that being enough time for the average test taker.

Like Deardevil says, it is going to be contingent on the individual. For some, 3 months is enough. However, from my experience on these forums and other LSAT-oriented forums, somewhere closer to 6-9 months seems to be a good amount of time for the average test taker to hit the 170s. I've pretty much followed every cycle on here since 2012 and that seems to be the case. Every time I've spoken to someone whose hit 170+ within 3-months, it turns out their diagnostic was a 160+

The most important takeaway is that there is no "right amount" for LSAT prep that is universal. The best way is just to take it when you're confident like DearDevil says.

Hey! Thanks for the advice- I haven't signed up yet for the exam as I was planning on doing so In january based on the Princeton proctored exams and their results. Therefore if I dont feel ready I will schedule it for June. I really want to kill this exam and Im super motivated. Im finishing my MA in Psychology but Id really like to attend Georgetown for Law school. (UG GPA- 3.7, Graduate 3.8. ). If I get a 165+ would I even have a shot? I have presented research on juvenile delinquency numerous conferences with research labs from John Jay (a criminal justice college) and Pace U (It has a Law school I plan on applying to), I KNOW Law school doesn't care about research as that was more for psych BUT my point is my professors have offered to write me strong letters.

Like I mentioned I will be in the library 5-6 hrs everyday really trying to master each of the books+ concepts. Honestly this adds up to about 35+ hours per week. I will finish the PowerPrep study guide within a month. I don't think 3 months is neccessarily cramming as I have looked at other sites and this forum where they said 3 months is definately ideal to get a great score. But I agree I think the time will honestly come down to me feeling prepared or not.

[PrezRand]

Gonna keep reviewing MBT/MSS questions today. I'm still struggling with them a lot. Hopefully, more practice will help. I'll also do 1 LG section today and possibly a RC sectio

[O.J.]

Never said 3 months was optimal, just that suggesting it's not possible is incorrect information. of course 4-6 months is best, I thought that was implied. But 3 months has been successful for a large enough amount of takers that it proves workable.

In any case, like I said, it's about the individual. Good luck to all!

[AvatarMeelo]

I'm about 65% done with my first go around of the Trainer, and I'm about ready to purchase all the PrepTests. I know the Bibles come super recommended but can someone break down exactly what it offers in terms of which tests it's pulling from?

Also, is 7Sage the only resource that has explanations for everything? Including the most recent? I know Cambridge has the bundles but doesn't seem comprehensive.

[Deardevil]

I'm about 65% done with my first go around of the Trainer, and I'm about ready to purchase all the PrepTests. I know the Bibles come super recommended but can someone break down exactly what it offers in terms of which tests it's pulling from?

Also, is 7Sage the only resource that has explanations for everything? Including the most recent? I know Cambridge has the bundles but doesn't seem comprehensive.

7Sage has free explanations for LG only; you have to pay for the rest.
Manhattan has them for all sections on its forums, though not everything is as precise.

[blackmamba8]

I'm about 65% done with my first go around of the Trainer, and I'm about ready to purchase all the PrepTests. I know the Bibles come super recommended but can someone break down exactly what it offers in terms of which tests it's pulling from?

Also, is 7Sage the only resource that has explanations for everything? Including the most recent? I know Cambridge has the bundles but doesn't seem comprehensive.

The bibles all pull material from the older tests. I'm not sure the exact cutoff, but at the least tests 40 and newer won't be included. The Bibles are good if you have no LSAT experience and need to get a solid foundation, but idk how useful they'd be if you've already gone through the Trainer. After using both I would recommend Manhattan Prep over the Bibles.

[AvatarMeelo]

I'm about 65% done with my first go around of the Trainer, and I'm about ready to purchase all the PrepTests. I know the Bibles come super recommended but can someone break down exactly what it offers in terms of which tests it's pulling from?

Also, is 7Sage the only resource that has explanations for everything? Including the most recent? I know Cambridge has the bundles but doesn't seem comprehensive.

7Sage has free explanations for LG only; you have to pay for the rest.
Manhattan has them for all sections on its forums, though not everything is as precise.

Yup, I'm aware I have to pay for them so i figured I should ask around before I bite the bullet and purchase their big package. LG is my strongest section so I'm looking for a great resource for LR and RC. I'll take a look at the Manhattan Prep forums - thanks for mentioning it!

[AvatarMeelo]

I'm about 65% done with my first go around of the Trainer, and I'm about ready to purchase all the PrepTests. I know the Bibles come super recommended but can someone break down exactly what it offers in terms of which tests it's pulling from?

Also, is 7Sage the only resource that has explanations for everything? Including the most recent? I know Cambridge has the bundles but doesn't seem comprehensive.

The bibles all pull material from the older tests. I'm not sure the exact cutoff, but at the least tests 40 and newer won't be included. The Bibles are good if you have no LSAT experience and need to get a solid foundation, but idk how useful they'd be if you've already gone through the Trainer. After using both I would recommend Manhattan Prep over the Bibles.

Does Manhattan Prep pull from earlier exams as well? If >PT40 are in these books, then I definitely won't feel bad not purchasing them. I'm working full time and wanted to focus more on the recent material, but also didn't want to spend any more than necessary.

[blackmamba8]

I'm about 65% done with my first go around of the Trainer, and I'm about ready to purchase all the PrepTests. I know the Bibles come super recommended but can someone break down exactly what it offers in terms of which tests it's pulling from?

Also, is 7Sage the only resource that has explanations for everything? Including the most recent? I know Cambridge has the bundles but doesn't seem comprehensive.

The bibles all pull material from the older tests. I'm not sure the exact cutoff, but at the least tests 40 and newer won't be included. The Bibles are good if you have no LSAT experience and need to get a solid foundation, but idk how useful they'd be if you've already gone through the Trainer. After using both I would recommend Manhattan Prep over the Bibles.

Does Manhattan Prep pull from earlier exams as well? If >PT40 are in these books, then I definitely won't feel bad not purchasing them. I'm working full time and wanted to focus more on the recent material, but also didn't want to spend any more than necessary.

Yeah Manhattan uses earlier exams too. The only book I've used that uses material from newer exams is the Blueprint RC book. If you're looking to minimize your spending I'd recommend getting an LR book over an LG one. Once you get the LG basics you can just use 7sage for the rest of your prep for it.

[Barry grandpapy]

.

[Barry grandpapy]

.

[maybeman]

^^ appealing this shit

[Rigo]

What question type is it. I'll look it up.

[maybeman]

What question type is it. I'll look it up.

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... p?t=223177
apparently this questions is a result of early PTs being less refined. Unlikely to see this question-error in the future

[Deardevil]

*Should have specified. PT #2

So the stimulus says this:

Most artists hold political views that are less insightful than those of all educated people who are not artists.
Statements made by even great artists indicate that artistic talent and political insight are RARELY found together.
In conclusion, there is NO point in relying on artists for political insight.

(A) says NO artists have political insights; this is contradicted by the fact that artists have LESS insightful views.
(B) is out of scope; there is nothing that tells us what makes someone educated.
(C) seems like the answer, but be careful; it says ALL educated people who aren't artists have more insight,
but the stimulus only mentions that MOST artists have less insightful views, leaving SOME with as much or more insightful views.
(D) is unsupported; it's just a rare phenomenon.
(E) is left, and my reasoning for why C is wrong proves this is right; there must be artists who have no less politically insightful views.

[CMac86]

I have been hitting RC problem sets this weekend. I'm 163/237hrs into the 7sage curriculum (Ultimate Plus package). I have been reading more for undergrad as well as general practice (subscriptions to The New Yorker and Economist have arrived, waiting on Scientific American). If the problem sets from today are any indicator (Harder RC Problem sets from 7sage), I am making some solid progress. Over the course of four problem sets (two passages per problem set), I have missed 3 questions total.

[Rigo]

Impossible to focus on Election Day.

[CMac86]

Impossible to focus on Election Day.

I voted absentee, so other than being curious/anxious for the results, it is just another day to me. Bonus is that I got a half day at work, so extra study time today.