December 2013 LSAT Study Group Forum

[vicpin5190]

Hour long review of the test. Looks like in RC I probably went a little overboard on marking up passages, but that third passage was legitimately difficult in terms of overall read and questions. I found during review that actually drawing out what phenomenon that they were talking about helped me understand some of the answers more. Need to maybe slow down just a little on these PT60's reading as there seem to be way less "in the passage directly" questions that I was enjoying os much in the 40's and 50's.

Good thing I'm getting on this now, with a solid 4 weeks to get this settled. More and more its RC that's going to determine my score on game day.

General advice here is to decrease your reading time, possibly use less annotation to do this, and use this increased time to work on the more LR-like q's in the 60s. Lots of weird forms of inference q's come up, like choosing a workable title for passages, for example. There are also some difficult parallel reasoning-ish q's, or 'analogous situation' q's. Reading for structure still helps with most of RC, granted, but just make sure you're giving yourself enough time for these other q's.

That was the first thing i noticed in the 60s. I currently read at about a rate of 2 to 2:30 per passage. I think on the third passage where I got lucky on my guesses, I maybe rushed through the reading a little too much. In general I agree, I like having more time for the questions, but sometimes i sacrifice too much for the speed. Something I can definitely tweak though.

[OVOXO]

PT64: Getting killed by bikes

LR −3
LR2 −2
LG −4 (worst LG score in my PT history thus far, and worst of all, two of the wrong answers came from game 4)
RC −1
RCX49 −2 (happy with this since LSATBlog had it as one of the hardest RC sections ever)

91/101

173

I’d be content with this score on t-day but not ecstatic. I’m really banking on that −0 on LG but that bike game just killed me. It’s the hardest game I’ve seen thus far (far worse than dinos or the bus seating game or any of the tougher in/out games). Imagine the bike game with internal sequencing? Holy. Will be doing this game a million times before test day.

LR needs some serious work still but I’ll take a −2. I’m quite pleased with RC, I finished it in 30 mins but felt that this was one of the easier RCs since LG was so tough, though I went −2 on RCX so there’s that.

Going to review thoroughly tonight. Any of you have thoughts/comments on PT64, please share!

[vicpin5190]

PT 65 today. Today is my last 4 section PT, 5 going forward

LR#1 - 2
LG -1
RC - 6 (i found the comparative reading passage to be pretty damn hard, but the last passage was also tough).
LR#2 -3
Raw - 89
Score: 171

I thin LR's are finally coming along. WIll work pretty hard this week on RC's, probably start drilling anything I have left 1 thru 38 as well as some in the 40s. My ability to find info was good on RCs today, but as was the case yesterday, it was those inference/LR type questions that I struggled more with.

WIll review tonight.

[alecks]

any advice on timing anxiety? I get so worked up about having enough time that I have started missing up to 5,6,7 more questions than if I only had 5 minutes more per section. is this something that I'll get better at the more I practice timing?

I'm noticing I'm not reading things thoroughly, getting tripped up on easy stuff, etc., where I went -7 on a LR section and -10 on RC today and almost had a heart attack afterwards.

[dasani13]

any advice on timing anxiety? I get so worked up about having enough time that I have started missing up to 5,6,7 more questions than if I only had 5 minutes more per section. is this something that I'll get better at the more I practice timing?

I'm noticing I'm not reading things thoroughly, getting tripped up on easy stuff, etc., where I went -7 on a LR section and -10 on RC today and almost had a heart attack afterwards.

That's been happening to me as well and I associated it with my poor test-taking skills. I've never been great at standardized tests and I realized (a little late in the game) that it's not enough to drill the hell out of question types. I drilled Cambridge for many months and I can get almost all LR questions correct untimed (around 40mins) but it's a whole different feeling when you're doing them under pressure. I'm trying to take as many timed PTs as possible to improve my instincts and I've noticed some improvement already.

[dasani13]

I'm taking PT 62 tomorrow if anyone would like to review it together at night around 8PM EST.

[KingJamesLBJ]

PT 45 is considered a big curve right?

[nooooo]

any advice on timing anxiety? I get so worked up about having enough time that I have started missing up to 5,6,7 more questions than if I only had 5 minutes more per section. is this something that I'll get better at the more I practice timing?

I'm noticing I'm not reading things thoroughly, getting tripped up on easy stuff, etc., where I went -7 on a LR section and -10 on RC today and almost had a heart attack afterwards.

That's been happening to me as well and I associated it with my poor test-taking skills. I've never been great at standardized tests and I realized (a little late in the game) that it's not enough to drill the hell out of question types. I drilled Cambridge for many months and I can get almost all LR questions correct untimed (around 40mins) but it's a whole different feeling when you're doing them under pressure. I'm trying to take as many timed PTs as possible to improve my instincts and I've noticed some improvement already.

+1

It's incredible how anxious I get once I press the timer on my watch. It's as if all the questions suddenly become harder and time flies. Turn the timer off, -0 on any section. I've never had text anxiety before, but it's pretty nerve wrecking.

[SkYlarwHite]

I'm taking PT 62 tomorrow if anyone would like to review it together at night around 8PM EST.

I would like to review tomorrow. I'm down. I just took this today.

PT 62
RC: -8
LR: -1
LG: -1
LR: -0

Raw score: 92/102
173

I've been using LsatQA and it's been really helping me realize how shitty I am in Strengthen/weaken questions. So after drilling those for a week, I took this test today and am pleased with every section but RC. I scored 174 for PT 64, but the incorrect answers were more evenly distributed.

[dasani13]

I'm taking PT 62 tomorrow if anyone would like to review it together at night around 8PM EST.

I would like to review tomorrow. I'm down. I just took this today.

PT 62
RC: -8
LR: -1
LG: -1
LR: -0

Raw score: 92/102
173

I've been using LsatQA and it's been really helping me realize how shitty I am in Strengthen/weaken questions. So after drilling those for a week, I took this test today and am pleased with every section but RC. I scored 174 for PT 64, but the incorrect answers were more evenly distributed.

Nice, congrats on that score! I'll set up a chat room and send the link to whomever wants to join. I'm free all night after 7pm EST.

[vicpin5190]

If I could just have consistency in RC, god this thing would be solved.

[yomisterd]

What's the word about PTs lower than 40? Easier than 50-60s? Unreliable for seeing where I will be come December?

[vicpin5190]

What's the word about PTs lower than 40? Easier than 50-60s? Unreliable for seeing where I will be come December?

I don't think they're easier, just not quite the same. I think RC especially is where things changed most, though the LGs definitely got a lot less weird and more standardized, but at the same time they became a lot harder since they made inferences tougher.

[dasani13]

What's the word about PTs lower than 40? Easier than 50-60s? Unreliable for seeing where I will be come December?

I don't think they're easier, just not quite the same. I think RC especially is where things changed most, though the LGs definitely got a lot less weird and more standardized, but at the same time they became a lot harder since they made inferences tougher.

Yeah, they're easier in some ways but harder in other ways, in my opinion. They're probably not as reliable as the recent tests but they're not totally unreliable.

[dasani13]

Does anyone know if schools differentiate between a 3.70 and a 3.78? Do they round up and consider a 3.78 a 3.8 or do they just consider anything 3.7x a 3.70? OR do they consider a 3.78 an actual 3.78 as in not a 3.80 but also not a 3.70?

[vicpin5190]

Does anyone know if schools differentiate between a 3.70 and a 3.78? Do they round up and consider a 3.78 a 3.8 or do they just consider anything 3.7x a 3.70? OR do they consider a 3.78 an actual 3.78 as in not a 3.80 but also not a 3.70?

I...I wish I knew this. I imagine it's most likely seen as a 3.8 for all intensive purposes, though if its between you and someone else with 3.79 or 3.76 they'll then break it down by that......if it even gets to that point? I'm just taking a guess.

[OVOXO]

PT55 for me today if anyone wants to review later

[SkepticalAboutLaw]

What's the word about PTs lower than 40? Easier than 50-60s? Unreliable for seeing where I will be come December?

I wouldn't bother with them. Spend your time on PT65 and up. You can supplement your 65 and up prep with earlier exams, but don't trust that the results are all that representative of how you will perform on test day. In my experience, you should knock 5-8 points off your PT 1-38 averages to reach your 60s averages. The Games and RC in the 50s and 60s are noticeably different from 1-40. LR is not too, too different although you certainly do not want to underestimate what differences there are.

Obviously -- I find the earlier exams different from and much easier than what we're seeing now. I actually screwed myself this October by using 1-38 for a lot of my initial drilling and PTing and leaving the 60s as fresh PTs to use in the 4-6 weeks before test day. I had solidified a PT 1-38 style that was extremely successful and had not fully adjusted to the differences in time. I wound up feeling unprepared and blowing it because of the resulting lack of confidence.

[vicpin5190]

What's the word about PTs lower than 40? Easier than 50-60s? Unreliable for seeing where I will be come December?

I wouldn't bother with them. Spend your time on PT65 and up. You can supplement your 65 and up prep with earlier exams, but don't trust that the results are all that representative of how you will perform on test day. In my experience, you should knock 5-8 points off your PT 1-38 averages to reach your 60s averages. The Games and RC in the 50s and 60s are noticeably different from 1-40. LR is not too, too different although you certainly do not want to underestimate what differences there are.

Obviously -- I find the earlier exams different from and much easier than what we're seeing now. I actually screwed myself this October by using 1-38 for a lot of my initial drilling and PTing and leaving the 60s as fresh PTs to use in the 4-6 weeks before test day. I had solidified a PT 1-38 style that was extremely successful and had not fully adjusted to the differences in time. I wound up feeling unprepared and blowing it because of the resulting lack of confidence.

8 pts is a bit much I think. I'm not sure it's accurate to say if you are scoring like 171 on PT 35 that your score in 65 would potentially be around 166 to 163. There is a difference but I think the factors negate themselves to a degree. I think it's fair to say your PT average may be a little lower between 1 thru 30 and 50 thru 70 but to say that it's 5 to 8 pts seems like a bit of a stretch.

[OVOXO]

PT55: Much work to be done.

LR1 −4
LR2 −2
RC −4
LG −0
LGX44 −0

91/100

170.

LR pwned me here but I’ve noticed a majority (like 7/10) of my wrong answers on PTs now are right to wrong switches, so I really need to reinforce the process going forward. Going to drill flaw/parallel/and NA later this week and do some “hard LR” drills.

[vicpin5190]

Did a timed section of RC from PT 10 today (I'm running out of material so I actually bought some more sections from the unpublished PTs to drill and do timed). -1 total, getting a point off on the last section.

I guess it's not very representative of new PTs but at least my RC skills are there, just need to adapt to the new PTs.

Afterward drilled about 16 Method of Reasoning Level 1 questions and a couple Level 4 Necessary Assumption to keep myself fresh on those (I've found that I've become particularly strong on these question types).

Finishing off the Lolphins game on Tv and then I'll probably do 1 or 2 logic games timed before going to bed.

Edit: So the Dolphins disappointed, but then I did the last 2 logic games of PT56 timed. 16:57 total, 6:15 for first game, 10:42 for second. The second game was the one about executives visiting farms. I found that one for some reason really hard to figure out at first but then it hit me that it was just double layered sequencing game. Went -0 overall on the 2 games. I'm way better at logic games than the Miami Dolphins are at football/PR. Oh well. Maybe I can defend/legally advise them on how to build a successful football team in my future career.

[toshiroh]

Taking PT60 today after taking no PTs for a whole week. PT 61 on Thursday and PT 62(dreading it) on Saturday. PM me if you want to review.

[ftbchamp231]

My weakest spot is definitely RC. I have already taken all of the recent PTs when I was studying for the October tests. Is it even worth using the 1-20 RC passages to study for the new tests, at least for getting used to annotating?

Same thing for LR, if I take a newer test and realize I am weak at Sufficient Assumption questions, would drilling sufficient assumption questions from 1-40 be a good idea? Or are they that much different in structure?

[vicpin5190]

My weakest spot is definitely RC. I have already taken all of the recent PTs when I was studying for the October tests. Is it even worth using the 1-20 RC passages to study for the new tests, at least for getting used to annotating?

Same thing for LR, if I take a newer test and realize I am weak at Sufficient Assumption questions, would drilling sufficient assumption questions from 1-40 be a good idea? Or are they that much different in structure?

I use those older sections for timing practice. The questions are definitely different but at least getting the mechanisms down regarding timing/reading speed is always good practice.

[vicpin5190]

Taking PT60 today after taking no PTs for a whole week. PT 61 on Thursday and PT 62(dreading it) on Saturday. PM me if you want to review.

PT62 is the most fun, but not nearly as fun as 64.