JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread Forum

[CanILive]

Best of luck WeatherCoins.

So as I as browsing the Manhattan forums for review of LR (Great resource by the way, I recommend everyone visit there), I came across this great post about learning LR.

http://www.manhattanlsat.com/forums/q15 ... 4adf605dd8

It is the third post down.

I am unsure if I am allowed to put the post on TLS. If it is allowed, someone can feel free to do it, or I will.

Regardless, great resource.

[A → B ⊨ ¬B → ¬A]

I would just link to it.

[crazyrobin]

It is a great advice. I think TLS wisdom is in align with this suggestion: write down the explanation when you get some questions wrong or you are not sure about the question.

Another question guys, when you drill LR or take full time PT, do you read question stem first? What's your opinion?

[Daily_Double]

It is a great advice. I think TLS wisdom is in align with this suggestion: write down the explanation when you get some questions wrong or you are not sure about the question.

Another question guys, when you drill LR or take full time PT, do you read question stem first? What's your opinion?

Stimulus then stem.

[crazyrobin]

Stimulus then stem.

OK thanks DD, I am wrapping up all my LR drilling. Can't wait to take full time PT and soar my score to 17X.

[griffin.811]

Stimulus then stem.

OK thanks DD, I am wrapping up all my LR drilling. Can't wait to take full time PT and soar my score to 17X.

I read the stem first. I like to know what I'm looking for before I start reading. I did it the other way for a while, but much prefer this way. Say the question asks for the conclusion, you don't have to bother trying to put the whole core together, or waste a few seconds trying to find the gap in the core. Just one reason I do it this way.

I'd go with whatever feels most comfortable.

[Daily_Double]

I always confused those two, because I don't really care to call them by their correct names. I read the question first, must be true, assumption, etc., then read the passage. In RC I do the opposite.

[natashka85]

Lr bundle arrived today,i was planning to go through Logic Games bible ,but I guess i will drill some Lr by type.

[eliztudorr]

I always confused those two, because I don't really care to call them by their correct names. I read the question first, must be true, assumption, etc., then read the passage. In RC I do the opposite.

is it faster that way?

[Daily_Double]

I always confused those two, because I don't really care to call them by their correct names. I read the question first, must be true, assumption, etc., then read the passage. In RC I do the opposite.

is it faster that way?

Maybe, maybe not. It helps me anticipate what to look for. For example if the question stem, I think it's called a stem now, but I confused them in my reply to crazyrobin, reads which of the following is an assumption which the argument depends upon?" I know I'm looking for something which must be true, and if it is not true, negated, the the argent will collapse. I'm on my phone so I can't get into a full explanation, but I think it's the best approach for LR.

[griffin.811]

I always confused those two, because I don't really care to call them by their correct names. I read the question first, must be true, assumption, etc., then read the passage. In RC I do the opposite.

is it faster that way?

Maybe, maybe not. It helps me anticipate what to look for. For example if the question stem, I think it's called a stem now, but I confused them in my reply to crazyrobin, reads which of the following is an assumption which the argument depends upon?" I know I'm looking for something which must be true, and if it is not true, negated, the the argent will collapse. I'm on my phone so I can't get into a full explanation, but I think it's the best approach for LR.

I agree. Not necessarily faster (although it may be), but it should make your reading of the passage more focused. DD I also do it the other way for RC.

For LR, just think about the questions when they ask "what is the function of the third sentence" if you read the stem first, you can hone in on that sentence when you read. If you do it the other way around, you'll probably have to re-read unless it was the conclusion or a major premise.

I despise LR...

[wtrc]

PT 50- first time in a while taking a PT in a very quiet environment (my office) rather than a coffee shop or cafe or loud house. Also first time using a bubble sheet in a while.

Section I- RC- -4 (#'s 5,14,19,25). When 35 minutes came, still had 2 more questions to do, took 36:15 total.
Section II- LR1 -1 (#13)- 33 minutes
Section III- LG 0 (had to guess on one between 2 possible answers, guessed correctly). 34 minutes.
Section IV- RC2- -2 (#12, 23). 32 minutes

Raw 93/100, Scaled 173. PR! One more question right would have been a 175, which is my goal.

LG I've been pretty consistent between 0 and -2, LR between -1 and -4. But was very happy with this RC, despite the extra minute I took, since I've been consistently between -5 and -8. Limited social life the past month or two to study may be starting to pay off

[eliztudorr]

I always confused those two, because I don't really care to call them by their correct names. I read the question first, must be true, assumption, etc., then read the passage. In RC I do the opposite.

is it faster that way?

Maybe, maybe not. It helps me anticipate what to look for. For example if the question stem, I think it's called a stem now, but I confused them in my reply to crazyrobin, reads which of the following is an assumption which the argument depends upon?" I know I'm looking for something which must be true, and if it is not true, negated, the the argent will collapse. I'm on my phone so I can't get into a full explanation, but I think it's the best approach for LR.

im gonna try it today. and i will let you guys know what i think found a few threads on the issue and most ppl suggest reading the question first.

[rebexness]

Raw 93/100, Scaled 173. PR! One more question right would have been a 175, which is my goal.

Congrats!

[objection_your_honor]

MLSAT LR advocates reading the question first. It's not necessarily faster, but definitely has an impact on accuracy. Once used to it, I find it often does save time as it can obviate the need to return to the stimulus. You read with your task in mind the first time.

I think Powerscore LR says not to read the question first? It's been awhile since I've read that.

[wtrc]

MLSAT LR advocates reading the question first. It's not necessarily faster, but definitely has an impact on accuracy. Once used to it, I find it often does save time as it obviates the need to return to the stimulus as often. You read with your task in mind the first time.

I think Powerscore LR says not to read the question first? It's been awhile since I read that.

Testmasters also says not to. Glancing at it first helps save time for me with conclusion questions, and questions where there is a "dialogue" between two people

[crazyrobin]

I agree with DD. powerscore suggests otherwise thought ( to the best of my memory, I think ps LR bible suggests read argument first)

I tried to read argument first ( I think it's called stimulus? ) then question. Not really effective. Some questions throw me off so I have to go back to the argument again.

[rebexness]

MLSAT LR advocates reading the question first. It's not necessarily faster, but definitely has an impact on accuracy. Once used to it, I find it often does save time as it obviates the need to return to the stimulus as often. You read with your task in mind the first time.

I think Powerscore LR says not to read the question first? It's been awhile since I read that.

Testmasters also says not to. Glancing at it first helps save time for me with conclusion questions, and questions where there is a "dialogue" between two people

I tend to do it only when there is dialogue. Gonna drill LR today so I will try this and see if it saves me any time/increases accuracy.

[The-Specs]

Just finished PT 41.

LR: -4
LG: -3
LR: -5
RC: -0

Raw: 89
Scaled: 170!!!

This is my first time over 170 since may 2012 right before my first LSAT and to be honest that one was a fluke. To be fair though, this one could be too, I have never done better than -5 on RC before and usually I am much closer to -5/6 total for my LR sections. Bazaar but however it worked out I am feeling good about scoring a 170 on the back of scoring a 169 this last monday.

Can't wait for PT 42 on Saturday.

Also: final game of LG almost screwed me over because i read "either" instead of "neither". It cost me 6 mins and made me rush on the third game in which i got my -3. Carelessness is going to kill me.

[crazyrobin]

Just finished PT 41.

LR: -4
LG: -3
LR: -5
RC: -0

Raw: 89
Scaled: 170!!!

This is my first time over 170 since may 2012 right before my first LSAT and to be honest that one was a fluke. To be fair though, this one could be too, I have never done better than -5 on RC before and usually I am much closer to -5/6 total for my LR sections. Bazaar but however it worked out I am feeling good about scoring a 170 on the back of scoring a 169 this last monday.

Can't wait for PT 42 on Saturday.

Also: final game of LG almost screwed me over because i read "either" instead of "neither". It cost me 6 mins and made me rush on the third game in which i got my -3. Carelessness is going to kill me.

Wow
That -0 on RC is here to stay.
Seriously, I am jealous.

[Daily_Double]

Awesome job on the PTs guys. Weathercoins bold move using the bubbles so early, I like it.

[wtrc]

Just finished PT 41.

LR: -4
LG: -3
LR: -5
RC: -0

Raw: 89
Scaled: 170!!!

This is my first time over 170 since may 2012 right before my first LSAT and to be honest that one was a fluke.

Congratulations!! You'll have that LG down to 0 in no time, and I'm so jealous of that RC.

[CanILive]

I always confused those two, because I don't really care to call them by their correct names. I read the question first, must be true, assumption, etc., then read the passage. In RC I do the opposite.

is it faster that way?

Maybe, maybe not. It helps me anticipate what to look for. For example if the question stem, I think it's called a stem now, but I confused them in my reply to crazyrobin, reads which of the following is an assumption which the argument depends upon?" I know I'm looking for something which must be true, and if it is not true, negated, the the argent will collapse. I'm on my phone so I can't get into a full explanation, but I think it's the best approach for LR.

This is exactly how and why I do LR this way.

[CanILive]

Just finished PT 41.

LR: -4
LG: -3
LR: -5
RC: -0

Raw: 89
Scaled: 170!!!

Congratulations!

This thread is crushing in terms of scores this far out from the test.

[The-Specs]

Thanks guys.

We can all do it, TLS FTW! I am pumped and so motivated to keep at it.