The Official September 2014 Study Group Forum

[BillPackets]

Definitely reading for reasoning. Also, a lot of times, I'll read answer choices and they all sound similar to me. Sometimes I cant even eliminate one choice.

I think the best way to figure this one out is to look at the right answer and explain to yourself why it was correct, or more correct than the other choices. Do that a few times on questions you get stuck on, and you'll have an easier time eliminating answers that aren't strong enough.

Agree with that. Also, look at the answer choices and try and figure out which ones are not supported by the text--often times incorrect answer choices will combine two disparate things you read in the passage, making it seem attractive. Other times, the wrong answer choice may just have one word wrong that is not supported by the passage. Recognizing incorrect answer choices such as those is incredibly valuable.

[Valamar]

"Only those who appreciate these advances are scientists" structurally is "only A is B", "A is necessary for B", or "B---->A". It becomes clearer if you reword it as "the only people who are scientists are those who appreciate these advances", from which you can also deduce "people who do not appreciate these advances are not scientists", and thus "all scientists appreciate these technological advances".

On the other hand, if the prompt had read something like "the only people who appreciate these advances are scientists" or "only scientists appreciate these advances", that would be the reverse structurally: "only B is A", "B is necessary for A", or "A----->B". I haven't really studied formal logic too comprehensively so maybe someone else would be better able to provide proper technical terms, but that is the general gist of it.

Ah thank you. This definitely helps. Does this kind of logic come up much on the LSAT? It's a little more abstract or categorical than most conditional logic.

I'm not quite sure what conditional logic is haha, is it the same thing as formal logic? Formal logic (by this I refer to causal relationships that can be mapped out like A-->B-->C, A<---some--->B, etc.) definitely appears in about 3-5 questions per PT. In the case of this question a pretty straightforward formal logic model is presented, and it is rather the tricky wording in the prompt that serves as the most serious impediment to finding the right answer

[schmelling]

Just started drilling parallel and perpendicular games (idk if this is apsecifcally a testmasters term, but its games with multiple variable sets) my god they are difficult. Any tips on how to really nail down games? or how to approach drilling? it always seems as if i miss some big deduction that would make answering the questions much faster and easier. I would love to hear from people on here who were able to make big gains in the games sections.

[BillPackets]

Just started drilling parallel and perpendicular games (idk if this is apsecifcally a testmasters term, but its games with multiple variable sets) my god they are difficult. Any tips on how to really nail down games? or how to approach drilling? it always seems as if i miss some big deduction that would make answering the questions much faster and easier. I would love to hear from people on here who were able to make big gains in the games sections.

I have no clue what perpendicular games are, but drill drill drill. And then watch the 7sage videos. Those saved my life.

[schmelling]

.

[BillPackets]

Just started drilling parallel and perpendicular games (idk if this is apsecifcally a testmasters term, but its games with multiple variable sets) my god they are difficult. Any tips on how to really nail down games? or how to approach drilling? it always seems as if i miss some big deduction that would make answering the questions much faster and easier. I would love to hear from people on here who were able to make big gains in the games sections.

I have no clue what perpendicular games are, but drill drill drill. And then watch the 7sage videos. Those saved my life.

Are the videos free? I am already signed up for testmasters so I don't really want to spend much more on prep.

Hell yeah they're free and it's like highway robbery. If you have a smart phone, just download the 7sage app. It also comes with a free proctor.

[HRomanus]

I did PT 20 in May before I restarted studying and got a 168. I took it again tonight and got a 179. I am assuming that some of this jump is from remembering answers and questions, especially because i did so well on LR versus my historic PTs. What kind of jump have you guys seen in retakes of an exam?

[gavaga1]

.

[kbrizz]

Realizing that I never finished drilling in/out grouping. Aka, never finished practicing conditional logic problems. Which explains why I do not get them.

This is probably the most frustrating day I have had in a long time. I'm feeling so discouraged.

[BillPackets]

Realizing that I never finished drilling in/out grouping. Aka, never finished practicing conditional logic problems. Which explains why I do not get them.

This is probably the most frustrating day I have had in a long time. I'm feeling so discouraged.

Those days will happen. Other days will be great. You will absolutely get conditional logic. Just practice practice practice. Once you can do the new and used CD game with no probem you'll be fine. Just keep practicing.

[ilikebaseball]

Looking at the "guess the median" thread is uplifting... makes the goal target look a little more reachable

[BillPackets]

Looking at the "guess the median" thread is uplifting... makes the goal target look a little more reachable

I was just thinking the same thing!

[boris09]

It's interesting how drilling certain LR types can go so well up to level 3, and then drastically (at least so i think) escalate to the point where i'm thinking i'm going to get -20 on the real thing or something. The wording for the answer choices begins to get so convoluted. Hopefully with more and more practice, this will start working out

On the bright side, i decided to re-do the LR section i did worst at that i did for my diagnostic and improved from -12 (timed) to -2 (untimed). Gives me hope that not every question on the lsat will be a level 4 difficulty question lol

[ultraman]

Desperately need some help!

My PT scores fluctuate from 168 to 173. I have followed DD's study plan. I have drilled level 1&2 from Cambridge LR package and LG package twice. I have not drilled any RC passages, which I will start tomorrow.

My problem is: sometimes I missed around 6/7 on two LR sections combined and sometimes missed only 3. My RC is also a little bit messy. Sometimes I missed only 1 on RC but sometimes I could miss up to 8. I do not want take more PT because I am afraid that I will waste them. My LG is good usually 0/-1.

What should I do next? Should I do some older sections to focus on accuracy?

Any advice will be appreciated!

I am in the same boat as you!… a week and a half ago I scored a 174, and the last two PT's i had this week were a 168 and 169, almost all because of LR. I used to have trouble with RC, but lately I have missed 1 or 2, as opposed to the past - and I got that way with the Manhattan RC book. I ignored most of the "PEAR" stuff, but reading for a scale and really searching for the authors opinion helped me out a ton, so try that out.
I am at a standstill for LR though.. because I review each question and I just don't seem to be improving. I am about to start drilling tomorrow to see if it helps, but the problem is that there is no consistent type that I miss. It'll be 1-2 strengthen/weaken, maybe 2 MSS, a few "miscellaneous" (as 7sage names them), a method of reasoning question, and all of a sudden I have missed 12 total LR, when I only expected to miss 3 or 4.

Anyone who is really doing great at LR have some advice when the missed answers are so sporadic?

I plan to re-read LR Bible and Manhattan LR before doing some drill. What is your plan? Thanks for the RC tips.

Right now I'm reviewing the LR from PT 58, because of the dreadful score I got. I'm gonna go over the incorrect answers and rework them all, and then go over any that I had circled while taking the test... I'm also thinking of looking through Manhattan LR again and making some notes about each question type as a review, because I think that if I revise types and strategies, it'll help me clear out some silly mistakes I've been making. And then probably some drilling, I guess. And of course, let me know how the RC book treats you!

I am doing the same. I am redoing problems that I missed and felt not so sure when I drilled to see whether I can fix some thought patterns. I would recommend LSAT Trainer because reading it made me feel that there are some fundamental issues that I need to fix.

[HRomanus]

This is for my fellow FT workers -

Doing a logic game in the morning before work is such a fulfilling feeling.

[Gray]

.

[CFC1524]

Hahahaha my LG book is on my bedside table. Great way to wake up.

I read RC passages instead of the morning paper while I eat my cereal. This test is my life.

This is for my fellow FT workers -

Doing a logic game in the morning before work is such a fulfilling feeling.

My boss saw me drilling RC on Friday...it was awkward, but not awkward enough that I didn't bring PT 46 to work with me today.

[Gray]

.

[Learn_Live_Hope]

Hahahaha my LG book is on my bedside table. Great way to wake up.

I read RC passages instead of the morning paper while I eat my cereal. This test is my life.

This is for my fellow FT workers -

Doing a logic game in the morning before work is such a fulfilling feeling.

My boss saw me drilling RC on Friday...it was awkward, but not awkward enough that I didn't bring PT 46 to work with me today.

Hahahah

What will you be doing with PT 46? You won't be taking it will you?

[CFC1524]

Sometimes I wonder what I'll do after it's over... seriously, what will I do with the void in my life??

I've heard knitting is pretty rewarding. Maybe give that a try?

Hahahaha my LG book is on my bedside table. Great way to wake up.

I read RC passages instead of the morning paper while I eat my cereal. This test is my life.

This is for my fellow FT workers -

Doing a logic game in the morning before work is such a fulfilling feeling.

My boss saw me drilling RC on Friday...it was awkward, but not awkward enough that I didn't bring PT 46 to work with me today.

Hahahah

What will you be doing with PT 46? You won't be taking it will you?

Haha, no, not exactly. I'll do each of the sections under timed conditions, but I won't be able to do them sequentially. I do research in a lab so I spend a decent amount of time just waiting for reactions to finish. The other research assistant (who is working on her med school apps) and I have instituted a look-out system in case my boss comes wandering around again. Next step: motion activated alarms.

[kbrizz]

Realizing that I never finished drilling in/out grouping. Aka, never finished practicing conditional logic problems. Which explains why I do not get them.

This is probably the most frustrating day I have had in a long time. I'm feeling so discouraged.

Those days will happen. Other days will be great. You will absolutely get conditional logic. Just practice practice practice. Once you can do the new and used CD game with no probem you'll be fine. Just keep practicing.

Haha started that game last night. And ended on it which contributes to my annoyance but it's obviously a tough problem.

I think I just need to be more positive about it.

Thinking about buying a 7sage package because those videos save me.

[Colonel_funkadunk]

Looking at the "guess the median" thread is uplifting... makes the goal target look a little more reachable

I was just thinking the same thing!

Second that.

[Colonel_funkadunk]

It's interesting how drilling certain LR types can go so well up to level 3, and then drastically (at least so i think) escalate to the point where i'm thinking i'm going to get -20 on the real thing or something. The wording for the answer choices begins to get so convoluted. Hopefully with more and more practice, this will start working out

On the bright side, i decided to re-do the LR section i did worst at that i did for my diagnostic and improved from -12 (timed) to -2 (untimed). Gives me hope that not every question on the lsat will be a level 4 difficulty question lol

I felt this way jumping from level 3 to level 4 necessary assumption problems.

[kbrizz]

Looking at the "guess the median" thread is uplifting... makes the goal target look a little more reachable

I was just thinking the same thing!

Second that.

Where is the thread? Can't find it :/

[Gray]

.