The Official June 2016 Study Group Forum

[proteinshake]

either everyone in this group is a really high scorer or only the really high scorers are posting their PTs. just seems kinda weird.

[abcdefg1234567]

Took PT 70 today.

LR1: -3
RC: -2
LG: -5
LR2: -2
Raw: -12

Scaled: 170


UGH. OK, I officially need a major overhaul in LG. Any tips?

Any types in particular??

[somethingElse]

either everyone in this group is a really high scorer or only the really high scorers are posting their PTs. just seems kinda weird.

The latter for sures.

[20170322]

Took PT 70 today.

LR1: -3
RC: -2
LG: -5
LR2: -2
Raw: -12

Scaled: 170


UGH. OK, I officially need a major overhaul in LG. Any tips?

Any types in particular??

7sage says the biggest problem areas are grouping pure, grouping sequencing, Sequencing Conditional Rules, Sequencing with a twist. So, I guess I'll just drill this non-stop.

[abcdefg1234567]

Took PT 70 today.

LR1: -3
RC: -2
LG: -5
LR2: -2
Raw: -12

Scaled: 170


UGH. OK, I officially need a major overhaul in LG. Any tips?

Any types in particular??

7sage says the biggest problem areas are grouping pure, grouping sequencing, Sequencing Conditional Rules, Sequencing with a twist. So, I guess I'll just drill this non-stop.

Well for what it's worth, I saw an immediate jump in my LG score once got comfortable with the idea of setting up two to even four separate game boards for a given problem. It helped especially when a question sends you to a given "world" as 7sage puts it. I now spend the majority of my time on set up and even end up with enough time to check my answers on at least a few harder questions.

One more thing. I found myself confusing pieces in games with multiple categories for the variables. So I now make sure to use a different script for each. For example if there are four doctors ABCD, and four nurses STUV it may look like this:

D: ABCD
n: stuv

IN OUT
D: _ _ _/_
n: ⊔ ⊔ ⊔/⊔

[20170322]

Well for what it's worth, I saw an immediate jump in my LG score once got comfortable with the idea of setting up two to even four separate game boards for a given problem. It helped especially when a question sends you to a given "world" as 7sage puts it. I now spend the majority of my time on set up and even end up with enough time to check my answers on at least a few harder questions.

One more thing. I found myself confusing pieces in games with multiple categories for the variables. So I now make sure to use a different script for each. For example if there are four doctors ABCD, and four nurses STUV it may look like this:

D: ABCD
n: stuv

IN OUT
D: _ _ _/_
n: ⊔ ⊔ ⊔/

Sweet! That actually helps a lot. I've been trying to be more open to "splitting" the board during LG, but when I'm stressed I get super bad tunnel vision, which is a huge hinderance for LG.

[lawpro82]

Took PT 70 today.

LR1: -3
RC: -2
LG: -5
LR2: -2
Raw: -12

Scaled: 170


UGH. OK, I officially need a major overhaul in LG. Any tips?

Do games over and over again after waiting a few days.

Another thing I used to do to master games was to write my own LG questions. I used the rules and setup, but instead of the 5-6 questions in the game, I'd create more of my own and have other people do them. This allowed me to think like the test makers and try to make people slip up, which is their job. Now, when I approach a LG on a PT, I can foresee where the testers are going to try and trick me before I even start reading the questions. When the trap comes, I'm ready for it

[appind]

I think being an attorney helps the most with the LR section. I rarely miss any in my practice tests. 9 years of strengthening/weakening, pointing out assumptions, identifying the flaw, making inferences etc. certainly has its perks. My PT's are usually -0 on LR and games, and then anywhere between -0 and -4/5 on RC for somewhere between a 176 and 180 depending on the curve.

The last official test I took I got -0 in games, -2 in LR and -4 in RC for a 175. All my RC misses were on an extremely boring RC passage, last passage of RC, last section of the test, and I ran out of time. Just couldn't get my head around the passage, kept re-reading the same paragraph over and over without comprehension.

I'm definitely smarter (in an LSAT sense) than in 2006, so we'll see

nice.. which administration was it? it looks like rc has gotten a little more difficult in the new tests.

re your LR approach, do you think that for any actual lsat question, one shouldn't have to compare answer choices amongst each other to pick the credited response i.e. an answer choice can be said to correct or wrong on it's own, or you think that sometimes answer choices have to be compared to pick the best one which would be credited, such as may be for some strengthen or weaken questions?

[appind]

either everyone in this group is a really high scorer or only the really high scorers are posting their PTs. just seems kinda weird.

likely the latter. iirc you too were a high scorer in the dec thread.

[lawpro82]

I think being an attorney helps the most with the LR section. I rarely miss any in my practice tests. 9 years of strengthening/weakening, pointing out assumptions, identifying the flaw, making inferences etc. certainly has its perks. My PT's are usually -0 on LR and games, and then anywhere between -0 and -4/5 on RC for somewhere between a 176 and 180 depending on the curve.

The last official test I took I got -0 in games, -2 in LR and -4 in RC for a 175. All my RC misses were on an extremely boring RC passage, last passage of RC, last section of the test, and I ran out of time. Just couldn't get my head around the passage, kept re-reading the same paragraph over and over without comprehension.

I'm definitely smarter (in an LSAT sense) than in 2006, so we'll see

nice.. which administration was it? it looks like rc has gotten a little more difficult in the new tests.

re your LR approach, do you think that for any actual lsat question, one shouldn't have to compare answer choices amongst each other to pick the credited response i.e. an answer choice can be said to correct or wrong on it's own, or you think that sometimes answer choices have to be compared to pick the best one which would be credited, such as may be for some strengthen or weaken questions?

I think it works both ways...I agree, in strengthen/weaken you should usually read every answer choice, HOWEVER, in inference questions, method of reasoning, find the flaw, and assumption questions, once you find the correct answer, bubble in and move on. For two reasons. First and most obvious, speed. No explanation necessary. Secondly, I think the test is designed to make people second guess their original (and correct) answer. Often, I see the difference between somebody in the 160s and 170s being that the former get hung up on answer choices and allow the testmakers to confuse and trick them.

To succeed in all question types, but most importantly in LR, one must be PROACTIVE, not REACTIVE. During your untimed practice tests, work through the stimulus and try and answer the question before you even examine the answer choices.

[devilsadvocatetroll]

.

[carasrook]

ALTHOUGH I went untimed... I really needed a confidence boost this week, and I wanted to make sure I was honestly grasping concepts, just struggling with timing (like I suspected), I'm *so happy* to report I got a 173 today. LR -4, LG -2, and RC -3. PT 60.

Phew. Less than perfect, obviously, but now I can move forward hating myself less than I have in recent weeks

[20170322]

New LSAT strategy-- do nothing but Logic Games for the next few weeks. On the last few exams, going -0 on LG would've meant a score in the upper 170's. Leggho.

[Mikey]

ALTHOUGH I went untimed... I really needed a confidence boost this week, and I wanted to make sure I was honestly grasping concepts, just struggling with timing (like I suspected), I'm *so happy* to report I got a 173 today. LR -4, LG -2, and RC -3. PT 60.

Phew. Less than perfect, obviously, but now I can move forward hating myself less than I have in recent weeks

That's a good thing honestly. Like you said, it means you're actually understanding how to do things. I sometimes do individual LR and RC sections. If I do this for LR I usually take my very sweet time making sure I have a clear reason why I eliminate answer choices. Usually I only do untimed stuff with older PT sections though (1-20ish).

[somewhatferal]

PT 64, 176 (-4 LR, -0 LG, -2 RC)

Actually recognized the right answer on one LR problem, and I just filled in the wrong bubble.

[YupSports]

either everyone in this group is a really high scorer or only the really high scorers are posting their PTs. just seems kinda weird.

The latter for sures.

I've been preparing for a loooong time. I took the December test after 3 months of prep, knew I didn't do well and immediately got back on it (albeit, at a slower, more in-depth pace).

Feel absolutely free to message me or post in this thread with any questions.

I want to see us all do well.

[proteinshake]

PT 64, 176 (-4 LR, -0 LG, -2 RC)

Actually recognized the right answer on one LR problem, and I just filled in the wrong bubble.

If I do that I usually just change my score to reflect the intended answer instead of the misbubble. I only care if timing or lack of understanding is affecting my score, not bubbling. this is also because I don't really ever misbubble answers.

[appind]

I think it works both ways...I agree, in strengthen/weaken you should usually read every answer choice, HOWEVER, in inference questions, method of reasoning, find the flaw, and assumption questions, once you find the correct answer, bubble in and move on. For two reasons. First and most obvious, speed. No explanation necessary. Secondly, I think the test is designed to make people second guess their original (and correct) answer. Often, I see the difference between somebody in the 160s and 170s being that the former get hung up on answer choices and allow the testmakers to confuse and trick them.

To succeed in all question types, but most importantly in LR, one must be PROACTIVE, not REACTIVE. During your untimed practice tests, work through the stimulus and try and answer the question before you even examine the answer choices.

so you sometimes compare choices to pick the best one? and for the categories that you listed you don't compare and pick one without eliminating others?

[somewhatferal]

PT 64, 176 (-4 LR, -0 LG, -2 RC)

Actually recognized the right answer on one LR problem, and I just filled in the wrong bubble.

If I do that I usually just change my score to reflect the intended answer instead of the misbubble. I only care if timing or lack of understanding is affecting my score, not bubbling. this is also because I don't really ever misbubble answers.

Well, I figured that if I did it during practice, I might do it during the real thing, so I didn't change my score.

[Mikey]

PT 64, 176 (-4 LR, -0 LG, -2 RC)

Actually recognized the right answer on one LR problem, and I just filled in the wrong bubble.

If I do that I usually just change my score to reflect the intended answer instead of the misbubble. I only care if timing or lack of understanding is affecting my score, not bubbling. this is also because I don't really ever misbubble answers.

Well, I figured that if I did it during practice, I might do it during the real thing, so I didn't change my score.

That's reasonable. Either way, a 176 is amazing and it's something I probably won't even see in a dream HAHA. Nice score though!

[proteinshake]

PT 64, 176 (-4 LR, -0 LG, -2 RC)

Actually recognized the right answer on one LR problem, and I just filled in the wrong bubble.

If I do that I usually just change my score to reflect the intended answer instead of the misbubble. I only care if timing or lack of understanding is affecting my score, not bubbling. this is also because I don't really ever misbubble answers.

Well, I figured that if I did it during practice, I might do it during the real thing, so I didn't change my score.

true. I guess I just shouldn't record the question as something I missed so I don't waste time reviewing something I already know.

[20170322]

Is it possible to get LG down before the test date? I swing wildly from -0 to -5.

[Mikey]

Is it possible to get LG down before the test date? I swing wildly from -0 to -5.

I think so, for sure. Just keep at it man, best I've ever done was -1.

[cantis]

What's everyone's plan for the week before the test? Do you plan on taking any PT's? Drilling?

[somewhatferal]

What's everyone's plan for the week before the test? Do you plan on taking any PT's? Drilling?

I think the best course of action is to continue taking PT's during the week before with a one or two day break before the day of the test. You need to normalize the behavior of taking a 5-section PT, neurochemically.