The Official June 2016 Study Group Forum

[abcdefg1234567]

Anyone else occasionally slip up in LG when a question asks you for a complete and accurate list of possibilities for something? I get so confused sometimes whether it's asking for all possibilities of where something could go, or for the possibility of where it could go at the same time. If I get any questions wrong in LG, these are usually among them, BOOOO!

I feel like I didn't write this clear, but if anyone cares, I'm talking about a question such as PT43 S4 Q18.

this is why it's important to mark what CANNOT go in certain positions when you're making your initial diagram. if you do this you should be able to narrow the choices down to two answer choices fairly quickly.

Yeah I get what you mean, I usually do that for grouping/tougher games but for easier games I usually just keep a mental image which usually works for me. I just hate how I always get confused with the wording of the question when being asked for possibilities because I can never really get whether they want a full list of where something could go in general, or where it could go in a given scenario, if that makes any sense, lol. That's mainly what my issue is, and it's usually the one's I get wrong, along with any minor mistakes I make, if any.

ahh I see what you mean. I haven't studied LG since November, but wouldn't the answer choices reveal what the question is asking?

Not always. Like for the question I mentioned before (PT43 S4 Q18), it was asking for a possibility in a given scenario in which there was an answer that gave a list of the possibility of only 1 scenario (there were 2 scenarios on which I split my game board up), but another answer choice was every possible group for that entity to be put in.

I put a "spoiler" just in case someone hasn't done this game and doesn't want to see what I have to say about one of the questions.

[+] Spoiler

There was 1 entity that HAD to go into the middle group (Y), but COULD go into any of the other 2 groups (X or Z), but not both at the same time so there would only be 2 of that entity on the game board. I thought the question was asking for all possibilities that the entity could go in which was all 3 XYZ (wrong answer choice), when it was really either XY or YZ, in which the correct answer was YZ (XY wasn't an option), not XYZ.

I think that a key part of these questions the wording. In this example, you have to consider the CR to represent a situation where the entire game is completed without breaking rules. It's not asking about choices. it's askinging definitively which answer would not break any rules if the rest of the game was completed.

However if the question said "which of the following could be a complete and accurate list of buildings the falafel truck COULD serve", then the CR would be a list of ALL possible buildings it could serve. My guess is that you are mistaking these subtly different questions.

[Mikey]

Anyone else occasionally slip up in LG when a question asks you for a complete and accurate list of possibilities for something? I get so confused sometimes whether it's asking for all possibilities of where something could go, or for the possibility of where it could go at the same time. If I get any questions wrong in LG, these are usually among them, BOOOO!

I feel like I didn't write this clear, but if anyone cares, I'm talking about a question such as PT43 S4 Q18.

this is why it's important to mark what CANNOT go in certain positions when you're making your initial diagram. if you do this you should be able to narrow the choices down to two answer choices fairly quickly.

Yeah I get what you mean, I usually do that for grouping/tougher games but for easier games I usually just keep a mental image which usually works for me. I just hate how I always get confused with the wording of the question when being asked for possibilities because I can never really get whether they want a full list of where something could go in general, or where it could go in a given scenario, if that makes any sense, lol. That's mainly what my issue is, and it's usually the one's I get wrong, along with any minor mistakes I make, if any.

ahh I see what you mean. I haven't studied LG since November, but wouldn't the answer choices reveal what the question is asking?

Not always. Like for the question I mentioned before (PT43 S4 Q18), it was asking for a possibility in a given scenario in which there was an answer that gave a list of the possibility of only 1 scenario (there were 2 scenarios on which I split my game board up), but another answer choice was every possible group for that entity to be put in.

I put a "spoiler" just in case someone hasn't done this game and doesn't want to see what I have to say about one of the questions.

[+] Spoiler

There was 1 entity that HAD to go into the middle group (Y), but COULD go into any of the other 2 groups (X or Z), but not both at the same time so there would only be 2 of that entity on the game board. I thought the question was asking for all possibilities that the entity could go in which was all 3 XYZ (wrong answer choice), when it was really either XY or YZ, in which the correct answer was YZ (XY wasn't an option), not XYZ.

I think that a key part of these questions the wording. In this example, you have to consider the CR to represent a situation where the entire game is completed without breaking rules. It's not asking about choices. it's askinging definitively which answer would not break any rules if the rest of the game was completed.

However if the question said "which of the following could be a complete and accurate list of buildings the falafel truck COULD serve", then the CR would be a list of ALL possible buildings it could serve. My guess is that you are mistaking these subtly different questions.

Yeah! I get the idea you're making about having a list that completes the game without breaking rules. That way of looking at it actually makes it clear for me so thanks for that!

[YupSports]

Se let me tell you all about Riddled Basins of Attraction .

[abcdefg1234567]

PT 62 kicked my ass today!

RC -7
LR -5
LG -5
LR -6

Game 2 ate up a lot of time and I wasn't able to finish game 3. Gotta work on my conditional reasoning. Also, anyone else have problems with games that offer limited margin space? There was seriously no place to write out rules in game 1. Suggestions??

[Mikey]

PT 62 kicked my ass today!

RC -7
LR -5
LG -5
LR -6

Game 2 ate up a lot of time and I wasn't able to finish game 3. Gotta work on my conditional reasoning. Also, anyone else have problems with games that offer limited margin space? There was seriously no place to write out rules in game 1. Suggestions??

If I have a game with barely any space to work with, usually I would just write the rules in the bottom left of the page and leave the middle/right for work. Also try and use the space next to the answer choices of each question for the work pertaining to that question.

[guppiesbaby]

PT 62 kicked my ass today!

RC -7
LR -5
LG -5
LR -6

Game 2 ate up a lot of time and I wasn't able to finish game 3. Gotta work on my conditional reasoning. Also, anyone else have problems with games that offer limited margin space? There was seriously no place to write out rules in game 1. Suggestions??

If I have a game with barely any space to work with, usually I would just write the rules in the bottom left of the page and leave the middle/right for work. Also try and use the space next to the answer choices of each question for the work pertaining to that question.

Well that won't be an issue on your actual test, the new format is to spread 1 game out over 2 pages. That is reflected in the PTs in the 70s. But when I'm PTing with older tests I just flip another game page over to it's blank back and use that to draw out the games. You could also use scratch paper. Because on the actual test you won't have this issue.

[lawpro82]

Exactly. For example, if A and B are arguing about a topic, and the question asks how B responds to A, and in the stimulus, he clearly uses a counterexample, and counterexample is answer choice A, I choose A and move on. If a parallel flaw question confuses sufficient and necessary in the stimulus, and answer choice B also confuses sufficient and necessary, I choose B and move on. I save a minute by not having to read the other answer choices, which buys me time for later, harder questions that need more thought, and it also prevents me from getting tricked out of a good answer choice.

I don't advocate this technique until you're scoring with 90+% accuracy on LR questions

when you do compare answer choices for other types, do you think for some questions one must end up evaluating say choice B against choice C to find which one suits the task in the q-stem best? or, that a very skilled taker can always for all types of qs identify whether a choice is correct or wrong only by reading the answer choice without considering other choices?

Well, anytime a correct answer is "E", then the test taker will have read each and every answer choice, and then anytime a correct answer choice is "D" the test taker will have read most of the answer choices and so on. What happens when one gets very very skilled in LR (and as an LSAT taker in general) is almost a "zen" kind of experience on the LR portion of the exam, where he/she could basically do the test with one eye open and both hands tied behind their back. I think most questions (but not all) can be answered before you even look at the answer choices. I answer about 40% of the questions without reading all the answer choices. I would gander that gurus such as Robin Singh answer 70-80% of the questions once he sees the right answer.

The point I'm trying to make is that the test is VERY predictable, and an experienced high scorer is already aware of all of the pitfall questions and knows what the true answer looks like just about 100% of the time. Not only do I know the correct answer before I see it in these cases, I can also predict some of the trick answer choices before I see them too.

And I can't stress this next part enough; I believe it is the single best piece of advice I can give on the LR portion of the LSAT:

When you're doing untimed LR practice, my suggestion is do every question type for more practice. For example, when you see a "strengthen" question, after you answer it correctly, try and weaken it, try and think of assumptions that it depends on, point out inferences, state the flaw, determine if it depends on a principal, determine the role of each major statement in the argument, and so on. Turn one LR question into 8 questions, and your mind will sharpen to what needs to be done on test day, but in speed and accuracy.

[Mikey]

Exactly. For example, if A and B are arguing about a topic, and the question asks how B responds to A, and in the stimulus, he clearly uses a counterexample, and counterexample is answer choice A, I choose A and move on. If a parallel flaw question confuses sufficient and necessary in the stimulus, and answer choice B also confuses sufficient and necessary, I choose B and move on. I save a minute by not having to read the other answer choices, which buys me time for later, harder questions that need more thought, and it also prevents me from getting tricked out of a good answer choice.

I don't advocate this technique until you're scoring with 90+% accuracy on LR questions

when you do compare answer choices for other types, do you think for some questions one must end up evaluating say choice B against choice C to find which one suits the task in the q-stem best? or, that a very skilled taker can always for all types of qs identify whether a choice is correct or wrong only by reading the answer choice without considering other choices?

Well, anytime a correct answer is "E", then the test taker will have read each and every answer choice, and then anytime a correct answer choice is "D" the test taker will have read most of the answer choices and so on. What happens when one gets very very skilled in LR (and as an LSAT taker in general) is almost a "zen" kind of experience on the LR portion of the exam, where he/she could basically do the test with one eye open and both hands tied behind their back. I think most questions (but not all) can be answered before you even look at the answer choices. I answer about 40% of the questions without reading all the answer choices. I would gander that gurus such as Robin Singh answer 70-80% of the questions once he sees the right answer.

The point I'm trying to make is that the test is VERY predictable, and an experienced high scorer is already aware of all of the pitfall questions and knows what the true answer looks like just about 100% of the time. Not only do I know the correct answer before I see it in these cases, I can also predict some of the trick answer choices before I see them too.

And I can't stress this next part enough; I believe it is the single best piece of advice I can give on the LR portion of the LSAT:

When you're doing untimed LR practice, my suggestion is do every question type for more practice. For example, when you see a "strengthen" question, after you answer it correctly, try and weaken it, try and think of assumptions that it depends on, point out inferences, state the flaw, determine if it depends on a principal, determine the role of each major statement in the argument, and so on. Turn one LR question into 8 questions, and your mind will sharpen to what needs to be done on test day, but in speed and accuracy.

You know, I've never actually thought about doing that with LR, it seems like a really good approach.

[lawpro82]

^^^^That's what I'm here for my man

[cantis]

Finished grading PT 66. Breakdown was

RC: -13
LR1: -3
LG: -0
LR2: -1

I honestly have no idea what happened on the RC. I've been scoring -2 to -6 on them recently and haven't scored that bad...ever. I kept double checking the answer key because I really thought I was using the wrong key haha.

[ponderingmeerkat]

Well, did PT59 Monday evening and blind reviewed yesterday. Ended up with a 168 (-5 LG, -2/-2 LR, and -7?!?! RC) BRed to 177. A fairly unusual test as far as my trend lines are concerned. For the last half-dozen LG sections I've enjoyed a firewall of 0's followed by a handful of -1/-2 sections. Apparently I went on tilt for this LG section. Then, as far as RC is concerned...it didn't even feel that bad while accomplishing the test. Given my average was -4.2, I was definitely surprised by a -7.

I swear, this test is an exercise in trying to herd kittens. Just as soon as I get my LR scores down into my target range, LG and RC go off the reservation. I guess as long as the final-score trendline continues north toward that 173-5 range, I'm not going to rage too hard.

[abcdefg1234567]

Did PT 44 Today.

165/170 BR
RC -3
LR -2
LG -2
LR -9 (YIKES!)

I tried not eliminating all answer choices in LR and found myself finished with about 4 minutes to spare. HOWEVER, after BRing my last LR section found that I made 4 foolish mistakes that I probably would not have made if I eliminated. Hoping to find a balance between speed/100% confidence...

[20170322]

Debating whether or not to withdraw. Finals are kicking my butt rn, and I'm not applying next cycle, so September may be a smarter decision, especially with the more lenient curve.

[Mikey]

Debating whether or not to withdraw. Finals are kicking my butt rn, and I'm not applying next cycle, so September may be a smarter decision, especially with the more lenient curve.

If you have the time and aren't applying this cycle then wait if you're not feeling up to it. Will this be your first take?

[20170322]

Debating whether or not to withdraw. Finals are kicking my butt rn, and I'm not applying next cycle, so September may be a smarter decision, especially with the more lenient curve.

If you have the time and aren't applying this cycle then wait if you're not feeling up to it. Will this be your first take?

Yup! The original plan was to take now and retake in September, but on second thought that's pretty silly. Also, I'd like to get a year of work experience, and tbh knowing myself I'd apply for this next cycle if I got a good enough score.

So, I should get up to 177+ on PT's, then take in September. Just a hard pill to swallow.

[YupSports]

Just got done with 67; what a whirlwind!

RC: -5
LR: -5
LG -5
LR -5

Score: 163

So, I started with the RC section, struggled with the 3rd passage, and ran out of time. I thought I bombed the section and this ruined my mindset for the rest of the test.

It turns out I didn't bomb it (i just missed one question on that passage) so I essentially wasted 3 sections pouting.

Gonna crush review and try to get another PT in on Saturday.

[Mikey]

I feel weird being on spring break right now. They made it SUPER late this year, it's so weird. Oh well, it allows me to do more LSAT prep. On that note, RC passages here I come!

[lawpro82]

Just got done with 67; what a whirlwind!

RC: -5
LR: -5
LG -5
LR -5

Score: 163

So, I started with the RC section, struggled with the 3rd passage, and ran out of time. I thought I bombed the section and this ruined my mindset for the rest of the test.

It turns out I didn't bomb it (i just missed one question on that passage) so I essentially wasted 3 sections pouting.

Gonna crush review and try to get another PT in on Saturday.

If it makes you feel any better, PT 67 was my worst PT ever

[ayylmao]

When I take my PTs now, I ask myself after I finish whether, if this was the real thing, I'd want to cancel my score afterward. I always think "no." Not sure how much utility this little exercise has, but I think it forces me to focus on the general vibe of the test rather than fixating on the relatively few questions that gave me trouble. It's important to know yourself so that you can decide whether you wanna go all in after you take the real thing or pull out and try again next time.

Did PT 72 today. Haven't looked over it yet, but I thought it was on the harder side of normal. I was bracing for a crushingly hard games section based on what I've heard from people on the internets, but amazingly I semi-saw what they were trying to do with the pattern game.

Of course, knowing me I'll feel pretty good and then get a bunch of questions wrong without realizing it...but I expected the worst from this test and came out relatively clean on the other side so that's good.

[lawpro82]

When I take my PTs now, I ask myself after I finish whether, if this was the real thing, I'd want to cancel my score afterward. I always think "no." Not sure how much utility this little exercise has, but I think it forces me to focus on the general vibe of the test rather than fixating on the relatively few questions that gave me trouble. It's important to know yourself so that you can decide whether you wanna go all in after you take the real thing or pull out and try again next time.

Did PT 72 today. Haven't looked over it yet, but I thought it was on the harder side of normal. I was bracing for a crushingly hard games section based on what I've heard from people on the internets, but amazingly I semi-saw what they were trying to do with the pattern game.

Of course, knowing me I'll feel pretty good and then get a bunch of questions wrong without realizing it...but I expected the worst from this test and came out relatively clean on the other side so that's good.

I do that as well. Ironically, some of the tests I've felt the worst on were the ones I scored a 178-180. I remember getting done a couple weeks ago with a PT and expecting something in the low 170s, turned to the RC, my worst section, and aced a passage I thought I bombed. Graded the rest of the test and only missed 1 total, and had predicted missing 8-9 based solely on how I felt.

I think we're sometimes too hard on ourselves here at TLS. Our perfectionism shines through at times and we're willing to cancel the kind of score that some people would sell their firstborn for.

[longpig]

Se let me tell you all about Riddled Basins of Attraction .

Haha I loved this passage. Metaphorical riddled basins were my fave.

Also I know way too much about legal rights of Native Americans and lichen taxonomy now.

[ayylmao]

When I take my PTs now, I ask myself after I finish whether, if this was the real thing, I'd want to cancel my score afterward. I always think "no." Not sure how much utility this little exercise has, but I think it forces me to focus on the general vibe of the test rather than fixating on the relatively few questions that gave me trouble. It's important to know yourself so that you can decide whether you wanna go all in after you take the real thing or pull out and try again next time.

Did PT 72 today. Haven't looked over it yet, but I thought it was on the harder side of normal. I was bracing for a crushingly hard games section based on what I've heard from people on the internets, but amazingly I semi-saw what they were trying to do with the pattern game.

Of course, knowing me I'll feel pretty good and then get a bunch of questions wrong without realizing it...but I expected the worst from this test and came out relatively clean on the other side so that's good.

I do that as well. Ironically, some of the tests I've felt the worst on were the ones I scored a 178-180. I remember getting done a couple weeks ago with a PT and expecting something in the low 170s, turned to the RC, my worst section, and aced a passage I thought I bombed. Graded the rest of the test and only missed 1 total, and had predicted missing 8-9 based solely on how I felt.

I think we're sometimes too hard on ourselves here at TLS. Our perfectionism shines through at times and we're willing to cancel the kind of score that some people would sell their firstborn for.

Yeah, it's important to have perspective. Though as a 7sage staff member said, "Olympic sprinters don't judge themselves by their results in a race against 10th graders." Put slightly less aggressively, retain your perfectionism but don't get too bent when you "only" get a 172. Once you're at a certain level everything'll be fine one way or another.

[lawschoolbound17]

Anyone have tips on conditional grouping? Learning the MLSAT way and it seems functional, however, even on games that I feel like i'm going to score well on I find myself missing 2-3 questions.

Thanks!

[abcdefg1234567]

What's with the lsat makers obsession with meteorites and dinosaurs? I swear I see at least one question per test..lol

[lawpro82]

What's with the lsat makers obsession with meteorites and dinosaurs? I swear I see at least one question per test..lol

I was thinking the same thing, but with caffeine, heart disease, and cholesterol