February 2012 LSAT Study Group Forum

[062914123]

.

[062914123]

.

[BuckinghamB]

Checking in! Already got in my first choice school, but here's hoping for some $$

[lhess218]

Not to oversimplify, but the best way to prep for RC is to read. Pick dense material like academic journals or older popular works (stuff written in the 30s, 40s and 50s).

I used to get -5 to -7 on RC. WHen I was on deployment earlier this year (lots of down time on the boat), I read most of Dumas Malone's Thomas Jefferson 6-volume bio as well as some Carl Sagan books. Now I very rarely do worse than -2 on RC. I attribute it not to any kind of LSAT RC-specific drills or prep, but to, quite simply, being a better reader now after negotiating all that dense material.

I've started reading The Economist weekly and an array of academic journals for this purpose

Another couple of really good books to read (though more modern) are Brian Greene's The Elegant Universe, Stephen Hawking's A Brief History of Time, and Hofstadter's Gödel, Escher, Bach. RC was always my strong section (and ngogirl can vouch for me on that), but after reading those three during my husband's time in the sand, it's an extremely rare RC section where I don't get -0. It's even helped me marginally improve my LR, though I think that's because The Elegant Universe forced me to read and think over EVERY single damn word and thought experiment. Probably should've paid attention in my actual physics class.

[ngogirl]

Hey guys!! I talked to Noah earlier today and he said this:

1. It will be run like a typical session as the December group and other groups had earlier. For those of you that are not lurkers/familiar with this, he has a syllabus for all of us to follow, someone leads a review session every week where we go over LR, RC, or LG that are in the syllabus, it is consistent/goes along with the Manhattan LSAT books. We also will have a preptest schedule which we can follow and review tests together.

2. Once he knows what days we can meet, he will make the syllabus. He suggested we meet Wednesday/Thursday (one of those days) for the session, and Sundays to review tests together.

3. He said they can try to send in a teacher once in awhile to lead the sessions. Also, he said you all can get discounts on the Manhattan LSAT courses or books. I think with the last groups (June/Oct/Dec) they were 10 or 20% off, I don't remember.

4. To join, you just create a MLSAT account on manhattanlsat.com. Once you have done that send an email to Noah: noah@manhattanlsat.com and tell him you want to join the February group, he will send you the syllabus and the link to the elluminate room.

Lhess and I have lead sessions for the December group, it's not that difficult, you just act as a group facilitator. =)

[cany]

Hey guys!! I talked to Noah earlier today and he said this:

1. It will be run like a typical session as the December group and other groups had earlier. For those of you that are not lurkers/familiar with this, he has a syllabus for all of us to follow, someone leads a review session every week where we go over LR, RC, or LG that are in the syllabus, it is consistent/goes along with the Manhattan LSAT books. We also will have a preptest schedule which we can follow and review tests together.

2. Once he knows what days we can meet, he will make the syllabus. He suggested we meet Wednesday/Thursday (one of those days) for the session, and Sundays to review tests together.

3. He said they can try to send in a teacher once in awhile to lead the sessions. Also, he said you all can get discounts on the Manhattan LSAT courses or books. I think with the last groups (June/Oct/Dec) they were 10 or 20% off, I don't remember.

4. To join, you just create a MLSAT account on manhattanlsat.com. Once you have done that send an email to Noah: noah@manhattanlsat.com and tell him you want to join the February group, he will send you the syllabus and the link to the elluminate room.

Lhess and I have lead sessions for the December group, it's not that difficult, you just act as a group facilitator. =)

I am in for this.Just emailed Noah.
I like Thursday better

[outlookingin]

Checking in! Already got in my first choice school, but here's hoping for some $$

So how does this work? Sorry to be asking questions I should already know the answer to, but is it like if you score higher in Feb. they will re-consider your scholarship package? What if you score lower?

[Eichörnchen]

Hey, hope everyone's studying is going well. I just PTed for the first time in months, so here's how it went:

PT 47 -

LR1/2: -0
RC: -4
LG: -3 (My worst section, so I am OK with this for now)

raw 93/scaled 173

Now I'm takin the rest of the day off to do some Christmasy stuff. Then tomorrow will be PT review all day, bleh.

[outlookingin]

Hey, hope everyone's studying is going well. I just PTed for the first time in months, so here's how it went:

PT 47 -

LR1/2: -0
RC: -4
LG: -3 (My worst section, so I am OK with this for now)

raw 93/scaled 173

Now I'm takin the rest of the day off to do some Christmasy stuff. Then tomorrow will be PT review all day, bleh.

Seething with jealousy at your LR score. HOW DID YOU DO THAT!?!?! I'm still banging my head against the book over here. I'll PT soon though, looking to take a modern test (50+) for the first time.

[Gisney]

So I have been sick for a week now. Lost 11 pounds and have not touched the LSAT. Took a pt yesterday and did awful. Hoping it is just cause I am not all the way well and the time off. Trying to get back in study mode but it is difficult.

[iMisto]

I need advice.

How do you study when you've used PTs 29-38, and 48-64? I've taken 17 tests, and broken the others down by section. Do I get new sets (hoping I don't remember too much)? Do I get 39-47?

I've been scoring 170+, but not sure how well I did this Dec. Signed up for Feb., just to be safe, but not sure how I'm supposed to continue my studies - only had issues with RC, and am attempting to follow Voyager's technique.

[willwash]

I'm worried about this myself. I'm running out of recent PTs I haven't already seen. I was eyeballling the Princeton Review's Cracking the LSAT (37 bucks) just for the practice tests it includes. (I know you should only use real tests released by LSAC, but I flipped through the practice tests in the book, and at least the games and LRs I looked at were fairly good. If I run out of PTs I might buy this book. In any case, it's PT 60 for me tomorrow!

I need advice.

How do you study when you've used PTs 29-38, and 48-64? I've taken 17 tests, and broken the others down by section. Do I get new sets (hoping I don't remember too much)? Do I get 39-47?

I've been scoring 170+, but not sure how well I did this Dec. Signed up for Feb., just to be safe, but not sure how I'm supposed to continue my studies - only had issues with RC, and am attempting to follow Voyager's technique.

[princeR]

I've been doing a TON of RC. Just doing single passages, not timing myself but keeping track of how long each takes me. I have written things I need to focus on while doing them on note cards so I can keep reminding myself what I need to pay attention to. I am doing pretty well. Just to reiterate what a lot of others have said, I think the only way to improve on RC is to do a lot of them, and I mean actually sitting down and doing just RC for a while. I've probably done 20 passages a day for the past 3 days. Gonna do this for a couple more days and continue to develop my strategy.

[Eichörnchen]

Hey, hope everyone's studying is going well. I just PTed for the first time in months, so here's how it went:

PT 47 -

LR1/2: -0
RC: -4
LG: -3 (My worst section, so I am OK with this for now)

raw 93/scaled 173.

Seething with jealousy at your LR score. HOW DID YOU DO THAT!?!?! I'm still banging my head against the book over here. I'll PT soon though, looking to take a modern test (50+) for the first time.

Well, I should preface by saying that LR has always come pretty naturally for me (thankfully!). It just "clicks" with me, at least more than the other sections. If I remember correctly though on my diagnostic I had somewhere around -4 per section, so I have improved. I haven't done any books or drilling up until this point. I just started the LRB and after reading the first chapter, I did Cambridge's Most Strongly Supported packet. I've gone -0 in an LR section somewhere around 6 times, but I think this is my first -0 overall, so that made me very happy, especially considering in the past I seemed to make up for a -0 in one LR by doing worse than average in the other. So, I think that drilling helps, at least in that it keeps me used to doing LR.

My biggest piece of advice, and this goes for all sections, would be to not get too caught up in all the strategy guides. I learned LR by doing it - slowwwwly. I would do it, and then reread each question and focus on the ones I got wrong especially. Make sure you can articulate why you got it wrong, and why TCR is correct. Eventually, you really get to know the test which is hugely important. I also think it's better to be flexible and to ultimately have your own methods. I'm glad I did LR holistically at first, and I wish I had had the confidence to take that route in LG a little bit more. I'm trying to rectify that now.

[anteater1]

Hey guys checking in and looking for study buddies:

Quick backstory: Undergrad at UC-Irvine, was PT'ing high 160's prior to Oct and ended up with a 164. Decided next cycle is the best option for me but threw in apps to Loyola and Yeshiva.

Anyone want to form a twice weekly study group in Orange County, CA?

PM if anyone is interested, let's get some 170's goin!

[lhess218]

Changing subject for a quick second, but willwash, aren't you in the navy? Nice job winning.... 10 years in a row.

[willwash]

Changing subject for a quick second, but willwash, aren't you in the navy? Nice job winning.... 10 years in a row.

Haha, I've been so busy with work and LSAT prep I didn't even know the game was on until my wife told me Nevy had won...I went to OCS anyway, so I have little loyalty to the Naval Academy.

[lhess218]

Changing subject for a quick second, but willwash, aren't you in the navy? Nice job winning.... 10 years in a row.

Haha, I've been so busy with work and LSAT prep I didn't even know the game was on until my wife told me Nevy had won...I went to OCS anyway, so I have little loyalty to the Naval Academy.

In all honesty, I think the only reason my husband's CO threw a party was so that everyone could commiserate together when Army eventually lost.

[swordsman1]

A'right fellows!

Great going! Few days ago I asked for some help/insight as I was constantly losing couple points on Grouping Games, But, not a soul replied!

Well, I cracked it!

[ngogirl]

A'right fellows!

Great going! Few days ago I asked for some help/insight as I was constantly losing couple points on Grouping Games, But, not a soul replied!

Well, I cracked it!

Yaay!! Congrats!

Usually people are helpful, maybe no one saw your post?

[swordsman1]

ngogirl

Yaay!! Congrats!

Usually people are helpful, maybe no one saw your post?

Well....it happens.

9 weeks to go!

[062914123]

.

[willwash]

OK, now I am officially experiencing regression. This is quite disheartening. Took PT 60 tonight. -6 total on LR (about average), -4 on RC (slightly below average), -7 on LG (ATROCIOUS!!!). Overall scaled score of 83, which normalizes to 167. I don't know what it is about LG that gets me down so. It just seems like every time I see a game for the first time there's always some new trick, some new testmaking technique that throws me for a loop and results in disaster. If I could just get myself to a consistent -2 or better on LG, my PT scores would skyrocket. -2 on LG tonight would have yielded me a 170, my goal. In any case, here's my updated trend:

PT 61 on 11/6=163 (161 was a typo in my previous posts )
PT 64 on 11/9=168
PT 62 on 11/27=169
PT 63 on 12/3=168
PT 61 retake on 12/7=172
PT 60 on 12/11= 167

Starting to get very concerned.

[Eichörnchen]

OK, now I am officially experiencing regression. This is quite disheartening. Took PT 60 tonight. -6 total on LR (about average), -4 on RC (slightly below average), -7 on LG (ATROCIOUS!!!). Overall scaled score of 83, which normalizes to 167. I don't know what it is about LG that gets me down so. It just seems like every time I see a game for the first time there's always some new trick, some new testmaking technique that throws me for a loop and results in disaster. If I could just get myself to a consistent -2 or better on LG, my PT scores would skyrocket. -2 on LG tonight would have yielded me a 170, my goal. In any case, here's my updated trend:

PT 61 on 11/6=163 (161 was a typo in my previous posts )
PT 64 on 11/9=168
PT 62 on 11/27=169
PT 63 on 12/3=168
PT 61 retake on 12/7=172
PT 60 on 12/11= 167

Starting to get very concerned.

I wouldn't be at all concerned. That PT trend looks completely and absolutely normal. So far, you're actually quite consistent. Unfortunately one foray into the 170s doesn't keep us there (damnit! ) so you just did a bit better on PT 61 compared to others. It's all part of your upward trend.

(And I have to admit that you being within a point of your PT score before last and calling it official regression made me chuckle a little. You're FINE! Just breathe. )

[willwash]

OK, now I am officially experiencing regression. This is quite disheartening. Took PT 60 tonight. -6 total on LR (about average), -4 on RC (slightly below average), -7 on LG (ATROCIOUS!!!). Overall scaled score of 83, which normalizes to 167. I don't know what it is about LG that gets me down so. It just seems like every time I see a game for the first time there's always some new trick, some new testmaking technique that throws me for a loop and results in disaster. If I could just get myself to a consistent -2 or better on LG, my PT scores would skyrocket. -2 on LG tonight would have yielded me a 170, my goal. In any case, here's my updated trend:

PT 61 on 11/6=163 (161 was a typo in my previous posts )
PT 64 on 11/9=168
PT 62 on 11/27=169
PT 63 on 12/3=168
PT 61 retake on 12/7=172
PT 60 on 12/11= 167

Starting to get very concerned.

I wouldn't be at all concerned. That PT trend looks completely and absolutely normal. So far, you're actually quite consistent. Unfortunately one foray into the 170s doesn't keep us there (damnit! ) so you just did a bit better on PT 61 compared to others. It's all part of your upward trend.

(And I have to admit that you being within a point of your PT score before last and calling it official regression made me chuckle a little. You're FINE! Just breathe. )

That 172 was a PT 61 retake (trying to preserve the newer tests)...so far my highest score on a "first look" at a PT is 169.

I know I can get my LG skills to a consistent -2 or better, and once I get there I'll be in the 170's regularly.