The Official September 2016 Study Group - WAKE ME UP WHEN SEPTEMBER ENDS Forum

[Tiwinkle12]

I was wondering if anyone could tell me if the Reading Comprehension in the old tests is easier or different than the new tests? I know that the new tests feature dual passages but except that can one say the old RC is not too different from the new?

many people incl me find older rc much easier to score higher on than newer rc.

there are on average a few more tougher questions on newer rc (after late 50s) that make it more difficult.

I know this may be a strange question but I'm going to ask anyway. So I'm taking the older practice tests. So, roughly how many more points would one get correct in the older tests versus the new?? I know it may vary from person to person but I just kinda want to know so I can realistically think how I'll do in the newer.

[mwells56]

I was wondering if anyone could tell me if the Reading Comprehension in the old tests is easier or different than the new tests? I know that the new tests feature dual passages but except that can one say the old RC is not too different from the new?

many people incl me find older rc much easier to score higher on than newer rc.

there are on average a few more tougher questions on newer rc (after late 50s) that make it more difficult.

I know this may be a strange question but I'm going to ask anyway. So I'm taking the older practice tests. So, roughly how many more points would one get correct in the older tests versus the new?? I know it may vary from person to person but I just kinda want to know so I can realistically think how I'll do in the newer.

Not sure exactly how the numbers play out, but I have heard that there's a semi-false perception that old tests are "harder" than the newer ones. The perception comes from the fact that people do these tests in chronological order, and the tests start to seem easier as you've done more. Your score is your score. If you want to be going -0 on LG then you should be aiming to go -0 on LG every time.

[Barack O'Drama]

So I decided to purchase 7Sage's course because if the lessons are half as helpful as the LG explanations have been, I think it will be worth every penny. I also want to see how I do learning by watching videos rather than reading everything. The starter course is only $179 bucks and if that can net me a few points, I would be happy. By the same token, if I don't like it I think they have a good refund policy.

Welcome to the 7sage fam! As I said in a post on this thread already, their LR stuff is really good from what I've seen of it so far. I'm saying that even after going only -8 between both LR sections on my diagnostic and spending a whole semester learning harder versions of this stuff. I'm trying to go back to simplifying my thought process from that class lol. I think my goal is going to be to -0 on LR (went -6 last time before BR), -2/-3 on LG (also went -6 before BR), and -4/-5 on RC (-10 last time before BR). If you have any questions on LR, shoot me a PM.

Awesome! Thank you mwells Glad to hear you think it is good. I feel like JY really gets down to business. I like his formulaic-no-BS-gimmicks approach. Also for $180 bucks I can't ask for more. If I like it I might even upgrade to the Ultimate! And I am right with ya on LR. On my best days I miss 5 and on my worse 8. So I really need some help, lol.

As I'm doing the 7Sage course I am going to continue following The LSAT Trainer schedule. I also have the Manhattan trilogy I plan to go through as well. Right now working my way through the MLR and MLG.

Appreciate the help--I am sure I will have some questions I will PM you about. I want to make LR like LG and go -0 on test day!

Oh also one thing I forgot to mention is that I was digging through 7sage's discussion forums looking for suggestions on other study materials and JY actually wrote a short article about how he usually doesn't tell people about other test prep sources, but that if you're going to use 7sage that The LSAT Trainer is the way to go. He's buddies with the author.

No way! That makes me really happy to hear. I'm a huge fan of The LSAT Trainer. I think it would be hailed as the best LSAT prep book if people followed the corresponding study schedules and drills. A lot of people just breeze through it for basics and do the drills in the books, but neglect the free prep schedules. I'n glad they will work well together.

Thank you for letting me know this. I'm stocked

[mwells56]

So I decided to purchase 7Sage's course because if the lessons are half as helpful as the LG explanations have been, I think it will be worth every penny. I also want to see how I do learning by watching videos rather than reading everything. The starter course is only $179 bucks and if that can net me a few points, I would be happy. By the same token, if I don't like it I think they have a good refund policy.

Welcome to the 7sage fam! As I said in a post on this thread already, their LR stuff is really good from what I've seen of it so far. I'm saying that even after going only -8 between both LR sections on my diagnostic and spending a whole semester learning harder versions of this stuff. I'm trying to go back to simplifying my thought process from that class lol. I think my goal is going to be to -0 on LR (went -6 last time before BR), -2/-3 on LG (also went -6 before BR), and -4/-5 on RC (-10 last time before BR). If you have any questions on LR, shoot me a PM.

Awesome! Thank you mwells Glad to hear you think it is good. I feel like JY really gets down to business. I like his formulaic-no-BS-gimmicks approach. Also for $180 bucks I can't ask for more. If I like it I might even upgrade to the Ultimate! And I am right with ya on LR. On my best days I miss 5 and on my worse 8. So I really need some help, lol.

As I'm doing the 7Sage course I am going to continue following The LSAT Trainer schedule. I also have the Manhattan trilogy I plan to go through as well. Right now working my way through the MLR and MLG.

Appreciate the help--I am sure I will have some questions I will PM you about. I want to make LR like LG and go -0 on test day!

Oh also one thing I forgot to mention is that I was digging through 7sage's discussion forums looking for suggestions on other study materials and JY actually wrote a short article about how he usually doesn't tell people about other test prep sources, but that if you're going to use 7sage that The LSAT Trainer is the way to go. He's buddies with the author.

No way! That makes me really happy to hear. I'm a huge fan of The LSAT Trainer. I think it would be hailed as the best LSAT prep book if people followed the corresponding study schedules and drills. A lot of people just breeze through it for basics and do the drills in the books, but neglect the free prep schedules. I'n glad they will work well together.

Thank you for letting me know this. I'm stocked

In case you're curious to read the article itself... https://7sage.com/get-the-lsat-trainer/

[Barack O'Drama]

So I decided to purchase 7Sage's course because if the lessons are half as helpful as the LG explanations have been, I think it will be worth every penny. I also want to see how I do learning by watching videos rather than reading everything. The starter course is only $179 bucks and if that can net me a few points, I would be happy. By the same token, if I don't like it I think they have a good refund policy.

Welcome to the 7sage fam! As I said in a post on this thread already, their LR stuff is really good from what I've seen of it so far. I'm saying that even after going only -8 between both LR sections on my diagnostic and spending a whole semester learning harder versions of this stuff. I'm trying to go back to simplifying my thought process from that class lol. I think my goal is going to be to -0 on LR (went -6 last time before BR), -2/-3 on LG (also went -6 before BR), and -4/-5 on RC (-10 last time before BR). If you have any questions on LR, shoot me a PM.

Awesome! Thank you mwells Glad to hear you think it is good. I feel like JY really gets down to business. I like his formulaic-no-BS-gimmicks approach. Also for $180 bucks I can't ask for more. If I like it I might even upgrade to the Ultimate! And I am right with ya on LR. On my best days I miss 5 and on my worse 8. So I really need some help, lol.

As I'm doing the 7Sage course I am going to continue following The LSAT Trainer schedule. I also have the Manhattan trilogy I plan to go through as well. Right now working my way through the MLR and MLG.

Appreciate the help--I am sure I will have some questions I will PM you about. I want to make LR like LG and go -0 on test day!

Oh also one thing I forgot to mention is that I was digging through 7sage's discussion forums looking for suggestions on other study materials and JY actually wrote a short article about how he usually doesn't tell people about other test prep sources, but that if you're going to use 7sage that The LSAT Trainer is the way to go. He's buddies with the author.

No way! That makes me really happy to hear. I'm a huge fan of The LSAT Trainer. I think it would be hailed as the best LSAT prep book if people followed the corresponding study schedules and drills. A lot of people just breeze through it for basics and do the drills in the books, but neglect the free prep schedules. I'n glad they will work well together.

Thank you for letting me know this. I'm stocked

In case you're curious to read the article itself... https://7sage.com/get-the-lsat-trainer/

Thanks! I wasn't having much luck searching for it.

[appind]

I was wondering if anyone could tell me if the Reading Comprehension in the old tests is easier or different than the new tests? I know that the new tests feature dual passages but except that can one say the old RC is not too different from the new?

many people incl me find older rc much easier to score higher on than newer rc.

there are on average a few more tougher questions on newer rc (after late 50s) that make it more difficult.

I know this may be a strange question but I'm going to ask anyway. So I'm taking the older practice tests. So, roughly how many more points would one get correct in the older tests versus the new?? I know it may vary from person to person but I just kinda want to know so I can realistically think how I'll do in the newer.

Not sure exactly how the numbers play out, but I have heard that there's a semi-false perception that old tests are "harder" than the newer ones. The perception comes from the fact that people do these tests in chronological order, and the tests start to seem easier as you've done more. Your score is your score. If you want to be going -0 on LG then you should be aiming to go -0 on LG every time.

It's fully true for some people regardless of the order they do PTs, but may not be true for all esp the ones who are near perfect on rc no matter how new or old.

[BlackCanary]

It's before 6 am and I'm already at it. Was going to go for a run, but the temperature is so pleasant and perfect to sit on my roof and study.

Going to PT Saturday. Any thoughts if I should do it in the morning or in the afternoon? My administration is in the afternoon. Not working this Saturday, but starting at 2 pm is usually not doable because of my work schedule.

[Pozzo]

.

[34iplaw]

Just starting Testmasters HW on Type 7 - MP / MC questions. I should probably go to sleep though, but 20/20 and answering these pretty quickly. These all seem pretty standard and repetitive in the patterns they follow. Expecting to do 50/50 on these, and I think these are pretty importantly to consistently get right and quick, as it's the building block for other question types.

I'm really liking this, as it's the first time I'm really being forced to pay attention to what they are actually asking on the LSAT...which is important. It makes me kind of surprised that I scored relatively well on LR with no awareness of what they were really asking for.

[20170322]

It's hard getting out of my lazy, don't study, eat everything routine to hard working, 5 hours of LSAT, working out and dieting.

[MyNameIsntJames]

Making Progress.

Took a time PT last week

167

LR 1: -4
LR 2: -2
RC: -4
LG: -6

I was a bit bummed out, since I think I could have hit a 170. I made a stupid mistake and misrepresented a rule in the first game. It cost me several minutes, and thus had to really rush the final game in the section, as well as the other games to a lesser extent.

If you occasionally make small errors in representing the initial rules, is it better to re-read and check the rules after diagramming all the rules or after each rule? I do not make this mistake too often, but once every few game sets is troubling since my goal is a 170+

A big key to LG would be getting everything down correctly the first time in an ideal world. Its possible to go back and re-read...but if you're already 3-4 questions in and you realized you completely botched a rule you might be fucked unless you can make that mental adjustment very quickly and not spend more than 2-3 minutes figuring out where you went wrong and correcting your error and not letting it psyche you out for the rest of the LG section.

^More or less what happened, it is bit hard to recover after you botch a rule and waste 4-5 minutes. At that point you do not have the luxury to be thorough on all the questions.

Yeah. Its tough when it happens because its really easy to misread a rule or think they said 'place G ahead of H' when they really said 'place H ahead of G' or some shit. Happens to the best of us.

[Deardevil]

Does The LSAT Trainer do a decent job explaining reading comprehension?

I figure it's time to get it, but I'm also torn between that and Blueprint RC... Maybe I'll get both.

[Dodocogon]

That moment when you realize you're going to have to miss a day of tailgating and football in Ann Arbor because of the LSAT

Life is hard - luckily the KSU (Manhattan, KS) game that day already announced to be a 6pm one so hopefully I can make it back in town by 3pm and have a decent amount of quality football time. I'm taking the test at KU, so hopefully I don't get too much ridicule - they don't have a game that day so everyone won't be all school spirit-y at least. Like they get excited for football anyway.

[Alexandros]

Just starting Testmasters HW on Type 7 - MP / MC questions. I should probably go to sleep though, but 20/20 and answering these pretty quickly. These all seem pretty standard and repetitive in the patterns they follow. Expecting to do 50/50 on these, and I think these are pretty importantly to consistently get right and quick, as it's the building block for other question types.

I'm really liking this, as it's the first time I'm really being forced to pay attention to what they are actually asking on the LSAT...which is important. It makes me kind of surprised that I scored relatively well on LR with no awareness of what they were really asking for.

Excuse my ignorance, but what are MP/MC questions? I'm racking my brain to think what those could stand for and it's just not coming.
Paying attention / having awareness is definitely important, and something I really need to work on as well.

Legit impressed with your intense LR drilling - this is for your class, right? I do ten by type questions and I want to kill myself. Definitely need to change that attitude if I'm going to see the progress I need on LR.

[pretzeltime]

Does The LSAT Trainer do a decent job explaining reading comprehension?

I figure it's time to get it, but I'm also torn between that and Blueprint RC... Maybe I'll get both.

Depends on what you're looking for. First off.......I recommend getting the Trainer regardless. But with respect to RC,

His approach is more intuitive and less about categorizing every little thing to death. So in RC, he says he doesn't personally annotate and therefore he's not going to advocate for that.

The test prep companies generally (not sure about BP) tend to create these elaborate notation systems for RC. Some people may find that helpful, others not. I don't know how helpful I found the Trainer's RC stuff, but then again RC was my best 'natural' section and therefore I did not do much work from any source on it. Compared to LG/LR that is.

IIRC the Trainer's exploration of various RC question types and approaches was somewhat helpful. Very similar to his approach to broad themes of LR questions.

[Mikey]

Working on some "Most logically completes the argument above" questions. Or as 7sage likes to call them, "Miscellaneous" questions. I don't find these hard at all tbh. I've never drilled these types of questions before and I always get them right because I feel like most of them are like MSS questions. Just fill in the blank ^_^

[Alexandros]

.

[Mikey]

Does The LSAT Trainer do a decent job explaining reading comprehension?

I figure it's time to get it, but I'm also torn between that and Blueprint RC... Maybe I'll get both.

Depends on what you're looking for. First off.......I recommend getting the Trainer regardless. But with respect to RC,

His approach is more intuitive and less about categorizing every little thing to death. So in RC, he says he doesn't personally annotate and therefore he's not going to advocate for that.

The test prep companies generally (not sure about BP) tend to create these elaborate notation systems for RC. Some people may find that helpful, others not. I don't know how helpful I found the Trainer's RC stuff, but then again RC was my best 'natural' section and therefore I did not do much work from any source on it. Compared to LG/LR that is.

IIRC the Trainer's exploration of various RC question types and approaches was somewhat helpful. Very similar to his approach to broad themes of LR questions.

Yeah, BP has an annotating method. I found it to be a good system, but personally it screwed my focus up and I felt like I had less time to finish the section while doing it. But someone else may find it more useful than another.

[Dodocogon]

I just went -5 on an RC section, -3 on the passage about Rita Levi-Montalcini and NGF. Y'all I study neuroscience. We literally spent a third of a class last year on NGF. This is embarrassing.

Also -4 RC yesterday. This is not okay.

Going to stick to steady LR and LG for now though. 5 AL games, then the rest of the inference questions (timed), and hopefully MLSAT ch. 8 and conditional logic questions. But I also need to pack, show up to work, and take an international flight sometime today so we'll see.

Yeah, I'm a bio major so I know a good amount about many of the environmental, etc. sections - sometimes it helps to not have to worry about understanding terms and other things, but knowing too much (like you in this case) can sometimes be a burden - I always have to remind myself that the section wasn't written for me, and to really focus on the reasoning structure. It's easy to slip in this case though!

[Mikey]

I just went -5 on an RC section, -3 on the passage about Rita Levi-Montalcini and NGF. Y'all I study neuroscience. We literally spent a third of a class last year on NGF. This is embarrassing.

Also -4 RC yesterday. This is not okay.

Going to stick to steady LR and LG for now though. 5 AL games, then the rest of the inference questions (timed), and hopefully MLSAT ch. 8 and conditional logic questions. But I also need to pack, show up to work, and take an international flight sometime today so we'll see.

shit, i wish i could go -4/-5 on rc

[proteinshake]

gonna be drilling LR again today and maybe do a full LR section from PT 1-38.

[Deardevil]

Depends on what you're looking for. First off.......I recommend getting the Trainer regardless. But with respect to RC,

His approach is more intuitive and less about categorizing every little thing to death. So in RC, he says he doesn't personally annotate and therefore he's not going to advocate for that.

The test prep companies generally (not sure about BP) tend to create these elaborate notation systems for RC. Some people may find that helpful, others not. I don't know how helpful I found the Trainer's RC stuff, but then again RC was my best 'natural' section and therefore I did not do much work from any source on it. Compared to LG/LR that is.

IIRC the Trainer's exploration of various RC question types and approaches was somewhat helpful. Very similar to his approach to broad themes of LR questions.

Ah. Maybe I'll adjust, like with LG, if I don't find certain methods to click. Thanks!

[mwells56]

That moment when you realize you're going to have to miss a day of tailgating and football in Ann Arbor because of the LSAT

Life is hard - luckily the KSU (Manhattan, KS) game that day already announced to be a 6pm one so hopefully I can make it back in town by 3pm and have a decent amount of quality football time. I'm taking the test at KU, so hopefully I don't get too much ridicule - they don't have a game that day so everyone won't be all school spirit-y at least. Like they get excited for football anyway.

Yeah I'm hoping that they announce it as a night game but it probably won't be. We're playing Penn State that week and they're not exactly in the national spotlight right now. Only hope is that it's our opening conference game so maybe they can forge some fake hype? I'd be ok with missing but I also do club sports and I might have to miss three more football games as well. My ticket points are screwed after two years of perfect attendance

[Dodocogon]

That moment when you realize you're going to have to miss a day of tailgating and football in Ann Arbor because of the LSAT

Life is hard - luckily the KSU (Manhattan, KS) game that day already announced to be a 6pm one so hopefully I can make it back in town by 3pm and have a decent amount of quality football time. I'm taking the test at KU, so hopefully I don't get too much ridicule - they don't have a game that day so everyone won't be all school spirit-y at least. Like they get excited for football anyway.

Yeah I'm hoping that they announce it as a night game but it probably won't be. We're playing Penn State that week and they're not exactly in the national spotlight right now. Only hope is that it's our opening conference game so maybe they can forge some fake hype? I'd be ok with missing but I also do club sports and I might have to miss three more football games as well. My ticket points are screwed after two years of perfect attendance

Oh damn; maybe you'll get lucky and it'll be put on the Big 10 network or something so you won't be pushed up - We're playing like Missouri State or some nobody school so we get the benefit of putting the game at whatever time we want.

[proteinshake]

Depends on what you're looking for. First off.......I recommend getting the Trainer regardless. But with respect to RC,

His approach is more intuitive and less about categorizing every little thing to death. So in RC, he says he doesn't personally annotate and therefore he's not going to advocate for that.

The test prep companies generally (not sure about BP) tend to create these elaborate notation systems for RC. Some people may find that helpful, others not. I don't know how helpful I found the Trainer's RC stuff, but then again RC was my best 'natural' section and therefore I did not do much work from any source on it. Compared to LG/LR that is.

IIRC the Trainer's exploration of various RC question types and approaches was somewhat helpful. Very similar to his approach to broad themes of LR questions.

Ah. Maybe I'll adjust, like with LG, if I don't find certain methods to click. Thanks!

also the Trainer is 600 very dense pages. the RC chapters probably make up about 100 of those pages (its the least talked about section in the book (for obvious reasons)).