Engineer in trouble Forum

[09042014]

I have almost no reasoning skills

I do not suck at logical reasoning

lol

flame

People just get defensive when you call them out on their faults.

A 2L at my law school says there are basically two types of engineers at law school. Those that are amazing at it. And those who are awful at it.

[KevinP]

^
Still... kind of hard to believe that an engineer can score below a 160. Especially one from a top school w/ straight As.

[thegarciab0y]

Since logical reasoning is a section that I have been having trouble on, despite the extent of my effort, I figured I would see what some of you would have to say and see if possibly any of you had some advice. Unfortunately, you’re just sitting on the other side of your computer screen picking apart every little word I said and not really understanding the nature of my problem. Since this forum seems to be guided toward constructive criticism, I really do not know why any of you are wasting your time picking apart my statements and trying to discredit what I am trying to explain, because if it is not positive, I couldn’t care less what you have to say. I have been a fan of this website for months, and there are a lot of good people on here who have good things to say, and others just like to pretend like they have never struggled on an LSAT prep test or carelessly goofed on a question before in their life.

[KevinP]

Since logical reasoning is a section that I have been having trouble on, despite the extent of my effort, I figured I would see what some of you would have to say and see if possibly any of you had some advice. Unfortunately, you’re just sitting on the other side of your computer screen picking apart every little word I said and not really understanding the nature of my problem. Since this forum seems to be guided toward constructive criticism, I really do not know why any of you are wasting your time picking apart my statements and trying to discredit what I am trying to explain, because if it is not positive, I couldn’t care less what you have to say. I have been a fan of this website for months, and there are a lot of good people on here who have good things to say, and others just like to pretend like they have never struggled on an LSAT prep test or carelessly goofed on a question before in their life.

I meant no disrespect if you are in fact not a flame. The elitism/d-bag in me + the constant flames on TLS make me respond as such. Are you currently taking your PTs timed? Have you tried taking them untimed and truly analyzing every question until you fully understood it? The prep materials you've mentioned help give an overview of how to attack the LSAT but to truly conquer the LSAT, you need to optimize them to fit your particular needs.

[thegarciab0y]

I am not here to flame. I find the advice for the route to a patent practitioner very helpful because that is what I aspire to be. Taking the bar after my engineering undergrad would secure me a job with the USPTO or any other employer of patent agents; then I can possibly look towards law schools again and take the LSAT whenever I am able to designate 100% of my time to it, since engineering undergrad classes are obviously conflicting three full semesters of the year. I might just be the type of person who has to concentrate on one thing at a time because 4 to 5 classes per semester seems to be enough as it is. I will be graduating with my undergrad degree by the age of 22, and I hear the average incoming law student age is 28 anyway; so there seems to be nothing wrong with the idea of trying the law school route after engineering. I recently went to a prelaw advisor and she told me that there’s no right time for law school, and the right time for going to law school should be when you are ready for law school. Does anybody have any input on the patent agent->patent attorney route rather than the undergrad->straight into law school route?

[09042014]

I am not here to flame. I find the advice for the route to a patent practitioner very helpful because that is what I aspire to be. Taking the bar after my engineering undergrad would secure me a job with the USPTO or any other employer of patent agents; then I can possibly look towards law schools again and take the LSAT whenever I am able to designate 100% of my time to it, since engineering undergrad classes are obviously conflicting three full semesters of the year. I might just be the type of person who has to concentrate on one thing at a time because 4 to 5 classes per semester seems to be enough as it is. I will be graduating with my undergrad degree by the age of 22, and I hear the average incoming law student age is 28 anyway; so there seems to be nothing wrong with the idea of trying the law school route after engineering. I recently went to a prelaw advisor and she told me that there’s no right time for law school, and the right time for going to law school should be when you are ready for law school. Does anybody have any input on the patent agent->patent attorney route rather than the undergrad->straight into law school route?

This is just me parroting back shit I've heard from other places. But experience as a patent agent is better than USPTO experience. But USPTO is still good.

And if you have a 4.0 in engineering from a good school, with several years of patent agent experience, you will be very secure in getting a job. That's still true even if you get crappy law grades from a crappy school.

[James Bond]

^
Still... kind of hard to believe that an engineer can score below a 160. Especially one from a top school w/ straight As.

why is that hard to believe?

[thegarciab0y]

Most helpful advice yet, I will continue to research this. Thank you Fox.

[Nicholasnickynic]

I have a feeling engineering has dramatically inclined my academic skills toward pure analytical and I have almost no reasoning skills despite my completion of the LR bible.

Fellow engineer here. Sorry, I don't think you can blame your LSAT troubles on your major.

Are you a fast reader? I found that to be a major advantage. I don't know how much it can be improved in a couple of weeks/months, but I've read voraciously my whole life and can get through a 600-page book in a day and a half (just in my spare time off work). The RC reading selections take me less than 2 minutes each, giving me much more time for actually answering questions. If you're taking 4 minutes to slog through the reading selection, think about how much time that's wasting.

TLS recommends reading dense material like The Economist and Scientific American to improve your speed and absorption of the boring stuff you'll find on the LSAT.

When you review your answers on a PT, don't just look at the ones you get wrong. Also review the ones you got right. You need to be able to explain to yourself why the correct answer is correct and the incorrect ones are incorrect. Confirm to yourself your answer choice on the ones you got right, and convince yourself of the correct answer on the ones you got wrong.

I don't think there's any way to fix "careless mistakes due to juggling too much information in my head" except to, well, not make careless mistakes. If you ignore the time limit, do you reduce the careless mistakes? I'd try taking a PT with unlimited time to see whether it's the material or the time limit affecting you most. Not everyone agrees, but I personally say aim for quality first, and then work on quantity (speed). The only section I personally had time issues on was LG, but first I worked at mastering the LG skills (with no time limit), and as I got more comfortable with the material, my speed gradually increased on its own.

Are you using the spreadsheets available to identify which types of questions give you the most trouble? LSAC also has the ItemWise service on the shop on LSAC.org, which keeps track of what answers you're getting wrong and explains the solutions.

Regarding the bold, thats true for the most part, But depending on how often you study, I'd say it could be a symptom of burn out.

My test scores started around 150, went to 155, 158, 160, 162 163 and then finally I was able to reach 164-166. But then my scores started going back down. Pretty soon I was hardly able to get over 160. I eventually realized it was burn out- my mind could just not comprehend anymore information. I took 1 week off. Next test I took 166. I decided that this was my max, so from then on I only took two tests every week (for about a month)- to stop teh burn out while keeping my skillz up.

While you may have not peeked and then started worsening, if you find your self making careless mistake, I definitly think you should take a day or two off, and then go back and try again. Really.

[mtrl]

Reading your description, this sounds like it's clearly a reading problem. You can do games, which require minimal reading. You struggle with LR, which requires a bit more reading. And reading comprehension? You don't even get to the fourth selection!

My guess is the more you read, the more you will improve. Also, try to work on underlining salient points in both LR and RC so that you don't have to juggle the information in your head quite as much. You've spent four years focusing on applied science; most of your test-writing peers will have spent that time doing courses that require reading at least a full-length article each week. I think it may help you to start reading in your spare time.

[Eddo!]

I figured I'd jump in as well and pop my posting cherry in one fell swoop
I'm an Electrical Engineer who's been working in Telecom for about 3 years now and I'm definitely ready to switch gears and go to law school. I can somewhat relate to your frustration in the LR sections, but I have to agree with a previous poster that I'm not entirely certain that Engineering necessarily precludes you from doing well in RC. I see that you've been studying with the Powerscore books; have you read the chapter on time management and guessing? I think it would behoove you to try and find a strategy that works best for the score that you're actually getting right now. I know that other posters are basically writing the same thing, but I really wanted to emphasize that point. The Powerscore books specifically state that you should tailor your strategy not to the score that you wish to get, but one that you are most likely to get. I know it can be frustrating, because I'm sure you figure that you could be getting a much better score, but maybe you're just not a great test taker?
Also, have you perhaps considered that the time pressure is costing you some points? I think for me that seemed to be the one factor that caused me more anxiety than everything. I was spending so much time worrying about the time that I was dedicating too much working memory to just being anxious. The LSAT requires all your working memory. Maybe what you need to try is relaxing before taking any of the practice tests. I actually ended up reading this book, Choke (by Sian Beilock, not Chuck Palahniuk's book) that's been really helpful in controlling my pre-testing anxiety.
Anyway, best of luck. I'm also taking the December test, and I hope that the info on this site helps me as well!

[thegarciab0y]

I am not denying the fact that it is largely a reading problem, I just figured that for 1 section on the LSAT I could improve just enough to get the score I want (160) and then just be ready to make the switch to the most reading I’ve ever done before (Law School), but it seems that the way I’m going even 20 right on RC is a long shot, and for some of you that may seem ridiculous or even funny, but I’m serious, give me 7 sections of LG and id be going to Harvard. My plan of action was to actually increase my games score to perfect every time (which I can definitely see possible), and then use most of my other study time to get as good at reasoning as I possibly could, so I can take a really good swing at 75% of the test and then cross my fingers with RC and hope to land on a 160…. Because from what I’ve been experiencing with RC, I feel like I need to learn how to literally read. I’m just surprised this far into my academic career I’m so ill-prepared for something like this.

[TheTallOne0602]

I am not denying the fact that it is largely a reading problem, I just figured that for 1 section on the LSAT I could improve just enough to get the score I want (160) and then just be ready to make the switch to the most reading I’ve ever done before (Law School), but it seems that the way I’m going even 20 right on RC is a long shot, and for some of you that may seem ridiculous or even funny, but I’m serious, give me 7 sections of LG and id be going to Harvard. My plan of action was to actually increase my games score to perfect every time (which I can definitely see possible), and then use most of my other study time to get as good at reasoning as I possibly could, so I can take a really good swing at 75% of the test and then cross my fingers with RC and hope to land on a 160…. Because from what I’ve been experiencing with RC, I feel like I need to learn how to literally read. I’m just surprised this far into my academic career I’m so ill-prepared for something like this.

Reading is hard. And you have to learn how to do it. Do not feel bad or laugh it off; it is a skill you have to learn. No one would deny that 3, 4 and 5-year-olds have to learn letters, and then how to form them into words, and then how to form words into sentences, and so on and so forth. And yet we seem to think that after that, everything else just comes easily. Not the case. And the only way to get better at it is to DO it. As others have mentioned, read the Economist, and dense articles. But also, read books. Not stupid political memoirs or whatever else; read Dickens, read Dostoevsky, read Vonnegut, and Asimov, etc. It will seem pointless but you will be learning how to read. And if you want to do just about anything other than pure math (heck even if you do that) reading is a skill that will be massively useful. For Law School, it is essential. But you will not have wasted your time regardless (not to mention that reading good books is worth it on its own merits).

[KevinP]

^
Still... kind of hard to believe that an engineer can score below a 160. Especially one from a top school w/ straight As.

why is that hard to believe?

Because engineers are committed to what they do

--ImageRemoved--

[pu_golf88]

^
Still... kind of hard to believe that an engineer can score below a 160. Especially one from a top school w/ straight As.

why is that hard to believe?

Because engineers are committed to what they do

--ImageRemoved--

Please, real engineers use a TI-89 Titanium.

[James Bond]

^
Still... kind of hard to believe that an engineer can score below a 160. Especially one from a top school w/ straight As.

why is that hard to believe?

Because engineers are committed to what they do

What they do =/= what the LSAT emphasizes

[mtrl]

I am not denying the fact that it is largely a reading problem, I just figured that for 1 section on the LSAT I could improve just enough to get the score I want (160) and then just be ready to make the switch to the most reading I’ve ever done before (Law School), but it seems that the way I’m going even 20 right on RC is a long shot, and for some of you that may seem ridiculous or even funny, but I’m serious, give me 7 sections of LG and id be going to Harvard. My plan of action was to actually increase my games score to perfect every time (which I can definitely see possible), and then use most of my other study time to get as good at reasoning as I possibly could, so I can take a really good swing at 75% of the test and then cross my fingers with RC and hope to land on a 160…. Because from what I’ve been experiencing with RC, I feel like I need to learn how to literally read. I’m just surprised this far into my academic career I’m so ill-prepared for something like this.

Reading is hard. And you have to learn how to do it. Do not feel bad or laugh it off; it is a skill you have to learn. No one would deny that 3, 4 and 5-year-olds have to learn letters, and then how to form them into words, and then how to form words into sentences, and so on and so forth. And yet we seem to think that after that, everything else just comes easily. Not the case. And the only way to get better at it is to DO it. As others have mentioned, read the Economist, and dense articles. But also, read books. Not stupid political memoirs or whatever else; read Dickens, read Dostoevsky, read Vonnegut, and Asimov, etc. It will seem pointless but you will be learning how to read. And if you want to do just about anything other than pure math (heck even if you do that) reading is a skill that will be massively useful. For Law School, it is essential. But you will not have wasted your time regardless (not to mention that reading good books is worth it on its own merits).

This. Also, it will only be hard at first, you will get the hang of it faster than you think. You've clearly got a very smart mind, you just need to practice a little.

[JazzOne]

^
Still... kind of hard to believe that an engineer can score below a 160. Especially one from a top school w/ straight As.

why is that hard to believe?

Because engineers are committed to what they do

--ImageRemoved--

Please, real engineers use a TI-89 Titanium.

If your TI is <90, then you're not pretentious enough for law school.

[thegarciab0y]

Haha well thanks for all the advice given, I really appreciate it. And yeah, engineers are serious about what they do, I told a few fellow classmates that I was studying to go to law school and one of them went “Law School? What are you doing in this class then?”
That pic is hilarious also
Today I’m going to attempt three RC passages instead of trying to race to 4 unsuccessful every time, and try to only attempt around 20 LR but just make sure to nail those exact 20 questions. (Remember my goal is a 160 not a 180 and a different pace guideline might just help me get up to a 160). As for the reading struggling, it’s a little late to try to fix that skill now since I’m testing in December, so I guess I will be buckling down hardcore for the next 4 weeks.

[JazzOne]

Haha well thanks for all the advice given, I really appreciate it. And yeah, engineers are serious about what they do, I told a few fellow classmates that I was studying to go to law school and one of them went “Law School? What are you doing in this class then?”
That pic is hilarious also
Today I’m going to attempt three RC passages instead of trying to race to 4 unsuccessful every time, and try to only attempt around 20 LR but just make sure to nail those exact 20 questions. (Remember my goal is a 160 not a 180 and a different pace guideline might just help me get up to a 160). As for the reading struggling, it’s a little late to try to fix that skill now since I’m testing in December, so I guess I will be buckling down hardcore for the next 4 weeks.

Postpone until February.

[TheTallOne0602]

Haha well thanks for all the advice given, I really appreciate it. And yeah, engineers are serious about what they do, I told a few fellow classmates that I was studying to go to law school and one of them went “Law School? What are you doing in this class then?”
That pic is hilarious also
Today I’m going to attempt three RC passages instead of trying to race to 4 unsuccessful every time, and try to only attempt around 20 LR but just make sure to nail those exact 20 questions. (Remember my goal is a 160 not a 180 and a different pace guideline might just help me get up to a 160). As for the reading struggling, it’s a little late to try to fix that skill now since I’m testing in December, so I guess I will be buckling down hardcore for the next 4 weeks.

Read for the next four weeks. I mean if you really want to do this, in the long run spending your free time reading right now is barely a sacrifice at all.

[rinkrat19]

Please, real engineers use a TI-89 Titanium.

If your TI is <90, then you're not pretentious enough for law school.

The -92 served me well until I had to take the FE exam, which doesn't allow QWERTY keyboards. I had to buy an -89 (same functions, no QWERTY) and get comfortable with it in a week.

[AverageTutoring]

Please, real engineers use a TI-89 Titanium.

If your TI is <90, then you're not pretentious enough for law school.

The -92 served me well until I had to take the FE exam, which doesn't allow QWERTY keyboards. I had to buy an -89 (same functions, no QWERTY) and get comfortable with it in a week.

TI-89 is where it's at!

[nStiver]

Two or three months is not enough. You need to hit that shit for six months at least, unless you are a natural LSAT taker or a TLS "got a 170 on my diagnostic and I am superior to you clowns" internet forum genius. Break down the tests you take. Review all of the problems. This is the time to put the knowledge you got from the bibles into practice. Reading the bibles is not enough. You have to use them as reference materials when reviewing your problems. Its like learning a sport. You have the coach teach you the proper technique for the first few times, but you don't really master the game until you get years of muscle memory burned into the back of your mind. The LSAT is the same way. The instruction you get from the bibles is only a blue print, a road map that tells you how to solve the problems. To see REAL improvement, you have to review do so many questions that the fundamental, underlying, patterns of the test become second nature to you. Then, once you get accuracy down, comes the timing. Taking full length PT's is essential here, but don't slack off on the question review either.

Long story short: you have more work to do. You won't get off that easy.

[James Bond]

ITT: "Quantitative" people masturbate to pics of calculators