June 2011 Study Group Forum

[davesmystery]

Eich, thanks a lot for that list of LR mistakes! After reviewing some answers it seems as though 7 and 8 are exactly what seems to be causing me the most grief in LR. Sometimes I'll cross out TCR because it either didn't match my understanding or I missed the key word that ruled it out for me. On the questions I know are difficult, I always narrow it down to the right answer and the tempting answer which really tests my comprehension of the question but also sometimes causes me to overthink the stimulus. Perhaps I'll print out this list and when I go over my wrong answers I'll write down which mistakes I seem to have made. Now just to figure out how to correct whatever is causing me to make those mistakes...

[westinghouse60]

173 on PT #7, 170 on PT #9...these are easier than more recent tests aren't they

Edit: also how does everyone warm up for a PT?

[JG7773]

Hello everyone! The time is upon is (almost!). Tomorrow night at 8 pm ET we will be meeting up for another great session. At 9 pm ET tomorrow, we will be joined by MLSAT instructor Brian Birdwell to go over any lingering issues, general prep questions, or perhaps some psychological evaluations (the couch won't be provided). As the deadline approaches, I would urge you all to attend and take advantage of our time that we have direct access to one of the best LSAT minds.

If you have any questions, let me know!

[mickeyD]

For warm up on PTs I always do an entire games section. Recently I've started doing an entire LR section also. The games section warms me up and gets things moving. The LR section sounds excessive/mentally taxing, but I use old sections where I've seen the questions before. This way I can just focus on looking at the patterns of reasoning, seeing the tricks of the tough questions at the end, and get used to reading stimuli without having to reread sentences. Whole warmup is usually about 20 mins for games and 25 mins for LR.

[Miracle]

What is this LSAT withdraw? It says you can withdraw up until June 5th?

[soj]

I've been away for a while trying to recover from a cold. But I have reviewed over 150 LR Qs in the meantime. Today went well--only one error out of ~80.

I'll be taking a PT tomorrow for the first time in 6 days.

[theaether]

I've been away for a while trying to recover from a cold. But I have reviewed over 150 LR Qs in the meantime. Today went well--only one error out of ~80.

I'll be taking a PT tomorrow for the first time in 6 days.

Very nice job. sadly I got 11 wrong out of 50 I reviewed today. i really hate review, I don't think I take it seriously enough even though it's so important

[Strange]

Did the RC for PT16 tonight, another -2. Made a couple mistakes at the end as far as attacking the questions - focused on one part of the paragraph without using the other part of it. Still feeling confident though. Also didn't have as much time at the end as I'd like.

By the way, Kaplan's explanations are horrible. If anyone can explain #26 and why B is wrong on PT16 RC, I'd appreciate it.

[mickeyD]

PT31
LG: -1
LR1: 0
LR2: -3
RC: -2

Raw: -6
Scaled: 177

Considering that I had seen the entire sections of LG and LR1 before, I'm pretty disappointed here. Of LR2, I had seen 4 questions (9, 10, 18, 22) only one of which I missed the first time I had seen them, none of which I missed this time around. I'm pissed because I missed early questions (#8, #11), and all the ones I missed were debates between two answers where I picked the wrong one.

Had never seen the RC before and went -2, but I feel like I missed an opportunity for -0. Usually I look at my RC mistakes and say "I'm not too mad about that one at all," but these were ones that were directly supported in the passage and I just couldn't put them together.

Considering I'd done the entire games section before, it kind of sucks that it still took me 33 minutes to do the whole thing, and that I missed one.

I know some of you are like "wtf you got a 177," but it's not much of an accomplishment when you have seen 51 of the questions before.

Gonna do some heavy review of this one and probably take a break on PTs until Saturday, taking PT56 through my Testmasters class, right after my 8am philosophy final. At least I'll be warmed up..

[mickeyD]

By the way, Kaplan's explanations are horrible. If anyone can explain #26 and why B is wrong on PT16 RC, I'd appreciate it.

Dexter believes in the idea that the 17th and 18th century women were part of a "golden age" because they were essential for the economic survival of the society. In contrast, she says, industrialization in the 19th century made women less useful and therefore confined to more rigid roles. Therefore, the reduction of their economic necessity/function in society led to a lower social status.

The new publications mentioned in paragraph 3 say that this is too simple of an explanation for the decline in status, and that there are way more factors to consider like gender roles, religion, law, etc.

Therefore, the new publications "undermine Dexter's argument on the status of women colonists during the colonial period," as stated in TCR (A).

(B) is wrong because the "tenacity" of the theory has nothing to do with the publications introduced in the third paragraph. Such "tenacity" is mainly discussed in paragraph 2, when the author says that even people who didn't completely buy in the golden age still think that women in the 19th century had it worse than the 17th and 18th centuries.

[Strange]

By the way, Kaplan's explanations are horrible. If anyone can explain #26 and why B is wrong on PT16 RC, I'd appreciate it.

Dexter believes in the idea that the 17th and 18th century women were part of a "golden age" because they were essential for the economic survival of the society. In contrast, she says, industrialization in the 19th century made women less useful and therefore confined to more rigid roles. Therefore, the reduction of their economic necessity/function in society led to a lower social status.

The new publications mentioned in paragraph 3 say that this is too simple of an explanation for the decline in status, and that there are way more factors to consider like gender roles, religion, law, etc.

Therefore, the new publications "undermine Dexter's argument on the status of women colonists during the colonial period," as stated in TCR (A).

(B) is wrong because the "tenacity" of the theory has nothing to do with the publications introduced in the third paragraph. Such "tenacity" is mainly discussed in paragraph 2, when the author says that even people who didn't completely buy in the golden age still think that women in the 19th century had it worse than the 17th and 18th centuries.

Thanks, seems clear to me now.

[jim-green]

I never warrm up. The prospect of a 5 section PT on 1 day is distasteful enough. Does warming up really help? To the person who does 1-2 sections as warmup, does that mean you do 6-7 sections that day?

Edit: also how does everyone warm up for a PT?

[OhOkay]

I never warrm up. The prospect of a 5 section PT on 1 day is distasteful enough. Does warming up really help? To the person who does 1-2 sections as warmup, does that mean you do 6-7 sections that day?

Edit: also how does everyone warm up for a PT?

I don't warm up either, for the same reasons. thinking I should start though -- perhaps not with an entire section, but with just a single RC passage or so (since i suck at RC, i could probably use the extra practice).

Anyway, i just made my final and hopefully nevermore-to-be-revised study schedule. PT every day! Trying to pretend like i'm very excited about this...

[Manhattan LSAT Noah]

The Sunday 4:30 group is reviewing these questions (open assignment and parallel reasoning/flaw questions):

LG
PT35, S3, G2

LR
PT30, S2, Q6
PT29, S1, Q13
PT32, S4, Q21
PT35, S4, Q23

Have fun!

[jim-green]

Thanks again! Is anyone at MLSAT still looking at the LR questions forum? I posted questions to PT52 LR sections this morning.

The Sunday 4:30 group is reviewing these questions (open assignment and parallel reasoning/flaw questions):
LG
PT35, S3, G2

[aquyenl]

The Sunday 4:30 group is reviewing these questions (open assignment and parallel reasoning/flaw questions):

LG
PT35, S3, G2

LR
PT30, S2, Q6
PT29, S1, Q13
PT32, S4, Q21
PT35, S4, Q23

Have fun!

is this free? how do i get in on the session? i have the 4month access to mlsat if that matters.

[davesmystery]

My warm ups are pretty crazy, I went from just doing a games section to a system that both acts as a warm up and as a way to boost my mental stamina. I take the games and either the LR or RC section of an older test (timed of course) before I take a newer PT, then after the actual PT I do the remaining two sections from the older test. That way I get two PTs done in one sitting and mentally push myself to the max. I always take a break after the third section of the real PT to get myself used to it. Also, if my brain gets overwhelmed (which it is wont to do after six sections), it will be on those last two sections, so I can really see how I operate when mentally fatigued and work on ways to push through it. The last two PTs I did using this method number 10 was my warm up/mental fatigue PT, and 48 was my actual PT. I got a 165 on both which effectively secures me on a plateau now, so I'm going to try some new RC strategies and really focus on how to fix my LR mistakes.

[jim-green]

Would anyone who has experience with and without doing a normal warmup, such as a few questions or at most 1 section, please say whether it made a difference to do warmup?

My warm ups are pretty crazy, I went from just doing a games section to a system that both acts as a warm up and as a way to boost my mental stamina.

[coldshoulder]

RC on PT 47 is complete bullshit. I've found 3 question that I literally have no idea why the 'correct' answer choice is correct.

[davesmystery]

Jim, my warm ups originally started with doing just a few questions out of the LGB and LRB, then progressed to one section, then to where I am now. I found that doing just a few questions didn't really help too much but doing one timed section did since it helped to start my pacing as well as my mind. If you're able to just jump right in with excellent pacing and you can just switch on LSAT logic mode, you can probably get away with just doing a few questions.

[davesmystery]

Coldshoulder, which questions? I remember I had a couple of WTF moments with those passages as well, some of the right answers seem to be a stretch.

[coldshoulder]

Coldshoulder, which questions? I remember I had a couple of WTF moments with those passages as well, some of the right answers seem to be a stretch.

1, 3, 26
I thought the first passage was surprisingly difficult, because of the ambiguity of the answer choices.

[mickeyD]

Just did this PT a few weeks ago, the questions on the first passage were pretty tough.

[davesmystery]

On #1 I was able to eliminate A, B and C since none of it was mentioned and I guessed D because of lines 53-60. But E still remained a contender because the author defended the agreement against the civil rights activists who criticized it. I guess it just wasn't strong enough? But I agree it could be argued either way.

On #3 I chose C because of lines 26-29, which to me said that they wanted ministers who had done those specific things mentioned and that the risk was just a consequence. I can understand why E is correct, since they were now using a different method to being about change, but since lines 26-29 directly precede the lines in the question, C still seems more fitting.

#26 was tough. I eliminated D and E and eventually B since the author never argues for the view. I eventually chose C because the author just seems to offer new evidence that expounds upon the situations in which the prevailing view does not necessarily occur. A remained a contender because a lot of the passage seemed to center around the difference in the examples. I really just got lucky on this one.

[Eichörnchen]

I think it's a combination of these two factors. There are some questions where it's kind of hard to visualize the argument, or if I can visualize the argument, be able to see how TCR pertains to it. I'm just curious how solid LR scorers approach these questions and I'm wondering if it is because they zoom through the rest of the section with plenty of time they can go back and just solidify the question/argument.

ps - I (accidentally) watched the game last night and thought of you and your tar haha

Gotta love it. As much as playoff hockey is limiting some study time at night, I'll gladly choose the wings. This has been a great series. If anything my nerves are well tested for June 6th.

Well at least you are identifying a common pattern in your incorrect LRs - that's the first step! I have the same problem sometimes with understanding/visualizing a science problem, and the only things I've really found that helps me is finishing the section fast enough to come back and break it down/paraphrase it in simpler terms. Oh, and enjoy the game tonight (It's tonight...I think. I'm so involved in sports).

Eich, thanks a lot for that list of LR mistakes! After reviewing some answers it seems as though 7 and 8 are exactly what seems to be causing me the most grief in LR. Sometimes I'll cross out TCR because it either didn't match my understanding or I missed the key word that ruled it out for me. On the questions I know are difficult, I always narrow it down to the right answer and the tempting answer which really tests my comprehension of the question but also sometimes causes me to overthink the stimulus. Perhaps I'll print out this list and when I go over my wrong answers I'll write down which mistakes I seem to have made. Now just to figure out how to correct whatever is causing me to make those mistakes...

You're welcome, I thought it was really helpful because I think IDing your problem question types is half the battle - the rest is your approach/habits etc. The more you recognize the same bad habits or problem areas, the easier they are to fix.