June 2011 Study Group Forum

[soj]

Really? Groupthink was hardest? I'd say it was my 2nd easiest.

I'm going to try the whole section again later tonight. And again in two weeks.

I also paced very poorly today--I think realizing I don't have much time left added to the frustration in answering the questions to the last passage. It shouldn't have affected me, though. This is unlike a seasoned prepper who's taken more than 50 PTs.

[soj]

Ugh, I'm actually really bummed out about the -5 in RC today. I truly thought I'd turned the page in RC with the recent RC sections. Before today, my RC average in PTs after 44 was -1.22. Still a long way to go.

[coldshoulder]

Ugh, I'm actually really bummed out about the -5 in RC today. I truly thought I'd turned the page in RC with the recent RC sections. Before today, my RC average in PTs after 44 was -1.22. Still a long way to go.

It's just one slip, get back on the horse and I'm sure you'll kick ass SOJ.

PT 49
LR: -1
LG: -1
RC: -1
LR: -0
-3 total, 97, 178

Best score yet! Made a stupid LG mistake, but my LR was the best it's ever been, and this was an awesome RC as well. Very excited, hope this is how I can keep going until the real thing!

[soj]

It's just one slip, get back on the horse and I'm sure you'll kick ass SOJ.

Thanks, and congrats on your fantastic score again! I'm predicting upper 170s for you in June.

I'm going to regroup and redouble my efforts. Break tomorrow, RC review and drills on Wednesday, and PT57 on Thursday.

Yeah, the infamous PT with Willa Cather + fractals RC, as well as the dinosaurs game. And the curve's not even that generous. I'm not afraid of the LSAT, and I'm not going to let one PT's bad reputation intimidate me at all. (People who says things like this are usually intimidated by the very thing that they claim doesn't intimidate them. ) In fact, I'm going to tackle it ASAP so I can learn from it if I do poorly, and gain confidence if I do well.

It's kind of ridiculous how much I know about PTs I haven't taken.

Also, am I allowed to just say how much I fucking love the PTs in the 20s? In fact, I'm loving the entire sky blue 10 More book (19-28). I'm averaging 177.7 in PT21-28 (missing 23, 24). It's all thanks in part to the ridiculously generous curves in the 20s. I'm willing to make a few human sacrifices for a -16 curve in June.

[coldshoulder]

It's just one slip, get back on the horse and I'm sure you'll kick ass SOJ.

Thanks, and congrats on your fantastic score again! I'm predicting upper 170s for you in June.

I'm willing to make a few human sacrifices for a -16 curve in June.

I sure hope so! I need it to balance my damn LSDAS GPA (3.5, as compared to my UG GPA of 3.7)
I completely agree. I'm hating these rough curves in the 40's.

[mickeyD]

All I can think about nowadays is the curve. I'm confident in my ability to consistently hit raw scores between -6 and -9. But given that some very bad curves have popped up in the past few years (-8 in Dec 05, -8 in Jun 07, -9 in Oct 08), if I hit my lower range on test day, I could drop below 170.

Guess I just gotta start dropping -3 totals like you animals.

[Ssushi]

Just took PT53 yesterday and got a 171. About damn time.

Taking PT54 later in the day

[maxpower430]

so i just went -11 on PT51, which is a little frustrating but i'm hoping to turn it into a learning experience, particularly in terms of LR (where i went -3 and -4 respectively, my worst combined score in a while). am i crazy, or do the sections in the 50s just feel a little different? i.e. in the superprep i blazed through the first 15 in under 15 pretty consisently, but in the 50s the easier questions just don't feel quite so obvious. It is frustrating b/c i've been second guessing myself a little and double checking answers which chews up time on questions i got right. any thoughts on this? it's weird b/c the harder questions i generally have an easier time with, but when i'm not efficient with my time it leads to rushing when i shouldn't need to. thanks guys.

[jim-green]

I also paced very poorly today--I think realizing I don't have much time left added to the frustration in answering the questions to the last passage. It shouldn't have affected me, though. This is unlike a seasoned prepper who's taken more than 50 PTs.

Haha, when I read the words "seasoned prepper" I imagined Soj covered in oregano and garlic salt! I think I'm getting LSAT-delirium

[jim-green]

Best score yet! Made a stupid LG mistake, but my LR was the best it's ever been, and this was an awesome RC as well. Very excited, hope this is how I can keep going until the real thing!

Congrats! I'm officially promoting you to "TLS badass" status. Earlier Soj held the title, but he's been demoted because of his -5 RC. Soj, as cold said, its just 1 section. If you get back on the horse, I'm sure you'll soon recover your badass title.

[jim-green]

Just took PT53 yesterday and got a 171. About damn time. Taking PT54 later in the day

I just did both of these. PT53 is tough - your score will be 5 lower than your actual ability. PT54 is much easier. And oh, we Feb 2011 LSAT takers agreed that the curve was -11 for Feb 2011...just to give you an idea.

[jim-green]

Haha, exactly! The words and phrasing in LR changes from straightforward prephraseable to tricky and need-a-double-take style in the 50s. The 50s are where the WTF questions start to show up. Its to balance the fact that games get easier. For the 50s LR, I would say do 10 in 10, 15 in 17, 20 in 25, 26 in 35. Don't kill yourself or you'll take shortcuts and just choose the fastest ans to beat the clock. I did this and paid for it.

so i just went -11 on PT51, which is a little frustrating but i'm hoping to turn it into a learning experience, particularly in terms of LR (where i went -3 and -4 respectively, my worst combined score in a while). am i crazy, or do the sections in the 50s just feel a little different? i.e. in the superprep i blazed through the first 15 in under 15 pretty consisently, but in the 50s the easier questions just don't feel quite so obvious. It is frustrating b/c i've been second guessing myself a little and double checking answers which chews up time on questions i got right. any thoughts on this? it's weird b/c the harder questions i generally have an easier time with, but when i'm not efficient with my time it leads to rushing when i shouldn't need to. thanks guys.

[maxpower430]

Haha, exactly! The words and phrasing in LR changes from straightforward prephraseable to tricky and need-a-double-take style in the 50s. The 50s are where the WTF questions start to show up. Its to balance the fact that games get easier. For the 50s LR, I would say do 10 in 10, 15 in 17, 20 in 25, 26 in 35. Don't kill yourself or you'll take shortcuts and just choose the fastest ans to beat the clock. I did this and paid for it.

so i just went -11 on PT51, which is a little frustrating but i'm hoping to turn it into a learning experience, particularly in terms of LR (where i went -3 and -4 respectively, my worst combined score in a while). am i crazy, or do the sections in the 50s just feel a little different? i.e. in the superprep i blazed through the first 15 in under 15 pretty consisently, but in the 50s the easier questions just don't feel quite so obvious. It is frustrating b/c i've been second guessing myself a little and double checking answers which chews up time on questions i got right. any thoughts on this? it's weird b/c the harder questions i generally have an easier time with, but when i'm not efficient with my time it leads to rushing when i shouldn't need to. thanks guys.

haha wonderful, well at least i know i'm not going crazy over here. really is too bad that they have started trending questions that way, i wonder if they are moving away from it now that lg are getting easier? or if the lsat is just getting generally more difficult?

oh well, just gonna have to spend a lot of time reviewing everything, and sharpening my answer elimination skills, since i think that's the best way to tackle those types of questions, but i guess we'll see.

[OhOkay]

Has anyone tried doing two PTs in a day? It's either waste a practice test, or do double duty at this point (i.e. more PTs left for me than days to the test).

[jim-green]

haha wonderful, well at least i know i'm not going crazy over here. really is too bad that they have started trending questions that way, i wonder if they are moving away from it now that lg are getting easier? or if the lsat is just getting generally more difficult?

No, LR is getting tougher precisely becuase LG is getting easier. They have to keep the entire test difficult overall same, since a taker is compared with others in a 5-year period. So if one sec is hard another is easy to balance.

[jim-green]

Has anyone tried doing two PTs in a day? It's either waste a practice test, or do double duty at this point (i.e. more PTs left for me than days to the test).

I did this a month ago. It wasn't a waste for me. After I did the 5 sections, I felt good about myself, so I said lets just do another few sections instead of TV. I ended up doing another PT and then graded both. But other days, I haven't felt like this. (I mean as energetic). Don't force yourself. Do it only if you have the energy.

[Eichörnchen]

All I can think about nowadays is the curve. I'm confident in my ability to consistently hit raw scores between -6 and -9. But given that some very bad curves have popped up in the past few years (-8 in Dec 05, -8 in Jun 07, -9 in Oct 08), if I hit my lower range on test day, I could drop below 170.

Guess I just gotta start dropping -3 totals like you animals.

Argh I know, the curves can be so mean. That's why I'd really appreciate it if you all figured out the exp section while you're testing, and fill in all "A".

[Ssushi]

Just took PT53 yesterday and got a 171. About damn time. Taking PT54 later in the day

I just did both of these. PT53 is tough - your score will be 5 lower than your actual ability. PT54 is much easier. And oh, we Feb 2011 LSAT takers agreed that the curve was -11 for Feb 2011...just to give you an idea.

I'm hoping so. 171 is my second best score yet, i think i have about a 168 average. I did discover some stuff while reviewing PT52 so I think that's what made the difference. I'm just starting PT54 now, so if i manage to at least keep up this 171 for a few PT's i will be very pleased.

[jim-green]

Your PT avg is about 3 above your actual LSAT score as a rule. This is to account for the ease of taking at home and for the 5-6 questions you're familiar with from study. The actual LSAT will have 100% new material.
And Eich, you got it, I'll make sure to put in all As. Your PT54 will be higher than PT53 by a point or two at least.

I'm hoping so. 171 is my second best score yet, i think i have about a 168 average. I did discover some stuff while reviewing PT52 so I think that's what made the difference. I'm just starting PT54 now, so if i manage to at least keep up this 171 for a few PT's i will be very pleased.

[maxpower430]

haha wonderful, well at least i know i'm not going crazy over here. really is too bad that they have started trending questions that way, i wonder if they are moving away from it now that lg are getting easier? or if the lsat is just getting generally more difficult?

No, LR is getting tougher precisely becuase LG is getting easier. They have to keep the entire test difficult overall same, since a taker is compared with others in a 5-year period. So if one sec is hard another is easy to balance.

hmm fair enough, though the past 5 yrs of pts go from 49-62. all the same though, i do feel like from the 30s onward, the tests have roughly the same difficulty, just with difficulty in diff sections (i.e. i found lg/rc to be harder in the 30s, whereas early 50s i think lr is by far the trickiest, with rc there too and lg bringing up the rear). from my limited (thus far) review of pt 51 lr though, it is becoming clear that even moreso than before, having strict attention to detail is the most important thing (i.e. i think i've seen more hiding of the conclusion in strenghten questions than in the past). i dunno, i know it's more than doable, i'm mostly just looking forward to getting to my next pt and redeeming myself haha

[jim-green]

You're abs correct. By the way, my error, I may have meant to say 3 years instead of 5. I mean the LSAT score is valid for a certain period during which they try to keep the difficulty level the same. So a 165er from the beginning of that period equals a 165er from a few years later, if they both apply to the same school. They can be compared on the basis of the score. Yes, you're right, TCRs are now increasingly hidden in outlandishly-worded ans choices, while the obvious ans choice has a small flaw that makes it incorrect. MLSAT says the same thing. It's now become "choose the least bad ans" not "choose the right answer". You WILL redeem yourself and soon claim my daily TLS Badass trophy giveaway. I guarantee it.

hmm fair enough, though the past 5 yrs of pts go from 49-62. all the same though, i do feel like from the 30s onward, the tests have roughly the same difficulty, just with difficulty in diff sections (i.e. i found lg/rc to be harder in the 30s, whereas early 50s i think lr is by far the trickiest, with rc there too and lg bringing up the rear). from my limited (thus far) review of pt 51 lr though, it is becoming clear that even moreso than before, having strict attention to detail is the most important thing (i.e. i think i've seen more hiding of the conclusion in strenghten questions than in the past).

[soj]

Haha, when I read the words "seasoned prepper" I imagined Soj covered in oregano and garlic salt! I think I'm getting LSAT-delirium

It sounded awkward to me when I wrote it but I kept it just because.

Coldshoulder is pretty much a lock for a great score. Just look at his recent scores. I'm pretty confident I can do well in LG, at least decently in LR, but RC is just such a wild card for me. I know I've been doing well recently, but I've just proved I can also do quite poorly.

FWIW I did the RC section again and easily got -0. I knew vaguely which Qs I got wrong (except in groupthink, in which I got so many wrong that I kind of lost track), and any knowledge of TCR was unconscious.

You know, I'm actually lucky to have gotten -3 in groupthink the first time--I could easy have gotten -5 if I guessed wrong. And I'm actually a psychology major who studied social decision-making. This is definitely an excuse, but prior knowledge hurt a lot on this passage.

[Ssushi]

Your PT avg is about 3 above your actual LSAT score as a rule. This is to account for the ease of taking at home and for the 5-6 questions you're familiar with from study. The actual LSAT will have 100% new material.
And Eich, you got it, I'll make sure to put in all As. Your PT54 will be higher than PT53 by a point or two at least.

I'm hoping so. 171 is my second best score yet, i think i have about a 168 average. I did discover some stuff while reviewing PT52 so I think that's what made the difference. I'm just starting PT54 now, so if i manage to at least keep up this 171 for a few PT's i will be very pleased.

Seriously? Well my diagnostic is a 165 and i took it at a free princeton review thing, so it seems i've basically made no progress. I'm not sure how I could study for a month and not make any gains. I'm hoping to bump up a few points on the actual test, since I miss many questions because i just don't focus and on the real test i don't see that being a problem.

[maxpower430]

Your PT avg is about 3 above your actual LSAT score as a rule. This is to account for the ease of taking at home and for the 5-6 questions you're familiar with from study. The actual LSAT will have 100% new material.
And Eich, you got it, I'll make sure to put in all As. Your PT54 will be higher than PT53 by a point or two at least.

I'm hoping so. 171 is my second best score yet, i think i have about a 168 average. I did discover some stuff while reviewing PT52 so I think that's what made the difference. I'm just starting PT54 now, so if i manage to at least keep up this 171 for a few PT's i will be very pleased.

Seriously? Well my diagnostic is a 165 and i took it at a free princeton review thing, so it seems i've basically made no progress. I'm not sure how I could study for a month and not make any gains. I'm hoping to bump up a few points on the actual test, since I miss many questions because i just don't focus and on the real test i don't see that being a problem.

I've actually read on here that even if you are sufficiently prepped, you can see a 5 point drop from your pt average. that being said, there are plenty of stories on tls where people outperformed their average by several points. i just think it depends on the person and the test you get. my way of looking at is most people here are at least familiar with tough logic games and reading comp passages, which i think can let you get psyched out by them, whereas that can't happen on the real thing. also, some people may be better performers when something is on the line vs just wanting to increase your raw score/not wanting to share a bad score on tls haha. tbh though, i think the biggest thing is just to be as prepped as possible and be able to walk in there confidently. a quote i saw on lsatblog that i think is great is basically "the actual test seems intimidating, but really it is no different from all the other practice tests you've taken at home". and that came from a guy who outperformed his average (171 to a 177), so i wouldn't let the potential score drop worry you too much.

[jim-green]

Seriously? Well my diagnostic is a 165 and i took it at a free princeton review thing, so it seems i've basically made no progress. I'm not sure how I could study for a month and not make any gains. I'm hoping to bump up a few points on the actual test, since I miss many questions because i just don't focus and on the real test i don't see that being a problem.

Yes, seriously. Do they do a 5-section test at the princeton review with an exp section in the 1st 3? If not, your 165 diag may not be a true diag. It seems high to me since I got a 155 under true conditions. I know there are folks who diag at 170, but not the general case. Are u saing that your diag is 165 and after a month, it's still 165? then, the study method is not right. Overall, 1 month is not enough.