October 2012 Retakers Forum

[Gisney]

Checking in

Just back from a month in Scotland where I refused to think about my score (which I recieved two days into my trip). Anywho started studying today by reviewing the June's test.

So disappointed and suprised by my results.

Before the test I was averaging

-3 for a combined LR
-4 RC
-0 LG

In June I ended up with
-0 LR1
-1 LR2
-4 RC
-6 LG

I still cannot get over my LG score. My cold diagnostic I only missed 4.

I can only think that because it was the 5th section and I had 3 mentally draining LR back to back in front of it combined with the suprising 2 page spread that stumped me.

I redid the games timed today without having looking at the LSAT since June testing and went -1 in 30 min.

Could shoot myself...

Oh well back to drilling

[rglifberg]

Man, the Manhattan LR guide is 1000x better than the LR bible.

This. I am ready to CRUSH necessary and sufficient assumptions.

Same! Necessary and sufficient assumption questions were my biggest weakness. Manhattan's explanations really made sense to me.

Man, the Manhattan LR guide is 1000x better than the LR bible.

This. I am ready to CRUSH necessary and sufficient assumptions.

All this talk of the Manhattan magic has finally convinced me to lay my LRB down and give it a try.

Good luck! Manhattan's explanations are really top notch, in my opinion. Especially if you're already familiar with the test and need a new perspective.

[NoodleyOne]

Just got the Cambridge LR bundle. Going to drill NA and SA for awhile before moving on to the next chapter? Or do I drill some but advance through the book?

[sanjola]

Christ I need to start studying again.

+1

I took two days off (purely out of lack of motivation) and need to dive back in today.

[Pocahontas]

Manhattan LR is fantastic. It's $10 for the nook version + free nook reader....if you don't mind reading off of your laptop.

Whew! Just got it for the same price for my iPad. Your post just saved me from paying $40 on eBay. My budget thanks you.

I can't wait to get started. Hopefully I will see some progress in my LR scores soon.

[johnmuir1]

Man, the Manhattan LR guide is 1000x better than the LR bible.

This. I am ready to CRUSH necessary and sufficient assumptions.

THIS. When I read through that - everything made sense.

Long-time lurker here, hoping to get some advice. I'm looking to improve on some of LR question types but I'm not sure if I should study on my own or get another test prep book. I took testmasters about two years ago and have the Manhattan LG and RC books. Is it worth it to get the Manhattan LR book as well, or take up the testmasters material again?

Manhattan LR is fantastic. It's $10 for the nook version + free nook reader....if you don't mind reading off of your laptop.

Sweet, thanks! I'm going to give it a shot and hope that it works out. Good luck everyone!

[seacow]

Did some mad RC today after a few days off. 6 sections; -12 total. Untimed but ~35 minutes each. Word.

They were mostly familiar sections, but still.

I'm getting somewhere with this untimed, not moving on until 100% approach. My annotation is working too (noting the function of sentences and bracketing conclusions).

It is still a little disconcerting to tell myself that I am not going to move on until I am 100% and still miss ~2 per section. While there are bona fide reasons for some of my misses, sometimes I am settling, or at least selecting an answer without fully exhausting all of ways by which I can figure out the answer.

As I write this, it seems to me like I should slow it down even more. I don't really think I am performing much different than I would before June. -2 is great for me, obviously. But they are old sections, I have improved my annotation, and I am now prephrasing, which I did not do on test day. I don't really feel like I'm achieving my goal of correcting my "settling" habit and not really learning any mid-test, answer-solving techniques (i.e. knowing how not to have that lapse in focus or overlooking the right answer).

What do you guys think about this "no settling" thing? I don't think anyone has commented on it yet.

Nice RC work.

I settle as well and it's a really bad habit that needs to be broken, and I read your post earlier and tried out the "no settling" thing - works well for me.
The process definitely takes much longer, but I can see this being a very good method for retakers.
I'll keep with it and post updates.

After Parallel Reasoning yesterday, I got back to RC today: -9 over five sections. I would be f'ing thrilled with a -2 on test day, but it is still frustrating that I miss questions because of overlooks or lapses in concentration ("settling"), as we have put it. There were 2 or 3 that I legit could not answer but the others could have been corrected had I look into it more closely.

Next time I tackle RC I am going to go to the extreme and this time never move forward without being 100%. I have been settling at a little less than 100% these past few days.

I may be getting too obsessive about this. I'll come back and tell you all how it went.

[Pocahontas]

Would anyone care to share their strategy for RC with me. This is by far my weakest section. I've put off attacking it fully because I dread it so much. By doing this, I'm settling on a whole other level. I've given up. I have never used any annotation methods other than underlining sentences I thought were important without truly knowing why.

I need help. Sinceriously.

[espressocream]

Would anyone care to share their strategy for RC with me. This is by far my weakest section. I've put off attacking it fully because I dread it so much. By doing this, I'm settling on a whole other level. I've given up. I have never used any annotation methods other than underlining sentences I thought were important without truly knowing why.

I need help. Sinceriously.

I personally treat RC kinda like a giant LR passage. So I'll think about what the point of each paragraph is (as opposed to each sentence in LR)
while reading it. I don't annotate because it distracts me and when I do take note of things I usually go overboard.
I'll underline when it's a complicated natural science passage just to keep myself focused.
I also run my pencil under the sentence that I'm reading and work through the passage that way, again to keep myself focused.

ex)

¶ 1 - Intro- main point?
¶ 2 - purpose of this paragraph?/ supporting or refuting
¶ 3 - ""
¶ 4 - conclusion?/ purpose?

obviously this is a very generalized approach and you'll have to adjust accordingly to what type of passage it is.

Also - since the questions are usually the same...a pattern develops as to what you'll be expected to focus on.

Don't settle! I like RC the best since it's answering a couple of questions based on the same "stem", if you will.
You don't switch topics every question and the readings manage to get interesting after you do enough.

[anteater1]

Took my first PT since Feb. and got a 171, that was about where I was PT'ing before.... hopefully I can bring my range up a bit before Oct.


Per the recommendation of this forum I'm gonna grab manhattan LR on the iPad as well.

[99.9luft]

Would anyone care to share their strategy for RC with me. This is by far my weakest section. I've put off attacking it fully because I dread it so much. By doing this, I'm settling on a whole other level. I've given up. I have never used any annotation methods other than underlining sentences I thought were important without truly knowing why.

I need help. Sinceriously.

I personally treat RC kinda like a giant LR passage. So I'll think about what the point of each paragraph is (as opposed to each sentence in LR)
while reading it. I don't annotate because it distracts me and when I do take note of things I usually go overboard.
I'll underline when it's a complicated natural science passage just to keep myself focused.
I also run my pencil under the sentence that I'm reading and work through the passage that way, again to keep myself focused.

ex)

¶ 1 - Intro- main point?
¶ 2 - purpose of this paragraph?/ supporting or refuting
¶ 3 - ""
¶ 4 - conclusion?/ purpose?

obviously this is a very generalized approach and you'll have to adjust accordingly to what type of passage it is.

Also - since the questions are usually the same...a pattern develops as to what you'll be expected to focus on.

Don't settle! I like RC the best since it's answering a couple of questions based on the same "stem", if you will.
You don't switch topics every question and the readings manage to get interesting after you do enough.

agree with everything you wrote, aka +1

[anteater1]

Would anyone care to share their strategy for RC with me. This is by far my weakest section. I've put off attacking it fully because I dread it so much. By doing this, I'm settling on a whole other level. I've given up. I have never used any annotation methods other than underlining sentences I thought were important without truly knowing why.

I need help. Sinceriously.

When I was having trouble with RC a friend told me to repeat "VAMPS" before each section as an acronym for Viewpoints, Authors tone, Main Points (for each paragraph) and Summary. However I think this is probably only effective if you're really doing bad (-6 to-8) on the section. After time you get ingrained with the repetition and never forget one of those four elements that often show up in the questions.

Not for more advanced RC takers who are missing -1 to -3 though, not sure where you're at on PT's.

[chem!]

I drilled lg in the car on the way to destin. -0 on all. Yes!

[espressocream]

I drilled lg in the car on the way to destin. -0 on all. Yes!

I can't do anything in the car without getting nauseous.

So mad props.

[bdeebs]

Would anyone care to share their strategy for RC with me. This is by far my weakest section. I've put off attacking it fully because I dread it so much. By doing this, I'm settling on a whole other level. I've given up. I have never used any annotation methods other than underlining sentences I thought were important without truly knowing why.

I need help. Sinceriously.

I apologize if I've already posted some version of this here. My weakness is that I don't read for structure very well. What I've done to remedy this is to take each sentence and describe what it does for the passage as a whole, as well as any questions that I have about a particular sentence. In my description, I underline in red all words that indicate a question may be asked (e.g. Definitions, itemizations, reasons). I did this for about 10 passages, then I started abbreviating the process to make it quicker/less tedious. Then when I finish I write down 4 things: A short summary of each paragraph, the purpose of the passage as a whole, the author's attitude, and the main point of the passage. When I answer the questions, I write down a reason why all of the incorrect answers are wrong, and reference my evidence in the passage for the correct answer. This is HORRIBLE the first couple times, but it gets better, and it has greatly improved my accuracy and overall comprehension of why answers are right/wrong. I have yet to translate this into timed sections, but I have no doubt it will be beneficial to me. Here's a sample from my notebook:

48.3.1-5 (underlined in red words will be in all caps)
0-4 Intro to topic question (expect 2-3 views)
4-8 Narrow scope, DEFINE key term
8-10 ASCRIBE viewpoint1
10-17 Give 2 REASONS for V1 belief
17-22 Elaborate on reasons

23-25 Present evidence that may contradict V1
25-31 EXPLAIN how the evidence makes V1 unlikely
32-34 Premise for forthcoming conclusion
35-37 V2 of "many" anth
37-43 REASONING why paintings would support V2 (note: mammoth/bison ref seems unnecessary)
etc.

System: P1-Pose a question and ascribe a position (V1), P2-Present evidence that V1 doesn't explain, Present alternate hypothesis with itemized supporting evidence.
Purpose: Evaluate 2 hypotheses explaining a phenomenon, endorsing the second view
Attitude: Disagree with V1 due to poor explanation of evidence, Agree with V2 because it more completely explains evidence
Main Point: Aurignacians drew cave paintings to help ensure a steady supply of food rather than serving as an indication of a secure life.

Question 3:
A) Argues against this
B) No evidence...Shamans were drawn, nothing to support that Shamans drew at all
C) "any art" too strong, not supported
D) "all art" too strong
E) Lines 51-53

I think of it as basically doing what prep companies do for you, but there's a big difference between hearing something and thinking, "Oh yeah, that makes sense," and coming up with it on your own.

Edit: hypothesis to hypotheses

[Pocahontas]

Thanks for sharing everyone! Espressocream, I never thought of RC that way, but it definitely makes sense. Anteater1, I really like your acronym "VAMPS". I think it'll help me stay focused when reading the passages.

Right now, I'm consistently doing about -4 to -6 a section. Hopefully I can use both of your suggestions to develop a new method for me to get better at this. I plan on spending a large amount of prep time this weekend on RC. I'll let you all know how it goes.

[andreskicdo]

4pm and just now I'm gonna start studying ugh it's gonna be along night. Doing Velocity Chapter 3 and 4, LRB and about 40 LR questions. If I have energy I'll read another LRB chapter.

[theprophet89]

4pm and just now I'm gonna start studying ugh it's gonna be along night. Doing Velocity Chapter 3 and 4, LRB and about 40 LR questions. If I have energy I'll read another LRB chapter.

Same here. Starting my day with some AL-B games.

[TheThriller]

Anyone want to help me with this?

PT 35, Section 4 Q11.

Says answer choice B) is correct but does anyone else find that they can't make the logical leap from "Objects posited for theoretical reasons..." in the answer to match "entities posited solely on theoretical grounds" in the stim? I have a hard time connecting the idea of an object being posited for a certain reason to mean that they are solely posited on those grounds.

For instance: I want to run a marathon, my reasoning for doing so is because I like winning things. However that does not mean that the sole grounds for me running a marathon is to win things. Maybe I want to lose weight or hit on hot runner chicks.

I find answer E) to be more compelling. Can anyone explain to me why E) has to be wrong and B) has to be right?

[andreskicdo]

My game accuracy has been pretty high, but I can only solve few games in less than 11 mins. Does somebody have any tips on how to work on speed. What has worked for you in the past? Currently using velocity games to study.

Thanks!

[ninetails]

Anyone want to help me with this?

PT 35, Section 4 Q11.

Says answer choice B) is correct but does anyone else find that they can't make the logical leap from "Objects posited for theoretical reasons..." in the answer to match "entities posited solely on theoretical grounds" in the stim? I have a hard time connecting the idea of an object being posited for a certain reason to mean that they are solely posited on those grounds.

For instance: I want to run a marathon, my reasoning for doing so is because I like winning things. However that does not mean that the sole grounds for me running a marathon is to win things. Maybe I want to lose weight or hit on hot runner chicks.

I find answer E) to be more compelling. Can anyone explain to me why E) has to be wrong and B) has to be right?

Did you just overlook a word perhaps? Answer choice B says "objects posited for theoretical reasons ONLY..."

[GATA1989]

Mostly done working my way through LRB so I took my first PT since June, 168 on PT 56. Very pleased bc 168 was my highest PT heading into June so I'm hoping to start getting into the 170s by the end of August. LRB has definitely helped, -5 combined (-2 on 1st section and -3 on the next) and was -10 in June. I plan on starting the powerscore RC bible this week and hopefully I can start fixing that while continuing to drill LR. I like the VAMPS acronym and will keep that in mind as I start. Loving all the tips ITT

[TheThriller]

Mostly done working my way through LRB so I took my first PT since June, 168 on PT 56. Very pleased bc 168 was my highest PT heading into June so I'm hoping to start getting into the 170s by the end of August. LRB has definitely helped, -5 combined (-2 on 1st section and -3 on the next) and was -10 in June. I plan on starting the powerscore RC bible this week and hopefully I can start fixing that while continuing to drill LR. I like the VAMPS acronym and will keep that in mind as I start. Loving all the tips ITT

Drop the PS RC bible and go with Manhattan for RC

[andreskicdo]

4pm and Sunday studying begins. Need to stop slacking so much...

[TheThriller]

I've been all over the place with these LR passages lately. Anywhere from -0 to -5.

Frustrating