JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread Forum

[jad0re]

PT 63:

LR1: -0
LG: -0
LR2: -0
RC: -2

Raw: 99 Scaled: 179

Super pissed off at myself right now, as I switched the second to last answer after doubting my answer, and got it wrong. So damn close to my first 180 PT. Kind of a rough scale, but an insanely easy test.

My exact numbers for October... damn -2.

Congrats on the 179 though. Nice place to be with a month left.

PT63
LR -1
LG -1
LR -1
RC -1

177.
Given how shitty I felt for the last two parts I am surprised.

[NoodleyOne]

As instructed, i forwent a PT today to study the MLSAT LR book... And i got through the first 10 chapters, while most of it was review, I feel i have solidified my understanding of argument core, but i still have trouble with weaken problems. For weaken problems I'm trying to find a flaw between a premise and a conclusion and find the correct answer that addresses that flaw, but does not resolve that flaw. In fact, if possible, the correct answer will exacerbate the flaw. Correct?

Yeah. You're trying to widen the gap. Don't go for premise or conclusion weakeners, make sure you're actively attacking the logic of the argument, not the facts of the argument.

Ya, i think that is what i intuitively do. I go for something that mentions either the premise or conclusion and actively weakens it. I need to focus more on the logic of the argument, rather than the premise or conclusion... Thanks

Another way of looking at it:

You're arguing with this dick uber-liberal/conservative (whichever your preferred villain is). He keeps pointing out how great FDR/Reagan is by saying a bunch of possibly false facts, but every time you call him out on that, he just rolls with it. The only way you can win the argument is to show that the entire line of thinking is wrong, because if you fuck with one set of facts, he'll just come up with another to suit his argument.

[msslater]

Hi everybody,

Would anybody be interested in reviewing tests together over the next month? I am located in Los Angeles at USC. I find it helps immensely when two people can explain to one another why each AC is wrong and why the correct one is right. Helped a lot before I took the October test and cancelled.

I will be taking June looking to get a 168+. Almost there!

Feel free to email me at msslater@usc.edu

[mvonh001]

As instructed, i forwent a PT today to study the MLSAT LR book... And i got through the first 10 chapters, while most of it was review, I feel i have solidified my understanding of argument core, but i still have trouble with weaken problems. For weaken problems I'm trying to find a flaw between a premise and a conclusion and find the correct answer that addresses that flaw, but does not resolve that flaw. In fact, if possible, the correct answer will exacerbate the flaw. Correct?

Yeah. You're trying to widen the gap. Don't go for premise or conclusion weakeners, make sure you're actively attacking the logic of the argument, not the facts of the argument.

Ya, i think that is what i intuitively do. I go for something that mentions either the premise or conclusion and actively weakens it. I need to focus more on the logic of the argument, rather than the premise or conclusion... Thanks

Another way of looking at it:

You're arguing with this dick uber-liberal/conservative (whichever your preferred villain is). He keeps pointing out how great FDR/Reagan is by saying a bunch of possibly false facts, but every time you call him out on that, he just rolls with it. The only way you can win the argument is to show that the entire line of thinking is wrong, because if you fuck with one set of facts, he'll just come up with another to suit his argument.

Thanks.

Great analogy... And for strengthen it would be the same, but opposite?

[NoodleyOne]

Thanks.

Great analogy... And for strengthen it would be the same, but opposite?

Yeah, although I think strengthen can provide the trickiest questions in LR, mainly because things can seem out of scope that will actually strengthen the reasoning a bit. Beware of premise boosters or things that just reiterate the conclusion, and work on narrowing the gap.

[mvonh001]

Thanks.

Great analogy... And for strengthen it would be the same, but opposite?

Yeah, although I think strengthen can provide the trickiest questions in LR, mainly because things can seem out of scope that will actually strengthen the reasoning a bit. Beware of premise boosters or things that just reiterate the conclusion, and work on narrowing the gap.

That sounds like I'm solving a NA question.

[NoodleyOne]

Thanks.

Great analogy... And for strengthen it would be the same, but opposite?

Yeah, although I think strengthen can provide the trickiest questions in LR, mainly because things can seem out of scope that will actually strengthen the reasoning a bit. Beware of premise boosters or things that just reiterate the conclusion, and work on narrowing the gap.

That sounds like I'm solving a NA question.

It's similar in a lot of ways.

[Dr. Dre]

IMPORTANT:


For those taking the June LSAT, can you please poast on THE PENCIL THREAD what your experience was like with your pencil choice?

[Chambo]

Did RC drilling yesterday.

RC 30: -4
RC 31: -3
RC 32: -1
RC 33: -0

So I guess I do well once I'm warmed up? I finished with about two minutes left each time, but I wasn't filling in scantron sheets so I'd imagine I would be cutting it close to the wire. I think the key here was being able to crush the easier passages in 6 minutes or so, leaving me with a cushion to tackle the tougher ones and peace of mind. I definitely feel more comfortable with this stuff, and I'm making a more consistent strategy, so I'll keep drilling and hope for the best.

[wtrc]

Did RC drilling yesterday.

RC 30: -4
RC 31: -3
RC 32: -1
RC 33: -0

So I guess I do well once I'm warmed up? I finished with about two minutes left each time, but I wasn't filling in scantron sheets so I'd imagine I would be cutting it close to the wire. I think the key here was being able to crush the easier passages in 6 minutes or so, leaving me with a cushion to tackle the tougher ones and peace of mind. I definitely feel more comfortable with this stuff, and I'm making a more consistent strategy, so I'll keep drilling and hope for the best.

Really not sure what to do with RC. I went from a consistent -4 to -7 to a consistent 0 to -4, but not sure what else there is to do at this point. I guess hoping for (and working towards) a perfect LG and near-perfect LR means that RC has a little room for error.... but it's all about mindset and the passage itself. I've had RC sections where I lose 3 or 4 on one passage and then nothing on anything else. So inconsistent.

[mlansky]

I'm sure this gets asked frequently, and I tried to search but didn't find a thread that addressed this question: If I delay till October, but get my other ducks in a row before I take the test, can I still apply in the same cycle (send applications in as soon as I get my score, pretty much)? Is that considered late in the admissions cycle? I'll probably be a splitter, with a 3.1 gpa and and I'm PTing in the low/mid 170s now, and am led to believe that applying early is crucial for splitters. Any feedback/links to where this was already addressed would be appreciated, thanks

[isuperserial]

I'm sure this gets asked frequently, and I tried to search but didn't find a thread that addressed this question: If I delay till October, but get my other ducks in a row before I take the test, can I still apply in the same cycle (send applications in as soon as I get my score, pretty much)? Is that considered late in the admissions cycle? I'll probably be a splitter, with a 3.1 gpa and and I'm PTing in the low/mid 170s now, and am led to believe that applying early is crucial for splitters. Any feedback/links to where this was already addressed would be appreciated, thanks

Generally speaking, anything before Thanksgiving is considered early, from what I understand.

[wtrc]

I'm sure this gets asked frequently, and I tried to search but didn't find a thread that addressed this question: If I delay till October, but get my other ducks in a row before I take the test, can I still apply in the same cycle (send applications in as soon as I get my score, pretty much)? Is that considered late in the admissions cycle? I'll probably be a splitter, with a 3.1 gpa and and I'm PTing in the low/mid 170s now, and am led to believe that applying early is crucial for splitters. Any feedback/links to where this was already addressed would be appreciated, thanks

You're solid. Definitely not late in the cycle. The only disadvantage is you won't be first (not such a big deal) and if you are EDing some places. Taking December is when it gets late.

[mlansky]

thanks bros, the deadline to change the date on the lsac website is may 26th, so if I'm not consistently killin em by them, see ya in oct

[owlblood]

thanks bros, the deadline to change the date on the lsac website is may 26th, so if I'm not consistently killin em by them, see ya in oct

i'm in the same boat as you.

[Otunga]

If you don't reschedule by the deadline, then is there a fee? Or is there a fee regardless of when you reschedule?

[mvonh001]

Just took PT 51.5 and I got a 161. But more importantly I got a -3 in one of the LR sections, which has been the highest that I have gotten.

LG: -2 (careless errors)
LR1: -6 (I haven't reviewed yet, but I will tomorrow)
LR2: -3 (My best LR section ever)
RC: -9 (I tore up passage 3, and had a good grasp of the double passage, but i got seriously fucked on the other 2)

Raw:80

I really need to get RC down, how the hell am i supposed to review these answers? I have no procedure of reviewing my wrong RC... Any help please...

Also, thanks to you guys, noodley, cardoza, DD for helping me out with solidifying my LR, and because of you guys and my recent 2 days MLSAT LR binge, I have improved a great deal.

-I think im going to have to hit the MLAST book one more time, as I stopped again at inference chapters and it turns out 2 of my wrong LR questions where logical continuations...-

On my way to a 170.

Now i panned on taking PT 52/pt 53 saturday then monday, then pt 61 on wednesday, should I continue with that plan or bring in 61 saturday/monday then jump back to the 50's again? Basically im asking should i go sequentially?

[mlansky]

If you don't reschedule by the deadline, then is there a fee? Or is there a fee regardless of when you reschedule?

From LSAC website:

You can withdraw after the deadlines for refund, test center and date change have passed up until a day before the test.

Note: If you cannot make it to the test, withdrawing a registration will prevent an absentee notation from appearing on your LSAC Law School Report.

So... I guess I'll see where I am on May 25th, and if the 160 bucks is worth it, I'll reschedule, otherwise I've got another 2 weeks after that to decide.

[monadologist]

Currently got the mid 160s blues, so taking a few days off to just focus on MLG, MLR, MRC and drill sections.
Hopefully starts to pick up. At this point I'm on the PT51-62 grind, then ordering 62+ perhaps later this month. I take it virtually everyone is doing 50+ from here on in?

[mlansky]

Also, they just sent me an email with the following:

TEST-DATE CHANGE, PARTIAL REFUND, AND WITHDRAW REQUESTS

If you are unable to take the June 2013 LSAT, you have three options that will remove the test date from your file.

You may pay a fee to change your test date. Select the option to change the date in the LSAT Status section of your LSAC.org account or speak to a telephone representative at 215.968.1001. NOTE: This option will be available as of May 19, 2013. The deadline to make the change is May 24 (by telephone) or May 26 (online).
You may remove your registration by submitting a request before the refund-request deadline and obtain a partial refund. You may download a Refund Request Form from the policy section of the LSAC website.
Once the refund and test-date change deadlines have passed, you will find an option to withdraw your registration in the LSAT Status section of your LSAC.org account. You may withdraw your registration up until 11:59 p.m. ET the night before the test. There will be no refund for this option.
Be sure that your request is received by the appropriate deadline date, which can be found in the LSAT Dates and Deadlines section of the LSAC.org website. The test-date change and partial-refund deadlines are approximately three weeks prior to each LSAT administration date. If you received a fee waiver, you must request withdrawal of your test registration by the withdrawal deadline.

If you do not request a partial refund, change your test date, or withdraw your registration by the stated deadlines, and you do not take the test, your LSAC file will note "absent."

[Otunga]

Not feeling it today. -7 on a RC section and -11 on two LR sections (combined). Much of my mistakes were due to careless reading. Anybody else get stubborn and try to make amends, but realize it's fruitless because their eyes are glazing over? I think that's what was happening. A couple weeks ago, I was getting scores much worse than my averages. Next day, I was back to my averages/better. Hope it's just that.

[wtrc]

May the 10th. Officially the final month, TLSers.

[Word1]

May the 10th. Officially the final month, TLSers.

You got this, Beast Mode.

[SteelPenguin]

Is everyone here familiar with the Manhattan In/Out Logic Chain strategy? I thought it was a pretty neat diagram at first, but I'm struggling when trying to apply it to LGs I've done before. When I use the Powerscore way, I do pretty well, but can get stuck on one or two questions that can cost me some time. I'm hoping that getting more familiar with the Logic Chain would help me answer these.

For those of you familiar with the method, did you find it to be a useful tool, or was it easier to just write out the rules and try and keep track that way?

EDIT: More specifically, the conditional questions (If X is in, which of the following...) are easier with the logic chain for me, but general questions like "which of the following CANNOT be true" are more time consuming with the logic chain.

[monadologist]

Is everyone here familiar with the Manhattan In/Out Logic Chain strategy? I thought it was a pretty neat diagram at first, but I'm struggling when trying to apply it to LGs I've done before. When I use the Powerscore way, I do pretty well, but can get stuck on one or two questions that can cost me some time. I'm hoping that getting more familiar with the Logic Chain would help me answer these.

For those of you familiar with the method, did you find it to be a useful tool, or was it easier to just write out the rules and try and keep track that way?

EDIT: More specifically, the conditional questions (If X is in, which of the following...) are easier with the logic chain for me, but general questions like "which of the following CANNOT be true" are more time consuming with the logic chain.

Logic chain is fine if you understand the ins and outs (no pun intended) of contraposition and DeMorgan's theorem and can apply them to the chain (contra can be represented fully by the chain, whereas DeM is probably the only shortfall of the chain, since I do not believe it can be accurately represented without having to add stuff to the diagram). With that in mind, I still use it, but I still write the rules off to the side somewhere in case I need a fall-back plan.