December 2012 Re-takers Forum

[finnandjake2]

Given it's the last chance, I'm pondering the February LSAT. Any others thinking the same way?

This. I've taken this test 3 times already and wouldn't be able to do Dec. and Feb.

My plan right now is to polish my apps and apply right now. I am going to take a mental break from the LSAT for a bit in the meantime. I'm considering taking the February LSAT to get off wait-lists and potentially boost scholly money. I'd perhaps apply to a few reach schools late in the cycle as well if I were to hit the 170/172+ mark.

[finnandjake2]

I've taken the older PT's (7-18) and the more recent ones (52-65) and I was wondering how 19-38 compare. Are the the PT's in the 30's more comparable to the older or more recent PT's? (Besides the obvious RC change)

I will probably go over the more recent test sections as well but will use fresh tests for the majority of my prep so I'd appreciate any feedback on the relative difficulty of 19-38. My thought is that I'll get the next 10 and 10 more actual LSAT books and start with 19. I'll use the tests I've taken already closer towards the test to retake games sections and to review trouble problem types.

[Lenahan3]

I've taken the older PT's (7-18) and the more recent ones (52-65) and I was wondering how 19-38 compare. Are the the PT's in the 30's more comparable to the older or more recent PT's? (Besides the obvious RC change)

I will probably go over the more recent test sections as well but will use fresh tests for the majority of my prep so I'd appreciate any feedback on the relative difficulty of 19-38. My thought is that I'll get the next 10 and 10 more actual LSAT books and start with 19. I'll use the tests I've taken already closer towards the test to retake games sections and to review trouble problem types.

How'd you do on the old (7-18) PT's compared to the new ones?

[1TLStudent]

its official..checking in haha

[Zoomie]

Decided against retaking. If my cycle doesn't go well I'm gonna start prepping for next June around February. Down to my last take already. Good luck, guys!

Smart. There's no way in hell I would risk taking the December test after seeing my dismal October score. I'd be lying if I said my confidence wasn't shaken after that. Going to be hard waiting until June for redemption, though.

Same here. Planning on retaking in Feb. Too little time to prep for December and already know I can't get off work that day. My confidence was shaken for sure. Sick feeling in the pit of my stomach. Now I am off the lsat wait and onto the application wait.

[Zoomie]

Anyone suggest a good prep class? I've heard kaplans is no good.

[Lenahan3]

Anyone suggest a good prep class? I've heard kaplans is no good.

Whereabouts are you scoring?

[Zoomie]

Anyone suggest a good prep class? I've heard kaplans is no good.

Whereabouts are you scoring?

155

[Zoomie]

Anyone suggest a good prep class? I've heard kaplans is no good.

Whereabouts are you scoring?

I've done 4 prep test and read the power score books. I thought it was enough prep but evidently not.

[Lenahan3]

Anyone suggest a good prep class? I've heard kaplans is no good.

Whereabouts are you scoring?

I've done 4 prep test and read the power score books. I thought it was enough prep but evidently not.

Read Manhattan in conjunction with the PS books.

Also, I don't believe four prep tests is anywhere near enough to adequately prepare you for the LSAT. You need to start doing quite a few more of them and really focusing on their review.

Personally, I'd skip shelling out the megacash for a class but that's just me.

[finnandjake2]

I've taken the older PT's (7-18) and the more recent ones (52-65) and I was wondering how 19-38 compare. Are the the PT's in the 30's more comparable to the older or more recent PT's? (Besides the obvious RC change)

I will probably go over the more recent test sections as well but will use fresh tests for the majority of my prep so I'd appreciate any feedback on the relative difficulty of 19-38. My thought is that I'll get the next 10 and 10 more actual LSAT books and start with 19. I'll use the tests I've taken already closer towards the test to retake games sections and to review trouble problem types.

How'd you do on the old (7-18) PT's compared to the new ones?

Before my first retake I went 167, 164, 163, 166, 170 on half of 52-61.

I started with 7-18 before second retake and went 166, 174, 171, 171 on the full ones I took. Some of the other tests I've just done some of the sections (extra fifth section for other PT's.) On the newer tests I went 169, 168, 173, 171, 172, 170. I guess there really isn't much difference besides not doing as well before I got really into studying. (166 when I started studying for Oct.)

This question made me pull out my prep books for the first time since the test and I realize I also have some full prep tests left. (18, 16, 15, 14)

It seems the main things I need to work on are endurance and consistency. Also I went -7 on LG in Oct. (out of -13 total) so I feel like that is where I need to drill the most. I know this has been mentioned before on this site and probably ITT as well but what are some of the harder games sections?

[gaud]

Anyone suggest a good prep class? I've heard kaplans is no good.

I worked for Kaplan. They're no good.

The other poster's suggestion for Manhattan is credited. Overall, I'd say they're the best. Powerscore and Blueprint are also good.

[finnandjake2]

One more PT question. Is it worth it to buy 39-51 individually or as an over-priced package? I was thinking I'll stick to 19-38 as well as 14,15,16,18 and resort to 39-51 if I run out of material in my study schedule. Honestly, 20 full PT's would be more prep than I did for my last two retakes.

[Lenahan3]

One more PT question. Is it worth it to buy 39-51 individually or as an over-priced package? I was thinking I'll stick to 19-38 as well as 14,15,16,18 and resort to 39-51 if I run out of material in my study schedule. Honestly, 20 full PT's would be more prep than I did for my last two retakes.

The hardest games by far are in the 30's, if you're speaking of where the majority are located. There are some outliers to be sure, and some doozies in the 20's too, but if you're looking for games work I'd suggest 30's.

The 30's games taught me to think in unconventional ways, at least for the games section. I didn't have very much trouble with it in October.

[Lenahan3]

After PT review tonight I thought about my problems with conditional logic. Its not that I dont understand, not at all. Its just that I always try to reason it out in my head and by the time I realize that I need to draw it out its already been 90 seconds and I start thinking that if its going to take another 2 minutes to do that then I might as well move on.

Here's the question: How do you guys recognize that its time to pull out the scalpel and just work it out?

The only time I pull out my pencil for conditional logic is toward the harder questions, and even then only occasionally. Ill use it sometimes on LR questions that are nothing but CL with no argument to be found within it, but I'd say only those and even then not all the time.

I don't find diagramming in LR to be very helpful for the majority of questions involving CL.

[HawkeyeGirl]

Someone said it earlier, might have been Worm or Noodles, but for some reason it just sunk in pretty hardcore for me right now. Respect the test. This test clearly got the best of us last time, so I think one attitude that can help us all is to give each question a healthy amount of respect. I think this will mitigate the silly mistakes we make.

[Lenahan3]

Someone said it earlier, might have been Worm or Noodles, but for some reason it just sunk in pretty hardcore for me right now. Respect the test. This test clearly got the best of us last time, so I think one attitude that can help us all is to give each question a healthy amount of respect. I think this will mitigate the silly mistakes we make.

Oh yeah, definitely. I"m not saying take any question lightly; that was part of my problem in October. I just think diagramming LR questions easily turns into something that is both overused and a time-waster, particularly for Worm since if I remember correctly he has trouble finishing sections within the allotted time.

But, like I said, that is just me. Mayhaps somebody else finds diagramming quickens their test. Mine was nothing but anecdotal info.

[HawkeyeGirl]

Someone said it earlier, might have been Worm or Noodles, but for some reason it just sunk in pretty hardcore for me right now. Respect the test. This test clearly got the best of us last time, so I think one attitude that can help us all is to give each question a healthy amount of respect. I think this will mitigate the silly mistakes we make.

Oh yeah, definitely. I"m not saying take any question lightly; that was part of my problem in October. I just think diagramming LR questions easily turns into something that is both overused and a time-waster, particularly for Worm since if I remember correctly he has trouble finishing sections within the allotted time.

But, like I said, that is just me. Mayhaps somebody else finds diagramming quickens their test. Mine was nothing but anecdotal info.

My post wasn't in response to yours haha, just generally throwing it out there into the void. I agree with not diagramming LR. I pretty much only do it for parallel reasoning or on a rare case where i need to just visualize the dense language.

[Lenahan3]

Someone said it earlier, might have been Worm or Noodles, but for some reason it just sunk in pretty hardcore for me right now. Respect the test. This test clearly got the best of us last time, so I think one attitude that can help us all is to give each question a healthy amount of respect. I think this will mitigate the silly mistakes we make.

Oh yeah, definitely. I"m not saying take any question lightly; that was part of my problem in October. I just think diagramming LR questions easily turns into something that is both overused and a time-waster, particularly for Worm since if I remember correctly he has trouble finishing sections within the allotted time.

But, like I said, that is just me. Mayhaps somebody else finds diagramming quickens their test. Mine was nothing but anecdotal info.

My post wasn't in response to yours haha, just generally throwing it out there into the void. I agree with not diagramming LR. I pretty much only do it for parallel reasoning or on a rare case where i need to just visualize the dense language.

Oh okay. It still made sense in reference to my original post, haha. But okay, cool.

[GabeQuixote]

Someone said it earlier, might have been Worm or Noodles, but for some reason it just sunk in pretty hardcore for me right now. Respect the test. This test clearly got the best of us last time, so I think one attitude that can help us all is to give each question a healthy amount of respect. I think this will mitigate the silly mistakes we make.

No. The test is evil and must be destroyed.

Make it pay. Make it know your name. Take the score you want from it. Leave it defeated, broken and crawling back to its lair.

Then you can start moaning about the bar.

[HawkeyeGirl]

Someone said it earlier, might have been Worm or Noodles, but for some reason it just sunk in pretty hardcore for me right now. Respect the test. This test clearly got the best of us last time, so I think one attitude that can help us all is to give each question a healthy amount of respect. I think this will mitigate the silly mistakes we make.

Oh yeah, definitely. I"m not saying take any question lightly; that was part of my problem in October. I just think diagramming LR questions easily turns into something that is both overused and a time-waster, particularly for Worm since if I remember correctly he has trouble finishing sections within the allotted time.

But, like I said, that is just me. Mayhaps somebody else finds diagramming quickens their test. Mine was nothing but anecdotal info.

My post wasn't in response to yours haha, just generally throwing it out there into the void. I agree with not diagramming LR. I pretty much only do it for parallel reasoning or on a rare case where i need to just visualize the dense language.

Oh okay. It still made sense in reference to my original post, haha. But okay, cool.

I was just reviewing my October test and realized I missed 4 questions purely because I didn't respect the test and thought they were too "easy" to double check. Could have had a 173.... But next time, I will be sure to slow down and give every question it's fair amount of attention!

[M.M.]

Was posting in the Dec study group thread, but I figured here would be better... so, in. I've really hated the test lately ... but today I forced myself to go and study and got my first ever -1 on LG, and my first ever -0 on LR... nothing like a little motivation via success

Does anyone know if older LR sections are easier? I did PT 35s first LR section

[megagnarley]

What are you guys thinking is a reasonable score bump expectation after a month of drilling? From the 170 mark...could a month of drilling cause a bump up to 174 with a few solid hours of studying a day?

(For the record my breakdown on Oct. was -1 lr, -4 lg, -6 rc)

[HawkeyeGirl]

Was posting in the Dec study group thread, but I figured here would be better... so, in. I've really hated the test lately ... but today I forced myself to go and study and got my first ever -1 on LG, and my first ever -0 on LR... nothing like a little motivation via success

Does anyone know if older LR sections are easier? I did PT 35s first LR section

Yay, congrats!! I haven't found older LR easier, just kind of different. They don't have the two part questions anymore.

[HawkeyeGirl]

What are you guys thinking is a reasonable score bump expectation after a month of drilling? From the 170 mark...could a month of drilling cause a bump up to 174 with a few solid hours of studying a day?

(For the record my breakdown on Oct. was -1 lr, -4 lg, -6 rc)

I went -5 RC, -4 LR -2 LG for a 169 and I'm hoping to bump it up to a 173+ in december by drilling RC like crazy.
I also missed 4 questions (3 on LR and 1 on LG) that I straight up shouldn't have missed. So I'm going to work on slowing down and making sure I'm 100% confident on most answers, especially the earlier, "easy" ones.