JUNE 2013 Study Group / Study Partner Thread Forum

[objection_your_honor]

It means jack shit since I took it 30 days ago, but I got a 180 on PT 68 retake.

[mvonh001]

congrats on the 180, i was supposed to retake pt 68 today, but i realized that if I do PT / PT back to back I will feel no motivation at all for the second PT, So I decided to take today to review my PT from yesterday 65, and Tomorrow im Gonna take 64, then on Saturday im gonna take 66, then im gonna redo 68, untimed on sunday to keep everything fresh...

[mvonh001]

Also, as I was in the library studying - sleeping - I had this idea that since less people are taking the LSAT that means that less people are scoring higher. Therefor to be in the 99% wouldnt that mean that the curve gets looser?

[objection_your_honor]

Also, as I was in the library studying - sleeping - I had this idea that since less people are taking the LSAT that means that less people are scoring higher. Therefor to be in the 99% wouldnt that mean that the curve gets looser?

It's about proportions, not raw numbers.

[jad0re]

edit

[Daily_Double]

http://blueprintprep.com/lsatblog/lsat/ ... edictions/

These are some scary predictions!

I would prefer a harder exam with a looser curve, so I hope he's right.

I agree, but I doubt he's right. I'm expecting a difficult LG and a tough RC passage, but nothing too bad. If I had to guess, this will be one of the easier tests.

[TheMostDangerousLG]

Wow. Extremely disappointing performance on my PT 68 retake.

PT 68: 176
RC: -2
LR1: -0
LR2: -0
LG: -4
Total: -6 (RS: 95)

Got completely destroyed by LG. Had to rush through (/essentially guess) on the last couple of questions, and rushed through game 3. Haven't done that badly on LG in a long time.. makes me pretty worried for test day, especially if the section is as difficult as predicted.

[NoWorries]

Also, as I was in the library studying - sleeping - I had this idea that since less people are taking the LSAT that means that less people are scoring higher. Therefor to be in the 99% wouldnt that mean that the curve gets looser?

It's about proportions, not raw numbers.

But of course, since the 170's are shrinking faster than any other range it could theoretically help those of us in that range on PT's from ~55-68.

[Ambitious1]

http://blueprintprep.com/lsatblog/lsat/ ... edictions/

These are some scary predictions!

As long as LR is generally as straight forward as the other 60's exams, with a few exceptions like 62, I'm okay with it. Ill take a slightly more difficult LG any day over the LR sections I saw in February.

[magickware]

My dream test is-

Sec 1- RC
Sec 2- Exp LG.
Sec 3-LR
Sec 4-LG
Sec 5-LR

Even the greatest mind-fuck of a LG section is easier to deal with than 2 RC or 3 LR sections.

[Ambitious1]

Great post, thank you very much. My last PT was -1 LR and -0 LG, and -8 RC. It's truly the last hurdle I have to cross in order to become a consistent mid 170s test taker. Do you begin with the RC passage with 8 questions or do you start with the passage with least amount of questions in order to finish the first 2 passages in 15 minutes?

I just go in the order that they are presented. I think that trying to go in a different order is a bad idea unless you're only doing three of the passages. If you know you're going to be doing all 4 passages anyway it doesn't make sense to use your time for anything except actually doing them. It takes time to sort by difficulty, and that time is better spent actually reading and working on questions. I think that the first two passages are generally easier than the last two, regardless of the number of questions, even if this isn't the case on the individual level.

Of the methods you mention I am most sympathetic to starting with the passage that has the most questions, but I still don't think it's a good strategy. Counting questions takes time, and I know that for me at least I would inevitably clog my mind with the topics of other passages which would more than outweigh the benefits of going most questions to least.

I should mention that I grew up without a television and that I have never had cable. I learned to read at a very young age and reading has always been my default form of entertainment. I credit whatever amount of success that I have in RC at least 75% to my history of reading casually and no more than 25% to the strategy that I employ.

Great stuff. I underestimate how long I take in sorting through passages based on questions. Even if it takes 30-45 seconds that's the difference between a question or 2 in the section. With a few days left and some pathetic RC scores I will give it a try on my next PT.

[mvonh001]

I hope the LR section is more akin to 62 than to the other PT's as I scored my best LR in PT 62. I also hope there is a -13 curve as well to compensate for my shitty RC performance recently - I can't seem to break a -4 when I'm doing a timed RC section in a PT the first round. I just completed PT 65 RC for a second time after doing it yesterday (but with no review) and I went -4 when i went -9 initially. I need to slow down and read. Luckily I feel like everything slows down (not my performance) when I take standardized tests... so hopefully I have luck on my side - or something - come game time.

[the_pakalypse]

How is everyone here so confident about LG? I'm dreading it, even though rationally I know I shouldn't be..

[Typhoon24]

took PT 68. one thing to say: EFF that LR. I usually do well on it, but this one pwned me. I know what I'm gonna be reviewing the next few days.

[magickware]

How is everyone here so confident about LG? I'm dreading it, even though rationally I know I shouldn't be..

LG is the least mentally exhausting of the lot, at least for me. There's not a lot to read and the conditionals and sheer logic involved is much more brutal on LR than on LG.

And you get confident at LG once you've done just about every existing LG at least twice.

[MKX]

took PT 68. one thing to say: EFF that LR. I usually do well on it, but this one pwned me. I know what I'm gonna be reviewing the next few days.

Because I honestly find LG fun so I do well on them. Can't stand lr and rc.

[wtrc]

Panic/bad stress mode has suddenly just set in. Ugh. Going to take a few hours off work on Friday and just relax this weekend, with a possible PT on Saturday.

[mvonh001]

took PT 68. one thing to say: EFF that LR. I usually do well on it, but this one pwned me. I know what I'm gonna be reviewing the next few days.

Because I honestly find LG fun so because I do well on them. Can't stand lr and rc.

FTFY

[the_pakalypse]

How is everyone here so confident about LG? I'm dreading it, even though rationally I know I shouldn't be..

LG is the least mentally exhausting of the lot, at least for me. There's not a lot to read and the conditionals and sheer logic involved is much more brutal on LR than on LG.

And you get confident at LG once you've done just about every existing LG at least twice.

I've done that as well -- but the irrational fear still exists

I'm just worried about coming up blank on a game (similar to what happened when I first took the LSAT). I've worked on it a shit ton after that -- like ridiculous amounts of hours -- but the worry still persists...

[mvonh001]

Panic/bad stress mode has suddenly just set in. Ugh. Going to take a few hours off work on Friday and just relax this weekend, with a possible PT on Saturday.

I don't know why but I don't panic when I am faced with situations like these. Thank god for that, I guess. Lol But what i do experience is complete burn out- which before this week i would have said was a myth.

[okaygo]

Why do I study when Im tired. Especially RC. Everytime I do it I have crappy results and it just makes me more upset with myself.

But the problem is its hard not to be tired when you're day starts at 6 and you don't get home until 7:30. Gahhhh.

I just went -11 on RC from 65 because I'm tired right?

[objection_your_honor]

With RC and LR, how bad can it really be? A legendary LG is fucking scary.

[wtrc]

Anybody have thoughts about the difficulty of RC in 61?

[TheMostDangerousLG]

With RC and LR, how bad can it really be? A legendary LG is fucking scary.

Yeah, the fear of having a future legendary LG section keeps me up at night.

[mvonh001]

Anybody have thoughts about the difficulty of RC in 61?

I went -11 on that particular one... Granted my usual is -5, but still its a big enough discrepancy for me to recommend it as a harder section than average.