The Official December 2014 Study Group Forum

[Rigo]

[Rigo]

[jrdavila09]

Thanks guys! That helped a lot! I missed 7 of 28 on NA questions, 3 of 11 on SA questions. Working on ID Flaw questions next. Late night for me! Also I think I just got hit with a copyright notice!

[nlee10]

also which LR packet? all of my cambridge stuff is broken down into types (NA, SA, must be true, etc.)

I believe it is the Cambridge PT 1-38 LR Packets by Question Type.

well yeah but is it a NA question? the index in the back say which question it actually is?

I don't have 1 packet of LR, I have a packet of all must be true questions, a packet of all NA q's, a packet of all principle questions...

Yup. It's in the NA packet. On my packet it wasn't listed as #3 but rather #47. Had to look it up on the index and refer to the right page. lol.

[nlee10]

Thanks guys! That helped a lot! I missed 7 of 28 on NA questions, 3 of 11 on SA questions. Working on ID Flaw questions next. Late night for me! Also I think I just got hit with a copyright notice!

From TLS or from your internet provider? lol

[jrdavila09]

Also, how would everyone feel about not allowing people to ask about specific LSAT questions on here? I would hate to give away the correct answers before people encountered them in either drilling or in a PT.

This was a question from PT 21 so it's whatever, but I would be ticked off if a more recent question (From PT40+) was analyzed in the thread because it ruins the whole idea of interacting with questions yourself for the first time--potentially during a timed PT.

I think asking about individual questions should be done in their own, clearly-labeled topics in the forum (much like user WalterWhite is doing) so we can each choose whether to click on it or not.
Your thoughts on this??

But why can't we ask in here if its under the PT 40? Everything after that should be asked in its own thread!

[jrdavila09]

Thanks guys! That helped a lot! I missed 7 of 28 on NA questions, 3 of 11 on SA questions. Working on ID Flaw questions next. Late night for me! Also I think I just got hit with a copyright notice!

From TLS or from your internet provider? lol

TLS. I may be wrong though.

[Rigo]

[Colonel_funkadunk]

Also, how would everyone feel about not allowing people to ask about specific LSAT questions on here? I would hate to give away the correct answers before people encountered them in either drilling or in a PT.

This was a question from PT 21 so it's whatever, but I would be ticked off if a more recent question (From PT40+) was analyzed in the thread because it ruins the whole idea of interacting with questions yourself for the first time--potentially during a timed PT.

I think asking about individual questions should be done in their own, clearly-labeled topics in the forum (much like user WalterWhite is doing) so we can each choose whether to click on it or not.
Your thoughts on this??

But why can't we ask in here if its under the PT 40? Everything after that should be asked in its own thread!

It was just a thought. I'm by no means saying your question was inappropriate since we haven't set guidelines.

You could just highlight at the top of the post the PT and question number, so if you havent seen it yet you can scroll by quickly. Works in our thread

[jrdavila09]

Also, how would everyone feel about not allowing people to ask about specific LSAT questions on here? I would hate to give away the correct answers before people encountered them in either drilling or in a PT.

This was a question from PT 21 so it's whatever, but I would be ticked off if a more recent question (From PT40+) was analyzed in the thread because it ruins the whole idea of interacting with questions yourself for the first time--potentially during a timed PT.

I think asking about individual questions should be done in their own, clearly-labeled topics in the forum (much like user WalterWhite is doing) so we can each choose whether to click on it or not.
Your thoughts on this??

But why can't we ask in here if its under the PT 40? Everything after that should be asked in its own thread!

It was just a thought. I'm by no means saying your question was inappropriate since we haven't set guidelines.

I understand fully what your saying and I agree. But the majority of us will be using everything under PT 40 for drilling anyway(assuming that is), why not just limit it to that. I would be equally as angry if I was skimming through here and saw a question from PT 50.

[Rigo]

[nlee10]

I'm perfectly fine with the PT 40 rule as long as everyone else is.

I support this rule!

[MEAhrnsbrak]

Yeah I just did check Manhattan, I still don't get it. I need something in layman's terms.

It really comes down to the symptoms of lead poisoning.
Premise: People who have lead poisoning see bright haloes around light sources.
Premise: Van Gough painted haloes around the stars and sun in his paintings.
Conclusion: Van Gough had led poisoning.

(A) is necessary because it it lets us know that Van Gough painted some things as he saw them. Apply the negation test: Van Gough NEVER painted things as he saw them. The negation kills the argument because if he saw haloes, he wouldn't paint haloes. And the haloes are the only thing that supports the conclusion of Van Gough having lead poisoning.

(B) is not necessary. We don't need to know that he continued ingesting lead, let alone use lead-based paint. Maybe when it comes to lead poisoning, it only takes one exposure and you see haloes for life. Applying the negation test (Van Gough did not continue to use paints containing lead) does not destroy the argument. In fact, the premise that Naples Yellow paint contained lead isn't even needed for this argument.

Hope that helped.

Your explanation is awesome. I need to remember to negate questions to check my answers.

[Smallville]

Spoiler alert PT24


blah blah blah question
^normally whats done in sept thread... I can see the argument for not having the posts but I feel like helping explaining is half the help gained from this thread, otherwise what are we here for? strictly to talk about how we're to study? I mean if we want we can have for above 40 say you have a question and people could pm but giving spoiler alerts should work fine.

[WorldsCollide]

What do you all suggest about reviewing PTs? (As in a PT I finished and timed). Aside from reading explanations etc. and how can I review RC?

[IDream247]

I don't come on for like 2 days and you guys add like 5 pages! This thread is entertaining especially at work or in my boring classes. I seriously need to buckle down now, I'm dragging through this Manhattan RC book, its boring. My work study decided to make me a teachers assistant (without my permission) so now I have even less time to study

sorry for my rant

[Smallville]

What do you all suggest about reviewing PTs? (As in a PT I finished and timed). Aside from reading explanations etc. and how can I review RC?

Go over the questions after reading the explanations and go through the answers. can you point out why the right answer is right and why each wrong answer is wrong? Also going through the questions can you point out the flaws/arguments/assumptions, etc. As for RC I would say maybe try seeing how much you still remember. Go and try to summarize each passage and the whole thing without fully reading it again to see what you retained.

[Smallville]

I don't come on for like 2 days and you guys add like 5 pages! This thread is entertaining especially at work or in my boring classes. I seriously need to buckle down now, I'm dragging through this Manhattan RC book, its boring. My work study decided to make me a teachers assistant (without my permission) so now I have even less time to study

sorry for my rant

Make sure you drill too and not just stick with reading the book for awhile. When I first started all I did was reading the bibles and trainer which were great but I feel I would have improved much more if I added some drilling with the books.

[Colonel_funkadunk]

How I envision a study thread that doesn't discuss particular questions:

"Sup you guys studying"

"Yea we studying"

"Whatre u having trouble w"

"Lsat probs"

"Same here"

"Good luck"

[santoki]

how do yall review RC sections? im trying to just reread the passage a bit more slowly to try to catch any structural qualities i missed. but when it comes to questions, it seems as if questions are unique to the passage so it is hardly worth going over. I KNOW IM WRONG but id like to know how those that excel at RC got to that point as far as review.

[bmking]

deleted

[nlee10]

.

[IDream247]

I don't come on for like 2 days and you guys add like 5 pages! This thread is entertaining especially at work or in my boring classes. I seriously need to buckle down now, I'm dragging through this Manhattan RC book, its boring. My work study decided to make me a teachers assistant (without my permission) so now I have even less time to study

sorry for my rant

Make sure you drill too and not just stick with reading the book for awhile. When I first started all I did was reading the bibles and trainer which were great but I feel I would have improved much more if I added some drilling with the books.

Thanks for the advice, I will definitely start drilling along with reading the books. I get how you drill for LG and LR but for RC is it the same?

[IDream247]

The 7sage model is seriously one of the best tools for RC. I'm still having trouble conquering LR, those f***in assumptions and weaken questions

Hopefully, there's enough time to get the hang of it by test day

Are you taking the course too? I haven't gotten to the Reading Comp part yet, I've just been swamped with work and school.

[Smallville]

how do yall review RC sections? im trying to just reread the passage a bit more slowly to try to catch any structural qualities i missed. but when it comes to questions, it seems as if questions are unique to the passage so it is hardly worth going over. I KNOW IM WRONG but id like to know how those that excel at RC got to that point as far as review.

Same. If it's an easier passage that I was able to fully comprehend, the few questions I miss tend to be random. But if it's a really dense passage, a lot of my errors tends to be inference. Sigh. I'm reading the Manhattan RC and see if it helps this week. I'm consistently only scoring 13-17 right on RC. Hope to bring it up to to 20-24 by December!

I'm by no means one who excel's but I would say try summarizing each paragraph as you read the passage then summarize the entirety (as your reading) and then when your done try writing down each paragraphs main point + passage main point without looking at the actual passage to see what you retained