The Official September 2016 Study Group - WAKE ME UP WHEN SEPTEMBER ENDS Forum

[appind]

Anyone else struggle with 62.2.23?

[+] Spoiler

Got it right and I guess C is the best answer out of them, but I didn't get that the pesticide has been shown to harm children, only that the implication that it potentially could.

I also thought 62.2.15 was a weird question.
Eta: and the last four questions of 22.2 are pretty brutal imo. My doc of weird LR qs is expanding...

I think 62.2.23 is an airtight q. The stim doesn't have to say that pesticide harms children or for that matter any segment of population as long as it doesn't say that the pesticide is shown not to harm population.

Since pesticide isn't being used for its intended purpose when children ingest it and we don't know if pesticide is shown not to harm population, C will give us that the practice is unacceptable.

[thatlawlkid]

I wish i could go back and bitchslap freshman year me so i wasn't stuck trying to overcome this awful GPA. Those classes were easy.

[appind]

Took my third PT last night. Can't remember which number. Somewhere in the low 60s:

RC: -2
LR1:-1
LG: -1
LR2: -4 (was tough)
Raw: 92
Scaled: 172

Still not where I need to be but I'm satisfied with my progress so far. I've only been focusing on LG the past 2 weeks using the 7sage fool proofed method and it's REALLY helped me a lot I think. I should've gone -0 for LG but I made a small error on game 1. The thing that 7sage has helped me the most with is actually using the diagrams to make inferences. Before I was thinking too hard instead of just visually following the diagram. Rote memorization of past games is surprisingly helpful.

Now I just need to do something about LR. I'm finishing with extra time to spare on all sections. But then for LR when I go back to tough questions that I was shaky on I'm still not getting most of them. So I guess since timing is not an issue for me (I finished all sections with at least 5 minutes to spare for some reason) I think I need to drill LR a lot.

congrats, that's exceptional just for a 3rd pt esp the scores in RC and 5+ min spare in each section

how is it even possible to finish rc near perfect on a recent pt this fast, what's your approach to rc?

[Pozzo]

Anyone else struggle with 62.2.23?

[+] Spoiler

Got it right and I guess C is the best answer out of them, but I didn't get that the pesticide has been shown to harm children, only that the implication that it potentially could.

I also thought 62.2.15 was a weird question.
Eta: and the last four questions of 22.2 are pretty brutal imo. My doc of weird LR qs is expanding...

I think 62.2.23 is an airtight q. The stim doesn't have to say that pesticide harms children or for that matter any segment of population as long as it doesn't say that the pesticide is shown not to harm population.

Since pesticide isn't being used for its intended purpose when children ingest it and we don't know if pesticide is shown not to harm population, C will give us that the practice is unacceptable.

62.2.23

[+] Spoiler

I thought of it through the parts/whole lens. The words "per capita" in the stimulus and "portion" tipped me off to this. The only thing demonstrated so far is that it doesn't occur in harmful levels on a per capita basis. However, there's this small segment of the population, 20%, that ingests a much higher amount of pesticide than the rest. The advocate is arguing that because it hasn't been proven that the pesticide doesn't harm this portion of the population, it is an unacceptable practice.

62.2.15 - yeah, weird af

[34iplaw]

Anyone have a list (or know of one) of weirdly worded question stems? I just missed one question Feb 96 LR 1#23, because I had literally zero idea what the stem was asking.

[appind]

Anyone else struggle with 62.2.23?

[+] Spoiler

Got it right and I guess C is the best answer out of them, but I didn't get that the pesticide has been shown to harm children, only that the implication that it potentially could.

I also thought 62.2.15 was a weird question.
Eta: and the last four questions of 22.2 are pretty brutal imo. My doc of weird LR qs is expanding...

I think 62.2.23 is an airtight q. The stim doesn't have to say that pesticide harms children or for that matter any segment of population as long as it doesn't say that the pesticide is shown not to harm population.

Since pesticide isn't being used for its intended purpose when children ingest it and we don't know if pesticide is shown not to harm population, C will give us that the practice is unacceptable.

62.2.23

[+] Spoiler

I thought of it through the parts/whole lens. The words "per capita" in the stimulus and "portion" tipped me off to this. The only thing demonstrated so far is that it doesn't occur in harmful levels on a per capita basis. However, there's this small segment of the population, 20%, that ingests a much higher amount of pesticide than the rest. The advocate is arguing that because it hasn't been proven that the pesticide doesn't harm this portion of the population, it is an unacceptable practice.

62.2.15 - yeah, weird af

62.2.15 is the kind of q that can do damage larger than the q itself due to the time it can take in real rest conditions.

[Pozzo]

Anyone else struggle with 62.2.23?

[+] Spoiler

Got it right and I guess C is the best answer out of them, but I didn't get that the pesticide has been shown to harm children, only that the implication that it potentially could.

I also thought 62.2.15 was a weird question.
Eta: and the last four questions of 22.2 are pretty brutal imo. My doc of weird LR qs is expanding...

I think 62.2.23 is an airtight q. The stim doesn't have to say that pesticide harms children or for that matter any segment of population as long as it doesn't say that the pesticide is shown not to harm population.

Since pesticide isn't being used for its intended purpose when children ingest it and we don't know if pesticide is shown not to harm population, C will give us that the practice is unacceptable.

62.2.23

[+] Spoiler

I thought of it through the parts/whole lens. The words "per capita" in the stimulus and "portion" tipped me off to this. The only thing demonstrated so far is that it doesn't occur in harmful levels on a per capita basis. However, there's this small segment of the population, 20%, that ingests a much higher amount of pesticide than the rest. The advocate is arguing that because it hasn't been proven that the pesticide doesn't harm this portion of the population, it is an unacceptable practice.

62.2.15 - yeah, weird af

62.2.15 is the kind of q that can do damage larger than the q itself due to the time it can take in real rest conditions.

Yeah, I put down an answer and came back to it after I finished. Total timekill.

[thatlawlkid]

Anyone have a link to a decent letter of rec resource? Whats being looked for, who is expected to be asked?

[20170322]

Just did my 3 sections, -1 on each. Each Q I missed was like the only one left circled. I need to figure out how to choose the right answer when I'm down to the last 2 choices. I'm hitting between 25 and 30 minutes on each section, so I guess I should just use the remainder of the test to check the circled Q's.

[34iplaw]

Anyone have a link to a decent letter of rec resource? Whats being looked for, who is expected to be asked?

Don't have a source, but, generally speaking, they should...

1- actually know you and have worked with you.

2- someone you can trust to write a good letter.

3- at least one academic.

You should...

1- talk to them in person, if possible, and, if not, make every effort to try to ask over the phone/in person rather than over e-mail.

2- discuss what you are trying to convey to admissions.

3- give them time to do it, and give them any supplemental materials to do it.

[thatlawlkid]

Anyone have a link to a decent letter of rec resource? Whats being looked for, who is expected to be asked?

Don't have a source, but, generally speaking, they should...

1- actually know you and have worked with you.

2- someone you can trust to write a good letter.

3- at least one academic.

You should...

1- talk to them in person, if possible, and, if not, make every effort to try to ask over the phone/in person rather than over e-mail.

2- discuss what you are trying to convey to admissions.

3- give them time to do it, and give them any supplemental materials to do it.

Thanks. Trying to narrow down my choices. I really want to have a guy I work for seasonally write one, as he's the CEO/President of his company and would sell me like he was being paid to do it, but my concern is i dont have him on my resume, but could put him on (the work was just done on the wrong side of the table). And with him it the work experience encompasses much more than what i normally do, including supervising other people. The seasonal aspect of the job also makes me hesitate as it is only for a few weeks a year, but i've worked with him during most of my college career and after graduation as well.. Conflicted

[Instrumental]

On the PT I just took, I had two of my best LR sections paired with one of the worst of AR and RC. Lovely how that works out. Goddammit.

[34iplaw]

Anyone have a link to a decent letter of rec resource? Whats being looked for, who is expected to be asked?

Don't have a source, but, generally speaking, they should...

1- actually know you and have worked with you.

2- someone you can trust to write a good letter.

3- at least one academic.

You should...

1- talk to them in person, if possible, and, if not, make every effort to try to ask over the phone/in person rather than over e-mail.

2- discuss what you are trying to convey to admissions.

3- give them time to do it, and give them any supplemental materials to do it.

Thanks. Trying to narrow down my choices. I really want to have a guy I work for seasonally write one, as he's the CEO/President of his company and would sell me like he was being paid to do it, but my concern is i dont have him on my resume, but could put him on (the work was just done on the wrong side of the table). And with him it the work experience encompasses much more than what i normally do, including supervising other people. The seasonal aspect of the job also makes me hesitate as it is only for a few weeks a year, but i've worked with him during most of my college career and after graduation as well.. Conflicted

I think the content is what matters most. They'll have zero idea who 99% of recommenders are.

[dietcoke1]

Anyone have a link to a decent letter of rec resource? Whats being looked for, who is expected to be asked?

Check out "How To Get into the Top Law Schools" book. most local barns and nobles have them. I just went into one and checked out the section on LOR. The book has a big list of traits that your LOR ideally should include and info on who should write them, etc.

Also, try posting your question in the TLS 2020 Applicants thread

[WWhitman]

Just did my 3 sections, -1 on each. Each Q I missed was like the only one left circled. I need to figure out how to choose the right answer when I'm down to the last 2 choices. I'm hitting between 25 and 30 minutes on each section, so I guess I should just use the remainder of the test to check the circled Q's.

Talk about CHAMPAGNE PROBLEM!!! Haha... JK... But not really!

[Alexandros]

I wish i could go back and bitchslap freshman year me so i wasn't stuck trying to overcome this awful GPA. Those classes were easy.

Feel that.

[Mikey]

I wish i could go back and bitchslap freshman year me so i wasn't stuck trying to overcome this awful GPA. Those classes were easy.

Feel that.

I'm the opposite... Freshman year me was so motivated and I had near a 4.0 my first year. My sophomore self is a fucking retard. At that time, I was like "ehh, fuck skewl i duNt cArRrrree". No clue why I was like that but yep lmao

[Alexandros]

I wish i could go back and bitchslap freshman year me so i wasn't stuck trying to overcome this awful GPA. Those classes were easy.

Feel that.

I'm the opposite... Freshman year me was so motivated and I had near a 4.0 my first year. My sophomore self is a fucking retard. At that time, I was like "ehh, fuck skewl i duNt cArRrrree". No clue why I was like that but yep lmao

I think that was me first semester vs second semester first year, when I took a couple harder-ish classes. I think first year classes kinda give you a false sense of security.

[Mikey]

I wish i could go back and bitchslap freshman year me so i wasn't stuck trying to overcome this awful GPA. Those classes were easy.

Feel that.

I'm the opposite... Freshman year me was so motivated and I had near a 4.0 my first year. My sophomore self is a fucking retard. At that time, I was like "ehh, fuck skewl i duNt cArRrrree". No clue why I was like that but yep lmao

I think that was me first semester vs second semester first year, when I took a couple harder-ish classes. I think first year classes kinda give you a false sense of security.

DEFINITELY! My biggest GPA boost for LSAC will FOR SURE come from my short time spent at community college. I mean, classes now are still not that bad they're only slightly more challenging but that's b/c they're upper level obv. But freshman English, algebra, intro to psych/sociology, omfg easiest A's.

[proteinshake]

I wish i could go back and bitchslap freshman year me so i wasn't stuck trying to overcome this awful GPA. Those classes were easy.

Feel that.

I'm the opposite... Freshman year me was so motivated and I had near a 4.0 my first year. My sophomore self is a fucking retard. At that time, I was like "ehh, fuck skewl i duNt cArRrrree". No clue why I was like that but yep lmao

I destroyed (in a good way) my first two years because I went to an easy university then transferred to a really hard one. I didn't do bad my last two years, but I don't have the close to 4.0 I would have if I stayed at my first school lolz. this is also why I love the way LSAC calculates grades

[Mikey]

I wish i could go back and bitchslap freshman year me so i wasn't stuck trying to overcome this awful GPA. Those classes were easy.

Feel that.

I'm the opposite... Freshman year me was so motivated and I had near a 4.0 my first year. My sophomore self is a fucking retard. At that time, I was like "ehh, fuck skewl i duNt cArRrrree". No clue why I was like that but yep lmao

I destroyed (in a good way) my first two years because I went to an easy university then transferred to a really hard one. I didn't do bad my last two years, but I don't have the close to 4.0 I would have if I stayed at my first school lolz. this is also why I love the way LSAC calculates grades

TRUE. Thank you to that near 4.0 I had at community college!!!

[ngogirl12]

I wish i could go back and bitchslap freshman year me so i wasn't stuck trying to overcome this awful GPA. Those classes were easy.

Feel that.

I'm the opposite... Freshman year me was so motivated and I had near a 4.0 my first year. My sophomore self is a fucking retard. At that time, I was like "ehh, fuck skewl i duNt cArRrrree". No clue why I was like that but yep lmao

I think that was me first semester vs second semester first year, when I took a couple harder-ish classes. I think first year classes kinda give you a false sense of security.

DEFINITELY! My biggest GPA boost for LSAC will FOR SURE come from my short time spent at community college. I mean, classes now are still not that bad they're only slightly more challenging but that's b/c they're upper level obv. But freshman English, algebra, intro to psych/sociology, omfg easiest A's.

For me sociology and drama classes were the easiest easy A classes I ever took! (I did both for GE as a freshman/frosh in UG).

[ngogirl12]

So this morning I finished drilling LG. I still have a few more to drill from Ch. 7 to do (tomorrow) for my day 2 drilling.

(The way I drill is watch the video - drill 1 or 2 times after watching the video - drill the next day 1 copy- drill the day after next day 1 copy - drill after 1 week 1 copy - drill after 2 weeks 1 copy).

So for the bulk of my games it's buh bye LG for a week! Now it's time to hit LR, will miss doing my favorite part of LSAT prep lol.

[Mikey]

I wish i could go back and bitchslap freshman year me so i wasn't stuck trying to overcome this awful GPA. Those classes were easy.

Feel that.

I'm the opposite... Freshman year me was so motivated and I had near a 4.0 my first year. My sophomore self is a fucking retard. At that time, I was like "ehh, fuck skewl i duNt cArRrrree". No clue why I was like that but yep lmao

I think that was me first semester vs second semester first year, when I took a couple harder-ish classes. I think first year classes kinda give you a false sense of security.

DEFINITELY! My biggest GPA boost for LSAC will FOR SURE come from my short time spent at community college. I mean, classes now are still not that bad they're only slightly more challenging but that's b/c they're upper level obv. But freshman English, algebra, intro to psych/sociology, omfg easiest A's.

For me sociology and drama classes were the easiest easy A classes I ever took! (I did both for GE as a freshman/frosh in UG).

Never took any drama classes, but sociology is so easy.. I've taken like 3 different soc. classes and have gotten A's in all of them. The only sociology classes I would say are SOMEWHAT of a challenge are probably the research/statistics classes. But I have only taken stats and research classes for psych, but i know soc. is similar in a way.

[tofuspeedstar]

PT61

152 pre br
168 post br

I don't get it. I'm scoring where I want within BR. But under test conditions I'm shitting the bed. Any ideas?

I have adhd. Should I petition LSAC for more time?