Top Law Schools

Tips/Advice on studying? I took the February test and hit my lowest PT score on the nose...161. I am disappointed, but not really upset. I am pretty sure that I missed a majority of my questions on games. On my lowest PT I missed 10 in games and got a 161, I feel that I did similar on the February test. 161 seemed to be a fluke to me, I hit 165 or about on everything else and got a 171 on the Sept 2009 PT. I never cheated on my PT's. I was nervous and the actual games were my first section. I am going to take a break, but when I start studying I am going to focus heavily on games and just do some LR and RC to keep them fresh.
For those that have retaken and were successful: How did you get back into the groove?

///

charlesxavier wrote:Tips/Advice on studying? I took the February test and hit my lowest PT score on the nose...161. I am disappointed, but not really upset. I am pretty sure that I missed a majority of my questions on games. On my lowest PT I missed 10 in games and got a 161, I feel that I did similar on the February test. 161 seemed to be a fluke to me, I hit 165 or about on everything else and got a 171 on the Sept 2009 PT. I never cheated on my PT's. I was nervous and the actual games were my first section. I am going to take a break, but when I start studying I am going to focus heavily on games and just do some LR and RC to keep them fresh.
For those that have retaken and were successful: How did you get back into the groove?

Take a couple weeks off if you want, and then start up again. The way I look at it is that you're ready to take the test, but you need to stay fresh.

What the hell happened with the February test? I didn't take it, but everyone on TLS seems to have scored way below their average.

I'm sure a lot of folks can talk about what they did to re-start their studies, but you might want to figure out what is the obstacle for you. For some it's time, for others, they're not making the inferences that are really the heart of the matter, while others have ineffective diagrams. Or, is it nerves?

For most of these, I would recommend taking a break, as you suggested, and then starting up with fresh eyes. Perhaps you want to get a new book and really focus on mastering an approach and then learning to adapt it under time pressure. No diagrams are going to get you the score if you can't switch them up to match whatever curve the LSAT throws in June. I've noticed a lot of people simply do game after game, but don't go back and learn what they can from the games they've done. Re-playing games is a big part of this. I also have students write questions for games to get them to think a bit more deeply about what is underneath an LSAT question, and then you can start to be able to predict answers too. Another issue may be you're looking at answer choices too intensely -- I know this sounds counter intuitive, but a lot of answer choices warrant saying "I don't know about that?! Let me see if there's an easy answer." Many LSAT questions are created in such a way that when you see the correct answer, there's a "oh, right! Duh!" sort of feeling.

Good luck!

It's tough for me because I know a lot of it was nerves, but it is hard to tell how much. On my best PT I had -5 LG, -0 LR1, -4 LR2, and -1 on RC. So, from that I can tell that I scored well below my abilities. I took a prep course, and a 161 is much better than my 154 diagnostic, but I think I am just going to work through the LG bible and do some practice questions each week to keep my mind fresh. Now that I have taken the test once, and have an okay score, I feel that I will have better control over my emotions.

i got a 166 and am looking to retake the october one.
games for me is usually my strongest...finishing with extra time. on the feb test, i guessed on 3, definitely disappointed

LR is my weakest section.

i want to get to 170. what do you guys recommend doing the 2nd time around? I took powerscore, did 2 private tutoring sessions solely on LR. i did all 3 bibles. took 25+ tests

i have a friend who has the blueprint books. should i look at those? are the 2 methods completely different?

any tips of restudying?

Atlas LSAT Teacher wrote:I'm sure a lot of folks can talk about what they did to re-start their studies, but you might want to figure out what is the obstacle for you. For some it's time, for others, they're not making the inferences that are really the heart of the matter, while others have ineffective diagrams. Or, is it nerves?

For most of these, I would recommend taking a break, as you suggested, and then starting up with fresh eyes. Perhaps you want to get a new book and really focus on mastering an approach and then learning to adapt it under time pressure. No diagrams are going to get you the score if you can't switch them up to match whatever curve the LSAT throws in June. I've noticed a lot of people simply do game after game, but don't go back and learn what they can from the games they've done. Re-playing games is a big part of this. I also have students write questions for games to get them to think a bit more deeply about what is underneath an LSAT question, and then you can start to be able to predict answers too. Another issue may be you're looking at answer choices too intensely -- I know this sounds counter intuitive, but a lot of answer choices warrant saying "I don't know about that?! Let me see if there's an easy answer." Many LSAT questions are created in such a way that when you see the correct answer, there's a "oh, right! Duh!" sort of feeling.

Good luck!

What do you mean by this? Are you saying that you should go back and review your answers and see what you did right and wrong, or are you saying that you should redo the game.

letsdoit1982 wrote:

Atlas LSAT Teacher wrote:I'm sure a lot of folks can talk about what they did to re-start their studies, but you might want to figure out what is the obstacle for you. For some it's time, for others, they're not making the inferences that are really the heart of the matter, while others have ineffective diagrams. Or, is it nerves?

For most of these, I would recommend taking a break, as you suggested, and then starting up with fresh eyes. Perhaps you want to get a new book and really focus on mastering an approach and then learning to adapt it under time pressure. No diagrams are going to get you the score if you can't switch them up to match whatever curve the LSAT throws in June. I've noticed a lot of people simply do game after game, but don't go back and learn what they can from the games they've done. Re-playing games is a big part of this. I also have students write questions for games to get them to think a bit more deeply about what is underneath an LSAT question, and then you can start to be able to predict answers too. Another issue may be you're looking at answer choices too intensely -- I know this sounds counter intuitive, but a lot of answer choices warrant saying "I don't know about that?! Let me see if there's an easy answer." Many LSAT questions are created in such a way that when you see the correct answer, there's a "oh, right! Duh!" sort of feeling.

Good luck!

What do you mean by this? Are you saying that you should go back and review your answers and see what you did right and wrong, or are you saying that you should redo the game.

i think what he means (or i may be projecting here) is that the value in re-doing games lies in (1) seeing what you could have done to get at the correct answer more efficiently and (2) practice this new and more efficient method so it will naturally manifest itself whenever you do a new game.

personally, i think it's super important not to cheat (i.e. giving yourself a crucial inference that you remember from the first time); so instead, i personally like trying to re-solve the game without that deduction - with only my most basic skills at my disposal (i.e. not rules, contrapositives, etc), and then try figure out how i could have solved it - both quickly and accurately - if i did not have make that inference to begin with. basically, you'd be giving yourself a handicap on these games. but i think it's beneficial for couple reasons: first, you practice taking more efficient steps (since you've taken it before) thus re-enforce good habits. second, you force yourself to solve the game without critical deduction and thus forces you to find new ways of being able to solve the same problem, which will invariably deepen your understanding.

hope this is helpful. and sorry if i misinterpreted you mr. atlas.

I think skip james has an interesting idea -- handicapping yourself. I'll have to try that.

However, as skip j noted, I meant to re-solve the game, reinforcing the correct form/process for the game. People who do well on the logic games make the correct inferences and they make them quickly.

Here's an article about reviewing work that might be helpful: http://www.atlaslsat.com/blog/index.php ... lanations/