Top Law Schools

ok so ive been answering certain question types (assumptions, justifiers, etc)

and also solved about 3 PTs... and ive also done many different problems.

and today i did about 30-40 assumption questions and after I did them i just asked myself "did i really get anything out of this?"

I pondered myself about this after reviewing two pts, and meticulously going through the questions. but then I felt like i just forgot about all that in my head.

However the biggest reason i asked myself this is while doing assumption questions today... In general, assumption questions seem to go a few select ways..in that they block out alternative explanations or they connect things.. but i just dont see
that kinda formula sticking my head... so what i mean by this is that after doing all these assumption questions, i dont feel like i got any BIG PICTURE about assumption questions other than the answers to the particular questions i looked at.

i heard that doing PTS....and ESPECIALLY certain question types, IE assumption questions in my case, are done because they start to give u a sense of the basic patterns and outcomes of how these questons are going to turn out.. but the thing is so far i dont really know JACK about any formulaic or patternized way to think about assumption questions.. i DO understand that like i said before a lotta times they block out other alternatives..or they block a hole in which the argument goes.. but this logic seems to work easily only on the very simple questions, ones where the authors' missing out on something is BLATANTLY obvious

so whats the deal here... does it get better with more practice, or am i doing something wrong?

Yes, it should get better. I am also focusing on each question type (same with logic games) and for me it turns out A LOT more beneficial than simply
doing the prep tests.
One more thing though. When you are doing specific question types, try to do them in small batches. In other words, dont storm through all
assumption questions you have in one session. This way the reasoning patterns are easier to follow and you can either reinforce the positive trends on the questions answered correctly, or try to learn from mistakes from the questions you got wrong.

Ideally, you have some book of technique to point out the major patterns to be looking for, and then in doing that set of questions, you see what those patterns actually look like in practice, not just in the abstract or on fake examples.

In general, assumption questions seem to go a few select ways..in that they block out alternative explanations or they connect things.. but i just dont see that kinda formula sticking my head...

What on earth do you mean? You don't see that formula sticking in your head? Once you've spotted a pattern, don't forget it! That's completely the OPPOSITE of what you should be doing!

tomwatts, your posts on this board are very helpful

sangr wrote:so whats the deal here... does it get better with more practice, or am i doing something wrong?

from my experience it gets better with practice.