On Track for the June 2010 LSAT -- Refractory Period Forum

[BigA]

question: have you found it weird jumping around between older and newer PTs? I have 1-6 sitting here but I'm afraid to do them, because I don't want them to throw me off. So I am just finishing up with the most recent tests heading into test day. Is there any method to your ordering?

Nah, I haven't found it weird really. If anything it's good because it puts me a little bit off balance, and prepares me for any potentially weird questions. I'm planning on doing all PT's except for 1-6 actually.

Yeah there's a method to my ordering, but it's kind of hard to explain. The main gist of it is I want to be taking the newer PT's as I get closer to the test, but if I only took newer PT's, I would run out of material too soon. So i'm making sure that I take the newest PT's closest to the test date.

I suppose there's nothing wrong with that. Seems to be working fine for you obviously. I'd be worried about throwing off my timing if I were to take a bunch of older PTs right before the LSAT. With all of the double questions and more easy questions on LR, and easier RC I think you could go at a more lax pace on older tests. So I'm thinking it's important to establish timing based on the newer tests. Are you finding that you feel less time pressure on the older tests (games excluded)?

[Knock]

question: have you found it weird jumping around between older and newer PTs? I have 1-6 sitting here but I'm afraid to do them, because I don't want them to throw me off. So I am just finishing up with the most recent tests heading into test day. Is there any method to your ordering?

Nah, I haven't found it weird really. If anything it's good because it puts me a little bit off balance, and prepares me for any potentially weird questions. I'm planning on doing all PT's except for 1-6 actually.

Yeah there's a method to my ordering, but it's kind of hard to explain. The main gist of it is I want to be taking the newer PT's as I get closer to the test, but if I only took newer PT's, I would run out of material too soon. So i'm making sure that I take the newest PT's closest to the test date.

I suppose there's nothing wrong with that. Seems to be working fine for you obviously. I'd be worried about throwing off my timing if I were to take a bunch of older PTs right before the LSAT. With all of the double questions and more easy questions on LR, and easier RC I think you could go at a more lax pace on older tests. So I'm thinking it's important to establish timing based on the newer tests. Are you finding that you feel less time pressure on the older tests (games excluded)?

Hmm...that's a difficult question to answer. My skills and abilities have been slowly but surely improving during this whole process, but I can't seem to recall a pattern off of the top of my head. I'll try and keep this in mind the next few tests I take, and maybe write down how much time I had left, if any, when I finished, and see if there is any difference for me.

Taking a shot at answering your question though, I'd say that each individual test, and each individual sections are different (excluding all older games being relatively time-consuming). I've had old PT's that took a while, and new PT's that went by fast. I'd say RC probably takes me the most time; sometimes I finish a few minutes early, but usually I take all the time available. For LR it depends on my pacing, I can go fast or I can go a little bit relaxed. It's just so subjective and variable that it's difficult for me to make a sweeping generalization like that. And for LG, it depends on the games. I've definitely improved through so I currently finish quicker than I used to, but on tough LG sections it can take me a while sometimes.

[BigA]

You're in a totally different spectrum as a test-taker than me, hitting 180s and all. So maybe what I said doesn't apply as much. But for me, timing is a big problem and I have to force myself to hurry more on the newer LR and RC. Although what's kinda weird about the old ones is I believe there are more 30 second questions but more 3 minute questions as well.

[Knock]

You're in a totally different spectrum as a test-taker than me, hitting 180s and all. So maybe what I said doesn't apply as much. But for me, timing is a big problem and I have to force myself to hurry more on the newer LR and RC. Although what's kinda weird about the old ones is I believe there are more 30 second questions but more 3 minute questions as well.

Hmm...have you tried to push through the first 15 questions in 15 minutes (1 minute a question), which gives you 20 minutes for the last 10 questions (2 minute a question). I think this might help you out with timing.

You need to take advantage of the relatively straightforward and relatively simple (I say relative because even the "easy" LSAT questions are still difficult) to give yourself the time you need on the difficult ones.

I think you need to identify what is causing you to have time problems. Are you reading the stimulus, then the question stem, then re-reading the stimulus?

Also identifying the conclusion when you're reading through the stimulus, and pre-phrasing answers to questions might help you with your timing issues as well.

You definitely need to "attack" the questions that are possible to "attack". But i'm a big believer that accuracy >>> speed, so dont' sacrifice any correct answers.

[BigA]

I would say that I always TRY to get through the first 15 questions in 15 minutes. But I ultimately need to work until I have determined the correct answer. And it always takes me longer than this. I think if I were to set the stopwatch for 15 minutes and do the first 15, I would just be skimming and guessing more, which doesn't seem very prudent, so I've never done that. Would that actually be good practice??

[Knock]

I would say that I always TRY to get through the first 15 questions in 15 minutes. But I ultimately need to work until I have determined the correct answer. And it always takes me longer than this. I think if I were to set the stopwatch for 15 minutes and do the first 15, I would just be skimming and guessing more, which doesn't seem very prudent, so I've never done that. Would that actually be good practice??

No, I definitely wouldn't recommend it. You get faster by understanding the concepts behind the questions, and the test itself.

What do you think about this: Do the 1st 15 questions of a LR section timed, counting up (preferably a section that you weren't planning on taking anyways). Take as long as you need to be 100% sure (or as sure as you possibly can be) that your answer is correct. Then, slowly repeat, taking time off in small increments as you improve.

You need to build up to faster times, and you do that through improved understanding and reasoning ability. You get that through giving yourself the time you need to answer the questions.

It actually would be good to do the whole section untimed in this manner, slowly and gradually speeding up, but if you want to only do the 1st 15 questions that's okay too.

[BigA]

You're in a totally different spectrum as a test-taker than me, hitting 180s and all. So maybe what I said doesn't apply as much. But for me, timing is a big problem and I have to force myself to hurry more on the newer LR and RC. Although what's kinda weird about the old ones is I believe there are more 30 second questions but more 3 minute questions as well.

Hmm...have you tried to push through the first 15 questions in 15 minutes (1 minute a question), which gives you 20 minutes for the last 10 questions (2 minute a question). I think this might help you out with timing.

You need to take advantage of the relatively straightforward and relatively simple (I say relative because even the "easy" LSAT questions are still difficult) to give yourself the time you need on the difficult ones.

I think you need to identify what is causing you to have time problems. Are you reading the stimulus, then the question stem, then re-reading the stimulus?

Also identifying the conclusion when you're reading through the stimulus, and pre-phrasing answers to questions might help you with your timing issues as well.

You definitely need to "attack" the questions that are possible to "attack". But i'm a big believer that accuracy >>> speed, so dont' sacrifice any correct answers.

Ha! I think you edited some things as I was typing.

After a lot of experimenting, I think I usually read the stem first now. What takes me the most time is just reading the stimulus so I understand it. My brain just doesn't work as well as other people's. This often means reading a sentence multiple times to understand it, and understanding it within the context of everything else. I have gotten slightly better though, the more I practice.

[Knock]

You're in a totally different spectrum as a test-taker than me, hitting 180s and all. So maybe what I said doesn't apply as much. But for me, timing is a big problem and I have to force myself to hurry more on the newer LR and RC. Although what's kinda weird about the old ones is I believe there are more 30 second questions but more 3 minute questions as well.

Hmm...have you tried to push through the first 15 questions in 15 minutes (1 minute a question), which gives you 20 minutes for the last 10 questions (2 minute a question). I think this might help you out with timing.

You need to take advantage of the relatively straightforward and relatively simple (I say relative because even the "easy" LSAT questions are still difficult) to give yourself the time you need on the difficult ones.

I think you need to identify what is causing you to have time problems. Are you reading the stimulus, then the question stem, then re-reading the stimulus?

Also identifying the conclusion when you're reading through the stimulus, and pre-phrasing answers to questions might help you with your timing issues as well.

You definitely need to "attack" the questions that are possible to "attack". But i'm a big believer that accuracy >>> speed, so dont' sacrifice any correct answers.

Ha! I think you edited some things as I was typing.

After a lot of experimenting, I think I usually read the stem first now. What takes me the most time is just reading the stimulus so I understand it. My brain just doesn't work as well as other people's. This often means reading a sentence multiple times to understand it, and understanding it within the context of everything else. I have gotten slightly better though, the more I practice.

Yeah lol, I always forget stuff or want to add more so i'm always editing after I post. I try and do it quick enough that no one notices though

Good. It doesn't matter whether you read the stimulus or question stem first, but you should find and pick the one you like and stick with it (and it sounds like you have).

Have you gone through the LR Bible? If you haven't, you need to, and if you have, you should try and get as familiar as possible with the question stems. There are only so many types of questions, each question type only has so many ways it can be presented to you. Ideally, you want to be so familiar with the question stems that you can quickly recognize what type of question type it is indicating. Besides indicating the question type, question stems aren't too important, just be sure to pay attention for any unique particulars to the question.

Edit: RC fail. I thought you said question stem. Editing now...

For stimulus, try reading through the argument initially and underlining the conclusion. Then you know what point the argument is heading towards, and can piece together what each part each portion of the stimulus plays. Kind of like reverse engineering to some degree. If you can identify that the stimulus is giving you conclusion A, then you know what the other parts of the stimulus/argument play. Hypothetically then, you would know that the first sentence which you were unsure what part it played, you can confidently say that it functioned to do X/Y/Z. The conclusion is of vital importance, identifying it is extremely valuable, and will get you some points/questions. I'm not sure if this is necessarily the best for you with your time management issue, but if your rereading each sentence a few times, this might actually be quicker.

[BigA]

I would say that I always TRY to get through the first 15 questions in 15 minutes. But I ultimately need to work until I have determined the correct answer. And it always takes me longer than this. I think if I were to set the stopwatch for 15 minutes and do the first 15, I would just be skimming and guessing more, which doesn't seem very prudent, so I've never done that. Would that actually be good practice??

No, I definitely wouldn't recommend it. You get faster by understanding the concepts behind the questions, and the test itself.

What do you think about this: Do the 1st 15 questions of a LR section timed, counting up (preferably a section that you weren't planning on taking anyways). Take as long as you need to be 100% sure (or as sure as you possibly can be) that your answer is correct. Then, slowly repeat, taking time off in small increments as you improve.

You need to build up to faster times, and you do that through improved understanding and reasoning ability. You get that through giving yourself the time you need to answer the questions.

It actually would be good to do the whole section untimed in this manner, slowly and gradually speeding up, but if you want to only do the 1st 15 questions that's okay too.

Thanks. That sounds like good advice. I have also gotten faster by being able to eliminate wrong answers more quickly, at just a glance sometimes. This has come from practice -- having done almost all the PTs by now.

Ha! You are always one post ahead of me. Believe me, I'm aware of the things you mentioned in your last post. I'm not exactly terrible, if it has sounded that way. Sometimes I do get through a whole section, but too often I don't get to two or three. I have hit -1s and 2s. Just not with anything close to consistency.

[BigA]

Edit: RC fail. I thought you said question stem. Editing now...

For stimulus, try reading through the argument initially and underlining the conclusion. Then you know what point the argument is heading towards, and can piece together what each part each portion of the stimulus plays. Kind of like reverse engineering to some degree. If you can identify that the stimulus is giving you conclusion A, then you know what the other parts of the stimulus/argument play. Hypothetically then, you would know that the first sentence which you were unsure what part it played, you can confidently say that it functioned to do X/Y/Z. The conclusion is of vital importance, identifying it is extremely valuable, and will get you some points/questions. I'm not sure if this is necessarily the best for you with your time management issue, but if your rereading each sentence a few times, this might actually be quicker.

LOL. You were right the first time. Still helpful tho

[zworykin]

So, until a couple weeks ago I wasn't really planning to go to law school. I took the LSAT in Dec. 05, get this, on a whim. A friend said to me, "I think you should take the LSAT, it seems like you'd do well." I said, "Sure, why not?" and scored a 169. At the time I had no interest in going to law school, so I only took two practice tests to familiarize myself with the test (167, 171) and wasn't really all that worried about it, so I didn't put in anything like my maximum effort. Now my friends from undergrad are starting to get OUT of law school, and it's spurred me to finally do something with my life. Law school it is! Of course by the time I matriculate in Fall '11, that 169 will no longer be valid, so I have to retake it...

My prep so far (all tests timed, 4-section unless noted, and I lost the first few sheets before I started tracking details):

46 165
47 167
48 174
49 178 (-3)
50 180 (-2 [-1RC -0LG -1LR])
51 179 (-3 [-2RC -0LG -1LR]) Exp section 7.3 (-2RC)
45 175 (-7 [-2RC -1LG -4LR]) Exp section 7.4 (-0LR) -- a surprisingly bad PT at this point, with a misbubble on LG
[At this point I had a rough day at work and finished up PT 7 as a sort of half-day off]
7.1 (-0LR), 7.2 (-0LG) So, overall for 7 was (-2 [-2RC -0LG -0LR]) = 180



Yeah, kinda strange pattern, I know. I've been out of school 3 years and working in a job that does almost nothing to stimulate me intellectually. So, I was probably a bit rusty when I took my first couple PTs. The plan is to take one PT per weekday from here til the June 7 test with weekends to rest, finishing up with the most recent tests I have in the last week. I plan to take my last one, 57, on the 5th, and give myself the 6th off. Should be all 5-section tests from this point on. I may actually do one test per weekend split in half, just to stay sharp.

[Knock]

I would say that I always TRY to get through the first 15 questions in 15 minutes. But I ultimately need to work until I have determined the correct answer. And it always takes me longer than this. I think if I were to set the stopwatch for 15 minutes and do the first 15, I would just be skimming and guessing more, which doesn't seem very prudent, so I've never done that. Would that actually be good practice??

No, I definitely wouldn't recommend it. You get faster by understanding the concepts behind the questions, and the test itself.

What do you think about this: Do the 1st 15 questions of a LR section timed, counting up (preferably a section that you weren't planning on taking anyways). Take as long as you need to be 100% sure (or as sure as you possibly can be) that your answer is correct. Then, slowly repeat, taking time off in small increments as you improve.

You need to build up to faster times, and you do that through improved understanding and reasoning ability. You get that through giving yourself the time you need to answer the questions.

It actually would be good to do the whole section untimed in this manner, slowly and gradually speeding up, but if you want to only do the 1st 15 questions that's okay too.

Thanks. That sounds like good advice. I have also gotten faster by being able to eliminate wrong answers more quickly, at just a glance sometimes. This has come from practice -- having done almost all the PTs by now.

Ha! You are always one post ahead of me. Believe me, I'm aware of the things you mentioned in your last post. I'm not exactly terrible, if it has sounded that way. Sometimes I do get through a whole section, but too often I don't get to two or three. I have hit -1s and 2s. Just not with anything close to consistency.

Haha, i'm just on top of it tonight I guess. And sorry if I implied that you were terrible! i'm just trying to be helpful, I promise .

Yeah, good job on improving your answer choice eliminating abilities. Since you've done a lot of PT's, have you been able to develop a better "feel"? Like you can tell just whether the answer feels like a credited answer or an incorrect answer. I feel like I have, and it's help me improve my speed/consistency. Just if I know the answer has that perfect feel, I won't do much more than glance at the other answer choices to confirm. This also saves me some brain power.

Honestly, a lot of consistency comes from just repetition, and practice. You've done good if you're almost done with all the PT's. Be sure you aren't rushing through the material though. Make sure you review thoroughly. What's your current review strategy?

[Knock]

So, until a couple weeks ago I wasn't really planning to go to law school. I took the LSAT in Dec. 05, get this, on a whim. A friend said to me, "I think you should take the LSAT, it seems like you'd do well." I said, "Sure, why not?" and scored a 169. At the time I had no interest in going to law school, so I only took two practice tests to familiarize myself with the test (167, 171) and wasn't really all that worried about it, so I didn't put in anything like my maximum effort. Now my friends from undergrad are starting to get OUT of law school, and it's spurred me to finally do something with my life. Law school it is! Of course by the time I matriculate in Fall '11, that 169 will no longer be valid, so I have to retake it...

My prep so far (all tests timed, 4-section unless noted, and I lost the first few sheets before I started tracking details):

46 165
47 167
48 174
49 178 (-3)
50 180 (-2 [-1RC -0LG -1LR])
51 179 (-3 [-2RC -0LG -1LR]) Exp section 7.3 (-2RC)
45 175 (-7 [-2RC -1LG -4LR]) Exp section 7.4 (-0LR) -- a surprisingly bad PT at this point, with a misbubble on LG
[At this point I had a rough day at work and finished up PT 7 as a sort of half-day off]
7.1 (-0LR), 7.2 (-0LG) So, overall for 7 was (-2 [-2RC -0LG -0LR]) = 180



Yeah, kinda strange pattern, I know. I've been out of school 3 years and working in a job that does almost nothing to stimulate me intellectually. So, I was probably a bit rusty when I took my first couple PTs. The plan is to take one PT per weekday from here til the June 7 test with weekends to rest, finishing up with the most recent tests I have in the last week. I plan to take my last one, 57, on the 5th, and give myself the 6th off. Should be all 5-section tests from this point on. I may actually do one test per weekend split in half, just to stay sharp.

Cool man. Sounds like you're well on your way to an excellent score ! What's your UG GPA looking like?

If I were you, i'd buckle down and shoot for a 175+ on the LSAT, which you've already shown yourself more than capable of. That kind of LSAT score could really be life changing.

Also, have you thought about the newest PT's, 58 and 59. It's not really a huge difference, but might as well do the most current ones available, the ones most similar to the test you will actually be taking in June.

Anyways, best of luck to you!

[zworykin]

UG GPA is 3.66. Nothing to write home about. Again it comes down to not having planned to go to law school (or grad school at all), I started to focus more on work and less on school as the years went by. 3.95 for my first two years. A sad downward trend that I'll have to write an addendum for, haha. But, yeah, I'm definitely shooting for 175+, and fingers crossed for 178. I think RC is my weakest section at this point--I've missed the same number of RC as LR give or take, despite answering twice as many LR questions.

I haven't really thought about grabbing 58 and 59. Do you think it's really worth it? I can't imagine the test has changed too much since 57. Of course, on the other hand, if $16 actually did help earn, say, a 180 instead of a 178, that would probably make a big $$$ difference in my app cycle. I think I probably will get them, now that you mention it. I hadn't really looked into what was available now (I got my materials from a friend who took his test a while back). And hey, Amazon has a big 4 for 3 promotion right now, so it's a good time to buy from them!

[Knock]

UG GPA is 3.66. Nothing to write home about. Again it comes down to not having planned to go to law school (or grad school at all), I started to focus more on work and less on school as the years went by. 3.95 for my first two years. A sad downward trend that I'll have to write an addendum for, haha. But, yeah, I'm definitely shooting for 175+, and fingers crossed for 178. I think RC is my weakest section at this point--I've missed the same number of RC as LR give or take, despite answering twice as many LR questions.

I haven't really thought about grabbing 58 and 59. Do you think it's really worth it? I can't imagine the test has changed too much since 57. Of course, on the other hand, if $16 actually did help earn, say, a 180 instead of a 178, that would probably make a big $$$ difference in my app cycle. I think I probably will get them, now that you mention it. I hadn't really looked into what was available now (I got my materials from a friend who took his test a while back). And hey, Amazon has a big 4 for 3 promotion right now, so it's a good time to buy from them!

Definitely. When you put it in these terms, it's seem almost silly not to get them. This is how i've thought about my whole prep process, and I think it has greatly benefited me.

[BigA]

I would say that I always TRY to get through the first 15 questions in 15 minutes. But I ultimately need to work until I have determined the correct answer. And it always takes me longer than this. I think if I were to set the stopwatch for 15 minutes and do the first 15, I would just be skimming and guessing more, which doesn't seem very prudent, so I've never done that. Would that actually be good practice??

No, I definitely wouldn't recommend it. You get faster by understanding the concepts behind the questions, and the test itself.

What do you think about this: Do the 1st 15 questions of a LR section timed, counting up (preferably a section that you weren't planning on taking anyways). Take as long as you need to be 100% sure (or as sure as you possibly can be) that your answer is correct. Then, slowly repeat, taking time off in small increments as you improve.

You need to build up to faster times, and you do that through improved understanding and reasoning ability. You get that through giving yourself the time you need to answer the questions.

It actually would be good to do the whole section untimed in this manner, slowly and gradually speeding up, but if you want to only do the 1st 15 questions that's okay too.

Thanks. That sounds like good advice. I have also gotten faster by being able to eliminate wrong answers more quickly, at just a glance sometimes. This has come from practice -- having done almost all the PTs by now.

Ha! You are always one post ahead of me. Believe me, I'm aware of the things you mentioned in your last post. I'm not exactly terrible, if it has sounded that way. Sometimes I do get through a whole section, but too often I don't get to two or three. I have hit -1s and 2s. Just not with anything close to consistency.

Haha, i'm just on top of it tonight I guess. And sorry if I implied that you were terrible! i'm just trying to be helpful, I promise .

Yeah, good job on improving your answer choice eliminating abilities. Since you've done a lot of PT's, have you been able to develop a better "feel"? Like you can tell just whether the answer feels like a credited answer or an incorrect answer. I feel like I have, and it's help me improve my speed/consistency. Just if I know the answer has that perfect feel, I won't do much more than glance at the other answer choices to confirm. This also saves me some brain power.

Honestly, a lot of consistency comes from just repetition, and practice. You've done good if you're almost done with all the PT's. Be sure you aren't rushing through the material though. Make sure you review thoroughly. What's your current review strategy?

First, you didn't imply I was terrible. If anything, I felt like I might have implied it.

Hmmn, I don't think I can rely on this "feel" as you describe it. I think I would make too many mistakes working like that. I need to confirm pretty much everything. I think the thing that would get me most is necessary/sufficiency. However, I am pretty good at moving on once I've selected an answer, and not reading the rest of the choices. I know this goes against anything I've read in any prep materials, but I do this for the sake of time. Like I said, my brain works slower. If it means not getting to two or three or more questions, it's definitely worth it.

[Knock]

First, you didn't imply I was terrible. If anything, I felt like I might have implied it.

Hmmn, I don't think I can rely on this "feel" as you describe it. I think I would make too many mistakes working like that. I need to confirm pretty much everything. I think the thing that would get me most is necessary/sufficiency. However, I am pretty good at moving on once I've selected an answer, and not reading the rest of the choices. I know this goes against anything I've read in any prep materials, but I do this for the sake of time. Like I said, my brain works slower. If it means not getting to two or three or more questions, it's definitely worth it.

Have you checked this out?
http://www.top-law-schools.com/conditio ... oning.html

I have only glanced at it, so I can't speak for it, but it seems helpful.

Anyways, my battery is about to die so I had to make this post quick. Heading to bed, good night everyone!

[zworykin]

However, I am pretty good at moving on once I've selected an answer, and not reading the rest of the choices. I know this goes against anything I've read in any prep materials, but I do this for the sake of time. Like I said, my brain works slower. If it means not getting to two or three or more questions, it's definitely worth it.

I'm actually a big fan of picking the first answer that seems right and moving on, BUT with the proviso that you MUST make a note of the question and remember to come back to it at the end of the section and try to eliminate the other options if you have the time to do so. I consider each option on its own first, rather than comparing it to the others. If I find one that I'm, say, 90% certain is correct, I'll bubble it and move to the next question. Then at the end I'll come back and compare it to the other options. Until you've answered the rest of the questions, it isn't worth taking the extra minute, or two, or three, agonizing over two options on one question. I also find this tends to work out better on the questions with shorter, simpler answer choices. The more complicated the answer, the harder it is to be certain its the best option without checking the rest, even if it seems great on its own.

[jman77]

However, I am pretty good at moving on once I've selected an answer, and not reading the rest of the choices. I know this goes against anything I've read in any prep materials, but I do this for the sake of time. Like I said, my brain works slower. If it means not getting to two or three or more questions, it's definitely worth it.

I'm actually a big fan of picking the first answer that seems right and moving on, BUT with the proviso that you MUST make a note of the question and remember to come back to it at the end of the section and try to eliminate the other options if you have the time to do so. I consider each option on its own first, rather than comparing it to the others. If I find one that I'm, say, 90% certain is correct, I'll bubble it and move to the next question. Then at the end I'll come back and compare it to the other options. Until you've answered the rest of the questions, it isn't worth taking the extra minute, or two, or three, agonizing over two options on one question. I also find this tends to work out better on the questions with shorter, simpler answer choices. The more complicated the answer, the harder it is to be certain its the best option without checking the rest, even if it seems great on its own.

This would be a good strategy if you are 100% certain that you will have extra time to go back to your previous answers. There is no way you can be 100% certain. Additionally, I have found that when I pick an answer, I tend to get a certain "bias" for it when I go back and review (particularly true if the answer seemed to be easy/obvious). Also, I have found that picking the first answer that seems correct results almost always results in at least 1-2 careless errors. The test makers are pretty devious and write up answer choices that seem oh so right, but then insert one tiny word that makes it wrong.

For me at least, the best approach is to still go through the elimination process for every question, even the seeminly easy ones. This is especially true for LR and RC.

I agree with what you said about not spending too much time on any question. However, you can still go through the elimination process without spending to much time. If, after going through all the answer choices and eliminating the wrong ones you still haven't narrowed them down to 1, then pick one from among the narrowed down choices and mark the question for later review and move on.

There is still no guarantee you will have time or that you will not be biased towards the first option you picked, but at least by eliminating answers you enhance the likelihood of picking the correct answer, i.e., 1 chance in 5 translates to 20% while 1 in 3 translates to 33% probability.

[Knock]

Took PT 53 today, and wow it was tough! went -2 LR -0 LG -2 LR -3 RC for 93 raw/174 scaled. Pretty disappointing test...although as soon as I started on the first section I realized that this was a tough test. A little bummed, these newer tests I seem to average a lower score . I need to get back up to 175+!

53 -- 05/20/10 ----- -2 LR -0 LG -2 LR -3 RC ------ 93/174 ----- 5 sections, w/ 9.2 as 3rd experimental

[GATORTIM]

I would have done anything to have had that much time to prep

[Knock]

I would have done anything to have had that much time to prep

Yeah, I definitely am lucky in this respect, and very grateful for the opportunities I have, and i'm trying to take full advantage of them. [strike]Would you have any more time for prep in the summer? and then take the October LSAT?[/strike]

Edit: Saw your profile.

[BigA]

Hey Knockglock. After our little chat last night, I got my first perfect score on an LR section today! However, the rest of the test was pretty terrible.

[BigA]

This would be a good strategy if you are 100% certain that you will have extra time to go back to your previous answers. There is no way you can be 100% certain. Additionally, I have found that when I pick an answer, I tend to get a certain "bias" for it when I go back and review (particularly true if the answer seemed to be easy/obvious). Also, I have found that picking the first answer that seems correct results almost always results in at least 1-2 careless errors. The test makers are pretty devious and write up answer choices that seem oh so right, but then insert one tiny word that makes it wrong.

Yeah, but like I said I'm pretty good at not falling for the tricky wrong answers the test makers create. Sure, once in a while I miss one by not reading all the choices. But I more than make up for it by getting through more of the questions in a section.

I agree with what you said about not spending too much time on any question. However, you can still go through the elimination process without spending to much time. If, after going through all the answer choices and eliminating the wrong ones you still haven't narrowed them down to 1, then pick one from among the narrowed down choices and mark the question for later review and move on.

I have a serious problem with getting away from questions sometimes. I'm missing something so I think that if I just read the stimulus again or disect an answer choice, I'll figure it out. So I keep doing this and then I may be 3 minutes in or more and am still not really sure of the answer. It's tricky though because sometimes if I just invest another 20-30 seconds, I will get it, and in those cases I'm glad I didn't just move on...

[BigA]

Took PT 53 today, and wow it was tough! went -2 LR -0 LG -2 LR -3 RC for 93 raw/174 scaled. Pretty disappointing test...although as soon as I started on the first section I realized that this was a tough test. A little bummed, these newer tests I seem to average a lower score . I need to get back up to 175+!

53 -- 05/20/10 ----- -2 LR -0 LG -2 LR -3 RC ------ 93/174 ----- 5 sections, w/ 9.2 as 3rd experimental

Oh wow. Just realized we took the same PT! You didn't find the games devastatingly brutal? Oh my, I have to go back and review when I'm done here. But I thought it was the hardest games I've seen in the newer tests. Like I said, you are in another league than me as a test-taker. I scored higher in an LR section though