Top Law Schools

Im taking a new approach to LSAT prep since the last approach I took didnt work (basically taking PT after PT). Right now im working through the LGames Bible. After each section I do all the logic games from previous tests. For instance I just finished the Linear games section so Im going to do all linear logic games using T14's classification. After that Ill work on the next section (grouping) in the LGB and then work through the corresponding logic games. Ill do this until Im done with the LGB and at the end I'll redo each and every single game. Obviously timed.

My plan is to take this same approach with LR after im done with the LGB and then RC. Finally in the month prior to the Oct LSAT Ill take timed PT's. Where Im fuzzy is whether or not I should do this one section at a time prep. Should I work on LG, LR and RC at the same time or is this one at a time method ok? Just looking for some opinions and thoughts. Thanks!

I think that splitting them up is a good idea, but I would probably integrate your system more. I.e. Monday-games. Tuesday-LR. Wednesday-RC etc etc.

Otherwise it may be a pretty substantial period of time between your first section (games apparently) and your last one. That elapsed time may affect how well you remember what you learned etc.

gdane5 wrote:Im taking a new approach to LSAT prep since the last approach I took didnt work (basically taking PT after PT). Right now im working through the LGames Bible. After each section I do all the logic games from previous tests. For instance I just finished the Linear games section so Im going to do all linear logic games using T14's classification. After that Ill work on the next section (grouping) in the LGB and then work through the corresponding logic games. Ill do this until Im done with the LGB and at the end I'll redo each and every single game. Obviously timed.

My plan is to take this same approach with LR after im done with the LGB and then RC. Finally in the month prior to the Oct LSAT Ill take timed PT's. Where Im fuzzy is whether or not I should do this one section at a time prep. Should I work on LG, LR and RC at the same time or is this one at a time method ok? Just looking for some opinions and thoughts. Thanks!

how are you planning on doing all the LR questions by classification?

I have the Kaplan Mastery book. The LR questions from past LSAT's have been grouped into different categories (Parallel, main point, etc etc).

That's a good source of questions by type.

Keep in mind, however, that Mastery Practice fails to make some important distinctions. It doesn't differentiate between "Must Be True" and "Most Strongly Supported" questions (it lumps them together under "Inference"), nor does it distinguish between "Necessary Assumption" and "Sufficient Assumption" questions (it lumps them together under "Assumption").

Let me know if you'd like details on the differences between these question-types.

LSATBlog I appreciate the help. Would you weigh in on my question? Should I incorporate all three sections into my prep at the same time or is it ok to concentrate on one section at a time? Thanks!

In my schedules, I recommend concentrating on one section at a time to avoid being too scattered. This way, you can solidify the skills.

What you've described in your initial post is along the lines of what I recommend in my schedules, so I agree with your approach.

Thanks for advice. I appreciate it.

gdane5 wrote:I have the Kaplan Mastery book. The LR questions from past LSAT's have been grouped into different categories (Parallel, main point, etc etc).

Then your study plan is VERY similar to mine http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 6&t=120710

Keep in mind, however, that Mastery Practice fails to make some important distinctions. It doesn't differentiate between "Must Be True" and "Most Strongly Supported" questions (it lumps them together under "Inference"),

I've taken every practice LSAT and didn't know there was a difference

As for your question, I'm starting out with LR simply because I want to wait longer before I do the games again. I've done them all twice, including many leading up to the last LSAT. So they'll seem fresher if I do it later.

As for RC, I'm still not sure how I'll study this time around.

I'm sure whatever order you do them in will be fine.

I was in the same boat, especially after finishing linear games and debating on whether to move onto grouping games or LR.

I chose grouping games because I want to develop my LG skills before starting a whole new section (and way of thinking). I intend to keep doing 1-3 LG's I've already done on a daily basis while studying LR to keep the games process fresh in my mind so my skills don't deteriorate. We'll see how that goes!

I feel like I'm too focused on LG to take a break and put all my focus and energy on another section, so it's a comfortable decision for me. I've already seen decent progression of my linear games skills so far after 3 weeks, and I actually think they're fun now!

LSAT Blog wrote:That's a good source of questions by type.

Keep in mind, however, that Mastery Practice fails to make some important distinctions. It doesn't differentiate between "Must Be True" and "Most Strongly Supported" questions (it lumps them together under "Inference"), nor does it distinguish between "Necessary Assumption" and "Sufficient Assumption" questions (it lumps them together under "Assumption").

Let me know if you'd like details on the differences between these question-types.

One benefit of that classification system though, is that it forces you to be able to think about more subtle differences in question types as you move along, hence keeping you conscious of what you're doing. You have to be aware of the distinctions, of course.

Anaconda wrote:I was in the same boat, especially after finishing linear games and debating on whether to move onto grouping games or LR.

I chose grouping games because I want to develop my LG skills before starting a whole new section (and way of thinking). I intend to keep doing 1-3 LG's I've already done on a daily basis while studying LR to keep the games process fresh in my mind so my skills don't deteriorate. We'll see how that goes!

I feel like I'm too focused on LG to take a break and put all my focus and energy on another section, so it's a comfortable decision for me. I've already seen decent progression of my linear games skills so far after 3 weeks, and I actually think they're fun now!

Thats the reason why I'm taking this road. I dont want to do LG and LR and RC at the same time because Ill feel too scattered and Im afraid I wont improve on any section. By keeping it to one section at a time, hardcore, I feel that I can really hone my skills. My only concern is that ill "forget" how to do the games or how to think for LR, but I dont think this is too much to be concerned about.

HiLine wrote:

LSAT Blog wrote:That's a good source of questions by type.

Keep in mind, however, that Mastery Practice fails to make some important distinctions. It doesn't differentiate between "Must Be True" and "Most Strongly Supported" questions (it lumps them together under "Inference"), nor does it distinguish between "Necessary Assumption" and "Sufficient Assumption" questions (it lumps them together under "Assumption").

Let me know if you'd like details on the differences between these question-types.

One benefit of that classification system though, is that it forces you to be able to think about more subtle differences in question types as you move along, hence keeping you conscious of what you're doing. You have to be aware of the distinctions, of course.

Agreed. For those who are aware of the distinctions, it could be a useful drill to simply run through the questions stems within those chapters, marking which is which type.

Unfortunately, the lack of any these distinctions suggests that there is no difference at all between these question-types, so those who are unaware of the differences are misled.

I remember seeing a Kaplan rep on here say there had been some "recent updates" to the course. I wonder if they've changed their categorization system to reflect these nuances...

gdane5 wrote:Im taking a new approach to LSAT prep since the last approach I took didnt work (basically taking PT after PT). Right now im working through the LGames Bible. After each section I do all the logic games from previous tests. For instance I just finished the Linear games section so Im going to do all linear logic games using T14's classification. After that Ill work on the next section (grouping) in the LGB and then work through the corresponding logic games. Ill do this until Im done with the LGB and at the end I'll redo each and every single game. Obviously timed.

My plan is to take this same approach with LR after im done with the LGB and then RC. Finally in the month prior to the Oct LSAT Ill take timed PT's. Where Im fuzzy is whether or not I should do this one section at a time prep. Should I work on LG, LR and RC at the same time or is this one at a time method ok? Just looking for some opinions and thoughts. Thanks!

This is exactly how I prepped - and I purchased the questions organized by type from Cambridge LSAT. However, one thing that tripped me up was I spent way too much time focused on logic games (which I feel I did pretty well on the June 2010) and ran out of time to thoroughly prepare for LR (I have no clue how I did for June 2010 on LR). So be sure you are keeping track of time. But do save at least 10 pt's for real simulated practice testing so you can get a feel for timing.

Ill have more than enought time for LR. I should be done with the logic games component of my prep by late next week. Ill start LR prep right after which gives me a very long time to work on it. This is good since Im terrible at LR. The problem is going to be PT since Ive exhausted them already. I reckon that I wont remember what I looked at since the last PT I took was back in Dec. so Ill be ok.

LSAT Blog wrote:Agreed. For those who are aware of the distinctions, it could be a useful drill to simply run through the questions stems within those chapters, marking which is which type.

Unfortunately, the lack of any these distinctions suggests that there is no difference at all between these question-types, so those who are unaware of the differences are misled.

I remember seeing a Kaplan rep on here say there had been some "recent updates" to the course. I wonder if they've changed their categorization system to reflect these nuances...

I believe the Powerscore Bible treats them as the same as well.

I should be done with the logic games component of my prep by late next week

Wow! Done with every logic game since the June test? You're really gunning for October

BigA wrote:LSAT Blog wrote:
Agreed. For those who are aware of the distinctions, it could be a useful drill to simply run through the questions stems within those chapters, marking which is which type.

Unfortunately, the lack of any these distinctions suggests that there is no difference at all between these question-types, so those who are unaware of the differences are misled.

I remember seeing a Kaplan rep on here say there had been some "recent updates" to the course. I wonder if they've changed their categorization system to reflect these nuances...

I believe the Powerscore Bible treats them as the same as well.

The Powerscore Bible does treat Must Be True and Most Strongly Supported as the same type.

However, it refers to Necessary Assumption as "Assumption" and refers to Sufficient Assumption as "Justify," so it makes a distinction there.

i have a similar question about study plan. I adapted the 4-month study schedule of LSAT Blog by changing it from doing one section at a time to doing one section per week. so the materials covered will be the same in the long run, but the plan is divided as LG, LR, RC, LG, LR, RC, LG, LG, LR, LR, RC for 11 weeks, and the last 4 weeks is devoted to doing full timed PTs (only 15 weeks left til october test). What do you think of my schedule?? would it be better off if i just do one section at a time? i worry that I will need a lot of extra time to pick things up in the last month if i do it that way.

also i bought the RC Bible and Traciela grouped by passage type book; in the Blog there isn't time devoted to RC, but if i wish to include these two books in my 4-month schedule, how much time should I allocate??

xqhp82 wrote:also i bought the RC Bible and Traciela grouped by passage type book; in the Blog there isn't time devoted to RC, but if i wish to include these two books in my 4-month schedule, how much time should I allocate??

I devoted less time to RC than to LG and LR simply because people are less interested in covering it. The schedule is simply a sample based on what the majority of people I've encountered want to focus on. Modify as desired.

Idea: Devote 3 weeks to RC Bible and the Traciela grouped by passage type book, and complete LR stuff faster.

xqhp82 wrote:would it be better off if i just do one section at a time?

I think it's better to focus on one section at a time, but that's just my opinion.

Any reasons why you prefer to study one section at a time?

LSAT Blog wrote:

xqhp82 wrote:also i bought the RC Bible and Traciela grouped by passage type book; in the Blog there isn't time devoted to RC, but if i wish to include these two books in my 4-month schedule, how much time should I allocate??

I devoted less time to RC than to LG and LR simply because people are less interested in covering it. The schedule is simply a sample based on what the majority of people I've encountered want to focus on. Modify as desired.

Idea: Devote 3 weeks to RC Bible and the Traciela grouped by passage type book, and complete LR stuff faster.

xqhp82 wrote:would it be better off if i just do one section at a time?

I think it's better to focus on one section at a time, but that's just my opinion.