pt 39? Forum

[paulshortys10]

was this PT hard for anyone?
Im coming off my best test yet (-13 in LR is my lowest ever), and i just decided to do an untimed test just for the hell of it practice on my accuracy, and i missed -10 on the first LR section alone, i've yet to finish the test, but this was a seriously low blow for me . 1 month to go

[lakers3peat]

Just took this one. Was feeling pretty discouraged after the first two sections. LG #2 is just plain weird... Maybe its the wording or something about the sessions I don't know. It took me like 12 minutes to get the 2nd game and I still got -3 on it. I found LR1 to be way tougher then the LR2. I missed 6 on LR1 then 2 on LR2.


Also, that 3rd reading comp passage destroyed me Lol. I got like -5 on it and still don't even know wtf was going on.

If you look at the curve though, it was VERY generous ha.

[zky]

LR1 of PT39 is above average difficulty, yes, but I would not say it is a major outlier or anything like that.

If you are missing 10+ on a section, you should review all your LR sections very carefully. Right and wrong questions, every answer choice. The biggest breakthrough on LR for me was when I mastered the easy questions; after that, I found I had enough time to really work on the hard questions, which DO take a lot of time to parse carefully.

[MrAdams]

Did you go from the 20's into the 30's? I have found that slowly, over the course of running through the 30's, my score has nosedived in LR from ~-9 total in the 20's to just stupid scores in the late 30's.

So what I am going to do now is start taking 45minute LR sections starting from pt38 today, and then slash a minute off with every subsequent pt until I get to about 32mins sections by the start of December. I do a new PT every day so hopefully that will allow my brain to re-adjust to the type of questions the newer LSATs ask in LR sections. In addition, reading the LRB bible again to remind yourself of the techniques that tackle the newer question types will also be of use.

Saying that though, 39 might just be a wild anomaly.

[xqhp82]

Just took this test as well, and I felt it was really strange the whole way through. First it was the 2nd game, I never really have problems with LG but I had to stop and came back to it in the end. Then it's the LR sections. Both of them were quite difficult I think, and I felt they are actually quite similar to the style in the October test (PT61). Well at least I felt similarly discouraged because I don't seem to know definitely what the answer to each question is. And finally the 3rd passage of RC (or 2nd? the one about fairy tales) is just plain difficult. I was pretty much guessing because I didn't get the author's viewpoint. Ended up getting a 165 (LG:-1, LR1:-7, RC:-7, LR2:-6) but would like something better especially with such a generous curve...

[xqhp82]

Hey, thought i'd start a question here regarding PT39 without starting a new thread...for LR2 #1, why is E the correct answer? I chose E and got it right, but upon reviewing it I felt that it does not weaken the argument that 'sleep plays a very important role' because the importance of intellectual development does not undermine the importance of sleep.

I found B quite tempting, but is it wrong because 'extra sleep during the day' does not mean 'extra hours of sleep' on the whole?

[niederbomb]

If you're missing more than -6 in LR, you really don't get LR, and your score has the potential to tank a lot further.

I think I got 169 on this PT about two months ago, with -7 on LG and -2 RC, so I don't think the LR is that hard. Try PT 33, 49, 5, 54, or 61 LR if you want hard.