Rushing or careful consideration: the new RC Forum

[niederbomb]

Up through the early 50's, I didn't have much trouble with RC. I was counting on -1 or -2 on test day next Sunday.

But in the last week, my RC scores have nosedived, including -6 on PT 59 and -5 on PT 54. And I had trouble finishing on time with many of the global questions.

So I panicked and just did the RC sections on PT 57 and 58 even before I took them as PT's. Instead of reading slowly and carefully considering all the answer choices, I just moved right through the passage, scanned through the choices, picked my first impression, and moved on. Of course, I referred to the passage frequently, but I didn't spend nearly as much time considering the answer choices as I was.

Guess what? I scored -1 on 58, and -2 on 57, exactly how I was doing in the 30's and 40's when I also finished RC with lots of time to spare.

I'd like to know if these last two PT's RC sections are unusually easy, or if my "quick" approach is just more effective.

I know it's a bit late to change my strategy, but I really got tripped up by 54, 55, 56, and 59. If I do as poorly on RC as I did on those tests, I would probably not even go to law school, given the expense and iffy job prospects for all but HYSCCN, Virginia, Penn, UCB, and Texas (the only law schools I would consider going to).

[Sandro]

1st impression sometimes = trap answer. You're basically suggesting the strategy LSAC uses to trick people with answer choices.

[niederbomb]

Yes, that's why I slowed down originally.

However, that does not work for me either.

Maybe, a better answer is "first impression after referring to the appropriate place in the passage"?

Any other suggestions? -4 or -6 on RC is not acceptable on test day.

Or maybe this is only applicable to 1) main point questions and 2) "With which one would the author be most likely to agree with?" questions.

Going with a first impression on detail questions is maybe not a good idea.

[testmachine45]

The only people I know who get high 170s and 180s have gotten extended time. This whole process is a shame.

[niederbomb]

The only people I know who get high 170s and 180s have gotten extended time. This whole process is a shame.

That's ridiculous.

I'm looking for a 173. I think that's perfectly doable in the time allowed.

[jfb]

The only people I know who get high 170s and 180s have gotten extended time. This whole process is a shame.

extended time as in the proctor accidently or intentionally didn't call time after 35 mins???

[incompetentia]

I haven't taken 57 or 58 yet, but I do know that for me, 56 and 59 were two of my worse RC scores...I know 59 does have a very generous curve supposedly due to the difficulty of the RC section so it might just be the specific tests you've taken.

[niederbomb]

extended time as in the proctor accidently or intentionally didn't call time after 35 mins???

Would be nice if that happens regularly at overseas locations.

[motiontodismiss]

extended time as in the proctor accidently or intentionally didn't call time after 35 mins???

Would be nice if that happens regularly at overseas locations.

Totally, considering my biggest problem seems to be time.

[etown989]

The only people I know who get high 170s and 180s have gotten extended time. This whole process is a shame.

you know multiple people who have scored 180s?... flame

[niederbomb]

testmachine45 wrote:
The only people I know who get high 170s and 180s have gotten extended time. This whole process is a shame.


you know multiple people who have scored 180s?... flame

Here's my LSAT burnout kicking in: I didn't notice the "180s" at first.

I didn't know it was possible to score in the 180's in the same sense one can score in the 170s.

[Hedwig]

Damn, I want a high 180's score now.

Here's my opinion on RC.
I hate the new RC. Mostly because I can score -0 repeatedly on the old RC, and this new RC sometimes leaves me with a -4.
The differences are in the subtle answer choices. I almost always make my mistakes on questions where I narrow it down to 2 or so answer choices, and pick the wrong answer choice.

What you're describing sounds to me more like you're going with intuition on answer choices, rather than "first impression." First impression is probably not guaranteed to net you a -1 or a -0. First impression isn't great. However, I do think that intuitively you can lean towards certain choices and pick the one you "like" best. This strategy doesn't work AS well on newer RC, but it still helps. On old RCs, it was almost a sure thing (besides detail questions).

[txadv11]

... I almost always make my mistakes on questions where I narrow it down to 2 or so answer choices, and pick the wrong answer choice...
.

EXACT same situation here.

[niederbomb]

Damn, I want a high 180's score now.

Here's my opinion on RC.
I hate the new RC. Mostly because I can score -0 repeatedly on the old RC, and this new RC sometimes leaves me with a -4.
The differences are in the subtle answer choices. I almost always make my mistakes on questions where I narrow it down to 2 or so answer choices, and pick the wrong answer choice.

What you're describing sounds to me more like you're going with intuition on answer choices, rather than "first impression." First impression is probably not guaranteed to net you a -1 or a -0. First impression isn't great. However, I do think that intuitively you can lean towards certain choices and pick the one you "like" best. This strategy doesn't work AS well on newer RC, but it still helps. On old RCs, it was almost a sure thing (besides detail questions).

So if intuition doesn't work as well on the new RC, then what is the best strategy?

I'm like you: I used to get -1 or less about half the time on the old RC, and rarely would I miss more than 2. Now, my record is -6 (PT 59). My old record was -5, on my cold diagnostic.

[incompetentia]

I think the key is careful consideration of the answer choices. You should be able to eliminate a minimum of three if you really look at all 5 (and they may be a different 3 than if you skim only).

I scored -5 on PT59 and -11(!) on PT60, but then today got -2 on PT57 by spending even more time than normal looking at the answer choices than scanning the passage for support.

[niederbomb]

Problem is, I get hung up on details on global and inference questions when I spend too much time reading the answer choices.

Maybe I just have an OCD personality:

B is the first one that caught my eye, but what if D is right? There is something in paragraph X that sounds like this? I sooo want to pick the unlikely choice, just in case it's right.

[Sandro]

I used to get -2 -3 usually on old RC usually finishing early. New RC im missing -5, -7, -10s. I even got a -5 in Sep09 when i took the lsat last year so I dont get it. Its as if i've regressed in RC.

[Sandro]

Problem is, I get hung up on details on global and inference questions when I spend too much time reading the answer choices.

Maybe I just have an OCD personality:

B is the first one that caught my eye, but what if D is right? There is something in paragraph X that sounds like this? I sooo want to pick the unlikely choice, just in case it's right.

ME TOO!!! Ill waste so much time debating stuff in my head and i will run out of time. I need to stop treating it like a LR question and realize that the answer will be right in the text...

[motiontodismiss]

Sometimes when I run out of time I read the answer choices in backwards order....from E to A. And hope that I get lucky and the correct answer is E (and it's safe to stop reading at that point because LSAC seems to assume that most people read from A to E and it's more likely that the trap answers are A to D than B to E....).