Top Law Schools

i feel like they're so irrelevant to anything you could possibly do

but they're my worst section so I'm biased

if they were replaced with a LR or RC id probably be getting 177s

You could argue that they should remove LGs, but the real reason is that it is highly learnable and doesn't really show anything innate. Then again, perhaps they want to test peoples' ability to learn?

You either get LG.

Or you don't.

tazmolover wrote:You either get LG.

Or you don't.

I couldn't disagree more.

I think that LG could be replaced by better things, but it is what it is. They're very learnable. I started getting only like 10 or 12 correct per section. By the end of my prep I was getting -2 or -3 on a consistent basis. They're learnable.

i tend to agree

I got better at them but when i hear about people that finish them with ten minutes to spare i just go O_O

I agree about LGs -- I don't see how they could be very relevant to either what you study in law school or what you do as a lawyer. That said, they're my weakest section too, so maybe I too am biased.

Practice tests I was getting about 14-15 right.

I know I got 9-10 right today. usually though the 14-15 comes from getting two games all the way right and guessing on the last two. Its anyone's guess how I did since I only completedly solved one game

Im biased against them but I dont care. I started out like -13 and the best I ever did was -3. On PTs I sometimes pulled a -5 or -6

If they replaced them with another LR I would be IN BUSINESS!!!

jd20132013 wrote:Practice tests I was getting about 14-15 right.

I know I got 9-10 right today. usually though the 14-15 comes from getting two games all the way right and guessing on the last two. Its anyone's guess how I did since I only completedly solved one game

If you were doing this poorly on them, then thats a lack of preparation. They really arent that difficult. It essentially comes down to putting things into order. I know they're tough, but they are totally learnable. They're also fun!

*shrug* i don't know what to tell you then. I don't know how I could have prepared more...went through the logic games bible twice as well as took 12 practice tests...I improved but yeah

Fuck you assholes, LG is the most learnable, take that away and I'm stuck with either another LR section (which I don't mind), but theres a chance of another RC section which would screw me up.

tazmolover wrote:Fuck you assholes, LG is the most learnable, take that away and I'm stuck with either another LR section (which I don't mind), but theres a chance of another RC section which would screw me up.

DItto.

I screwed up LG this time but I still love it.

I usually get between -0 and -3 on lg.. And this test I can't be so sure. Maybe -5 .. Which is pretty bad since i depend on the bulk of my score coming from games. And I effed up reading comp because i ran out of time on the last passage (8 questions) and had to bubble in answers. Might take two weeks off and start prepping for dec. Doesn't hurt to have a second chance.

jd20132013 wrote:*shrug* i don't know what to tell you then. I don't know how I could have prepared more...went through the logic games bible twice as well as took 12 practice tests...I improved but yeah

There are hundreds of LG out there. 12 PT's isnt enough to get them. I had a tough time with them as well, but after doing so many of them (all of them) something just clicked and I was rocking all the LG's on the last 6 PT's. Even the ones that people said were really hard (Dino's, Mulch) I did very well on. They're learnable.

If you hate LG. CivPro is gonna suck, at least if your class is similar to mine. We just had a midterm problem set (of sorts) and it felt just like LG. Making timelines and tables to keep the parties together and then applying rules to them to see which ones fit where. In one of your cases a woman had eight kids all with different first letters for there first names and we had to link them together over a series of occurrences. Only difference was they were being beaten by cops instead of playing musical chairs or sorting Dinos.

tazmolover wrote:Fuck you assholes, LG is the most learnable, take that away and I'm stuck with either another LR section (which I don't mind), but theres a chance of another RC section which would screw me up.

I absolutely agree with you. Another RC is like goodness.. I don't wanna think about it

I assure you, logic game skillz do come into play your 1L year, perhaps you should pursue other opportunities if they bother you so much.

The American mindset - if you do poorly, it's not you, it's the metric. It must be changed!

Veyron wrote:I assure you, logic game skillz do come into play your 1L year, perhaps you should pursue other opportunities if they bother you so much.

this, my LG weakness is highlighted in civ pro and, to a lesser extent, crim

Without games, I am nothing. Probably would be closer to 160 than 175.

Any professional school, I feel, will require SOME sort of analytical ability. There is some point, although the question of exactly how pertinent it is is always debatable...

my girlfriend is a 2l and she has often said that her contracts, tax and torts classes use much the same thinking as LG.

youknowryan wrote:my girlfriend is a 2l and she has often said that her contracts, tax and torts classes use much the same thinking as LG.

yknow, i personally think the LSAT is a great test to check for the skills for 1L performance. there's some data to support this, but it's tricky since students who are in competition with each other generally scored within a few points of each other. still, compared to GRE, ACT, etc, LSAT seems exceptionally relevant.

I don't know if people in here are just trying to scare law school applicants shitless or what, but there is really nothing particularly similar to a LG in the typical 1L curriculum. Law school exams are essentially an imaginary situation that professors come up with to test your legal knowledge. In a lot of ways it's a story, or a "tale" that someone tells you, where you use your legal knowledge to solve problems and make arguments. It is not like trying to figure how many red,blue, orange, and brown clowns can fit in a car that only seats 4 people etc. That's a lot more like a math test. The biggest difference is that in many ways, entirely unlike a logic game, there is no one right answer. As a matter of fact, that type of thinking (that there is one specific "best" answer and that's it) will hurt you on a typical law exam.

nooooooooooo please dont. games are my only chance at a half decent score =\ i was always good at math and I feel like these are sort of like solving a long equation where there is a definite right answer(although the steps you take my differ). LR and RC requires you to listen to the boring teacher's question and figure out what they want