Self-prepping...Nova Master the LSAT Forum

[Easy-E]

First post here, figure I should use every resource at my disposal

I'm not taking the test until next fall, so suffice to say I've got a good amount of time to prep. I've been reading and working through NOVA's "Master the LSAT" text, which I understand to be a decent starting point, as far general introduction to the test. My plan was to identify where I needed the most help, and then move on to more section-specific books, like the Logic Game Bible. I've always been pretty good with the type of work the LSAT entails (reading comp, logic and reasoning) and I'm happy to say that I'm having no real troubles grasping the material so far. I'm going to take my first practice test from the Next 10 Actual LSAT book, so I'll guess I'll know for sure then, but if I find I don't have any glaring problems with any of the work, would any more prep books or a class be beneficial, rather than just taking as many practice tests as possible? Is the NOVA book a poor reflection of the material on the test? And with such a large time available to prep for the test, would it be best just to get a logic game specific text, even though I didn't demonstrate any clear issues (finishing most games in 7-10 minutes, generally under 9) ?


Thanks for the help future competition!

[Easy-E]

No thoughts?

[NonTradHealthLaw]

I started with Nova. It was a good starting point for logic games and did an okay job outlining general principles for LR and RC, but I don't think it's a sufficient study tool in itself.

From my own perspective, I didn't ever have a problem with games (-0 June 2010, -0 October 2010) so didn't worry about the LG Bible. Instead I just kept honing LG by doing all of Manhattan LSAT's free weekly game. I did pick up the LR and RC bibles, though, and numerous prep tests. LR Bible is gold, RC Bible is fool's gold, judiciously used Prep Tests are more precious than gold (platinum? saffron, a big law job?)

[Easy-E]

I started with Nova. It was a good starting point for logic games and did an okay job outlining general principles for LR and RC, but I don't think it's a sufficient study tool in itself.

From my own perspective, I didn't ever have a problem with games (-0 June 2010, -0 October 2010) so didn't worry about the LG Bible. Instead I just kept honing LG by doing all of Manhattan LSAT's free weekly game. I did pick up the LR and RC bibles, though, and numerous prep tests. LR Bible is gold, RC Bible is fool's gold, judiciously used Prep Tests are more precious than gold (platinum? saffron, a big law job?)

This is about what I figured. Might grab LR Bible but most likely going to focus on completing a ton of practice tests.

What this Manhattan free game of the week?

[amorfati]

LG Bible and LR Bible are golden - definitely do both. Beyond that, do every test you can get your hands on. IMO, however, the sets of 10 are somewhat useful, but should most definitely not be the only practice tests you rely on. I won't speak too much about it, because there's lots of info on the matter around TLS, but the newer practice tests are different and in some ways more difficult (specifically in LG), so focus especially on those in the 50's/60's. The earliest tests are somewhat more comparable difficulty-wise for LG, but some of the game types are no longer in use.

As for classes, I haven't taken one, but from what I hear they're great if you're, say, aiming to go from low-mid range to high-mid range (such as 140's to low 160's). But if you're fairly disciplined and consider yourself to be a likely 170+ scorer, then I probably wouldn't bother - you can learn more on your own.

Beyond that, I recommend checking out the LSAT Blog for more good info - he does a great job of reviewing all the different LSAT prep materials available, and also has some great study schedules.

[Easy-E]

LG Bible and LR Bible are golden - definitely do both. Beyond that, do every test you can get your hands on. IMO, however, the sets of 10 are somewhat useful, but should most definitely not be the only practice tests you rely on. I won't speak too much about it, because there's lots of info on the matter around TLS, but the newer practice tests are different and in some ways more difficult (specifically in LG), so focus especially on those in the 50's/60's. The earliest tests are somewhat more comparable difficulty-wise for LG, but some of the game types are no longer in use.

As for classes, I haven't taken one, but from what I hear they're great if you're, say, aiming to go from low-mid range to high-mid range (such as 140's to low 160's). But if you're fairly disciplined and consider yourself to be a likely 170+ scorer, then I probably wouldn't bother - you can learn more on your own.

Beyond that, I recommend checking out the LSAT Blog for more good info - he does a great job of reviewing all the different LSAT prep materials available, and also has some great study schedules.

The book I have now is the "Next 10" one, but obviously more recent would be better. What do you mean when you say focus on those in the 50's/60's? The logic games is my main focus (like most), as I've had extremely little to zero trouble with the reading and arguments, so I boviously want to study the games that will actually be asked.

So if consistently scoring say, 165-170 on the practice tests, a class might be unwarranted? What about the smaller, four person class offered by Princeton Review, or private tutoring? I don't know if this is the case yet, but I feel pretty confident with the material, and am certainly hoping for a 170+, as my GPA isn't highly competitive (3.2). I'll be taking a practice test tomorrow morning.

[NonTradHealthLaw]

What this Manhattan free game of the week?

http://www.manhattanlsat.com/logic-games-practice.cfm

Free registration for ~30 games +answers +access to forums for solution discussions

[Easy-E]

What this Manhattan free game of the week?

http://www.manhattanlsat.com/logic-games-practice.cfm

Free registration for ~30 games +answers +access to forums for solution discussions

Thank you, looks great!

[Easy-E]

This is slightly off from my original topic, but I don't think it warrants another thread cluttering up the board. I guess I didn't realize the PrepTests I have ("The Next 10 Actual, Official..") were numbered. I assume the other two books in the series are the tests preceeding 29-38, so I guess my question is how do I get ahold of the newest PrepTests? As many advise, I'd like to move towards more recent tests as my test dates gets closer, though I do plan on completeing the 30 in the aforementioned series.

I guess I'm just a bit overwhelmed by all the different prep options..if I find that I'm only getting one in every twenty LR questions wrong, and I immediately see what I did wrong (generally a misreading or a mis-bubbleing), would a book on the section be a waste of time, and should I just stick with practice tests aplenty ?

[amorfati]

Seems you already got it at least partially figured out, but most of the newer tests have to be purchased individually. They're a bit pricey, but you can get them from Amazon, I think 4 tests for $24 (normally $8/test if you by them one by one). Otherwise, it is possible to get most PTs in pdf format via torrent, but that entails a whole moral discussion that usually ends poorly.

As for getting outside help, I can't speak for everyone, but as someone who went from a 160 diagnostic to a 176, I personally I wouldn't bother with the classes/tutoring - I think most of the material can be learned through repeat exposure. After awhile, you'll just get a sort of instinct for the questions, especially with LR and to a lesser extent RC. And LG just requires lots and lots of practice (coupled with, of course, a solid diagramming strategy). Seriously, I really recommend checking out the LSAT Blog's recommended study schedules.

[Easy-E]

Seems you already got it at least partially figured out, but most of the newer tests have to be purchased individually. They're a bit pricey, but you can get them from Amazon, I think 4 tests for $24 (normally $8/test if you by them one by one). Otherwise, it is possible to get most PTs in pdf format via torrent, but that entails a whole moral discussion that usually ends poorly.

As for getting outside help, I can't speak for everyone, but as someone who went from a 160 diagnostic to a 176, I personally I wouldn't bother with the classes/tutoring - I think most of the material can be learned through repeat exposure. After awhile, you'll just get a sort of instinct for the questions, especially with LR and to a lesser extent RC. And LG just requires lots and lots of practice (coupled with, of course, a solid diagramming strategy). Seriously, I really recommend checking out the LSAT Blog's recommended study schedules.

I just complete my first practice test about an hour ago with a score of 155. Lower than I hoped, but my only preperation was the NOVA section on logic games really, so I'm not disheartended, plus time management was the real issue. I think I'm still having problems recognizing the types of problems and the appropriate plan of attack (wasted my time drawing a diagram I never looked at) I suppose practice is the best fix though.

I'll be sure to check out the newer tests as well as the LSAT Blog, thank you very much!