Umpteenth question on old LSATs vs. newer LSATs... Forum

[justbubbles]

Okay, I know this question has been beaten to death on here........ and we all know how the LSAT has changed (in terms of format, questioning, difficulty, etc) over the years. So no point in repeating that.

Here's my deal:

* Took the Feb 2011 test; cancelled score; preparing for the June 2011 test while the stuff is still fresh in me.
* Did prepare quite extensively before Feb. (~3 mnths); scoring around low 160ish; I'm happy with this;
* My target is mid-160s; I'll accept more, if I'm lucky.

Here's my question: for the next 2 months, should I:

1. Focus on difficult areas (eg. RC); OR
2. Just start doing the newer PTs 33-61 (I don't have 62!), 1 test a day with a break between days, leading up to test day?

What do you guys think?

[bhan87]

I fail to see how Option #1 and #2 are mutually exclusive.

This set might interest you if you need more RC practice:

--LinkRemoved--

[EarlCat]

Churning and burning timed tests will not do as much as slow, deliberate practice. Focus on 100% understanding of every question you encounter. The better you know the test, the fast you can go. I'd take maaaaybe 1 timed preptest a week to hone your pacing (if you even have trouble with pacing).

[northwood]

DO more timed section work. Do at least LR LG or RC ( or a combination of them) a day- and analyze your mistake patterns and target those weak areas. ( Like trying to lose weight and get into shape this thing can be done- but you will only see the results you are looking for the more diligent you work at them, and the better you work at it- i.e doing proper section work and stregnthening your weak areas and figuring out why you fall for the wrong answers). If you are able to finish the section within 33 mintues, and you can do 3 sections back to back to back wihoout needing any sort of break- i wouldnt woryy about endurance. Target those areas- and take one or 2 at most 5 section prep tests a week to keep up your timing and endurance. If you have the powerscore books or any other reference material- refer to them as you work on question and section/ game types. Generally- the rule of thumb would be to use the newer pre tests for full length work and use older ones for drilling and practice. Best of luck!

[justbubbles]

Thanks, guys! I appreciate all the input.

One last quick question:

I'd like to do all much of the tests UNTIMED, as suggested by some of you, so that I understand the question and do 1 PT timed per week.

That said, given that all the sections pretty much (maybe except LR) has changed over time, what PT should I start @? 19? 35? Obviously the objective is to get recent PT experience... but is it even worth doing any of the old LGs, for example?

Thanks!

[northwood]

Do the logic games. THey are pretty similiar from old ones to new ones ( except for a few odd ones). You need to be able to learn how to write really small, diagram the rules and conditions, and learn how strategy for this section as well. The more games you do, and totally understand, the better off you will be. It seems as though on the newwer ones, that the games are starting to become a hybrid of 2 game tyeps. Maybe it was just me, but i still think the more games and game types you know inside and out, the better off on the actual test day you will be.

[EarlCat]

That said, given that all the sections pretty much (maybe except LR) has changed over time, what PT should I start @? 19? 35? Obviously the objective is to get recent PT experience... but is it even worth doing any of the old LGs, for example?

The test has changed, but not THAT much. There are some old game types that have't shown up in a long while (mapping games, for instance), but it's not a bad thing to have done one or two of these on the off chance they decide to bring em back.

[bp shinners]

The older tests aren't as good as the newer tests at prepping you, but they're still much better than anything else. I'd save the more recent ones for closer to the test date.

As far as reviewing the tests well, I've noticed people generally go back and figure out why the right answer is right and why their wrong answer is wrong. However, not enough people figure out what in their thought processes led them to the wrong answer. When you're reviewing a question you got wrong, think back to what you were thinking when you filled in that answer choice to diagnose the error in your thought process. It's slightly different than just figuring out why the answer was wrong, and it's a lot more helpful - a pattern usually emerges with enough thought.

Good luck!

[EarlCat]

As far as reviewing the tests well, I've noticed people generally go back and figure out why the right answer is right and why their wrong answer is wrong. However, not enough people figure out what in their thought processes led them to the wrong answer. When you're reviewing a question you got wrong, think back to what you were thinking when you filled in that answer choice to diagnose the error in your thought process. It's slightly different than just figuring out why the answer was wrong, and it's a lot more helpful - a pattern usually emerges with enough thought.

This is a really good post. Take notes, kids.