Top Law Schools

Hello world..

A lot of good info in these posts so I HAD to join.

I'm taking the LSAT in October and have recently started to prepare. I'm starting with LG, got the Kaplan prep and LG Bible. I am fast at accurately diagramming the different game types but having a tough time tackling questions. More specifically, drawing inferences from the diagram to answer the questions. It's like I get overwhelmed by the amount of information I see and can't think progressively through the the questions.

I've taken 4 times LG sections and consistently miss 10-12 questions, any combination of global and local questions.

- How can I make quick inferences from the diagram for global question stems?
- Should the process of elimination technique be used first on every global question?
- How can I make hypo's for local question stems without going through every single question (takes too much time)?
- From experience, should I tackle global or local first?

Not desperate, just ambitious..

Any feedback is very appreciated.

with global questions (most of the time) the wrong answers will violate the rules somehow, look at each answer and then consider the implications and cross off answers accordingly

Do you think that considering local questions first helps to make inferences about global questions after? My thinking is that local questions require you to explore various answer choices and connect with the rules section on a deeper level through hypotheticals. Once you make this connection you can make inferences and assumptions about the global perspective of the game.

Doing local questions first might help you come up with sketches (i.e. possibilities) that you can use to eliminate ACs in global Must Be False (i.e. could be true X) questions.

I don't think it's really worth it to spend time scanning for particular questions, though. Just try to do them in order, and if and only if you get stuck, either 1) quickly draw a sketch, or 2) scan for easier questions.

ExcelBaller wrote:Do you think that considering local questions first helps to make inferences about global questions after?

Yes. I always do local/specific questions before global/general.

For instance, a question might ask, "If G is third, which of the following must be true?" Say the answer is "J must be fifth." In this type of scenario, often one of the global or general could-be-true questions will ask, "Which of the following could be true," and one of the answer choices would be "J is fifth" or something that must follow when J is fifth and G is third.

This is the approach that I feel most comfortable with. Even though learning the methods presented in these LSAT prep books is very helpful in diagramming and placing rules they are by no means a "one size fits all" approach to this exam. I'm starting to see a trend that tackling LG questions is very redundant. The questions truly fall into two subdivided categories: global, local: (must be true's, could be true's) even if an "except of false" is thrown into the stem it is simple to reword it and move on. Get on the same wavelength as the people that made the test!