Princeton Method --> Powerscore/Testmasters Forum

[omeezy4sheezy]

So I took a 1 month prep course leading up to the June 2011 lsat at princeton and I didn't get the mark I was hoping (was aiming for a 160+, already have a near 4.0 GPA).

I've pretty much learned everything the 'princeton way', per se, so I was uncertain as to whether picking up pithypike's 3 month schedule would be good or whether it would mess up what I already know.

However, in hindsight princeton only really taught their way of solving LGs and didn't really teach us a method on approaching LR/RC. I'm already pretty decent at LG; I can finish only 3/4 but get those three usually near perfect so its clearly a time issue. LR is where I have the least consistency.

So two questions:

1. Has anyone gone through this and do you have any comments/tips on it?
2. What books should I read to re-train the way I approach RC/LR? (I know I could easily find that through a search, but since I thought since I'm here anyways).

Thanks in advance.

[Jeffort]

Are you considering taking a different full length class? I ask because you mentioned Testmasters and Powerscore in the thread title. The classes from both those companies go into a lot of detail about the LR section broken down by question types and concepts, I'm not sure what PR classes are teaching for LR in comparison.

If you are just going to get self study books, the powerscore LR and LG bibles are good and the Manhattan LSAT books for LR, LG and RC are good as well.

[omeezy4sheezy]

Are you considering taking a different full length class? I ask because you mentioned Testmasters and Powerscore in the thread title. The classes from both those companies go into a lot of detail about the LR section broken down by question types and concepts, I'm not sure what PR classes are teaching for LR in comparison.

If you are just going to get self study books, the powerscore LR and LG bibles are good and the Manhattan LSAT books for LR, LG and RC are good as well.

Yeah I was just going to self study books. I really don't mind using LR bibles or Manhattan LSAT books for LR or RC, but my issue was the LG which PR must've taught 'their' way. I'd rather not re-learn the whole thing when I'm doing alright on that part and will probably focus on drilling.

Any specific one thats better between the LR bible and Manhattan LSAT for LR? Gonna go out and buy one tonight.

[jln04a]

[...]my issue was the LG which PR must've taught 'their' way. I'd rather not re-learn the whole thing when I'm doing alright on that part and will probably focus on drilling.

Any specific one thats better between the LR bible and Manhattan LSAT for LR? Gonna go out and buy one tonight.

If you only get through 3/4ths of a section and you get those right but cannot finish, then you may want to change your method. I assume since you did a course that you spent a significant amount of time practicing.

You're missing 5-6 questions just by running out of time which is huge. (Ignore me though if you truly feel as though you can improve upon the time it takes you.)

That being said I like the LR Bible, though I would mostly suggest going over the problems you had and focus on correcting those issues. Or seeing what sorts of questions lead to inconsistancy and focus on those.

[suspicious android]

Different LG methods aren't like matter and anti-matter, they're not going to explode if you mix them up. No company's method is so amazingly magically perfect that it can't be learned in 30-40 minutes and adapted in a few hours if you're already basically familiar with games and conditional reasoning. I think it's a good idea to check out different methods, see what works for you, adapt those ideas and throw away the rest. You can come up with your own style, no need to be super orthodox, it's all 90% the same anyway.

[Jeffort]

Are you considering taking a different full length class? I ask because you mentioned Testmasters and Powerscore in the thread title. The classes from both those companies go into a lot of detail about the LR section broken down by question types and concepts, I'm not sure what PR classes are teaching for LR in comparison.

If you are just going to get self study books, the powerscore LR and LG bibles are good and the Manhattan LSAT books for LR, LG and RC are good as well.

Yeah I was just going to self study books. I really don't mind using LR bibles or Manhattan LSAT books for LR or RC, but my issue was the LG which PR must've taught 'their' way. I'd rather not re-learn the whole thing when I'm doing alright on that part and will probably focus on drilling.

Any specific one thats better between the LR bible and Manhattan LSAT for LR? Gonna go out and buy one tonight.

I like the Manhattan LR book more than the LRB. It goes into more detail, especially about pragmatic/strategic issues related to common pitfalls/costly sources of mistakes people often make working problems they get wrong for reasons other than lack of understanding of the basics like the concepts, question types, argument structure basics, and the rudimentary logic being tested.

[mrmojojak]

To be pathetically honest I practiced my logic games using "Logic Games for Dummies." Not at all a great book or great method but it had a really good symbol/notation system. I finished the book, but I found the setup was where I wasted the most time, so understanding the rules and how to diagram really helped. Solving the problems just seemed to come naturally after I brute forced my way through enough practice tests with review. I haven't missed a LG problem in the past 5 tests I've taken, I think you just get used to them.

I was never a fan of Princeton review's read the question stem before the stimulus in LR. LRB is the bees knees of LSAT books. Concise, is how I would describe it. Once you read it through you can very easily just jump through the bolded text to see what you recall and what you need to work on.

[EarlCat]

I was never a fan of Princeton review's read the question stem before the stimulus in LR.

[omeezy4sheezy]

Sweet thanks alot guys. I'm going to start my 3 month LSAT study session tomorrow, so I'm definitely gonna go and pick up a copy of the LRB. By the looks of it, most people seem to be leaning towards that book relative to the Manhattan one so I think I'll go with that.

[omeezy4sheezy]

You're missing 5-6 questions just by running out of time which is huge. (Ignore me though if you truly feel as though you can improve upon the time it takes you.)

That being said I like the LR Bible, though I would mostly suggest going over the problems you had and focus on correcting those issues. Or seeing what sorts of questions lead to inconsistancy and focus on those.

I'm definitely going to go over the specific problems I faced, especially with LR/RC and I might go ahead and buy LGB anyways since I have this much time to study and since I'm not starting from scratch.