February 2012 LSAT Study Group Forum

[Eichörnchen]

Well to maybe seem less creepy I only know your study habits from the study threads. I kept up with them to stay motivated to study.

Traveling is amazing. I went backpacking by myself in college and have lived abroad twice now. I am hoping to travel more (hopefully in asia this time) in the months before law school cause like you I hope to make the top 14 and thus welcoming the prospect of no life.

Good luck with the studies!

Haha no worries - I was a lurker for a long time (cough cough...don't look at my join date ) so I get it. Traveling asia sounds awesome. I'll be sticking to Europe and the states most likely - I can't do too much flying because that'll eat through my savings damn quick. Plus, I'll admit, the intimidation factor is high - I have zero language skills in that arena

But I have to remember - first this:




thennnnnnnnnn this:



Let's do this thang.

[bernaldiaz]

Just took my second prep test today. Very interesting results.

First prep test was a 164. I had -2 LR (total, -2 and a -0), -6 (CR), and -13 (LG).
Second prep test was a 166. I went -9 LR (-5 and -4), -3 (CR), and then -2 (LG).

I have no idea what to make of this. If you look at the numbers its pretty hard to make sense of.

[Gisney]

Just took my second prep test today. Very interesting results.

First prep test was a 164. I had -2 LR (total, -2 and a -0), -6 (CR), and -13 (LG).
Second prep test was a 166. I went -9 LR (-5 and -4), -3 (CR), and then -2 (LG).

I have no idea what to make of this. If you look at the numbers its pretty hard to make sense of.

The LG differance may just be due to which PT you took. Some PTs are noted to be more difficult than other like the 30s.

The LR might have been overcofidense from your last test. The lesson I suppose isto be on your game all th time. Easy, no?

All and all I think a third test is needed to make sense of it.

[bernaldiaz]

Just took my second prep test today. Very interesting results.

First prep test was a 164. I had -2 LR (total, -2 and a -0), -6 (CR), and -13 (LG).
Second prep test was a 166. I went -9 LR (-5 and -4), -3 (CR), and then -2 (LG).

I have no idea what to make of this. If you look at the numbers its pretty hard to make sense of.

The LG differance may just be due to which PT you took. Some PTs are noted to be more difficult than other like the 30s.

The LR might have been overcofidense from your last test. The lesson I suppose isto be on your game all th time. Easy, no?

All and all I think a third test is needed to make sense of it.

Oh definitely. I have one scheduled for Wednesday so we'll see then. From the practice I've done, I'd say -2 to -4 would be average for any RC or LR sections.

For the LG, I don't know what happened with the -13 but that was freaking awful. I'm really not very comfortable with them so I was very surprised with the -2. Once again, I'm probably realistically somewhere between those two numbers.

It just makes it hard to interpret the numbers when I am at the extreme of my range for the sections, but I am just a little more than a week into studying so I'm sure the consistency (and hopefully higher scores) will come soon.

[Gisney]

So I have been going through the Cambridge LR grouped by type and I thought I would post my results. Partly to shame myself to really be focused so I am not embarrassed.

Oh and in case someone has not seen these they are seperated by difficulty from easiest ( 1 ) to most difficult (4)

Necessary Assumption
1: 95% 72/76
2: 89% 64/72
3: 91% 32/35
4: 73% 31/42

Sufficient Assumption

1: 100% 14/14
2: 97% 19/20
3: 83% 5/6
4: 61% 11/18

Flaw

1: 97% 97/100
2: 94% 65/73
3: 70% 37/53
4: 78% 45/58

Weaken

1: 96% 73/76
2: 91% 53/8
3: 86% 25/29
4: 63% 22/35

Strengthn

1; 94% 51/54
2: 97% 29/30
3: 86% 25/29
4: 77% 14/18

Principle Identify

1: 93% 37/40
2: 94% 16/17
3: 100% 14/14
4: 72% 18/25

Principal Apply

1: 90% 9/10
2: 88% 7/8
3: 100% 4/4
4: 88% 7/8

Thoughts:
So as long as all the questions in Feb are level 1-3 I am golden But ah it isn't that bad.

I think part of my problem with the hardest questions is I do a whole packet in one setting and I am just tired and unfocused by the end. Another problem is one i mentioned earlier. I treat the harder questions like easy ones and do not take the time ad mental effort I need too.

To fix these problems I am now doing levels 1-3 in one setting in the afternoon and the rest the next morning. Also I am trying to slow down and the harder questions and really apply the tips and tricks I have learned from LRB and MLSAT LR.

Tomorrow finishing up Point, doing all of Method Statement cause there are so few and doing most of Main Conclusion.

[Eichörnchen]

Just took my second prep test today. Very interesting results.

First prep test was a 164. I had -2 LR (total, -2 and a -0), -6 (CR), and -13 (LG).
Second prep test was a 166. I went -9 LR (-5 and -4), -3 (CR), and then -2 (LG).

I have no idea what to make of this. If you look at the numbers its pretty hard to make sense of.

You've only done two PTs so I wouldn't be looking for a pattern quite yet. You'll see a pattern emerge as you get more used to taking PTs and you have more data to look at. LG is notorious for big swings because if you don't 'get' a game, it can be an instant -7 alone. Plus you haven't specified which tests these were, so, for example, if you took PT 1 and PT 50, that alone would be an enormous difference in test difficulty and style.

[bernaldiaz]

Just took my second prep test today. Very interesting results.

First prep test was a 164. I had -2 LR (total, -2 and a -0), -6 (CR), and -13 (LG).
Second prep test was a 166. I went -9 LR (-5 and -4), -3 (CR), and then -2 (LG).

I have no idea what to make of this. If you look at the numbers its pretty hard to make sense of.

You've only done two PTs so I wouldn't be looking for a pattern quite yet. You'll see a pattern emerge as you get more used to taking PTs and you have more data to look at. LG is notorious for big swings because if you don't 'get' a game, it can be an instant -7 alone. Plus you haven't specified which tests these were, so, for example, if you took PT 1 and PT 50, that alone would be an enormous difference in test difficulty and style.

Yeah sorry the first one was PT 29, the second was PT 54.

[Gisney]

Could anyone explain to me why the answer is C for PT3-S4-Q20? I put B which I did not think was a perfect answer but was the best available.

Thanks!

[Gisney]

Woke up with ants crawling all over the table I study on. Had to clear everything (god dont ask me how much study stuff I have) and spray the table down with a chemical prolly not allowed in the States which in turn drove me out of the house because of the fumes. But I did study for a few hours in the sun!

Enough of the misadventures of a PC LSAT studier.

Finished up to more groups of LR:

Point
1: 94% 16/17
2: 88% 14/16
3: 88% 7/8
4: 89% 8/9

Method (Statement)
1: 100% 12/12
2: 88% 14/16
3: 100% 2/2
4: 75% 6/8

Well So the plan to improve my level 4 worked for Point but was lackig for Method (St). Although I only missed two and one was the question I posted earlier that I still dont understand the correct AC.

Other news doing well on my Adv Linear drilling and continuing with RC drilling. I have not seen much improvement for RC still either -4 or -5 sometimes better but never worse.

Tomorrow finishing Main Conclusion and doing most of Method Argument with more Adv linear and RC drilling

Slow but steady to a 180!

How is everyone else coming along?

[VLFK]

Hi all. Although a frequent TLS stalker, this is my first time posting. To summarize, I took the June 2010 LSAT and cancelled, despite consistently scoring in the high 160s and occasionally breaking 170. Retook in October 2011 after studying for 1 month and got a 163-- which was in line with my PTs. I was solid on LR and RC, but my games were a mess. So, I'm back on the LSAT merry go round, and have signed up for the February exam, hoping to break into the 170s. Any and all advice is welcome, particularly advice geared towards a retake. I have all previous LSATs and the Power Score RC, LR, LG bibles.

Putting together study schedule today, will post first PT results once they're in!

[bernaldiaz]

Woke up with ants crawling all over the table I study on. Had to clear everything (god dont ask me how much study stuff I have) and spray the table down with a chemical prolly not allowed in the States which in turn drove me out of the house because of the fumes. But I did study for a few hours in the sun!

Enough of the misadventures of a PC LSAT studier.

Finished up to more groups of LR:

Point
1: 94% 16/17
2: 88% 14/16
3: 88% 7/8
4: 89% 8/9

Method (Statement)
1: 100% 12/12
2: 88% 14/16
3: 100% 2/2
4: 75% 6/8

Well So the plan to improve my level 4 worked for Point but was lackig for Method (St). Although I only missed two and one was the question I posted earlier that I still dont understand the correct AC.

Other news doing well on my Adv Linear drilling and continuing with RC drilling. I have not seen much improvement for RC still either -4 or -5 sometimes better but never worse.

Tomorrow finishing Main Conclusion and doing most of Method Argument with more Adv linear and RC drilling

Slow but steady to a 180!

How is everyone else coming along?

What is this from? The Cambridge package sorted by question type? I'm doing a Velocity class on my own now that I'm planning on finishing up in about 4 weeks and will be thirsting for more material after that. I think these may be a nice thing to buy to complete between my class and the test date.

[Gisney]

Hi all. Although a frequent TLS stalker, this is my first time posting. To summarize, I took the June 2010 LSAT and cancelled, despite consistently scoring in the high 160s and occasionally breaking 170. Retook in October 2011 after studying for 1 month and got a 163-- which was in line with my PTs. I was solid on LR and RC, but my games were a mess. So, I'm back on the LSAT merry go round, and have signed up for the February exam, hoping to break into the 170s. Any and all advice is welcome, particularly advice geared towards a retake. I have all previous LSATs and the Power Score RC, LR, LG bibles.

Putting together study schedule today, will post first PT results once they're in!

Well I dont have advice for a retake but there seemsto be a lot of them in the Dec group and they are a bit more active so if you have specific questions I would try them.

But for more material for LG I would advice buying the Manhattan LSAT LG Strategy guide. Particularily for their method n Pure Sequence and Grouping In and Out. ThereLR guide is great too. Also for improving LG try Pikes method of doing each game 3xs. I have found this really helpful.. You start to see the matrix behind game questions. For me when I first read LGB, I thought I would never see as many of the inferances as they did but wth Pikes I can now see them pretty easily.

Anywho good luck with studying and let us know how your progress is going!

[Gisney]

What is this from? The Cambridge package sorted by question type? I'm doing a Velocity class on my own now that I'm planning on finishing up in about 4 weeks and will be thirsting for more material after that. I think these may be a nice thing to buy to complete between my class and the test date.

Yes it is Cambridges LR grouped by type found on their website. Itsa pdf and costs $70 I think.

I have found it really helpful to focus on each type and really start to understand them better.

[bernaldiaz]

What is this from? The Cambridge package sorted by question type? I'm doing a Velocity class on my own now that I'm planning on finishing up in about 4 weeks and will be thirsting for more material after that. I think these may be a nice thing to buy to complete between my class and the test date.

Yes it is Cambridges LR grouped by type found on their website. Itsa pdf and costs $70 I think.

I have found it really helpful to focus on each type and really start to understand them better.

Do you think its more helpful than buying all the sections? I think having them in that form would be better practice so I could do timed section as practice.

[Gisney]

What is this from? The Cambridge package sorted by question type? I'm doing a Velocity class on my own now that I'm planning on finishing up in about 4 weeks and will be thirsting for more material after that. I think these may be a nice thing to buy to complete between my class and the test date.

Yes it is Cambridges LR grouped by type found on their website. Itsa pdf and costs $70 I think.

I have found it really helpful to focus on each type and really start to understand them better.

Do you think its more helpful than buying all the sections? I think having them in that form would be better practice so I could do timed section as practice.

Well these bundels are more for accuracy than timing. If your accuracy is good but your timing needs work then they are not worth it. Timed sections would be better.


Finished Main Conclusion

1: 94% 33/35
2: 91% 20/22
3: 80% 4/5
4: 100% 5/5

Getting better on focusing with the harder ones. While keeping up with that I need to eliminate silly mistakes with the easier one

[outlookingin]

Just took my second prep test today. Very interesting results.

First prep test was a 164. I had -2 LR (total, -2 and a -0), -6 (CR), and -13 (LG).
Second prep test was a 166. I went -9 LR (-5 and -4), -3 (CR), and then -2 (LG).

I have no idea what to make of this. If you look at the numbers its pretty hard to make sense of.

You've only done two PTs so I wouldn't be looking for a pattern quite yet. You'll see a pattern emerge as you get more used to taking PTs and you have more data to look at. LG is notorious for big swings because if you don't 'get' a game, it can be an instant -7 alone. Plus you haven't specified which tests these were, so, for example, if you took PT 1 and PT 50, that alone would be an enormous difference in test difficulty and style.

Yeah so what is the general trend here? I have heard that LGames get easier and don't depend as much on a single "killer inference" so much as making a couple frames/hypotheticals before beginning.

And someone also said that LR just gets harder as you go along. Which is worrisome.

I am currently on PT 29, just taking individual LR sections now and trying to address my weaknesses as I see them, and I am working my way up to PT 58 (I don't have the Superpreps or anything past PT58... do you guys think I need them?)

[outlookingin]

So I have been going through the Cambridge LR grouped by type and I thought I would post my results. Partly to shame myself to really be focused so I am not embarrassed.

Oh and in case someone has not seen these they are seperated by difficulty from easiest ( 1 ) to most difficult (4)


Thoughts:
So as long as all the questions in Feb are level 1-3 I am golden But ah it isn't that bad.

I think part of my problem with the hardest questions is I do a whole packet in one setting and I am just tired and unfocused by the end. Another problem is one i mentioned earlier. I treat the harder questions like easy ones and do not take the time ad mental effort I need too.

To fix these problems I am now doing levels 1-3 in one setting in the afternoon and the rest the next morning. Also I am trying to slow down and the harder questions and really apply the tips and tricks I have learned from LRB and MLSAT LR.

Tomorrow finishing up Point, doing all of Method Statement cause there are so few and doing most of Main Conclusion.

Hmmm I like what you are doing here. I'm kinda doing the same thing with Kaplan Mastery, but I admit that sometimes I get lazy and just hit a full LR section... just to "flex" or to get that feeling of "moving forward." I think I am approaching a breakthrough on LR. Seems like you're trucking along Gisney, keep it up! I'll post my results soon... maybe I'll take a PT right before Thanksgiving.

[Gisney]

Yeah so what is the general trend here? I have heard that LGames get easier and don't depend as much on a single "killer inference" so much as making a couple frames/hypotheticals before beginning.

And someone also said that LR just gets harder as you go along. Which is worrisome.

I am currently on PT 29, just taking individual LR sections now and trying to address my weaknesses as I see them, and I am working my way up to PT 58 (I don't have the Superpreps or anything past PT58... do you guys think I need them?)

I have heard that LG gets easier but also with checking out the past couple of Waiting threads that the LG on the past two or three exams have been really tough. If I were you I would at least get either the past OCT or June exam to see new trends that have been going on. You could get them at cambridgelsat wbsite.

I have never heardLR gets harder. I always heard it stays about the same. But I have only done LR for 1-38 and 43-45 which I have not seen any differance.

Eich since you have been studying longer maybe you could answer this.

[Gisney]

I am def trucking along OutLook. I just hope it is effective. Keep us posted on that PT if you take it. I am scheduled to start on my the monday after Thanksgiving.

This morning I finished Method Argument

1: 100% 55/55
2: 87 % 33/38
3: 94% 16/17
4: 72% 13/18

So levels 1-3 were really easy and then the last 18 for level 4 were a huge jump in difficult IMHO. I am having to look up 5 of my misses on the MLSAT board cause I still dont get how they are right.

[FrozenCavemanLawyer]

I am taking the december lsat and am probably going to sign up for the february lsat just in case i don't do as well as I would like on the december one. I am definitely starting law school next september and I wanted to know if most schools accept the february lsat for this rotation.

[Eichörnchen]

Yeah so what is the general trend here? I have heard that LGames get easier and don't depend as much on a single "killer inference" so much as making a couple frames/hypotheticals before beginning.

And someone also said that LR just gets harder as you go along. Which is worrisome.

I am currently on PT 29, just taking individual LR sections now and trying to address my weaknesses as I see them, and I am working my way up to PT 58 (I don't have the Superpreps or anything past PT58... do you guys think I need them?)

I have heard that LG gets easier but also with checking out the past couple of Waiting threads that the LG on the past two or three exams have been really tough. If I were you I would at least get either the past OCT or June exam to see new trends that have been going on. You could get them at cambridgelsat wbsite.

I have never heardLR gets harder. I always heard it stays about the same. But I have only done LR for 1-38 and 43-45 which I have not seen any differance.

Eich since you have been studying longer maybe you could answer this.

Sure. My thoughts are that LR does get a bit tougher as you go. In the twenties, I feel the right answer tends to jump out at me a lot easier. The further you go, the more nuanced they get. Things might hinge on you catching the meaning of one word (one that springs to mind is a question that a couple study buddies couldn't get. It was because they didn't catch the word "gratuitous" which totally changed the meaning of the answer choice) or there might be a few incorrect answers that are very tempting, whereas in the early days ACs can usually be sorted into losers and you're left with maybe two contenders.

LG did get easier, with the LG of the 30s generally being considered toughest. It seems that LG is leaning a lot more toward hybrid games nowadays which I personally find tough. However, this past Oct test has kind of shaken any solace I had in thinking LG is getting easier. There were a few people with whom I studied and talked to frequently, so I know their scoring patterns pretty well. People who I always knew to go -0 to -2 max on games said that they didn't finish Oct's LG or that they lost a lot of points there. It was kinda brutal. I'm fervently hoping that it was an anomaly and that we can expect a much easier LG section, but we will see.

[outlookingin]

Yeah so what is the general trend here? I have heard that LGames get easier and don't depend as much on a single "killer inference" so much as making a couple frames/hypotheticals before beginning.

And someone also said that LR just gets harder as you go along. Which is worrisome.

I am currently on PT 29, just taking individual LR sections now and trying to address my weaknesses as I see them, and I am working my way up to PT 58 (I don't have the Superpreps or anything past PT58... do you guys think I need them?)

I have heard that LG gets easier but also with checking out the past couple of Waiting threads that the LG on the past two or three exams have been really tough. If I were you I would at least get either the past OCT or June exam to see new trends that have been going on. You could get them at cambridgelsat wbsite.

I have never heardLR gets harder. I always heard it stays about the same. But I have only done LR for 1-38 and 43-45 which I have not seen any differance.

Eich since you have been studying longer maybe you could answer this.

Sure. My thoughts are that LR does get a bit tougher as you go. In the twenties, I feel the right answer tends to jump out at me a lot easier. The further you go, the more nuanced they get. Things might hinge on you catching the meaning of one word (one that springs to mind is a question that a couple study buddies couldn't get. It was because they didn't catch the word "gratuitous" which totally changed the meaning of the answer choice) or there might be a few incorrect answers that are very tempting, whereas in the early days ACs can usually be sorted into losers and you're left with maybe two contenders.

LG did get easier, with the LG of the 30s generally being considered toughest. It seems that LG is leaning a lot more toward hybrid games nowadays which I personally find tough. However, this past Oct test has kind of shaken any solace I had in thinking LG is getting easier. There were a few people with whom I studied and talked to frequently, so I know their scoring patterns pretty well. People who I always knew to go -0 to -2 max on games said that they didn't finish Oct's LG or that they lost a lot of points there. It was kinda brutal. I'm fervently hoping that it was an anomaly and that we can expect a much easier LG section, but we will see.

Ohhhhhhhhhhhhh no. That is REALLY not good news about the LG section... I'll have to stay on top of that.

[Gisney]

I am taking the december lsat and am probably going to sign up for the february lsat just in case i don't do as well as I would like on the december one. I am definitely starting law school next september and I wanted to know if most schools accept the february lsat for this rotation.

This was answered ealier in the thread on page twp O believe but ifyou want to be totally sure you should check out the schools your applying towebsites or call the admission office

Good luck in Dec!

[Gisney]

That blows about LR. Well I guess I will see how this will play out when I start PTing in a week.

I will miss the big inferences games. I find those easier and less time consuming. Course there has never been a game that has kiled me (so far!) except the CD game from the 30s. Whoever made that game is a cruel cruel person.

Finished Cannot Be True

1: 100% 2/2
2: 100% 7/7
3: 100% 6/6
4: 83% 10/12

[outlookingin]

That blows about LR. Well I guess I will see how this will play out when I start PTing in a week.

I will miss the big inferences games. I find those easier and less time consuming. Course there has never been a game that has kiled me (so far!) except the CD game from the 30s. Whoever made that game is a cruel cruel person.

Finished Cannot Be True

1: 100% 2/2
2: 100% 7/7
3: 100% 6/6
4: 83% 10/12

Yeah that CD game was a monster. My girlfriend made me watch "Legally Blonde" last night and I almost choked when she started trying to figure out if either opera or either jazz or whatever was going to be sold....