JammasterJ's retakers study guide
Posted: Sun Dec 11, 2011 2:28 pm
JammasterJ’s Official Study Guide for Retakers that Suck at RC.
Back story that no one cares about: skip paragraph one:
Ok, so I sorta put together a 4-month plan for myself for my retake. I talked to a few people in the Manhattan study group (October LSAT group) and we all were in a similar boat, so this is my attempt to create something that is coherent to more than just myself.
About me: I took my first LSAT with basically a month of prep in October, 2010. I scored a 166, which was two points below my original goal of 168. The reason that I thought I had underperformed was a fairly severe injury a few days before the test. The real reason was Reading Comp. My RC was -7 or -9 I think, and my LR and LG were strong enough to have a shot at the 170s. I really wanted to get into Illinois or IU-B, so i decided pretty close to the deadline, to take the February test. I studied for a month and took about 12 preptests, with scores mostly in the 172-174 range, with a 175 and a few in the high 160s/low 170s. I thought I did OK, maybe 168-170, but was shocked to get my score back: another damn 166. The thing that really pissed me off was that I found TLS forums about a week before the test and realized that I was vastly under-prepared. I’m not saying I had a shot a 180, but mid-170s was not out of the question. I decided to retake in October with 3 months of prep, which I changed to 4 months because of work, and focus on consistency and RC.
tldr; I found out I could have done much better than i actually did, and decided to put a lot more into the test than before. I focused on RC and consistency, my two biggest weaknesses, but with some attention to my weakest LG and LR question types.
This guide is pretty rough; I hope you can use it and modify it to meet your specific needs. It combines elements from pithy’s guide, some wisdom from Noah of Manhattan LSAT, KevinP, and a few others that I can’t quite remember.
Note: this assumes a decent comprehension of Powerscore or another basic strategy company’s method. It focuses on finding weak points, drilling them to perfection, and then practicing them. Most guides are a 3 step process: learning the methods, practicing the methods, then putting them to full tests. This assumes the first step - except with RC: if you want to use strategy books to brush up on your LG and LR methods, that’s cool, but I don’t really put a section in here on that.
Update: I scored a 176 in October
Materials:
LSAT Superprep - I only had the PTs, but I’ve heard reviewing the explanations is really great.
Manhattan LSAT LG, RC and LR
New 10 official preptests, next 10 official preptests, and as many new tests as you can afford. You need 2 + 4 + 8 + 12 = 26. However, you also need experimental sections, which is another 8 and 1/2 tests. I reused some of the older tests from drilling for experimental sections.
LSAT blog - hardest games and hardest questions.
Cambridge LR and LG 1-38
PS LG Bible - I had already done the Powerscore study guides, so I didn’t really use them. I’ll try to point out how to best use them in conjunction with the Manhattan books.
Month 1:
This month is for relearning and figuring out your weaknesses.
Relearn RC. I used the PS method, which, while not awful, wasn’t really helpful. I relearned Manhattan’s approach and mixed it with some advice I picked up in the October study thread (a shout out goes to KevinP). Use the Manhattan method on about 10 RC sections - mostly using the first two “10” books so you can save the newer tests for later. Review: After every full section of RC, grade yourself, then go back and reread the passages the way that you wish you had read them the first time. I got this tidbit from Noah - practice doesn’t make perfect; practice makes permanent (see footnote 1).
Identify LG and LR weaknesses. Work through some of Cambridge’s level 3 and level 4 questions to identify the question types that kill you. Using a guide to identify question types, figure out what your worst question types are. For instance, I suck at parallel reasoning and parallel flaw, and I’m not great at mapping games. So, I will note this for the next month, which is about drilling these question types much more than others. Make 3 photocopies of all the questions from the question types that you are having the most difficulty with. Do not copy the questions from the tests that you will take in full (or at least avoid the new 10 and the individual tests). You should also work through questions of every type so that your skills in these areas become sharpened. Noah mentions that you want to have as many “gimme” questions as possible. Do this by drilling everything, even if you’re not worried about missing it on the test, because four and a half minutes on an easy logic game instead of seven minutes gives you two and a half minutes to spend on tougher games.
Take a diagnostic at the beginning of the month, and take another test halfway through the month.
Month 2:
This month is for drilling the questions that trip you up on the real test.
RC - Continue to implement Manhattan’s guide in the same way as in month one. Find as much stuff to read on stuff that you don’t care about. for instance, I am awful on the science passages. Print off articles from the Economist, Scientific American etc. Print these so that you can read them as if they were LSAT passages. Notate them, spot the arguments, and find the conclusions. Be able to pick up any piece of dense material, read it quickly, and know the required information to answer any LSAT-esque question about it.
LR and LG - Start drilling the question types that you have problems with, as identified in month one. You need photocopies of the LG and LR question types that you ID’d in month one. (see, footnote 2)
Take one five section preptest every week during this month, a total of four.
Month 3:
Three and four are the months for practicing full tests. Month three, you can continue to drill other things, but since the last two weeks before the test are really light, month four is review and PTs only. I won’t get too specific; use your discretion, but I would mostly use my extra study time for review.
Take 2 five-section tests per week. Use the rest of the time to review. This can be done several ways. One way I have considered is notating every question that I miss, have to guess on, or spend a lot of time answering. I would then work through these questions individually, figuring out what about the stimulus needs to be determined, and what it is about the right answer completes it, as well as what it is about the wrong “contenders” that makes them wrong. Another method is geverett’s method - which I believe he got from another source. This is going through the PT timed, then going through again untimed, trying to answer every single question correctly. This part is really up to you, because the way that you review is really personal, as all of our weaknesses are so unique. I was kind of lazy about review. I only worked through the questions I missed or circled. It’s better to do something more comprehensive.
Month 4:
Month four is essentially a ramped up version of month three. take two five section tests and one six section test per week. If you are worried about burnout, you can pare it down some, especially about a twoweeks before the test. During both of these last two months, review the Bibles or Manhattan guides as necessary for specific question type needs.
Like I said, this plan is for me. It’s really tailored to what I need out of my prep; I’m really solid at LG and pretty good at LR, but consistent scores and RC in general are my definite weak points. Therefore, I chose to put a lot of time into learning to read like a law student/lawyer/LSAT taker, and then just doing a ton of full tests so that nothing on the real thing surprises me. This guide definitely isn’t for everyone, but maybe there’s something that you can find that makes reading it worthwhile.
Good luck
footnote 1:
RC approach: as you will find, Manhattan doesn’t exactly advocate a “tried and true” approach. There belief is that on RC, it’s very individualized; they can give you general ways of looking at things, but everyone reads and remembers differently. This is what I did; it may or may not help you. KevinP mentioned that there are a few things you need to look for in every passage: arguments between one or more parties, analogies, comparisons, and passage structure. There’s a ton of superfluous information, but this is what the vast majority of questions will ask. The other thing I did in RC was based on Manhattan’s advice to pause at the end of paragraphs to reflect on what you have just read. I took this a step further, writing a 1-4 word outline in the margin. Obviously, this does nothing to help you remember details, but it really helps understanding passage structure, and can be used to more easily draw comparisons in the comparative passage.
footnote 2: combining Manhattan LG with Powerscore LGB: each of these books does some things better than the other. Manhattan is amazing for in/out games, linear games, and a couple other game types. Powerscore is more comprehensive and has some game types that it does better than Manhattan. The best way to do this is to read the chapters that go together in conjunction while you’re drilling LG in month 1 and month 2. Figure out who’s approach you like better. Some are so similar that there seems to be no difference, but there will be certain game types where you read one and just go “damn, this is so much easier than the other book.” Like a lot of things on the LSAT, it’s about how you best approach it, not the way that everyone else tells you to.
Random note on LR: About a month or so before the test I was feeling like I was burning out at the end of LR sections. I decided that it might be better to hit the harder, middle and late, questions first. I decided to start LR sections with question 11 and work till the end, and then go back and do questions 1-10. It worked amazingly for me and several other people I told the strategy to. Again, it’s something that could or could not work for you, so I recommend trying it a few times and seeing how it feels.
Back story that no one cares about: skip paragraph one:
Ok, so I sorta put together a 4-month plan for myself for my retake. I talked to a few people in the Manhattan study group (October LSAT group) and we all were in a similar boat, so this is my attempt to create something that is coherent to more than just myself.
About me: I took my first LSAT with basically a month of prep in October, 2010. I scored a 166, which was two points below my original goal of 168. The reason that I thought I had underperformed was a fairly severe injury a few days before the test. The real reason was Reading Comp. My RC was -7 or -9 I think, and my LR and LG were strong enough to have a shot at the 170s. I really wanted to get into Illinois or IU-B, so i decided pretty close to the deadline, to take the February test. I studied for a month and took about 12 preptests, with scores mostly in the 172-174 range, with a 175 and a few in the high 160s/low 170s. I thought I did OK, maybe 168-170, but was shocked to get my score back: another damn 166. The thing that really pissed me off was that I found TLS forums about a week before the test and realized that I was vastly under-prepared. I’m not saying I had a shot a 180, but mid-170s was not out of the question. I decided to retake in October with 3 months of prep, which I changed to 4 months because of work, and focus on consistency and RC.
tldr; I found out I could have done much better than i actually did, and decided to put a lot more into the test than before. I focused on RC and consistency, my two biggest weaknesses, but with some attention to my weakest LG and LR question types.
This guide is pretty rough; I hope you can use it and modify it to meet your specific needs. It combines elements from pithy’s guide, some wisdom from Noah of Manhattan LSAT, KevinP, and a few others that I can’t quite remember.
Note: this assumes a decent comprehension of Powerscore or another basic strategy company’s method. It focuses on finding weak points, drilling them to perfection, and then practicing them. Most guides are a 3 step process: learning the methods, practicing the methods, then putting them to full tests. This assumes the first step - except with RC: if you want to use strategy books to brush up on your LG and LR methods, that’s cool, but I don’t really put a section in here on that.
Update: I scored a 176 in October
Materials:
LSAT Superprep - I only had the PTs, but I’ve heard reviewing the explanations is really great.
Manhattan LSAT LG, RC and LR
New 10 official preptests, next 10 official preptests, and as many new tests as you can afford. You need 2 + 4 + 8 + 12 = 26. However, you also need experimental sections, which is another 8 and 1/2 tests. I reused some of the older tests from drilling for experimental sections.
LSAT blog - hardest games and hardest questions.
Cambridge LR and LG 1-38
PS LG Bible - I had already done the Powerscore study guides, so I didn’t really use them. I’ll try to point out how to best use them in conjunction with the Manhattan books.
Month 1:
This month is for relearning and figuring out your weaknesses.
Relearn RC. I used the PS method, which, while not awful, wasn’t really helpful. I relearned Manhattan’s approach and mixed it with some advice I picked up in the October study thread (a shout out goes to KevinP). Use the Manhattan method on about 10 RC sections - mostly using the first two “10” books so you can save the newer tests for later. Review: After every full section of RC, grade yourself, then go back and reread the passages the way that you wish you had read them the first time. I got this tidbit from Noah - practice doesn’t make perfect; practice makes permanent (see footnote 1).
Identify LG and LR weaknesses. Work through some of Cambridge’s level 3 and level 4 questions to identify the question types that kill you. Using a guide to identify question types, figure out what your worst question types are. For instance, I suck at parallel reasoning and parallel flaw, and I’m not great at mapping games. So, I will note this for the next month, which is about drilling these question types much more than others. Make 3 photocopies of all the questions from the question types that you are having the most difficulty with. Do not copy the questions from the tests that you will take in full (or at least avoid the new 10 and the individual tests). You should also work through questions of every type so that your skills in these areas become sharpened. Noah mentions that you want to have as many “gimme” questions as possible. Do this by drilling everything, even if you’re not worried about missing it on the test, because four and a half minutes on an easy logic game instead of seven minutes gives you two and a half minutes to spend on tougher games.
Take a diagnostic at the beginning of the month, and take another test halfway through the month.
Month 2:
This month is for drilling the questions that trip you up on the real test.
RC - Continue to implement Manhattan’s guide in the same way as in month one. Find as much stuff to read on stuff that you don’t care about. for instance, I am awful on the science passages. Print off articles from the Economist, Scientific American etc. Print these so that you can read them as if they were LSAT passages. Notate them, spot the arguments, and find the conclusions. Be able to pick up any piece of dense material, read it quickly, and know the required information to answer any LSAT-esque question about it.
LR and LG - Start drilling the question types that you have problems with, as identified in month one. You need photocopies of the LG and LR question types that you ID’d in month one. (see, footnote 2)
Take one five section preptest every week during this month, a total of four.
Month 3:
Three and four are the months for practicing full tests. Month three, you can continue to drill other things, but since the last two weeks before the test are really light, month four is review and PTs only. I won’t get too specific; use your discretion, but I would mostly use my extra study time for review.
Take 2 five-section tests per week. Use the rest of the time to review. This can be done several ways. One way I have considered is notating every question that I miss, have to guess on, or spend a lot of time answering. I would then work through these questions individually, figuring out what about the stimulus needs to be determined, and what it is about the right answer completes it, as well as what it is about the wrong “contenders” that makes them wrong. Another method is geverett’s method - which I believe he got from another source. This is going through the PT timed, then going through again untimed, trying to answer every single question correctly. This part is really up to you, because the way that you review is really personal, as all of our weaknesses are so unique. I was kind of lazy about review. I only worked through the questions I missed or circled. It’s better to do something more comprehensive.
Month 4:
Month four is essentially a ramped up version of month three. take two five section tests and one six section test per week. If you are worried about burnout, you can pare it down some, especially about a twoweeks before the test. During both of these last two months, review the Bibles or Manhattan guides as necessary for specific question type needs.
Like I said, this plan is for me. It’s really tailored to what I need out of my prep; I’m really solid at LG and pretty good at LR, but consistent scores and RC in general are my definite weak points. Therefore, I chose to put a lot of time into learning to read like a law student/lawyer/LSAT taker, and then just doing a ton of full tests so that nothing on the real thing surprises me. This guide definitely isn’t for everyone, but maybe there’s something that you can find that makes reading it worthwhile.
Good luck
footnote 1:
RC approach: as you will find, Manhattan doesn’t exactly advocate a “tried and true” approach. There belief is that on RC, it’s very individualized; they can give you general ways of looking at things, but everyone reads and remembers differently. This is what I did; it may or may not help you. KevinP mentioned that there are a few things you need to look for in every passage: arguments between one or more parties, analogies, comparisons, and passage structure. There’s a ton of superfluous information, but this is what the vast majority of questions will ask. The other thing I did in RC was based on Manhattan’s advice to pause at the end of paragraphs to reflect on what you have just read. I took this a step further, writing a 1-4 word outline in the margin. Obviously, this does nothing to help you remember details, but it really helps understanding passage structure, and can be used to more easily draw comparisons in the comparative passage.
footnote 2: combining Manhattan LG with Powerscore LGB: each of these books does some things better than the other. Manhattan is amazing for in/out games, linear games, and a couple other game types. Powerscore is more comprehensive and has some game types that it does better than Manhattan. The best way to do this is to read the chapters that go together in conjunction while you’re drilling LG in month 1 and month 2. Figure out who’s approach you like better. Some are so similar that there seems to be no difference, but there will be certain game types where you read one and just go “damn, this is so much easier than the other book.” Like a lot of things on the LSAT, it’s about how you best approach it, not the way that everyone else tells you to.
Random note on LR: About a month or so before the test I was feeling like I was burning out at the end of LR sections. I decided that it might be better to hit the harder, middle and late, questions first. I decided to start LR sections with question 11 and work till the end, and then go back and do questions 1-10. It worked amazingly for me and several other people I told the strategy to. Again, it’s something that could or could not work for you, so I recommend trying it a few times and seeing how it feels.
