Top Law Schools

Still good study material? I already did 52 and up. Would these still be good for practice or should I focus on the ones between 38-52?

No, they are not too outdated. They are pretty similar, except there are no comparative passages. You really did 61,62,63,64,65 already??? Thats unfortunate. How about A,B,C and June 2007?

Nova wrote:No, they are not too outdated. They are pretty similar, except there are no comparative passages. You really did 61,62,63,64,65 already??? Thats unfortunate. How about A,B,C and June 2007?

The A, B, C are pretty old. Older than the 30s series.

The 30s are definitely good practice material.

If one has time, all the PTs can be useful. 1-65

I actually have 54-65. I still have four left but I'm definitely going to need some more soon. I've been breaking up the PT's and doing timed sections every day. My average is 163 now with a high of 165, I'm trying to hit that 170 for June. I just ordered 29-38, thanks!

hereyago wrote:

Nova wrote:No, they are not too outdated. They are pretty similar, except there are no comparative passages. You really did 61,62,63,64,65 already??? Thats unfortunate. How about A,B,C and June 2007?

The A, B, C are pretty old. Older than the 30s series.

The 30s are definitely good practice material.

Cool, thanks! Which ones are the A,B, and, C?

rglifberg wrote:I actually have 54-65. I still have four left but I'm definitely going to need some more soon. I've been breaking up the PT's and doing timed sections every day. My average is 163 now with a high of 165, I'm trying to hit that 170 for June. I just ordered 29-38, thanks!

hereyago wrote:

Nova wrote:No, they are not too outdated. They are pretty similar, except there are no comparative passages. You really did 61,62,63,64,65 already??? Thats unfortunate. How about A,B,C and June 2007?

The A, B, C are pretty old. Older than the 30s series.

The 30s are definitely good practice material.

Cool, thanks! Which ones are the A,B, and, C?

http://www.amazon.com/Official-SuperPre ... 0979305063

It's the LSAC SuperPrep book you can get on their website. I found it to be pretty useful.

SuperPreps have good explanations written by the test writers themselves, and they're must reads.

I just did the SuperPreps and also found them helpful. A warning: the game sections are much tougher than they have been recently.

.

-

.

No

I highly recommend doing 1-65 in chronological order. I've worked my way through them, and I'm on test 48 now. What's interesting, is that the phrasing of the exam has slightly changed, and certain words have become nuanced. It is very difficult to explain, but as you see the test progress, you really start to understand what the LSAT really wants when it asks a question. The LSAT has jargon of its own, words that aren't normally considered jargon. Watching the test progress allows you to identify these words through their slight shift in meaning. As test makers change the overall structure of the test, it gives you insight into what they really want from you.

Sloth Hero wrote:I highly recommend doing 1-65 in chronological order. I've worked my way through them, and I'm on test 48 now. What's interesting, is that the phrasing of the exam has slightly changed, and certain words have become nuanced. It is very difficult to explain, but as you see the test progress, you really start to understand what the LSAT really wants when it asks a question. The LSAT has jargon of its own, words that aren't normally considered jargon. Watching the test progress allows you to identify these words through their slight shift in meaning. As test makers change the overall structure of the test, it gives you insight into what they really want from you.

How long has it taken you to go through 1-48. I would ideally like to do this, but I'm not sure if I have the time. I am taking the October test, and I just finished the intro to SuperPrep and I'm not working through the Logic Games Bible. By the time I get through the PowerScore trilogy, it seems like I won't have enough time to do this, but I really wish I did.

Do you use a lot of those just for timed section drills, or do you actually use all of them for full-length, timed PTs?

.

echamberlin8 wrote:

Sloth Hero wrote:I highly recommend doing 1-65 in chronological order. I've worked my way through them, and I'm on test 48 now. What's interesting, is that the phrasing of the exam has slightly changed, and certain words have become nuanced. It is very difficult to explain, but as you see the test progress, you really start to understand what the LSAT really wants when it asks a question. The LSAT has jargon of its own, words that aren't normally considered jargon. Watching the test progress allows you to identify these words through their slight shift in meaning. As test makers change the overall structure of the test, it gives you insight into what they really want from you.

How long has it taken you to go through 1-48. I would ideally like to do this, but I'm not sure if I have the time. I am taking the October test, and I just finished the intro to SuperPrep and I'm not working through the Logic Games Bible. By the time I get through the PowerScore trilogy, it seems like I won't have enough time to do this, but I really wish I did.

Do you use a lot of those just for timed section drills, or do you actually use all of them for full-length, timed PTs?

Lets say you finish LR/AR PSB with 2 weeks left in June. You would have about 15 weeks till the test.

You could easily take and go over 10 sections a week. That would be 37 tests.
15 sections a week would be 56 tests.
Just under 18 sections a week would be all 66. Thats like a FT job.

I have been using 29-38 to work alongside the LRB and doing each question type. It has been very helpful building my LR skills.

I just finished 29's LR and LG sections ( timed section drilling) The LR seemed a lot more difficult to me than the recent ones. The recent ones are definitely much more pattern based as someone else said.

Use the older ones for section drilling and save any recent ones you haven't done for full timed test practice. You can also throw in sections from the older ones into your full, timed test to simulate the extra section.

rglifberg wrote:I just finished 29's LR and LG sections ( timed section drilling) The LR seemed a lot more difficult to me than the recent ones. The recent ones are definitely much more pattern based as someone else said.

Use 29-38 to go through each question type untimed then all sections timed. From 39-48 use half sections timed and half untimed. 49+ straight timed PTs.

Thanks that's almost exactly what I'm gonna do. Unfortunately I already did 53+ so I'm gonna use 29-38 for drlling and 39-48 for PT's

40 and up are pretty solid. The biggest difference is when the comparative reading begins. I would mostly use the stuff from 1-39 for drilling if possible

I've only just now starting doing PT's in the 20's after doing one's in the 30's and 50's for quite a while. I haven't really noticed a significant difference aside from harder LG's.

Generally, the LR is extremely similar and RC needs the same approach though people say recent RC is harder.

They all help!