December 2012 Re-takers Forum

[CU44BMD]

So i've been focusing on RC as it is my weak point. Average (-6/-7). Drilled today I realized something, I finished reading passage #2 on PT 14 (Deconstruction), and didn't "really" grasp what the main components of the passage where. My question is, what do you @ this point. Do you try and plow through the questions? Re-read? Guess? Completely ditch and move on then comeback for a quick skim? What's your plan of attack when shit hits the fan upon finishing a passage.

Note: this question is more towards the non-gifted RC'ers:) The kids that grew up watching to much Doug Funnie.

[gguuueessttt]

So i've been focusing on RC as it is my weak point. Average (-6/-7). Drilled today I realized something, I finished reading passage #2 on PT 14 (Deconstruction), and didn't "really" grasp what the main components of the passage where. My question is, what do you @ this point. Do you try and plow through the questions? Re-read? Guess? Completely ditch and move on then comeback for a quick skim? What's your plan of attack when shit hits the fan upon finishing a passage.

Note: this question is more towards the non-gifted RC'ers:) The kids that grew up watching to much Doug Funnie.

Well, in the interest of time, I would recommend taking a minute to summarize the passage in your head as well as you can (from what you did grasp). Then move onto the questions, attacking the questions with specific line numbers first and then moving onto the broader questions.

But really the best thing to do to improve RC is to slow down. Take more time to read the passage and try to summarize each paragraph really quickly as you read. It may seem like a waste of time, but you'll end up answering the questions much more quickly and consistently.

[gguuueessttt]

So, I got a 169 on the October test. Just took my first PT after not touching an LSAT problem since October 6th. 175! I think I've figured out my main issues stem from not practicing in the morning, being on a very terrible sleep schedule (which I still am), and plain old test anxiety. Not sure how to remedy the latter because I'm usually a very relaxed test taker but for some reason I got extremely anxious at the LSAT.

[CU44BMD]

So, I got a 169 on the October test. Just re-took my first test after not touching an LSAT problem since October 6th. 175! I think I've figured out my main issues stem from not practicing in the morning, being on a very terrible sleep schedule (which I still am), and plain old test anxiety. Not sure how to remedy the latter because I'm usually a very relaxed test taker but for some reason I got extremely anxious at the LSAT.

Congrats!, and thanks for your input. I will slow my pace on passages I deem difficult or hard to grasp. Maybe 4/5 mins on a read.

[sinfiery]

Imo powerscore is overly concerned with classification, especially in LG. Also Manhattan's core approach is far superior to Powescores stim based approach.

that's fair I guess. I liked the emphasis on classification because I was having trouble figuring out how to diagram selection games and pattern games. PS helped me a lot and I was having a TON of trouble with LG when I first started (cold diagnostic I got -12) and now I very rarely miss one.

I also have a friend who got a 180 in June who recommends Powerscore to everyone (he was having lots of trouble with LG and minor trouble with LR before he used PS) and there are also a few 180ers online who recommend PS. So I wouldn't say it's overrated.

Different strokes for different folks I guess.

+1 for PS LG bible.

Went from like -15 on my cold diagnostic to -1/2 on LG after going through the book. After some practice, >-0 was very rare. Best use of time for anything, ever. Probably. That being said, I've never read another LG bible and it will probably also be very useful.


I started with their method in how everything is diagrammed then start adjusting it as I got more comfortable.

[GabeQuixote]

Do you guys take four sections in a row without stopping or add in an experimental and a break?

[NoodleyOne]

Yeah, don't get me wrong. I think the LG Bible is great. I haven't used MLG personally but I hear that it is essentially the same in diagramming methods. My only issue with the LG bible is the focus on classification. I still think it is an excellent resource.

LR Bible is not that great, however. MLR blows it out of the fucking water.

[NoodleyOne]

Do you guys take four sections in a row without stopping or add in an experimental and a break?

Depends on whether stamina is an issue for me. I don't have a ton of free time to PT, so I did exclusively 4 section tests. Five section is still credited if you have the time, though.

[Poo-T]

are "bibles" really all that useful this late in the game?

I worked through the PS bibles for each section and their practice books too.

[PickledPanda]

Do you guys take four sections in a row without stopping or add in an experimental and a break?

I use 5 sections: 3 sections followed by a 10-15 min break and then the final two sections.

[Cobretti]

are "bibles" really all that useful this late in the game?

I worked through the PS bibles for each section and their practice books too.

Oh you...

But ya I think its important to go back to the fundamentals of whatever our weaknesses are at this point.

[Poo-T]

are "bibles" really all that useful this late in the game?

I worked through the PS bibles for each section and their practice books too.

Oh you...

But ya I think its important to go back to the fundamentals of whatever our weaknesses are at this point.

well you guys probably know better (no really). I guess I'll pick up a Manhattan LR.

[gguuueessttt]

are "bibles" really all that useful this late in the game?

I worked through the PS bibles for each section and their practice books too.

I think the LG one would definitely be useful to review. The test is still over three weeks away. And if you have enough time you could probably bang it out in two days.

[Lenahan3]

Yeah, don't get me wrong. I think the LG Bible is great. I haven't used MLG personally but I hear that it is essentially the same in diagramming methods. My only issue with the LG bible is the focus on classification. I still think it is an excellent resource.

LR Bible is not that great, however. MLR blows it out of the fucking water.

MLR is much more concise and well put together than is PLR. PLR is a gargantuan text that I don't feel like rereading again and while it does cover everything MLR covers, it does so using a somewhat awkward methodology.

[gguuueessttt]

Yeah, don't get me wrong. I think the LG Bible is great. I haven't used MLG personally but I hear that it is essentially the same in diagramming methods. My only issue with the LG bible is the focus on classification. I still think it is an excellent resource.

LR Bible is not that great, however. MLR blows it out of the fucking water.

MLR is much more concise and well put together than is PLR. PLR is a gargantuan text that I don't feel like rereading again and while it does cover everything MLR covers, it does so using a somewhat awkward methodology.

I didn't read MLR so I can't compare the two, but I found PLR relatively helpful. When I reviewed PLR I just re-did all of the practice problems rather than reading through the entire text. Then, if I was unsure about one, I would read the explanation and move on. I liked that they were organized by type because I had the most trouble with cannot be true and parallel questions, so I was able to focus only on those sections. After doing all of those problems once or twice I started getting consistent -0 LR sections (although I admittedly got -3 on one of the October sections. :/ )

[Sugar Lumps]

My jobs are not conducive to studying. Ugh.

[Lenahan3]

Yeah, don't get me wrong. I think the LG Bible is great. I haven't used MLG personally but I hear that it is essentially the same in diagramming methods. My only issue with the LG bible is the focus on classification. I still think it is an excellent resource.

LR Bible is not that great, however. MLR blows it out of the fucking water.

MLR is much more concise and well put together than is PLR. PLR is a gargantuan text that I don't feel like rereading again and while it does cover everything MLR covers, it does so using a somewhat awkward methodology.

I didn't read MLR so I can't compare the two, but I found PLR relatively helpful. When I reviewed PLR I just re-did all of the practice problems rather than reading through the entire text. Then, if I was unsure about one, I would read the explanation and move on. I liked that they were organized by type because I had the most trouble with cannot be true and parallel questions, so I was able to focus only on those sections. After doing all of those problems once or twice I started getting consistent -0 LR sections (although I admittedly got -3 on one of the October sections. :/ )

I don't even want to talk about what I did on LR. It's saddening in comparison to my PT's. I blanked out on one section and it ate my lunch.

Stupid night job.

[gguuueessttt]

Yeah, don't get me wrong. I think the LG Bible is great. I haven't used MLG personally but I hear that it is essentially the same in diagramming methods. My only issue with the LG bible is the focus on classification. I still think it is an excellent resource.

LR Bible is not that great, however. MLR blows it out of the fucking water.

MLR is much more concise and well put together than is PLR. PLR is a gargantuan text that I don't feel like rereading again and while it does cover everything MLR covers, it does so using a somewhat awkward methodology.

I didn't read MLR so I can't compare the two, but I found PLR relatively helpful. When I reviewed PLR I just re-did all of the practice problems rather than reading through the entire text. Then, if I was unsure about one, I would read the explanation and move on. I liked that they were organized by type because I had the most trouble with cannot be true and parallel questions, so I was able to focus only on those sections. After doing all of those problems once or twice I started getting consistent -0 LR sections (although I admittedly got -3 on one of the October sections. :/ )

I don't even want to talk about what I did on LR. It's saddening in comparison to my PT's. I blanked out on one section and it ate my lunch.

Stupid night job.

Same thing happened to me on RC. It's embarrassing because I got -0 on my cold diagnostic on RC and then decided to just never study RC. Woooops. Crushed me on the October test.

[Lenahan3]

Same thing happened to me on RC. It's embarrassing because I got -0 on my cold diagnostic on RC and then decided to just never study RC. Woooops. Crushed me on the October test.

I tied my worst performance ever on RC and went far beyond my worst performance ever on LR. Two things that could by themselves drop me below my target score combined together to destroy my score more than I had even thought possible.

Yay.

[gguuueessttt]

Same thing happened to me on RC. It's embarrassing because I got -0 on my cold diagnostic on RC and then decided to just never study RC. Woooops. Crushed me on the October test.

I tied my worst performance ever on RC and went far beyond my worst performance ever on LR. Two things that could by themselves drop me below my target score combined together to destroy my score more than I had even thought possible.

Yay.

At least it can be attributed to under-performance and you'll likely do much better in December!

[warandpeace]

Can I ask you guys who here was working full time? And in general, who spent less than 3 hours of prep a day? Just gathering info lol

[Lenahan3]

Same thing happened to me on RC. It's embarrassing because I got -0 on my cold diagnostic on RC and then decided to just never study RC. Woooops. Crushed me on the October test.

I tied my worst performance ever on RC and went far beyond my worst performance ever on LR. Two things that could by themselves drop me below my target score combined together to destroy my score more than I had even thought possible.

Yay.

At least it can be attributed to under-performance and you'll likely do much better in December!

True!

My brother, during my approved 1 hour mope-fest, saw some silver linings in underperforming:

1) I'm aiming for a 175+, but even if I hadn't blanked out on this test, I simply didn't have a good test and would have likely gotten around a 171 or 172. Those are acceptable scores, though not great, and I probably wouldn't have retaken the test. This way, I still have a shot at 175+, which is a pretty big deal.

2) I've never really taken any big tests in my life besides the ACT. Mostly been essay driven throughout college, which I do wonderfully on, so October gave me a taste of what I need to work on for the Dec. LSAT as well as law school exams.

3) I can quit my night job! Haha.

There were a few others, but really, 1) is a pretty good point. Rather than settling for an acceptable score, there is still a chance at something more great.

[gguuueessttt]

Can I ask you guys who here was working full time? And in general, who spent less than 3 hours of prep a day? Just gathering info lol

I work part-time and am an UG student. I study ~2 hours on weekdays and ~4-6 hours on weekends. I don't feel like it's enough and I wouldn't recommend it.

[Poo-T]

that feel when a logic game is really confusing and you almost finish it... and then you realize that you misinterpreted one of the rules

fuck everything.

[Lenahan3]

that feel when a logic game is really confusing and you almost finish it... and then you realize that you misinterpreted one of the rules

fuck everything.

Which one?