Top Law Schools

Is it better to drill 1 full section from a PT or 1 passage at a time(8:45 min)? Which way would be best to help with timing issues?

aep1989 wrote:Is it better to drill 1 full section from a PT or 1 passage at a time(8:45 min)? Which way would be best to help with timing issues?

I did both... It really depends on how much time you have. I found drilling up to 3 back to back sections timed to be the most efficient. At least to me it was.

Just do full sections, maybe slowly at first, untimed, but then move to timed. Get four passages and do them together. One passage at a time will not, I think, do it because there are factors that can hurt you that do not come into play unless you do consecutive sections. Plus, you will not necessarily spend equal time in each passage.

Echoing on full sections - I think that LR and RC should be done in full sections because there is a significant component of endurance and fatigue to overcome. That's probably the hardest part about LR and RC is that you have to be at your sharpest for 25 questions consecutively or 4 passages back to back. Can start un-timed and get your accuracy down, then start reducing the amount of time. Honestly, familiarity and developing a personalized strategy helped me the most with RC. And it definitely can be improved - I went from around -7 average to -3 average - without any 'specific' RC work besides sitting down with a stack of passages and drilling.

Some people can find passages separated by type. That might be helpful if it's a certain type of passage that's giving you trouble.

relevantfactor wrote:Some people can find passages separated by type. That might be helpful if it's a certain type of passage that's giving you trouble.

Just wanted to say I tried this, and while it is ostensibly a good way to go, I found it a detriment to my RC prep. For LR and LG, I found the cambridge packets to be nothing short of awesome, but for RC it seemed like a waste of money. I did mostly this leading up to the June test, and for my retake I worked exclusively with full sections and found it to be the best way.

If you want, do them untimed, or timed and pause after passages/etc, but the problem with working on a per-passage basis is that you will have no idea if you're moving too slowly or not.

If such a list existed (and it doesn't), it would be best to prep with RC by organizational structure. Otherwise, stick to full sections with comprehensive review.

i like doing sections, but writing the time per passage at the top of the page. that way, you get your endurance up and get to gauge your pacing.

cahwc12 wrote:

relevantfactor wrote:Some people can find passages separated by type. That might be helpful if it's a certain type of passage that's giving you trouble.

Just wanted to say I tried this, and while it is ostensibly a good way to go, I found it a detriment to my RC prep. For LR and LG, I found the cambridge packets to be nothing short of awesome, but for RC it seemed like a waste of money. I did mostly this leading up to the June test, and for my retake I worked exclusively with full sections and found it to be the best way.

If you want, do them untimed, or timed and pause after passages/etc, but the problem with working on a per-passage basis is that you will have no idea if you're moving too slowly or not.

If such a list existed (and it doesn't), it would be best to prep with RC by organizational structure. Otherwise, stick to full sections with comprehensive review.

Are you saying that there isn't a list separated by RC types? Because there is, if you are saying something else, then my bad.
I do agree with almost everything you said, however, I believe it can be a good supplement to your RC if it's a specific type that's giving you trouble (for example, scientific passages).

relevantfactor wrote:Are you saying that there isn't a list separated by RC types? Because there is, if you are saying something else, then my bad.
I do agree with almost everything you said, however, I believe it can be a good supplement to your RC if it's a specific type that's giving you trouble (for example, scientific passages).

There's a list on cambridge of "rc by type" but it is just RC passages by topic, which is like sorting LR by those dealing with dinosaurs or carbon dioxide. It just doesn't have any relevance.

The best and only good way to sort RC passages would be by organizational structure. Something like "Thesis, Critics, problems with critics views," "Old way, new evidence, problems with new evidence," etc etc. I don't think such a list exists, but people have been posting, asking for one between each LSAT administration since as long as I've been hanging around these boards. I honestly don't think it would take longer than a day for someone to do, it's just a matter of motivation for those who have already taken the LSAT (because it requires burning every passage).

Doing this I think would greatly increase someone's ability to learn how to absorb RC passages and I think learning all these organizational structures helps one become a predictive reader which is what leads to stronger comprehension on the passages.

Simply reading a bunch of passages on indian land use laws or female literary criticism of the 1800s isn't necessarily all that useful in my opinion.

^ Oh yeah, definitely agree. Pretty good idea for a RC book IMO.