Top Law Schools

BlueJeanBaby wrote:Wahhh!!!!!!!

I've been studying LR religiously the past few days from the Manhattan book. I tried to utilize what I've learned in this PT test. The DEVASTATING RESULT:

Section 1 (LR): -7
Section 2 (RC): -7
Section 3 (LR): -8
Section 4 (LG): -0

Scored: 161

I always bomb RC and I usually do well on LG, so those haven't changed. I can't believe that trying really hard to improve on a section made me do significantly worse on that section. It discourages me from reading those books more, and just rather spending time PTing and learning from my mistakes like I was before. Any thoughts?

Sometimes when you implement new strategies it gets worse before it gets better because you are getting used to it. Also what PT did you do? If more recent than the last ones you took, then it may have just been harder b/c it was more recent....

CONGRATS ON THE LG THOUGH. *clap*clap*

lebasy wrote:

BlueJeanBaby wrote:Wahhh!!!!!!!

I've been studying LR religiously the past few days from the Manhattan book. I tried to utilize what I've learned in this PT test. The DEVASTATING RESULT:

Section 1 (LR): -7
Section 2 (RC): -7
Section 3 (LR): -8
Section 4 (LG): -0

Scored: 161

I always bomb RC and I usually do well on LG, so those haven't changed. I can't believe that trying really hard to improve on a section made me do significantly worse on that section. It discourages me from reading those books more, and just rather spending time PTing and learning from my mistakes like I was before. Any thoughts?

Sometimes when you implement new strategies it gets worse before it gets better because you are getting used to it. Also what PT did you do? If more recent than the last ones you took, then it may have just been harder b/c it was more recent....

CONGRATS ON THE LG THOUGH. *clap*clap*

Sorry, PT 47. The one before that, that I did well on, was 59.

BlueJeanBaby wrote:Is anyone else really paranoid about taking the February test? Someone posted that graph that February test takers score significantly lower, on average, than other months. I know there are a ton of reasons this could be.. but I'm paranoid none-the-less.

That's because it's usually people who are procrastinators and don't know what to do with their life who take the test, and since it's equated, if dumber people take the test, more people score poorly.

But all of them are the same-- don't fret about February. Also, since so few people take it, your test center will likely be more low-key.

I am a firm believer that the Feb tests are easier/ are more explicit in their reasoning.

Could be a wild theory.

TheThriller wrote:I am a firm believer that the Feb tests are easier/ are more explicit in their reasoning.

Could be a wild theory.

<3

Guys I am joining u for February,lets get prepared and kick ass.

OK guys ,how we work ,we take tests and post in here?

In a past cycle, people tried to stay on the same schedule- would do the same PT (or 2) each week and then at a time that works for most people discuss it in some sort of chat, and discuss the questions people had difficulty with. Anybody interested in doing some sort of interactive study group like that (or, is this already going on?)

How are people taking PTs?

Like...full, strict, 5-section (3 straight, break, 2 straight)...or?

PurpleMustang wrote:How are people taking PTs?

Like...full, strict, 5-section (3 straight, break, 2 straight)...or?

Im going back to my "prep mode"- 3 tests a week, 2x4 sections and 1x5 sections.

patienunderstanding wrote:

PurpleMustang wrote:How are people taking PTs?

Like...full, strict, 5-section (3 straight, break, 2 straight)...or?

Im going back to my "prep mode"- 3 tests a week, 2x4 sections and 1x5 sections.

Timed like the real thing - 3 straight, break, 2 straight?

PurpleMustang wrote:How are people taking PTs?

Like...full, strict, 5-section (3 straight, break, 2 straight)...or?

Until it gets closer to test day I'm only doing 4 sections. I plan to make them more test-like in January (taking them at my test center, 5 sections, only my watch, even having my husband compile them so I don't know which section is "experimental")

PurpleMustang wrote:

patienunderstanding wrote:

PurpleMustang wrote:How are people taking PTs?

Like...full, strict, 5-section (3 straight, break, 2 straight)...or?

Im going back to my "prep mode"- 3 tests a week, 2x4 sections and 1x5 sections.

Timed like the real thing - 3 straight, break, 2 straight?

Drilling between sections and review of tests without timing, tests always timed.

Anyone wants to be my study partner?
My score ranged from 165 to 172 during the recent PTs
My strongest is LG...mostly but I sometimes bomb it too. :/
LRs are fairly stable within -4 to -7 overall
Now the weakest one is RC for me, partly because I am not a native speaker of English. I used to think that I was almost bilingual but these RC passages made me think otherwise.
The best Ive done so far in RC was -2. Im not even gonna go into the worst...
Im in Seoul, but it doesnt matter where you are since keeping my motivation high and supporting each other's weakness is what Im looking for. PM me if you r interested! thanks!

Hi all! Guess I'm joining you for February. Starting studying at the very end of October with the thought I'd take the December test.. a personal life disaster a week before the test completely threw off my game, so... here I am!

Original diagnostic 10/25 was a 158, average of the last five PTs is a 169.2, and aiming for a 173+. However, one of those is a 174 from a SuperPrep test.

Which brings me to my first Q for the group: did anyone find that the SuperPrep tests were particularly easy? I've taken A & C so far, and got a 174 on both (..which is grand, because of course the tests for which I have the least need for explanation are the ones for which arguably the most important explanations exist). But as you could guess from my average, not scoring above 170+ at any other point. Any thoughts / ideas why those would go well? Obviously want to figure out how I can replicate those scores.

Anyway, sorry for ranting! Look forward to studying with you all.

Anybody else here trying to decide Feb or June?

Is there any consensus on whether to use the Superprep tests? If I remember correctly they are Feb tests

TheThriller wrote:Is there any consensus on whether to use the Superprep tests? If I remember correctly they are Feb tests

I've never seen anyone recommend not using them.. the consensus as far as I've gathered is that they are worth doing if only for the explanations directly from the test makers after each test.

What I'm personally wondering about is whether people perceive them as notably less difficult.. for me they weren't particularly useful for gauging where I'm at and I don't think they significantly helped me study, but doing them can't hurt, right? X)

ETA: Yes, I believe they are previously undisclosed February tests. Maybe our February test will one day be SuperPrep D, eh?

Joining in on the february fun

I'm pretty consistent in LG, got that to around -1 or -0 usually. Could definitely buckle this up and make it more consistent, though. I ****ed up the stained glass game pretty bad the other day and have never looked at the dinosaur game yet

LR.. I'm getting better but still fluctuate anywhere between -5 and -7 per section. At least a couple of these are the result of guessing because of running out of time.

RC is a mess, usually around -7 to -9 per section. I've only taken a handful of PT's to date, best one being 164, the rest hovering around 161-163.

Here is what I plan to do to get better at LR and RC.. since I'm generally not a very organized person, and don't have cute little binders with color-coded tags on them, I will post my study plan for the next few months here. I very much appreciate any feedback/suggestions, even if its harsh, I just want to get better at this test

LR: I'm reading the Manhattan series, and after each chapter I will do the corresponding question type in the Cambridge bundle. So right now, after I finish chapter 3 assumption, I will answer about 50 questions of them from the Cambridge bundle. Then I will move on to chapter 4 flaw, answer 50 flaw questions and another 50 assumption questions. For any wrong questions I will cut them out and refer back to the books as well as the Manhattan online forum for help. After every 2 chapters, I will take a PT to reinforce what I hope to learn. I'll make an account with lsatqa, something I have yet to do, and try to find patterns.

RC: I'll probably go back and re-read the Manhattan RC guide and I'm going to try to make a habit of reading the Economist or the newspaper everyday, just get some more basic reading done on my own time. I've also noticed a general pattern on RC for me, in that I suck at humanitarian passages. I recently purchased a bundle of humanitarian and science passages and will do these 1 at a time to hopefully find patterns in the questions as well as reading for structure, something that just flies over my head at times.

Does this sound good? Anything else I should/shouldn't be doing? Thanks again for your help

Ambitious1 wrote:Joining in on the february fun
RC: I'll probably go back and re-read the Manhattan RC guide and I'm going to try to make a habit of reading the Economist or the newspaper everyday, just get some more basic reading done on my own time. I've also noticed a general pattern on RC for me, in that I suck at humanitarian passages. I recently purchased a bundle of humanitarian and science passages and will do these 1 at a time to hopefully find patterns in the questions as well as reading for structure, something that just flies over my head at times.

Does this sound good? Anything else I should/shouldn't be doing? Thanks again for your help

Just chiming in on RC.. sounds good to me! Also my sloppiest / least predictable section, I'm planning a similar strategy. Not sure what I think about doing bundles by type for RC, but I'm generally all over the place, so might be super effective if you've found one particular topic type you struggle with, as you have. Let us know how it goes! Think I might eventually check out the science bundle, as I'm guessing more time (/tests) will show that's where I'm the worst.

Anyone have any thoughts on the RCB? I've got it but haven't checked it out yet as I've heard iffy things. I have read the Manhattan RC guide- good stuff.

TheMostDangerousLG wrote:

TheThriller wrote:Is there any consensus on whether to use the Superprep tests? If I remember correctly they are Feb tests

I've never seen anyone recommend not using them.. the consensus as far as I've gathered is that they are worth doing if only for the explanations directly from the test makers after each test.

What I'm personally wondering about is whether people perceive them as notably less difficult.. for me they weren't particularly useful for gauging where I'm at and I don't think they significantly helped me study, but doing them can't hurt, right? X)

ETA: Yes, I believe they are previously undisclosed February tests. Maybe our February test will one day be SuperPrep D, eh?

I use superpreps by doing 1 question at a time and reviewing instead of full length PTs. I felt that's the most effective use...

Buying the Superpreps tonight. When I studied for June I went through every PT 20-65 so I am eager for new material.

I think I may 2 of the SPs timed and 1 question by question.

Also, just got the Manhattan LR book. Going to be going through it this week!

Almost 2 months guys and girls!

gobosox wrote:

BlueJeanBaby wrote:Is anyone else really paranoid about taking the February test? Someone posted that graph that February test takers score significantly lower, on average, than other months. I know there are a ton of reasons this could be.. but I'm paranoid none-the-less.

That's because it's usually people who are procrastinators and don't know what to do with their life who take the test, and since it's equated, if dumber people take the test, more people score poorly.

But all of them are the same-- don't fret about February. Also, since so few people take it, your test center will likely be more low-key.

YES!
I AM SLIGHTLY nervous about that the Feb answers will not be released!!! Can I trust the LSAC to score them fairly? Haha.

But BlueJeanBaby, what do you mean by test takers scoring significantly lower? I thought LSATS are curved - aka scores are relative; they are determined in relation to all test takers of that individual test? Isn't that why feb tests have more difficult curve than october and december ones? LSAC makes it more difficult to make it fair for all year-round test takers? (If the theory that February test takers are dumb procrastinators are correct)

Hello~ I am joining you for the February administration!

After I got deferred by a series of EA and ED schools, I've finally made up my mind to do this one last time!

Let's kick ass (talking to you stupid RC section!!!)

Omgosh! Our Feb Study group is poppiiiing now that Dec test is over.

I took my mock Dec LSAT and did abysmal on games. I legit missed one whole game which had a shit ton of questions.

PT 32
LR: -2
RC: -6
LG: - 13
LR: -1

Exp LG: -1

THATS THE THING THOUGH on my Experimental LG - I scored almost perfect. I went over the LG from the test for review and got them -2 when correcting and the game I missed, I got them all right. I guess its back to workbook fun for logic games.

Damn the holiday season though, all my friends want to hang out but after a night of drinking and merriment - I have 0 motivation to study and I am tired AF! Maybe that's why folks do poorly in Feb? But, I'm sure we'll be the ones setting the curve