To what extent is the past also prologue on LSAT Logic Games
Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2013 5:26 am
Hi,
In preparing for the LSAT, one of the most fascinating things I've noticed is that-while I may not be able to complete a difficult scenario like the June 2003 Zephyr Airlines game, the December 1998 Reptile game, or even the June 2002 swimming lanes game in a timely manner the first time- I can STILL apply the same general principles I have learned slogging through these difficult scenarios to logic games going all the way back to PrepTest 1. For example, after doing the Zephyr airlines game, no longer does a Grouping game with a discreet mapping element scare me (ie, the 1995 Zendu airzones game). Moreover, after returning to these difficult games later, say, in a month or so, I find that I ALSO can fly through the same games that previously gave me a headache.
This experience has lead me to consider the following question: to what extent does the LSAT's nature as a standardized test dictate that similar scenario's be repeatedly tested over and over again within the basic constructs of linearity and grouping? Is the past always prologue?
Put another way, would one effective way to prepare for the Analytical Reasoning section simply involve going through EVERY published game, basically memorizing the eccentricities of each one (rather than simply being a slave to the clock on each game the first time around)? What would be the drawbacks to this method, and would you care to speculate how significant they would likely be?
In preparing for the LSAT, one of the most fascinating things I've noticed is that-while I may not be able to complete a difficult scenario like the June 2003 Zephyr Airlines game, the December 1998 Reptile game, or even the June 2002 swimming lanes game in a timely manner the first time- I can STILL apply the same general principles I have learned slogging through these difficult scenarios to logic games going all the way back to PrepTest 1. For example, after doing the Zephyr airlines game, no longer does a Grouping game with a discreet mapping element scare me (ie, the 1995 Zendu airzones game). Moreover, after returning to these difficult games later, say, in a month or so, I find that I ALSO can fly through the same games that previously gave me a headache.
This experience has lead me to consider the following question: to what extent does the LSAT's nature as a standardized test dictate that similar scenario's be repeatedly tested over and over again within the basic constructs of linearity and grouping? Is the past always prologue?
Put another way, would one effective way to prepare for the Analytical Reasoning section simply involve going through EVERY published game, basically memorizing the eccentricities of each one (rather than simply being a slave to the clock on each game the first time around)? What would be the drawbacks to this method, and would you care to speculate how significant they would likely be?