Top Law Schools

Hi guys,

I posted a question under another topic, but thought I would ask a general question here. I am prepping for the December 2013 test. I am currently sitting between a 152 and a 157. I really would like to reach a 165 by the test date. My logic game section is ok, but im struggling with LR and RC. I've gone through the LRB and am going through it again. For some reason assumption and flaw just don't seem to be clicking for me. Is my goal realsitic? Can anyone share some advice please? Thanks.

If the LR Bible did not work for you, try the Manhattan books. I feel like with enough prep nearly anyone can hit mid 160s.

Thank you, I'm going to continue to push until I see the score I want

I use to have significant problems with Flaw and Assumption questions too. I didn't begin understanding these questions until I read Manhattan's LR book. For flaw questions, until you think in terms of why the conclusion doesn't necessarily follow from the premise(s), you are going to keep missing these questions. The Powerscore LRB is flawed in this respect because it just teaches you about different flaws. It fails to emphasize WHY an argument is flawed in the first place. An argument is flawed because the conclusion doesn't follow from the evidence given. The connection between the premises and the conclusion isn't strong and legit.

ImNoScar wrote:If the LR Bible did not work for you, try the Manhattan books. I feel like with enough prep nearly anyone can hit mid 160s.

This, although there are certainly plenty of people out there who cannot hit mid 160s. Just not many such people who frequent TLS.

I'm gonna go ahead and echo what everyone else said above and recommend the Manhatten LR book. Their approach for Flaw and Assumption questions (both kinds) helped me much more than Powerscore's LRB.