Advice for a third time retaker? Forum

[mark-wolverine]

Hey guys, I've been lurking for a really long time and I really appreciate every bit of information I gained here. But I still got some problems. I am going to retake for a third time this September. My previous two scores were 160 and 165. I am hoping I could score a 170+ this time.

I have basically used up all my new materials, leaving only PT 72 and some really old tests (PT1-10). Therefore I assume the score of redoing all the PTs I've already done twice is really arbitrary and not really predictive. I know how useful reusing all the PTs is, but I have really done all of them, excluding the ones I just mentioned, at least twice. I could literally explain to someone else any question on those PTs. But still I feel quite insecure about getting a 170+ this time.

I did PT7 and PT9, which are new materials for me, yesterday & today, and scored a 176 and 177 (but the curve was like super lenient, RC -3, LR -3 in total, so I guess it would be around 173 in modern tests).. But still, older tests are still not quite predictive.. Especially since the RC section is getting hard these days, and RC being my weakest part is killing me.

Any suggestions on what to do in the last couple of weeks? What mindset should I have now? Should I re-analyze PT 60-70 carefully or should I finish the PT1-10 to find out the level I really am on now? And the inconsistency in RC, any suggestions on that? It'll be even more helpful if someone who has ever taken a third time and done great could give me some suggestions, general, detailed, anything will do! Thanks in advance!

[msp8]

I'll preface this by saying I haven't even taken the test once, and I'm likely to take it in Dec. However, I would say that your best bet is not to look at PTs as predictive for you. As you've stated, you understand the mechanics of each PT, having taken them all. But that's where I'd focus, if I were you: the fact that you understand the structure and mechanics, I'd delve into those all the further. Rework/restructure questions, essentially reverse engineer them, to create new ones and 'get in the minds of the test makers' so that your comfort level goes up all the more.

The point is less to use PTs as predictive power and to know those PTs due to memory, and more about understanding the structure (mechanics over content, in other words). And with that perspective, the work you can do on PTs is unlimited.

(I'm certain I'm not telling you anything here you don't know, but this is what I've had in mind when worrying about exhausting PTs).

[PeanutsNJam]

Go through all your tests that you still have your answer sheet for. Then, find all the questions you got wrong, and hopefully questions you got right but were unsure about and therefore marked.

Go through proving why every single other answer choice is wrong. If you can't prove it go to Manhattan LSAT or something.

[dontdoitkid]

Third time taker here as well! 153 in October 2012, 163 in December 2013, and I'm scoring ~171 as of now. My two cents:

I'm assuming you're scoring at or about -0 for LG, but if you aren't there yet then keep drilling and redoing games to try and recognize why you didn't catch inferences the initial time.

RC was my weakest part for a long time, and it's only recently really began to click for me. The difference was in the way I started to approach the RC passages. It was kind of like in the Matrix, where Neo starts to see the Matrix in terms of codes and rules and numbers instead of holistically. A little over the top perhaps, but that's how I've started to view RC. I still keep a holistic approach in my mind to get some key points, (MP, tonality), but when I read and annotate I am now looking for specific clues and hints instead of reading to "get it." For example, I look for:

- Identifying all voices and establishing a "who's who" of the passage. Is the passage just explanatory? Does the other have a distinct voice? If they have opinions, why are they providing them? Are they arguing in support of something, against something, or presenting multiple issues for my own digestion? Also, be sure to identify whenever names or figures are referenced, because more often than not you'll need to know where they
stand in relation to the rest of the passage.

- Structure Indicators. Things like "but" "however" "Some professors believe..." "On the other hand." These are your road signs to guide you through. When I look at these I make sure to look for how the tone or focus is changing.

- Look for whenever the author (or any figure with the passage) concedes points. Make sure to recognize that these are concessions that recognize a weakness in the position that they support, and that you don't mistake them for the author changing their viewpoint.

- Timing! Cut your losses on a particular question if you think it'll jeopardize the last passage.

- Passage flow. You will often be asked how different passages relate to each other, and these will be a lot easier if you've figured this out
prior to reading that particular question prompt.

There are other important parts as well, but I am sure by now you are comfortable with the "fact finding" and MP types of questions that appear. The trickiest questions are ones that demand a synthesis of the information - questions that ask you to process the facts you've read, make inferences, and then juxtapose those inferences to reach further inferences and conclusions (thank you Manhattan Reading Comprehension, best resource I've used thus far).

Good luck with your last few weeks of prep. I'm sure you're as ready to get this over with as I am.

[el madrileno]

Third time taker here as well! 153 in October 2012, 163 in December 2013, and I'm scoring ~171 as of now. My two cents:

I'm assuming you're scoring at or about -0 for LG, but if you aren't there yet then keep drilling and redoing games to try and recognize why you didn't catch inferences the initial time.

RC was my weakest part for a long time, and it's only recently really began to click for me. The difference was in the way I started to approach the RC passages. It was kind of like in the Matrix, where Neo starts to see the Matrix in terms of codes and rules and numbers instead of holistically. A little over the top perhaps, but that's how I've started to view RC. I still keep a holistic approach in my mind to get some key points, (MP, tonality), but when I read and annotate I am now looking for specific clues and hints instead of reading to "get it." For example, I look for:

- Identifying all voices and establishing a "who's who" of the passage. Is the passage just explanatory? Does the other have a distinct voice? If they have opinions, why are they providing them? Are they arguing in support of something, against something, or presenting multiple issues for my own digestion? Also, be sure to identify whenever names or figures are referenced, because more often than not you'll need to know where they
stand in relation to the rest of the passage.

- Structure Indicators. Things like "but" "however" "Some professors believe..." "On the other hand." These are your road signs to guide you through. When I look at these I make sure to look for how the tone or focus is changing.

- Look for whenever the author (or any figure with the passage) concedes points. Make sure to recognize that these are concessions that recognize a weakness in the position that they support, and that you don't mistake them for the author changing their viewpoint.

- Timing! Cut your losses on a particular question if you think it'll jeopardize the last passage.

- Passage flow. You will often be asked how different passages relate to each other, and these will be a lot easier if you've figured this out
prior to reading that particular question prompt.

There are other important parts as well, but I am sure by now you are comfortable with the "fact finding" and MP types of questions that appear. The trickiest questions are ones that demand a synthesis of the information - questions that ask you to process the facts you've read, make inferences, and then juxtapose those inferences to reach further inferences and conclusions (thank you Manhattan Reading Comprehension, best resource I've used thus far).

Good luck with your last few weeks of prep. I'm sure you're as ready to get this over with as I am.

+1