So I am retaking the LSAT in 21 days. I took the test last October and scored a 165 (83 raw score). Since I had used up the green book and taken all of the tests in the new blue book (tests 52-71), I had been using prep tests 39-51 for actual practice tests. On these tests I had scored a 171 twice, a 177 once, and a 174 once. I pretty much go -1 on both LR, -4 on RC, and -2 on LG.
However, I had read that the recent tests had changed a bit starting around test 40. So I have been redoing practice tests 60-71 since I hardly remember them and they will help me get a flavor for what I will see on the real thing in a few weeks.
But my scores have massively declined! Like WTF! I don't understand how I can go from a 171 to a 167. Now I am getting 21/25 on LR and doing horribly on RC. Logic games got easier, but I am very frustrated.
Any thoughts... Advice... Any help or wisdom on how the test may possibly be a little different? I was really excited to be scoring in the mid 170's and I've worked so hard. This recent revelation has me feeling defeated.
Thank you.
Desperately need the opinion of RECENT retakers. Forum
-
Pablo
- Posts: 27
- Joined: Sun Jul 21, 2013 6:25 am
-
DetroitRed
- Posts: 230
- Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2014 8:40 am
Re: Desperately need the opinion of RECENT retakers.
I'm retaking at the end of this month too.
Conventional wisdom, which also happens to align pretty well with what I've found, is that RC has gotten harder and LR has gotten trickier. I used to get -0/-0 on LR without thinking on tests in the 30s, 40s, and 50s. The late 60s and early 70s have trickier LR sections. They aren't harder, per se, they just turn on subtler shifts in focus or scope. Just slow down, read every answer choice, and make sure (especially in parallel questions) that key scope-defining words (e.g. "some" or "all") in the stimulus match those in the answer choice. I've also found that it helps to read the question before the stimulus.
I also make myself read every answer choice regardless of how confident I feel in my answer. The recent LR questions have many more decoy answer choices (i.e. answer choices that aren't clearly wrong) than the older ones.
Conventional wisdom, which also happens to align pretty well with what I've found, is that RC has gotten harder and LR has gotten trickier. I used to get -0/-0 on LR without thinking on tests in the 30s, 40s, and 50s. The late 60s and early 70s have trickier LR sections. They aren't harder, per se, they just turn on subtler shifts in focus or scope. Just slow down, read every answer choice, and make sure (especially in parallel questions) that key scope-defining words (e.g. "some" or "all") in the stimulus match those in the answer choice. I've also found that it helps to read the question before the stimulus.
I also make myself read every answer choice regardless of how confident I feel in my answer. The recent LR questions have many more decoy answer choices (i.e. answer choices that aren't clearly wrong) than the older ones.
-
Jeffort
- Posts: 1888
- Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2008 4:43 pm
Re: Desperately need the opinion of RECENT retakers.
Yeah^
Modern LR questions have more and better attractive trap answers than the older tests, making them trickier if you're not thorough with your analysis.
The modern LR questions have more really good trap answers designed to be attractive and sound correct to people that make certain common types of careless or reading errors from rushing and/or selectively skipping some steps to cut corners and save time. The logic of the questions and behind the CRs isn't anything different or more difficult than past LR, they just have more and better trap answers that gives students more pits easy to fall into you have to navigate past successfully.
Same thing with current RC and more better tricky trap answers, plus there have been several recent RC sections with noticeably more difficult than usual/most older passages.
With LR for argument based assumption family questions, as long as you figure out and understand the argument core, flawed assumption/flawed reasoning before heading into the answer choices, you should be relatively immune to most of the attractive traps and be able to see through them with you understanding of the argument and perform well. However, for people that go with more of a brute force their way method by diving into the ACs as quickly as possible after rushing through the stimulus, modern LR is much more harsh. The modern LR questions with more tricky traps are brutal on people that don't put in analysis time upfront to figure out/gain a good understanding of the argument/stimulus before diving into the answers.
Focus on making sure you are clear about the core of each argument, what the main shift is, and what assumption(s)/flaw(s) that creates before diving into the answers. Having that more detailed clear understanding of the argument in mind before reading the answers will make most of the attractive traps easy to recognize as wrong. Time invested up front gaining a deeper logical understanding of the stimulus is key to performing at a high level on LR sections. Many people waste tons of time debating answer choices because they rushed through the stimulus and frequently end up spending double to triple or more time debating the answers than they would have had they spent a fraction of that time up front analyzing the stimulus better before diving into the answers.
What's your hands on timed PTs approach like?
Modern LR questions have more and better attractive trap answers than the older tests, making them trickier if you're not thorough with your analysis.
The modern LR questions have more really good trap answers designed to be attractive and sound correct to people that make certain common types of careless or reading errors from rushing and/or selectively skipping some steps to cut corners and save time. The logic of the questions and behind the CRs isn't anything different or more difficult than past LR, they just have more and better trap answers that gives students more pits easy to fall into you have to navigate past successfully.
Same thing with current RC and more better tricky trap answers, plus there have been several recent RC sections with noticeably more difficult than usual/most older passages.
With LR for argument based assumption family questions, as long as you figure out and understand the argument core, flawed assumption/flawed reasoning before heading into the answer choices, you should be relatively immune to most of the attractive traps and be able to see through them with you understanding of the argument and perform well. However, for people that go with more of a brute force their way method by diving into the ACs as quickly as possible after rushing through the stimulus, modern LR is much more harsh. The modern LR questions with more tricky traps are brutal on people that don't put in analysis time upfront to figure out/gain a good understanding of the argument/stimulus before diving into the answers.
Focus on making sure you are clear about the core of each argument, what the main shift is, and what assumption(s)/flaw(s) that creates before diving into the answers. Having that more detailed clear understanding of the argument in mind before reading the answers will make most of the attractive traps easy to recognize as wrong. Time invested up front gaining a deeper logical understanding of the stimulus is key to performing at a high level on LR sections. Many people waste tons of time debating answer choices because they rushed through the stimulus and frequently end up spending double to triple or more time debating the answers than they would have had they spent a fraction of that time up front analyzing the stimulus better before diving into the answers.
What's your hands on timed PTs approach like?
