LR scores literally have not improved for months. Forum

[flash21]

Guys, I am just stuck at getting 20-21 correct. Getting 22 correct is such a rare thing, only happened once before on a PT.

I feel like I'm reviewing properly, I am going over the questions I got wrong after blind review, then comparing to Cambridge to make sure that I understand the reasoning behind the right / wrong answer, and trying to see where my thought process went wrong, basically like Jeffort explains here: (great link btw) :

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 3#p7930933

I don't really know whats up. I looked at my trends from 7sage and it seems like from recent PT's the misses are all over the place, but they are invariably the "hard" questions. Don't really think its a certain type at this point.


Did anyone get stuck in this range for a long time? I'm writing in December so I am very worried.

Overall just stuck in the low 160's over the course of the 5 PT's I have taken so far. Have had one 164, one 160, and the rest were 161's.

Any help PLEASE? I don't know if I'm just not following that advice by Jeffort above close enough or if anyone can please help.

[nlee10]

Guys, I am just stuck at getting 20-21 correct. Getting 22 correct is such a rare thing, only happened once before on a PT.

I feel like I'm reviewing properly, I am going over the questions I got wrong after blind review, then comparing to Cambridge to make sure that I understand the reasoning behind the right / wrong answer, and trying to see where my thought process went wrong, basically like Jeffort explains here: (great link btw) :

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 3#p7930933

I don't really know whats up. I looked at my trends from 7sage and it seems like from recent PT's the misses are all over the place, but they are invariably the "hard" questions. Don't really think its a certain type at this point.


Did anyone get stuck in this range for a long time? I'm writing in December so I am very worried.

Overall just stuck in the low 160's over the course of the 5 PT's I have taken so far. Have had one 164, one 160, and the rest were 161's.

Any help PLEASE? I don't know if I'm just not following that advice by Jeffort above close enough or if anyone can please help.

Have you drilled using Cambridge LR Packets? I used to get only 22-24 right on LR. Once I read through Manhattan LR + Drilling, I improved to about 32-38 right. Still working to get 40+ right by Dec.

[msp8]

5 PTs isn't enough, I'd say.

[GreenTee]

Have you drilled using Cambridge LR Packets? I used to get only 22-24 right on LR. Once I read through Manhattan LR + Drilling, I improved to about 32-38 right. Still working to get 40+ right by Dec.

This. Drill level 4s for every question type. Review any question you get wrong thoroughly until you understand why each wrong answer is wrong and why the credited answer is correct.

Then collect all of the hardest questions that you missed, analyze them as a whole, and draw conclusions about the kind of reasoning errors you're making. Then fix those reasoning errors.

[GreenTee]

5 PTs isn't enough, I'd say.

Also this.

[nlee10]

Have you drilled using Cambridge LR Packets? I used to get only 22-24 right on LR. Once I read through Manhattan LR + Drilling, I improved to about 32-38 right. Still working to get 40+ right by Dec.

This. Drill level 4s for every question type. Review any question you get wrong thoroughly until you understand why each wrong answer is wrong and why the credited answer is correct.

Then collect all of the hardest questions that you missed, analyze them as a whole, and draw conclusions about the kind of reasoning errors you're making. Then fix those reasoning errors.

Yeah, I only got around to drilling up to Level 1's and 2's before starting a BP class and already saw this kind of improvement. Going to finish drilling some 3's and 4's and excited to see more gains.

[Shakawkaw]

When you guys are drilling, do you schedule it where you do one question type a day? Or do you drill until you've exhausted the entire packet, and then move on to the next one?

I'm currently switching between drilling Conditional Reasoning, NA and SA - just finished the level 1's on each.

[flash21]

Have you drilled using Cambridge LR Packets? I used to get only 22-24 right on LR. Once I read through Manhattan LR + Drilling, I improved to about 32-38 right. Still working to get 40+ right by Dec.

This. Drill level 4s for every question type. Review any question you get wrong thoroughly until you understand why each wrong answer is wrong and why the credited answer is correct.

Then collect all of the hardest questions that you missed, analyze them as a whole, and draw conclusions about the kind of reasoning errors you're making. Then fix those reasoning errors.

Guys, i've done a ton of drilling on cambridge, to the point where I would remember the answer to almost all the questions - so I doubt going back over those again would be helpful. I've went over most of them 2-3x.

Also, how does the amount of PT's affect how well I am doing on LR? I've done many timed sections also, which have also been in the same range. I also don't see how PT's makes you BETTER at LR, do you guys know what I mean?

Thanks for the help, anyone have any more ideas?

[GreenTee]

Have you drilled using Cambridge LR Packets? I used to get only 22-24 right on LR. Once I read through Manhattan LR + Drilling, I improved to about 32-38 right. Still working to get 40+ right by Dec.

This. Drill level 4s for every question type. Review any question you get wrong thoroughly until you understand why each wrong answer is wrong and why the credited answer is correct.

Then collect all of the hardest questions that you missed, analyze them as a whole, and draw conclusions about the kind of reasoning errors you're making. Then fix those reasoning errors.

Guys, i've done a ton of drilling on cambridge, to the point where I would remember the answer to almost all the questions - so I doubt going back over those again would be helpful. I've went over most of them 2-3x.

Also, how does the amount of PT's affect how well I am doing on LR? I've done many timed sections also, which have also been in the same range. I also don't see how PT's makes you BETTER at LR, do you guys know what I mean?

Thanks for the help, anyone have any more ideas?

Sorry about that, flash. I didn't realize how far along you were in your prep. If you've drilled everything already, and you're still missing that many, then you need a new problem solving strategy. What prep materials have you used? I strongly recommend the LSAT trainer for LR.

[flash21]

Have you drilled using Cambridge LR Packets? I used to get only 22-24 right on LR. Once I read through Manhattan LR + Drilling, I improved to about 32-38 right. Still working to get 40+ right by Dec.

This. Drill level 4s for every question type. Review any question you get wrong thoroughly until you understand why each wrong answer is wrong and why the credited answer is correct.

Then collect all of the hardest questions that you missed, analyze them as a whole, and draw conclusions about the kind of reasoning errors you're making. Then fix those reasoning errors.

Guys, i've done a ton of drilling on cambridge, to the point where I would remember the answer to almost all the questions - so I doubt going back over those again would be helpful. I've went over most of them 2-3x.

Also, how does the amount of PT's affect how well I am doing on LR? I've done many timed sections also, which have also been in the same range. I also don't see how PT's makes you BETTER at LR, do you guys know what I mean?

Thanks for the help, anyone have any more ideas?

Sorry about that, flash. I didn't realize how far along you were in your prep. If you've drilled everything already, and you're still missing that many, then you need a new problem solving strategy. What prep materials have you used? I strongly recommend the LSAT trainer for LR.

Not a problem GT. I was actually in the Sept taker thread (but I was always taking December). I've been prepping for a while, I got a 139 diagnostic so I basically had to by default lol.

Yeah i have the trainer actually and enjoyed it. Sorry, not trying to shoot down all of your suggestions, but feeling pretty hopeless at this point.

[msp8]

You may not have a trend in question type, but do you have a trend in what sort of things you get wrong? e.g., do you have trouble determining what the Q is asking? What the gap is in the argument? What the conclusion is? Language/phrasing issues?

That's usually more valuable than trends in question type, I find.

[sfoglia]

You may not have a trend in question type, but do you have a trend in what sort of things you get wrong? e.g., do you have trouble determining what the Q is asking? What the gap is in the argument? What the conclusion is? Language/phrasing issues?

That's usually more valuable than trends in question type, I find.

Yes. Was the credited answer your second-choice option? Where do the misses fall, mostly towards the end of the section? You need to really look at this from multiple angles.

[flash21]

You may not have a trend in question type, but do you have a trend in what sort of things you get wrong? e.g., do you have trouble determining what the Q is asking? What the gap is in the argument? What the conclusion is? Language/phrasing issues?

That's usually more valuable than trends in question type, I find.

Yes. Was the credited answer your second-choice option? Where do the misses fall, mostly towards the end of the section? You need to really look at this from multiple angles.

Hey S,

Yeah, almost exclusively at the end. Sometimes it will be all toward the end, and multiple of them in a row!

I think my issue at least in part is finding gaps in sufficient assumption style situations, when you need to link them? If that makes sense. I know you said to look for trends beyond types but this is a type of pattern correct? Tomorrow I'll try to look for more patterns but its actually super difficult to find patterns, I always end up feeling like this was just a really hard question, but not really sure of WHY it was a hard question for me.

Sorry, feel like I'm being a bit useless.

[msp8]

Toward the end, meaning after Q20? Could this be a focus issue, then? Because after Q20, I generally find them a little easier than, say, Q14-20. Though that may just be my personal experience. Something to consider, though. And if it is a focus issue, then push your endurance by testing for longer -- drill packets, as you have, for 40 Qs in a row, for example.

And, yes, that would be a pattern. Actually, that would be a pattern in Question Type even -- not even in the 'different angle' pattern.

If you're not sure why it was a hard question, then that's important to examine. What is your process when you review? I'd recommend the following (apologies if you already do all of this!):

1 - blind review thoroughly
1b - in that blind review, examine each answer choice and internalise the phrasing of each of them
1c - understand precisely what you found difficult about any question that took longer than X time to answer (for me, that's 1min 10 secs)
1d - write out, even if it's just in one word (irrelevant/out of scope), why each answer choice is wrong. Then when you get to your top 2 answer choices, flesh it out a little more.
1e - aim to go -0 on the blind review.

2 - review thoroughly
2b - go through manhattan forums. They're invaluable.
2c - figure out why, if you missed anything in the blind review process, you missed anything there. You'll be able to see your thinking process since you wrote it down. I often found that when I reviewed, I'd say: of course, that's obvious! Why couldn't I think of that at the time? ... if you write it out, you'll see where your logic was heading, and you'll be able to correct that (and, you'll be able to see these patterns sfoglia and I are speaking about).

That's a basic outline of my process (which is pretty much taken from different sources on here and elsewhere). I find the more 'advanced' I get in the LSAT, the deeper I review -- even though I always followed the above method, my reviews are examining patterns differently than just Q types now.

[Smallville]

You may not have a trend in question type, but do you have a trend in what sort of things you get wrong? e.g., do you have trouble determining what the Q is asking? What the gap is in the argument? What the conclusion is? Language/phrasing issues?

That's usually more valuable than trends in question type, I find.

Yes. Was the credited answer your second-choice option? Where do the misses fall, mostly towards the end of the section? You need to really look at this from multiple angles.

Hey S,

Yeah, almost exclusively at the end. Sometimes it will be all toward the end, and multiple of them in a row!

I think my issue at least in part is finding gaps in sufficient assumption style situations, when you need to link them? If that makes sense. I know you said to look for trends beyond types but this is a type of pattern correct? Tomorrow I'll try to look for more patterns but its actually super difficult to find patterns, I always end up feeling like this was just a really hard question, but not really sure of WHY it was a hard question for me.

Sorry, feel like I'm being a bit useless.

disclaimer: in the middle of a pt break so didn't read thread...
Idk if you've tried any courses or anything but Id suggest looking into something like 7sage or velocity, relatively cheap and see how they break down the questions and attack the different types. Im the kind of person who can read how to go about answering a question and think I get it but then watch a video explanation and realize I didn't get it at all and start to grasp it... if that makes sense... I could easily be completely useless here and shouldn't even hit submit but hey, tis what I do... back to PT, toodles

[flash21]

Toward the end, meaning after Q20? Could this be a focus issue, then? Because after Q20, I generally find them a little easier than, say, Q14-20. Though that may just be my personal experience. Something to consider, though. And if it is a focus issue, then push your endurance by testing for longer -- drill packets, as you have, for 40 Qs in a row, for example.

And, yes, that would be a pattern. Actually, that would be a pattern in Question Type even -- not even in the 'different angle' pattern.

If you're not sure why it was a hard question, then that's important to examine. What is your process when you review? I'd recommend the following (apologies if you already do all of this!):

1 - blind review thoroughly
1b - in that blind review, examine each answer choice and internalise the phrasing of each of them
1c - understand precisely what you found difficult about any question that took longer than X time to answer (for me, that's 1min 10 secs)
1d - write out, even if it's just in one word (irrelevant/out of scope), why each answer choice is wrong. Then when you get to your top 2 answer choices, flesh it out a little more.
1e - aim to go -0 on the blind review.

2 - review thoroughly
2b - go through manhattan forums. They're invaluable.
2c - figure out why, if you missed anything in the blind review process, you missed anything there. You'll be able to see your thinking process since you wrote it down. I often found that when I reviewed, I'd say: of course, that's obvious! Why couldn't I think of that at the time? ... if you write it out, you'll see where your logic was heading, and you'll be able to correct that (and, you'll be able to see these patterns sfoglia and I are speaking about).

That's a basic outline of my process (which is pretty much taken from different sources on here and elsewhere). I find the more 'advanced' I get in the LSAT, the deeper I review -- even though I always followed the above method, my reviews are examining patterns differently than just Q types now.

Okay I think I've been doing mostly what you said, but I need to start doing my review more thoroughly, so for BR I'll begin writing out expl. for ones I choose to change. Hopefully that works. EDIT: I used to write things out more but kind of strayed away from that, need to reincorporate it.

For example, last PT I did (71) for S3 LR I missed questions 19,21,22,24,25 (accounting for all of my misses in this section)-- this is actually pretty typical. Usually its not so straight up all misses at the end like that but generally in the last 6 questions I'll miss like 3 of them or something like that.

but also, these questions on 7sage were ranked as high difficulty.

to Jgoods, I already took a 7sage course a long time ago, learned a lot.

[msp8]

I wouldn't only write out why you changed answers on BR, but also why you maintained whatever your original answer choice was.

If you're doing all of what I wrote out, you'd really have a strong idea about what you're missing and why. To be honest, I find the review process a painful, and daunting, process because it's time consuming. I'd much rather take another test or section than review. For tougher LR sections, I've spent upwards of 3-3.5 hrs reviewing it.

[flash21]

I wouldn't only write out why you changed answers on BR, but also why you maintained whatever your original answer choice was.

If you're doing all of what I wrote out, you'd really have a strong idea about what you're missing and why. To be honest, I find the review process a painful, and daunting, process because it's time consuming. I'd much rather take another test or section than review. For tougher LR sections, I've spent upwards of 3-3.5 hrs reviewing it.

Thanks a lot MSP8. I think I'll go back to writing out in huge detail why I am choosing to eliminate or keep a question if I can feel its difficult.

Yeah I find blind reviewing my whole PT's takes probably 2-3x more time than it took to actually write the thing.

Appreciate all the help.

[Smallville]

to Jgoods, I already took a 7sage course a long time ago, learned a lot.

gotcha, my B

[flash21]

to Jgoods, I already took a 7sage course a long time ago, learned a lot.

gotcha, my B

Hey no problem, I appreciate the advice.

[sfoglia]

Hey S,

Yeah, almost exclusively at the end. Sometimes it will be all toward the end, and multiple of them in a row!

I think my issue at least in part is finding gaps in sufficient assumption style situations, when you need to link them? If that makes sense. I know you said to look for trends beyond types but this is a type of pattern correct? Tomorrow I'll try to look for more patterns but its actually super difficult to find patterns, I always end up feeling like this was just a really hard question, but not really sure of WHY it was a hard question for me.

Sorry, feel like I'm being a bit useless.

You know what I would do to be sure it isn't just an issue of fatigue/focus? Take a couple of PTs and scan the last seven questions or so. Put together a packet of twenty-something for yourself to throw into your next PT as an experimental. See where you land. If you are still getting a number of questions wrong toward the end of the section, you have your answer, and it is definitely fatigue. If they are spread, then I'd suggest that your original assumption regarding difficulty is correct. LSAC always throws in an absolutely impossible question somewhere after 20. Without fail. Found it so infuriating that I could never manage to get that one correct (I was -2 generally for each LR).

But, if endurance, it's just PT practice, really. I think my major weakness was in endurance, and I had really started to see major progress when I hit twelve, thirteen PTs.

For gap-finding purposes, I personally found the Trainer most helpful. The way Mike Kim thinks just made sense to me. I'm sure you've already read, but maybe try reading again? I had read the Trainer a second time and found it to be super productive.

[flash21]

Hey S,

Yeah, almost exclusively at the end. Sometimes it will be all toward the end, and multiple of them in a row!

I think my issue at least in part is finding gaps in sufficient assumption style situations, when you need to link them? If that makes sense. I know you said to look for trends beyond types but this is a type of pattern correct? Tomorrow I'll try to look for more patterns but its actually super difficult to find patterns, I always end up feeling like this was just a really hard question, but not really sure of WHY it was a hard question for me.

Sorry, feel like I'm being a bit useless.

You know what I would do to be sure it isn't just an issue of fatigue/focus? Take a couple of PTs and scan the last seven questions or so. Put together a packet of twenty-something for yourself to throw into your next PT as an experimental. See where you land. If you are still getting a number of questions wrong toward the end of the section, you have your answer, and it is definitely fatigue. If they are spread, then I'd suggest that your original assumption regarding difficulty is correct. LSAC always throws in an absolutely impossible question somewhere after 20. Without fail. Found it so infuriating that I could never manage to get that one correct (I was -2 generally for each LR).

But, if endurance, it's just PT practice, really. I think my major weakness was in endurance, and I had really started to see major progress when I hit twelve, thirteen PTs.

For gap-finding purposes, I personally found the Trainer most helpful. The way Mike Kim thinks just made sense to me. I'm sure you've already read, but maybe try reading again? I had read the Trainer a second time and found it to be super productive.

Okay that sounds good. I will read the trainer again, its been a while. Appreciate all the advice

[TLSanders]

The first thing you need to do is take a break. It sounds like you're pushing pretty hard and nothing is changing, which is a sure sign that it's time to walk away and clear your head.

After you've achieved some healthy distance from the LSAT, gather up your most recent few timed LR sections (whether individual or from full PTs) and analyze every question that you missed--NOT in terms of your performance, but in terms of question characteristics. There are a number of pitfalls that don't show up on the typical test assessment: simply knowing which question types you're missing or how hard they are isn't enough.

Some of the characteristics that frequently trip up test-takers include:

-technical language
-dense or complex language in the stimulus
-abstract answer choices
-long or complex answer choices
-very similar answer choices
-long question stems

One or more of these may be an issue for you, or there may be some other common thread. But, chances are very good that there IS a common thread (at least, among a significant number of the questions you're missing); you just have to identify it. Once you do, the means of tackling the weakness will be much clearer.

[tennactitans]

If you're hitting 164 with only 20 LR Q's correct you must be KILLING the other sections. That is good news.

[Ron (PowerScore)]

Hey Flash,

If you want to list some of the representative questions you've missed together the with answer choice you selected for each, I'd be happy to look through and see if I can spot a trend or recommend anything that might help. A second pair of eyes never hurts.

Ron