Top Law Schools

I blind reviewed a PT today and it was grueling. I literally circled half of the test and it took me most of the day to complete it. I don't quite feel like I learned much by employing this method (difference between actual PT score and score after Blind Review was only 5 points). Could I be using my time more efficiently/effectively if I employ a different method to go over the PT or is the Blind Review method the consensus choice?
I found this a while back, this document is not mine, a TLSer posted this; focus on what this person said they did for grading under the "study schedule" bullet point: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-yd ... asic?pli=1


So, which method should I use?

Blind review alone might not be effective; it merely helps you identify which parts you are unsure or try weak at. When you locate weaknesses, it is important to go through explanations or do extra drilling.

This approach is effective I would say. I would have scored higher had I followed it more thorougly...

ihenry wrote:Blind review alone might not be effective; it merely helps you identify which parts you are unsure or try weak at. When you locate weaknesses, it is important to go through explanations or do extra drilling.

This approach is effective I would say. I would have scored higher had I followed it more thorougly...

Can you give me an anecdotal example of this?
What I do is compile the list of question types that I missed and visit the LSAT Trainer/Cambridge Drilling for those corresponding question types.

Post removed.

DoYouEvenTLS wrote:

ihenry wrote:Blind review alone might not be effective; it merely helps you identify which parts you are unsure or truly weak at. When you locate weaknesses, it is important to go through explanations or do extra drilling.

This approach is effective I would say. I would have scored higher had I followed it more thorougly...

Can you give me an anecdotal example of this?
What I do is compile the list of question types that I missed and visit the LSAT Trainer/Cambridge Drilling for those corresponding question types.

Ha no, I was just saying I didn't do blind review for every PT... only one or two I'd admit. Although I feel it is effective I just cannot wait to see the answers and how well I scored.

You'd want to get every single question that you are unsure of (blind review helps you identify them) very clear. I used Manhattan forums and found they were pretty useful.

I'm somewhat non-committed to blind review too. I find what helps me more, but probably in the same way, is untimed LR drilling where I write little cues to the side of each answer as to why it's right or wrong.

Simple stuff like "no evidence for this," or a diagram that maps out the question if it's a "most of this group, some of this group, but all of this group" kind of question.

I find myself saying those same phrases that I'd be writing to myself when I take the sections timed. Easily the best improvement I've made to my LR studying.

sorry for interrupting, but what if I miss LRs all over the place, not just on specific types. I usually get it wrong because I didn't have enough time or misunderstanding of what I read. OR, interpreting too far and "out of the box."

Honestly, I get most of my questions wrong because I either read it wrong, skipped the important wording, think way too far out of context or misunderstood what they were saying. How do you improve on these?

For me, I've seen improvement once I internalized the idea that there is one logically right answer and four logically incorrect answers. All the wrong answers have flaws that are there for you to find. You aren't assessing a few good arguments and choosing your favorite. You aren't judging anything based on prior knowledge or your own convictions.

I think it's that kind of thinking that lead me to pick some of what you call the "out of the box" answers. And I think LSAC does that on purpose.

It sounds simple and lame, but it's important for me. Forget everything you know about whatever the topic of the LR question is.

Post removed.

I feel some of us here do not give the BR method much credit. OP I would BR everything, despite what many people might claim. Let me explain myself here. One of the many reasons BR is so great is not because you learned that you are getting a specific question type wrong(although that is part of it), but rather understanding why right answers are right, and wrong answers are wrong. This is crucial to your prep due to the fact that this test is difficult, not because you can not get to the right answer, but rather because the wrong answers are just so darn attractive that you feel like they could be right. This is where the blind review comes in. What blind review does is force you to sit and think about why wrong answers are wrong, and why right answers are right, and because this test is just so consistent with how they choose right answers and wrong answers, getting familiar with right, and wrong answers just makes this test less challenging. I speak from experience when I tell you that sometimes I do like 5 or 6 practice problems, I go over them, and I'm just like "oh LSAC you and your attractive wording of wrong answer choices are epic." I say this because I know exactly why that wrong answer is wrong. The BR method also decreases time spent on questions because you just know that the wrong answer is wrong for a reason you eliminated it in another question, which in turn makes you recognize wrong answers to eliminate quickly.