The Official September 2016 Study Group - WAKE ME UP WHEN SEPTEMBER ENDS Forum

[boatymcboatface09]

So I just downloaded this awesome app (polymail) which alerts you when someone reads your email. Always was looking for something like this. I emailed my recommenders like 2 weeks ago and I'm not sure if they either didn't see the message or ignored me. I'll wait another week and resend the messages using the app. If I see they read it and they don't respond then I know they have no interest in writing a letter. Helps save some time.
Also I actually got a response from one of my professors who said he'll be happy to write one for me and meet with me. Did really well in his class and it was really tough. So 1 down. How many more do you think I should get?

I think the rule of thumb is 2 academic (professors) and (optionally) one non-academic...? right?

[Pozzo]

So I just downloaded this awesome app (polymail) which alerts you when someone reads your email. Always was looking for something like this. I emailed my recommenders like 2 weeks ago and I'm not sure if they either didn't see the message or ignored me. I'll wait another week and resend the messages using the app. If I see they read it and they don't respond then I know they have no interest in writing a letter. Helps save some time.
Also I actually got a response from one of my professors who said he'll be happy to write one for me and meet with me. Did really well in his class and it was really tough. So 1 down. How many more do you think I should get?

I think the rule of thumb is 2 academic (professors) and (optionally) one non-academic...? right?

Yes. Two Strong > Three Meh.

ETA: Worth expanding upon. If you're going to submit a non-academic reference, it really needs to be a solid, solid recommendation. And it likely won't compensate for a sub-par academic recommendation. A couple of good links:

https://www.law.yale.edu/admissions/jd- ... pplication
http://www.law.uchicago.edu/node/1453

[Mikey]

So I just downloaded this awesome app (polymail) which alerts you when someone reads your email. Always was looking for something like this. I emailed my recommenders like 2 weeks ago and I'm not sure if they either didn't see the message or ignored me. I'll wait another week and resend the messages using the app. If I see they read it and they don't respond then I know they have no interest in writing a letter. Helps save some time.
Also I actually got a response from one of my professors who said he'll be happy to write one for me and meet with me. Did really well in his class and it was really tough. So 1 down. How many more do you think I should get?

I think the rule of thumb is 2 academic (professors) and (optionally) one non-academic...? right?

2 lor from an academic professor is best. There's no need for a 3rd lor unless it's for a scholarship that requires an additional one.

[proteinshake]

So I just downloaded this awesome app (polymail) which alerts you when someone reads your email. Always was looking for something like this. I emailed my recommenders like 2 weeks ago and I'm not sure if they either didn't see the message or ignored me. I'll wait another week and resend the messages using the app. If I see they read it and they don't respond then I know they have no interest in writing a letter. Helps save some time.
Also I actually got a response from one of my professors who said he'll be happy to write one for me and meet with me. Did really well in his class and it was really tough. So 1 down. How many more do you think I should get?

I think the rule of thumb is 2 academic (professors) and (optionally) one non-academic...? right?

2 lor from an academic professor is best. There's no need for a 3rd lor unless it's for a scholarship that requires an additional one.

however, if you're applying to Stanford, get a Stanford specific LOR

[Alexandros]

PT 69:

LR: -1
LG: -6
RC: -4
LR: -2

Score: 169

On LG, I did the same thing I did last time - flipped a rule on a game (a very easy one), had to redo it, and thus fly through the last game to not run out of time.

RC feels a bit lucky. I tried a new strategy of trying to read the passage in 2 minutes 30 seconds tops, thus giving me more time to reference back. We'll see how the strategy works on PT 70; I will drill it with some old passages if need be.

As far as an overall strategy, I just tried to go as quickly as possible without hurrying. This cut down on a lot of the second guessing and looks like it helped my score.

That's some solid progress! Congratulations! Glad you found a strategy that works for you.

[Mikey]

however, if you're applying to Stanford, get a Stanford specific LOR

I asked this a while ago but no one ever answer me. I have two lor from two very good professors who I know will write great ones for me. But I work with someone who likes me and went to NYU yearsssss ago. Would it be a waste of time for him and I if I got an NYU specific lor from him?

[proteinshake]

however, if you're applying to Stanford, get a Stanford specific LOR

I asked this a while ago but no one ever answer me. I have two lor from two very good professors who I know will write great ones for me. But I work with someone who likes me and went to NYU yearsssss ago. Would it be a waste of time for him and I if I got an NYU specific lor from him?

I would believe that having one regular and one school-specific LOR is > than two regular ones. I don't know for sure though.

[Mikey]

however, if you're applying to Stanford, get a Stanford specific LOR

I asked this a while ago but no one ever answer me. I have two lor from two very good professors who I know will write great ones for me. But I work with someone who likes me and went to NYU yearsssss ago. Would it be a waste of time for him and I if I got an NYU specific lor from him?

I would believe that having one regular and one school-specific LOR is > than two regular ones. I don't know for sure though.

Hmm ok I see. I'll think about asking him, because he's always so busy doing stuff for our judge lol

[Rupert Pupkin]

however, if you're applying to Stanford, get a Stanford specific LOR

I asked this a while ago but no one ever answer me. I have two lor from two very good professors who I know will write great ones for me. But I work with someone who likes me and went to NYU yearsssss ago. Would it be a waste of time for him and I if I got an NYU specific lor from him?

I could be wrong, but I think you are right that this would be helpful. It just makes sense that a good letter from Alumni would be valued at the school you are applying too more than just a normal lor. It seems to be similar to the hiring process where if you went to a particular school that is popular in that firm or where the Partner went, they know exactly what education you got and your experience...so likely they hire most candidates from their school. I would see the application similarly. A NYU grad whose seen what you are capable of and writes "Ok this guy is sharp and has what it takes to go to NYU" would mean a lot more than someone who didn't go to that school.

Just my two cents and how I see it. Might want to ask someone who has more experience in applications than I, as I am going through the same process as you right now lol - But, unless told otherwise I am going to try to take that approach as best as I can.

[loomy78]

checking in friends. i studied hard for the LSAT years ago but never took it. I was PTing in mid-170's at my peak. Took an RC and LG section yesterday and was a little rusty.

-4 RC
-5 LG

I used to be -0 or -1 on LG so will continue drilling those, about to drill 50 LR Flaw questions.

Wish me luck!

[JGPGH]

So I just took PT52 and scored a 167 which is significantly better than anything I have gotten before. I am usually around a 160-162. However, this is my second go around studying for the test and I recognized some of the questions and games from prior studying, but I honestly didnt know what the correct answer to them was if that makes any sense. I would recognize reading the problem/passage/game before and be like oh I remember doing this 3-4 months ago but I wouldn't remember which answer was right.

I have no idea if my score is a genuine reflection of how I did, or if recognizing that I had done the questions helped me that significantly. Has anyone else run into this before?

[34iplaw]

So I just took PT52 and scored a 167 which is significantly better than anything I have gotten before. I am usually around a 160-162. However, this is my second go around studying for the test and I recognized some of the questions and games from prior studying, but I honestly didnt know what the correct answer to them was if that makes any sense. I would recognize reading the problem/passage/game before and be like oh I remember doing this 3-4 months ago but I wouldn't remember which answer was right.

I have no idea if my score is a genuine reflection of how I did, or if recognizing that I had done the questions helped me that significantly. Has anyone else run into this before?

If you didn't remember the answer choices, it probably didn't do it *all* that much unless it was a weird game type. Most games are more or less the same.

[boatymcboatface09]

So I just took PT52 and scored a 167 which is significantly better than anything I have gotten before. I am usually around a 160-162. However, this is my second go around studying for the test and I recognized some of the questions and games from prior studying, but I honestly didnt know what the correct answer to them was if that makes any sense. I would recognize reading the problem/passage/game before and be like oh I remember doing this 3-4 months ago but I wouldn't remember which answer was right.

I have no idea if my score is a genuine reflection of how I did, or if recognizing that I had done the questions helped me that significantly. Has anyone else run into this before?

I did this once a few weeks ago. My experience was similar, I recognized many of the questions but didn't know the answer. On the following preptest, my score went back down to its usual level. Ultimately my guess was that even though I couldn't remember what the answers were I was "intuiting" more than I realized (maybe, for example, when eliminating incorrect answer choices.)

That said, I increased by 2-3 points, not 6-7. That seems really high given the experience you described.

But that was just my experience. I'm sure other people on here have a more experienced perspective.

Edited for spectacular grammar fail.

[JGPGH]

So I just took PT52 and scored a 167 which is significantly better than anything I have gotten before. I am usually around a 160-162. However, this is my second go around studying for the test and I recognized some of the questions and games from prior studying, but I honestly didnt know what the correct answer to them was if that makes any sense. I would recognize reading the problem/passage/game before and be like oh I remember doing this 3-4 months ago but I wouldn't remember which answer was right.

I have no idea if my score is a genuine reflection of how I did, or if recognizing that I had done the questions helped me that significantly. Has anyone else run into this before?

If you didn't remember the answer choices, it probably didn't do it *all* that much unless it was a weird game type. Most games are more or less the same.

Yeah I'm pretty confident that it had almost no effect on my LG score but I'm a little more curious about my LR scores. I can't imagine that recognizing a question stem could have helped too much, especially if it felt like I was seeing the answers for the first time

[ngogirl12]

So I just downloaded this awesome app (polymail) which alerts you when someone reads your email. Always was looking for something like this. I emailed my recommenders like 2 weeks ago and I'm not sure if they either didn't see the message or ignored me. I'll wait another week and resend the messages using the app. If I see they read it and they don't respond then I know they have no interest in writing a letter. Helps save some time.
Also I actually got a response from one of my professors who said he'll be happy to write one for me and meet with me. Did really well in his class and it was really tough. So 1 down. How many more do you think I should get?

I think the rule of thumb is 2 academic (professors) and (optionally) one non-academic...? right?

2 lor from an academic professor is best. There's no need for a 3rd lor unless it's for a scholarship that requires an additional one.

I thought the rule of thumb was to have 3 letters of recommendation, and to ask for a fourth for waitlists i.e. if you get waitlisted send the school the fourth letter of recommendation. I also was under the impression the more academic vs professional letters of recommendation, the better.

[34iplaw]

So I just took PT52 and scored a 167 which is significantly better than anything I have gotten before. I am usually around a 160-162. However, this is my second go around studying for the test and I recognized some of the questions and games from prior studying, but I honestly didnt know what the correct answer to them was if that makes any sense. I would recognize reading the problem/passage/game before and be like oh I remember doing this 3-4 months ago but I wouldn't remember which answer was right.

I have no idea if my score is a genuine reflection of how I did, or if recognizing that I had done the questions helped me that significantly. Has anyone else run into this before?

If you didn't remember the answer choices, it probably didn't do it *all* that much unless it was a weird game type. Most games are more or less the same.

Yeah I'm pretty confident that it had almost no effect on my LG score but I'm a little more curious about my LR scores. I can't imagine that recognizing a question stem could have helped too much, especially if it felt like I was seeing the answers for the first time

Depends on your memory and all. I don't miss a lot of problems, so I tend to recall the ones that I do fairly well. Granted, that type of stuff will help you on new LRs you haven't seen, as many of their questions repeat format and what they are asking.

[amta]

So I just took PT52 and scored a 167 which is significantly better than anything I have gotten before. I am usually around a 160-162. However, this is my second go around studying for the test and I recognized some of the questions and games from prior studying, but I honestly didnt know what the correct answer to them was if that makes any sense. I would recognize reading the problem/passage/game before and be like oh I remember doing this 3-4 months ago but I wouldn't remember which answer was right.

I have no idea if my score is a genuine reflection of how I did, or if recognizing that I had done the questions helped me that significantly. Has anyone else run into this before?

could be that the 50s are *anecdotally* easier

[JGPGH]

So I just took PT52 and scored a 167 which is significantly better than anything I have gotten before. I am usually around a 160-162. However, this is my second go around studying for the test and I recognized some of the questions and games from prior studying, but I honestly didnt know what the correct answer to them was if that makes any sense. I would recognize reading the problem/passage/game before and be like oh I remember doing this 3-4 months ago but I wouldn't remember which answer was right.

I have no idea if my score is a genuine reflection of how I did, or if recognizing that I had done the questions helped me that significantly. Has anyone else run into this before?

could be that the 50s are *anecdotally* easier

Meaning?

[Mikey]

Just reviewed PT 60 LG that I did yesterday. Went -5 timed and -0 BR. I can't believe the misreads for two questions, smh. The other 3 wrong were from game 4 that I just simply didn't do right. Will BR the rest of the test tomorrow.

[amta]

So I just took PT52 and scored a 167 which is significantly better than anything I have gotten before. I am usually around a 160-162. However, this is my second go around studying for the test and I recognized some of the questions and games from prior studying, but I honestly didnt know what the correct answer to them was if that makes any sense. I would recognize reading the problem/passage/game before and be like oh I remember doing this 3-4 months ago but I wouldn't remember which answer was right.

I have no idea if my score is a genuine reflection of how I did, or if recognizing that I had done the questions helped me that significantly. Has anyone else run into this before?

could be that the 50s are *anecdotally* easier

Meaning?

my scores increase by 5-7 if i take a PT in the 40s or 50s as opposed to a PT in the 60s or 70s.

[dasq5511]

Checking in after lurking for months.

I've been hitting a plateau and have a few questions. I started studying initially about 3 months ago with the powerscore books and then moved to the 7sage curriculum. Once I finished 7sage I started drilling and taking full PTs. I'm aiming for 172-173 on test day and my average for the last 5 PTs is a 167 with the section averages being RC: -2.5, LR: -7, and LG: -4. My strongest section tends to be RC and weakest tends to be LG (RC average hasn't changed much from my diagnostic). Knowing that LG is supposed to be the easiest section to perfect, I've been thinking I should focus on that much more than the other two in this last 6 weeks, as LG being -0 would put me at my target.

My questions are:
1. How achievable is the jump from high 160's to 172-173 in the next 6 weeks?
2. Should I put the test off till December? I would very much prefer attending this cycle, but there is nothing stopping me from waiting a year.
3. How much studying per day is possible without burning out? Obviously I want to do as much as I can since we're in the home stretch.
4. Given that I want to focus on LG and that would put me at my target, how can I determine how to split up my time between that and the other sections as well as taking full PTs?
5. Typical advice given here includes taking a full 30+ PTs, focusing more on LGs means I wouldn't have time to do this, is that a good strategy?
6. My biggest challenge with LGs is getting the setup down, once I have that I'm able to answer the questions fairly quickly, what's the best way to improve this aspect specifically? I tend to score very well on the first 2-3 games and get stumped often on the last one.

Thanks!

Sorry, I know there are a lot of questions, could somebody give me some advice?

[Pozzo]

45 days, y'all

[ngogirl12]

.

[appind]

So I just took PT52 and scored a 167 which is significantly better than anything I have gotten before. I am usually around a 160-162. However, this is my second go around studying for the test and I recognized some of the questions and games from prior studying, but I honestly didnt know what the correct answer to them was if that makes any sense. I would recognize reading the problem/passage/game before and be like oh I remember doing this 3-4 months ago but I wouldn't remember which answer was right.

I have no idea if my score is a genuine reflection of how I did, or if recognizing that I had done the questions helped me that significantly. Has anyone else run into this before?

could be that the 50s are *anecdotally* easier

Meaning?

my scores increase by 5-7 if i take a PT in the 40s or 50s as opposed to a PT in the 60s or 70s.

iirc some early 50s LG is markedly easier than typical lg, and it may be useful to take that into account.

[JGPGH]

So I just took PT52 and scored a 167 which is significantly better than anything I have gotten before. I am usually around a 160-162. However, this is my second go around studying for the test and I recognized some of the questions and games from prior studying, but I honestly didnt know what the correct answer to them was if that makes any sense. I would recognize reading the problem/passage/game before and be like oh I remember doing this 3-4 months ago but I wouldn't remember which answer was right.

I have no idea if my score is a genuine reflection of how I did, or if recognizing that I had done the questions helped me that significantly. Has anyone else run into this before?

could be that the 50s are *anecdotally* easier

Meaning?

my scores increase by 5-7 if i take a PT in the 40s or 50s as opposed to a PT in the 60s or 70s.

iirc some early 50s LG is markedly easier than typical lg, and it may be useful to take that into account.

Hmm I see, thanks!