What does "thoroughly review" actually mean? Forum

[WeightliftingThinker]

It's been said that after completing a PT, you should "thoroughly review" it. Does that mean going over each question that was missed, understanding why the right choice is right, and why the other choices are wrong? If so, then for me, it seems as if my comprehension of my mistakes is tailored to that question.

Does "thoroughly review" also entail writing out reasons why the right choice is right and the others are wrong, as well as saving questions that were wrong for later review?

Is reviewing questions that were correct a bad idea in light of limited time?

[Deardevil]

I think you mean "blind review."

It entails circling answers you're not 100% certain on, as in you're not 100% sure that four choices are indeed incorrect.
After the PT, you focus on the questions you missed and the circled for as long as you can, deciphering why they're wrong.
You may end up with different answers, so you need to keep track. You're seeing if you can get something right if there were no time pressure.
Should you still get things wrong, those are the ones that you'll have to truly understand because you're just not getting them, even with the time.

Writing out reasons can be of some use, but in real-time, I think applying the thought process is more plausible.

[WeightliftingThinker]

I think you mean "blind review."

It entails circling answers you're not 100% certain on, as in you're not 100% sure that four choices are indeed incorrect.
After the PT, you focus on the questions you missed and the circled for as long as you can, deciphering why they're wrong.
You may end up with different answers, so you need to keep track. You're seeing if you can get something right if there were no time pressure.
Should you still get things wrong, those are the ones that you'll have to truly understand because you're just not getting them, even with the time.

Writing out reasons can be of some use, but in real-time, I think applying the thought process is more plausible.

I'm familiar with BR, but a 180 scorer underscored the importance of thoroughly reviewing, which is vague.

Is the reasoning behind BR that after consistent attempts at "deciphering" the incorrect choices, one will form an understanding and avoid those mistakes?

[Barack O'Drama]

I think you mean "blind review."

It entails circling answers you're not 100% certain on, as in you're not 100% sure that four choices are indeed incorrect.
After the PT, you focus on the questions you missed and the circled for as long as you can, deciphering why they're wrong.
You may end up with different answers, so you need to keep track. You're seeing if you can get something right if there were no time pressure.
Should you still get things wrong, those are the ones that you'll have to truly understand because you're just not getting them, even with the time.

Writing out reasons can be of some use, but in real-time, I think applying the thought process is more plausible.

I'm familiar with BR, but a 180 scorer underscored the importance of thoroughly reviewing, which is vague.

Is the reasoning behind BR that after consistent attempts at "deciphering" the incorrect choices, one will form an understanding and avoid those mistakes?

Yeah blind review is the most popular form high testers use for thoroughly reviewing your test. Daredevil it the nail on the head.

You can thoroughly review without blind reviewing but it is the process that almost all high scorers recommend. I just go through every question, break down the argument, and really try to understand every nuance. I like to make sure I understand exactly why every answer is right and write out the reason. Then I explain and write out why every wrong choice is wrong. It can take a while, but after reviewing sections and tests, I felt like I learned more than at any point during my prep.

[WeightliftingThinker]

I think you mean "blind review."

It entails circling answers you're not 100% certain on, as in you're not 100% sure that four choices are indeed incorrect.
After the PT, you focus on the questions you missed and the circled for as long as you can, deciphering why they're wrong.
You may end up with different answers, so you need to keep track. You're seeing if you can get something right if there were no time pressure.
Should you still get things wrong, those are the ones that you'll have to truly understand because you're just not getting them, even with the time.

Writing out reasons can be of some use, but in real-time, I think applying the thought process is more plausible.

I'm familiar with BR, but a 180 scorer underscored the importance of thoroughly reviewing, which is vague.

Is the reasoning behind BR that after consistent attempts at "deciphering" the incorrect choices, one will form an understanding and avoid those mistakes?

Yeah blind review is the most popular form high testers use for thoroughly reviewing your test. Daredevil it the nail on the head.

You can thoroughly review without blind reviewing but it is the process that almost all high scorers recommend. I just go through every question, break down the argument, and really try to understand every nuance. I like to make sure I understand exactly why every answer is right and write out the reason. Then I explain and write out why every wrong choice is wrong. It can take a while, but after reviewing sections and tests, I felt like I learned more than at any point during my prep.

Did you drill question types thoroughly before attempting BR? I have tried BR, but it seems like I "forget" the big picture because of the jumble of questions.

[Barack O'Drama]

I think you mean "blind review."

It entails circling answers you're not 100% certain on, as in you're not 100% sure that four choices are indeed incorrect.
After the PT, you focus on the questions you missed and the circled for as long as you can, deciphering why they're wrong.
You may end up with different answers, so you need to keep track. You're seeing if you can get something right if there were no time pressure.
Should you still get things wrong, those are the ones that you'll have to truly understand because you're just not getting them, even with the time.

Writing out reasons can be of some use, but in real-time, I think applying the thought process is more plausible.

I'm familiar with BR, but a 180 scorer underscored the importance of thoroughly reviewing, which is vague.

Is the reasoning behind BR that after consistent attempts at "deciphering" the incorrect choices, one will form an understanding and avoid those mistakes?

Yeah blind review is the most popular form high testers use for thoroughly reviewing your test. Daredevil it the nail on the head.

You can thoroughly review without blind reviewing but it is the process that almost all high scorers recommend. I just go through every question, break down the argument, and really try to understand every nuance. I like to make sure I understand exactly why every answer is right and write out the reason. Then I explain and write out why every wrong choice is wrong. It can take a while, but after reviewing sections and tests, I felt like I learned more than at any point during my prep.

Did you drill question types thoroughly before attempting BR? I have tried BR, but it seems like I "forget" the big picture because of the jumble of questions.

Hmm...I'm not sure exactly what you're asking. Can you elaborate a bit so I can give you a better answer.

If you're asking what I think, than maybe you aren't at the point where practice testing makes sense. If you are talking about BR of sections, than yes, I do/did drill before doing sections and BR. I am actually not to the point of full-timed practice tests yet. I am still going through prep materials and doing drills and sections. When I do drills, I am usually doing them untimed, so BR isn't really necessary for me. If I find a question troubling I return to prep materials to see if there is anything I am missing, and then look online to see if I can find where I went wrong if I still can't figure it out.

As far as timed sections, I do blind review those.

Make sure you have a good foundation and required LSAT skills before attempting to do anything with BR. It sort of renders it useless because you won't be able to effectively evaluate your thinking process and the things that make BR helpful. Know what I mean?

[WeightliftingThinker]

I think you mean "blind review."

It entails circling answers you're not 100% certain on, as in you're not 100% sure that four choices are indeed incorrect.
After the PT, you focus on the questions you missed and the circled for as long as you can, deciphering why they're wrong.
You may end up with different answers, so you need to keep track. You're seeing if you can get something right if there were no time pressure.
Should you still get things wrong, those are the ones that you'll have to truly understand because you're just not getting them, even with the time.

Writing out reasons can be of some use, but in real-time, I think applying the thought process is more plausible.

I'm familiar with BR, but a 180 scorer underscored the importance of thoroughly reviewing, which is vague.

Is the reasoning behind BR that after consistent attempts at "deciphering" the incorrect choices, one will form an understanding and avoid those mistakes?

Yeah blind review is the most popular form high testers use for thoroughly reviewing your test. Daredevil it the nail on the head.

You can thoroughly review without blind reviewing but it is the process that almost all high scorers recommend. I just go through every question, break down the argument, and really try to understand every nuance. I like to make sure I understand exactly why every answer is right and write out the reason. Then I explain and write out why every wrong choice is wrong. It can take a while, but after reviewing sections and tests, I felt like I learned more than at any point during my prep.

Did you drill question types thoroughly before attempting BR? I have tried BR, but it seems like I "forget" the big picture because of the jumble of questions.

Hmm...I'm not sure exactly what you're asking. Can you elaborate a bit so I can give you a better answer.

If you're asking what I think, than maybe you aren't at the point where practice testing makes sense. If you are talking about BR of sections, than yes, I do/did drill before doing sections and BR. I am actually not to the point of full-timed practice tests yet. I am still going through prep materials and doing drills and sections. When I do drills, I am usually doing them untimed, so BR isn't really necessary for me. If I find a question troubling I return to prep materials to see if there is anything I am missing, and then look online to see if I can find where I went wrong if I still can't figure it out.

As far as timed sections, I do blind review those.

Make sure you have a good foundation and required LSAT skills before attempting to do anything with BR. It sort of renders it useless because you won't be able to effectively evaluate your thinking process and the things that make BR helpful. Know what I mean?

Helpful insight. Is your progression like this: drill question type, timed section, timed tests with BR for timed sections and tests only?

[Barack O'Drama]

I think you mean "blind review."

It entails circling answers you're not 100% certain on, as in you're not 100% sure that four choices are indeed incorrect.
After the PT, you focus on the questions you missed and the circled for as long as you can, deciphering why they're wrong.
You may end up with different answers, so you need to keep track. You're seeing if you can get something right if there were no time pressure.
Should you still get things wrong, those are the ones that you'll have to truly understand because you're just not getting them, even with the time.

Writing out reasons can be of some use, but in real-time, I think applying the thought process is more plausible.

I'm familiar with BR, but a 180 scorer underscored the importance of thoroughly reviewing, which is vague.

Is the reasoning behind BR that after consistent attempts at "deciphering" the incorrect choices, one will form an understanding and avoid those mistakes?

Yeah blind review is the most popular form high testers use for thoroughly reviewing your test. Daredevil it the nail on the head.

You can thoroughly review without blind reviewing but it is the process that almost all high scorers recommend. I just go through every question, break down the argument, and really try to understand every nuance. I like to make sure I understand exactly why every answer is right and write out the reason. Then I explain and write out why every wrong choice is wrong. It can take a while, but after reviewing sections and tests, I felt like I learned more than at any point during my prep.

Did you drill question types thoroughly before attempting BR? I have tried BR, but it seems like I "forget" the big picture because of the jumble of questions.

Hmm...I'm not sure exactly what you're asking. Can you elaborate a bit so I can give you a better answer.

If you're asking what I think, than maybe you aren't at the point where practice testing makes sense. If you are talking about BR of sections, than yes, I do/did drill before doing sections and BR. I am actually not to the point of full-timed practice tests yet. I am still going through prep materials and doing drills and sections. When I do drills, I am usually doing them untimed, so BR isn't really necessary for me. If I find a question troubling I return to prep materials to see if there is anything I am missing, and then look online to see if I can find where I went wrong if I still can't figure it out.

As far as timed sections, I do blind review those.

Make sure you have a good foundation and required LSAT skills before attempting to do anything with BR. It sort of renders it useless because you won't be able to effectively evaluate your thinking process and the things that make BR helpful. Know what I mean?

Helpful insight. Is your progression like this: drill question type, timed section, timed tests with BR for timed sections and tests only?

More or less. I read whatever chapters I have scheduled from my prep materials (LSAT Trainer or Manhattan LSAT) and then drill the question type until I am comfortable with the process and not missing many. Then I try to do timed sections of mixed review, usually just sections of an older LSAT and then blind review those. When I get to full-timed exams I'll do the same.

I guess you could also time your drill and then BR those. I've tried that, but honestly my theory has always been that drilling should be more about applying what you've learned and getting your thought process and skills honed in as opposed to worry about timing. So when I drill untimed I rarely BR since you can take as much time as you need to really figure out the correct answer.

[Deardevil]

Is the reasoning behind BR that after consistent attempts at "deciphering" the incorrect choices, one will form an understanding and avoid those mistakes?

In a way, yes.

It's like a little kid falling down the stairs (God forbid).
Maybe after a second time, he/she is fed up, deciding it's better off just holding on to the ledge.
Thus, in the future, chances of falling down the stairs is greatly reduced.

Similarly, if you're bad at a certain question type, like parallel reasoning,
exposing yourself more to those kinds of questions gives a sort of immunity against them.
Because you'll eventually be familiar with the problem, you're more likely to break it down without too much hassle, if that makes sense.

I was pretty subpar with justify the conclusion, or sufficient assumption, questions,
but I'm now more attuned to them after seeing them so much. Just need to work on accuracy some more, and I'm ready to time myself.