Top Law Schools

Wondering if anyone has tried starting at the end of the LR section and then working toward the front. Since the first ten questions are always the easiest it could be an advantage to have those be your final questions when you are feeling the time crunch. Also starting with the harder questions your brain may be less fatigued and more able to focus as opposed to when you are 12 questions deep. Thoughts?

This is a really f'ing interesting idea.

I like the idea, but at the same time, you would want the easy ones out of the way first to maximize your gains.
The harder questions are spread in the middle, so shooting down the first and last bits is another option.

Terrible strategy IMO. You wanna pick up the easy questions first + getting the easy ones right in the beginning builds confidence.

Never did so myself, but I did end up doing the first ten, and then doing the last five, and then coming back to the middle ten. Worked like a beauty.

I did this while taking the LSAT, and I think it's a smart approach. You're freshest at the start, and typically the passages at the end have 8 questions, so you get more bang for your buck. Personally, I ended up getting 8/8 on the last passage, and that helped carry me despite a mediocre-ish performance on the rest of the section.

Personally, I wouldn't. The early ones can have some annoying tricks that you'll never fall for if you're alert, but can get suckered into if tired/autopilot (e.g. a rare 'agree' question otherwise identical to a 'disagree'. You risk leaving easy points on the table if you mess up the timing. You don't get the advantage of easing your way up to the harder ones working your brain in from the easier end.

But if it works for you, go for it.

I actually did this because it worked for me during PTs. The problem was that I wasn't nearly as confident entering the real test as I was on the PT so it COMPLETELY backfired. On the real test, my confidence was never built up, it took my brain a while to warm up (which made answering the harder questions even harder), and I was constantly freaking out about the time, even though I didn't experience any of that when I was taking PTs. Don't do anything that could rock your confidence on test day.

Don't think I would do that - I'd end up spending more time making sure I transferred my answers to the right Q's on the answer sheet.

I've been PTing at around 169-171 and what has worked for me is attacking the odd numbered questions first, and then the even questions. I know it sounds weird to do odd before even, but trust me - you'll see what I'm talking about.

I've been PTing at around 169-171 and what has worked for me is attacking the odd numbered questions first, and then the even questions. I know it sounds weird to do odd before even, but trust me - you'll see what I'm talking about.

gsy987 wrote:I did this while taking the LSAT, and I think it's a smart approach. You're freshest at the start, and typically the passages at the end have 8 questions, so you get more bang for your buck. Personally, I ended up getting 8/8 on the last passage, and that helped carry me despite a mediocre-ish performance on the rest of the section.

Outstanding RC irony.

This is a bad idea. Time management matters more for harder questions, and time management is easier when your numbers get smaller (fewer questions, less time remaining). The risk of going too slow to go 10/10 in the beginning, or rushing the hard questions to get to the easy ones only to finish with extra time, but not enough to really clean up your rushed hard questions is really bad. Start with 1-10, you'll want to know you have 25 minutes to do 15 questions a lot more than you'll want to know you have ten minutes left to do the last ten.

LibertyKoko wrote:Wondering if anyone has tried starting at the end of the LR section and then working toward the front. Since the first ten questions are always the easiest it could be an advantage to have those be your final questions when you are feeling the time crunch. Also starting with the harder questions your brain may be less fatigued and more able to focus as opposed to when you are 12 questions deep. Thoughts?

I followed this method, and recommend you give it a go.

When I was practicing LR, I often found that I'd race through the first 10 questions but lose a couple of minutes in 11-20, such that I was scrambling with the last 5 questions. I would even end up missing a couple.

So I tried going in the opposite direction. Questions 21-25 are decently challenging (but not V hard) such that they ease you in for 11-20. Even if I lost two minutes in this phase again and was left with, say, 8 minutes for 1-10, it was okay because those questions are easy and turns out I could do them in a rush too. In fact I ended up with 1-2 minutes to spare on many occasions. And my score increased from -4 to around -2 (although this may just be due to more practice).

To sum up, I would recommended you try a couple of PTs with this at least and see what works for you. Some of the comments on this thread have a really sharp tone and seem to overlook the fact that different ways might work for different people.

Best of luck!

Clearly wrote: Outstanding RC irony.

Savage.

TAD wrote:Never did so myself, but I did end up doing the first ten, and then doing the last five, and then coming back to the middle ten. Worked like a beauty.

I think it is good idea, but you should be careful when you fill out the bubble sheet. thanks dude.

As someone who goes 10/10 quite consistently but then messes up the rest of the section(I think I did -9 on my last LSAT), this strategy seems pretty appealing.

Deardevil wrote:

Clearly wrote: Outstanding RC irony.

Savage.

Eh.. I ended up testing 5 points higher than my diagnostics, and I got a half-ride to Michigan, so I'm doing just fine

I've tried starting an LR section by doing 15-25/26 and then going to the first 14. This seemed good for accuracy on the harder questions, but i found myself overthinking the easier ones and getting them wrong on a consistent basis when doing this.