Top Law Schools

...

Seems like you're currently focusing on sections. Are they timed?

I would suggest you track which question types in the sections are giving you the most trouble, and drill tf out of those.

I went from high 160's to 180 over the summer. Took non stop LG and RC drilling, plus tons of full tests.

SweetTort wrote:I went from high 160's to 180 over the summer. Took non stop LG and RC drilling, plus tons of full tests.

Wow congratulations! Would you mind sharing a bit on how frequently you did drilling and full tests? Did you take any days off?

peachyjade wrote:

SweetTort wrote:I went from high 160's to 180 over the summer. Took non stop LG and RC drilling, plus tons of full tests.

Wow congratulations! Would you mind sharing a bit on how frequently you did drilling and full tests? Did you take any days off?

For about a month I drilled every day for 2-3 hours. Then I started PTing about twice a week, drilling the other days. I took time off when I felt burnt out.

SweetTort wrote:

peachyjade wrote:

SweetTort wrote:I went from high 160's to 180 over the summer. Took non stop LG and RC drilling, plus tons of full tests.

Wow congratulations! Would you mind sharing a bit on how frequently you did drilling and full tests? Did you take any days off?

For about a month I drilled every day for 2-3 hours. Then I started PTing about twice a week, drilling the other days. I took time off when I felt burnt out.

Can you describe your drilling technique? Do you mean sections or questions by type? Did you just drill everything indiscriminately?

equang wrote:

SweetTort wrote:

peachyjade wrote:

SweetTort wrote:I went from high 160's to 180 over the summer. Took non stop LG and RC drilling, plus tons of full tests.

Wow congratulations! Would you mind sharing a bit on how frequently you did drilling and full tests? Did you take any days off?

For about a month I drilled every day for 2-3 hours. Then I started PTing about twice a week, drilling the other days. I took time off when I felt burnt out.

Can you describe your drilling technique? Do you mean sections or questions by type? Did you just drill everything indiscriminately?

I did LG sections, 4 or 5 games per, then proofed. Then did it again. And again. And again.


Don't go crazy with subsections. Like, study LR by section not by Q type.

SweetTort wrote:

peachyjade wrote:

SweetTort wrote:I went from high 160's to 180 over the summer. Took non stop LG and RC drilling, plus tons of full tests.

Wow congratulations! Would you mind sharing a bit on how frequently you did drilling and full tests? Did you take any days off?

For about a month I drilled every day for 2-3 hours. Then I started PTing about twice a week, drilling the other days. I took time off when I felt burnt out.

I scored a 169 in June, and started using this exact same same approach this summer. Hopefully this is the magic sauce haha

Edit - with that said, doing this approach combined with redoing lots of problems has vastly improved my understanding of the test. I definitely recommend it over the plug and chug PT approach

SweetTort wrote:

equang wrote:

SweetTort wrote:

peachyjade wrote:

SweetTort wrote:I went from high 160's to 180 over the summer. Took non stop LG and RC drilling, plus tons of full tests.

Wow congratulations! Would you mind sharing a bit on how frequently you did drilling and full tests? Did you take any days off?

For about a month I drilled every day for 2-3 hours. Then I started PTing about twice a week, drilling the other days. I took time off when I felt burnt out.

Can you describe your drilling technique? Do you mean sections or questions by type? Did you just drill everything indiscriminately?

I did LG sections, 4 or 5 games per, then proofed. Then did it again. And again. And again.


Don't go crazy with subsections. Like, study LR by section not by Q type.

Can you elaborate on why? I feel like most people would say drill by Q type (the approach I am current using). Were you pretty balanced with different LR types though? Like no significant weak categories?

peachyjade wrote:

SweetTort wrote:

equang wrote:

SweetTort wrote:

peachyjade wrote:

SweetTort wrote:I went from high 160's to 180 over the summer. Took non stop LG and RC drilling, plus tons of full tests.

Wow congratulations! Would you mind sharing a bit on how frequently you did drilling and full tests? Did you take any days off?

For about a month I drilled every day for 2-3 hours. Then I started PTing about twice a week, drilling the other days. I took time off when I felt burnt out.

Can you describe your drilling technique? Do you mean sections or questions by type? Did you just drill everything indiscriminately?

I did LG sections, 4 or 5 games per, then proofed. Then did it again. And again. And again.


Don't go crazy with subsections. Like, study LR by section not by Q type.

Can you elaborate on why? I feel like most people would say drill by Q type (the approach I am current using). Were you pretty balanced with different LR types though? Like no significant weak categories?

^This (LR). Although I tend to agree with this approach on the games. Single games untimed, Single games timed, groups of 4 Games timed, (groups of 5 of you get real good). Games used to be my worst section, sometimes I'd get minus 7, 8, 9. Now I can do them in my sleep and am a bit disappointed with anything less than -0. (Took about 6-8 weeks though).

I think if there are specific question types one is missing, then that approach is good for LR. However, if you're just missing the hardest problems, then it's better to focus on drilling the hardest problems. It's all contextual.

RamTitan wrote:I think if there are specific question types one is missing, then that approach is good for LR. However, if you're just missing the hardest problems, then it's better to focus on drilling the hardest problems. It's all contextual.

Makes Sense. So in regards to the hardest problems, would you just do them individually or do complete sections and allocate a lot of time to reviewing the most difficult questions.

SunDevil14 wrote:

RamTitan wrote:I think if there are specific question types one is missing, then that approach is good for LR. However, if you're just missing the hardest problems, then it's better to focus on drilling the hardest problems. It's all contextual.

Makes Sense. So in regards to the hardest problems, would you just do them individually or do complete sections and allocate a lot of time to reviewing the most difficult questions.

I've been doing 11-25/26 for every section the past couple of months. I'm seeing improvements. Definitely spend a lot of time reviewing missed problems

Makes sense the first 10 tend to be easy points, and even the low teens are often not incredibly difficult.