How often should I drill a question type to stay sharp? Forum
-
olikatz
- Posts: 109
- Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2016 4:10 am
How often should I drill a question type to stay sharp?
I was wondering how often I would need to trill a particular question type once I believe I have gotten the point? For example a few weeks ago I drilled the hell out of Weaken questions to the point that I was missing only about 1 in each set. Then I drilled weaken yesterday and missed about 1/3 of the set. So what is an adequate timeframe to start drilling by question type again just so I'm not rusty?
-
Deardevil
- Posts: 496
- Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2016 11:00 pm
Re: How often should I drill a question type to stay sharp?
Weekly is fine, I suppose, but this sounds more like an approach issue.
How are you currently doing these types of problems?
Weaken questions used to be my weak point too, but once familiarity comes into play, they're a piece of cake.
How are you currently doing these types of problems?
Weaken questions used to be my weak point too, but once familiarity comes into play, they're a piece of cake.
-
olikatz
- Posts: 109
- Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2016 4:10 am
Re: How often should I drill a question type to stay sharp?
For weaken I just do 15 in a set. I reckon I just go about answering them with the principles I learned from the PS Bibles I don't really make any notations for weaken questionsDeardevil wrote:Weekly is fine, I suppose, but this sounds more like an approach issue.
How are you currently doing these types of problems?
Weaken questions used to be my weak point too, but once familiarity comes into play, they're a piece of cake.
-
Deardevil
- Posts: 496
- Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2016 11:00 pm
Re: How often should I drill a question type to stay sharp?
Since my PowerScore memory is a bit fuzzy, I took the liberty of skimming over the eighth chapter.
I'm not really feeling the attacking the conclusion or premises bit, as what I found simpler to do is to go after what's in between.
Below is a non-LSAT problem I just made up,
so it's probably not air-tight; nonetheless, show me how you'd solve it.
In Neon Pink High School, there is an "elite four" that consists of the most popular kids.
With the exception of freshmen, at the beginning of a semester, they are to be chosen by their peers.
The policy is that there is the most popular includes a sophomore, two juniors, and a senior,
although, in 2008, there had been two seniors on the roster because they're twins.
Lisa was prom queen back in middle school. Jennie aims to be the valedictorian of the class of 2019.
Rosé was voted by the majority as the most popular person during her last two runs,
so she is bound to be the most popular coming into her final year as well.
Which of the following, if true, undermines the conclusion?
(A) Lisa will probably become prom queen when prom comes around.
(B) The second most popular child during the junior year was Jennie.
(C) There are no twins that are currently attending Neon Pink High School.
(D) Thorough studies show that, in the past, popularity dwindles after junior year.
(E) At her road test site, Rosé carelessly tailgated and rear-ended her principal's car.
I'm not really feeling the attacking the conclusion or premises bit, as what I found simpler to do is to go after what's in between.
Below is a non-LSAT problem I just made up,
so it's probably not air-tight; nonetheless, show me how you'd solve it.
In Neon Pink High School, there is an "elite four" that consists of the most popular kids.
With the exception of freshmen, at the beginning of a semester, they are to be chosen by their peers.
The policy is that there is the most popular includes a sophomore, two juniors, and a senior,
although, in 2008, there had been two seniors on the roster because they're twins.
Lisa was prom queen back in middle school. Jennie aims to be the valedictorian of the class of 2019.
Rosé was voted by the majority as the most popular person during her last two runs,
so she is bound to be the most popular coming into her final year as well.
Which of the following, if true, undermines the conclusion?
(A) Lisa will probably become prom queen when prom comes around.
(B) The second most popular child during the junior year was Jennie.
(C) There are no twins that are currently attending Neon Pink High School.
(D) Thorough studies show that, in the past, popularity dwindles after junior year.
(E) At her road test site, Rosé carelessly tailgated and rear-ended her principal's car.
-
olikatz
- Posts: 109
- Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2016 4:10 am
Re: How often should I drill a question type to stay sharp?
Okay if this was a real test I would bubble D and be fairly confident in the answer. A is irrelevant because we are focused on Rose. B same reason. C strengthens the conclusion. E does nothing for the argument. That's just how I would rationalize it. I usually look for answer choices with outside infoDeardevil wrote:Since my PowerScore memory is a bit fuzzy, I took the liberty of skimming over the eighth chapter.
I'm not really feeling the attacking the conclusion or premises bit, as what I found simpler to do is to go after what's in between.
Below is a non-LSAT problem I just made up,
so it's probably not air-tight; nonetheless, show me how you'd solve it.
In Neon Pink High School, there is an "elite four" that consists of the most popular kids.
With the exception of freshmen, at the beginning of a semester, they are to be chosen by their peers.
The policy is that there is the most popular includes a sophomore, two juniors, and a senior,
although, in 2008, there had been two seniors on the roster because they're twins.
Lisa was prom queen back in middle school. Jennie aims to be the valedictorian of the class of 2019.
Rosé was voted by the majority as the most popular person during her last two runs,
so she is bound to be the most popular coming into her final year as well.
Which of the following, if true, undermines the conclusion?
(A) Lisa will probably become prom queen when prom comes around.
(B) The second most popular child during the junior year was Jennie.
(C) There are no twins that are currently attending Neon Pink High School.
(D) Thorough studies show that, in the past, popularity dwindles after junior year.
(E) At her road test site, Rosé carelessly tailgated and rear-ended her principal's car.
-
Deardevil
- Posts: 496
- Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2016 11:00 pm
Re: How often should I drill a question type to stay sharp?
Awesome.
(A) is out of scope, indeed.
(B) is almost a premise booster because the stimulus states Rosé was #1 in the previous year,
so it's anyone's guess who #2 is, but true, that part is, on the whole, irrelevant.
(C) is definitely a strengthener.
(D) is our guy/gal!
(E) causes one to assume too much (will her principal kick her off the poll because his Ferrari got rekt?),
which is never a good way to look for a weakener; if it weakens, it does so and should be "straightforward."
(D) is correct because if actual analysis has been conducted to indicate that one's popularity can drop upon entering senior year,
we have reason to believe that, even though Rosé was super likable back in the day, Rosé will just lose some of that fame someday,
enough to make someone else become more popular than her,
someone (and this is a bit of a stretch) who was never that popular to begin with to skyrocket in popularity (wow, what a run-on).
The original assumption is that, since Rosé kept winning, she will stay winning, and that SUPPORT is what we ought to weaken,
NOT the premise, the FACT that Rosé had really won all those years, OR the conclusion, the outcome that is being supported.
By damaging the building blocks (support), the house (conclusion) will deteriorate and may even fall apart altogether.
We're not entirely convinced that Rosé won't still be #1, but there is now at least a shred of doubt. That's my weaken thought process.
TLDR; overall, even though it's just one problem to confirm my earlier suspicions,
I think you're on the right track, and it could be outside factors, like work, that are causing you to lag.
Drilling is great, but it's not a means to an end. Eventually, you're just gonna have to retain the way you operate the way surgeons do.
You're sitting in December, yes? Best of luck to you!
(A) is out of scope, indeed.
(B) is almost a premise booster because the stimulus states Rosé was #1 in the previous year,
so it's anyone's guess who #2 is, but true, that part is, on the whole, irrelevant.
(C) is definitely a strengthener.
(D) is our guy/gal!
(E) causes one to assume too much (will her principal kick her off the poll because his Ferrari got rekt?),
which is never a good way to look for a weakener; if it weakens, it does so and should be "straightforward."
(D) is correct because if actual analysis has been conducted to indicate that one's popularity can drop upon entering senior year,
we have reason to believe that, even though Rosé was super likable back in the day, Rosé will just lose some of that fame someday,
enough to make someone else become more popular than her,
someone (and this is a bit of a stretch) who was never that popular to begin with to skyrocket in popularity (wow, what a run-on).
The original assumption is that, since Rosé kept winning, she will stay winning, and that SUPPORT is what we ought to weaken,
NOT the premise, the FACT that Rosé had really won all those years, OR the conclusion, the outcome that is being supported.
By damaging the building blocks (support), the house (conclusion) will deteriorate and may even fall apart altogether.
We're not entirely convinced that Rosé won't still be #1, but there is now at least a shred of doubt. That's my weaken thought process.
TLDR; overall, even though it's just one problem to confirm my earlier suspicions,
I think you're on the right track, and it could be outside factors, like work, that are causing you to lag.
Drilling is great, but it's not a means to an end. Eventually, you're just gonna have to retain the way you operate the way surgeons do.
You're sitting in December, yes? Best of luck to you!
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
