Part of the challenge of LR comes from the mental battle of staring down a stack of questions. You don’t always know what will come next and where the test writers will take you. 

But part of what makes LR hard is that it’s really testing two different skills—speed and intense logical reasoning. That said, the same basic framework is consistent between the two “sections.” 

LR makes much more sense if you break it into two. The first part tests speed. For those first 10-15 questions—save a random curveball or two—the primary goal should be to move quickly  and accurately. Hold tight to your fundamentals (read the stem, read the stimulus, find the premise and the conclusion) and use them to push the pace. The strongest LSAT students move through the first half of LR quickly enough to leave time for the second “section.” The last seven to ten questions, and especially the last five, emphasize precise analytical reasoning. The most difficult questions often seem to have two right answers and require you to slow down and tease out the logic on display in the stimulus. 

Okay, so, what should this reframe change for you? 

First, it’s a nudge to change your mindset during LR. For that first slate of questions, think speed and confidence. For the second, (figuratively) crack your knuckles and lean in to scrutinize the stimulus. Take out your pen to do some diagramming! 

Second, it should impact how you study. In addition to doing full LR sections, try separating drills for “part one” and “part two.” For part one, try and see if you can answer the first ten questions in ten minutes or so. For part two, use only 7Sage four- and five-star difficulty questions and do a problem set of five to ten questions. Be sure to diagram as needed and be methodical. Every so often, pick a handful of five-star difficulty questions and do them without the pressure of a clock—this will sharpen your logic skills. 

Remember, though, that LR still requires the same basic intuition throughout. What’s the question asking you? Where does the logic in the stimulus break down? What’s the gap between the premises and conclusion? How does the answer choice match up to the conclusion?

Good luck!