I agree with the general sentiment that teaching material to lower-scoring folks is highly beneficial to top scorers. But dismissing OP's desire to work with like-achieving folks as an attempt to create a "mutual admiration society" (and related implications) is unnecessary and disrespectful.
@974 Trust me when I say you will get far more out of helping someone scoring lower than you than by hanging out in a mutual admiration society meeting with other high scorers, many of whom are reluctant to admit when they get questions wrong so the discussions you think will happen often don't.
Your argument is flawed in that you are taking for granted that people with correlated scores are likely to have similar issues, be comfortable raising them, and have adequate solutions for them that will work for everyone else simply because they are scoring in the same band. Furthermore, where someone is at in there studies is not really an issue when it comes to BR groups since everyone is in the PT phase.
I've been on calls with people with 170+ diagnostics and people scoring in the 150s after nine months. Trust me when I say you will get far more out of helping someone scoring lower than you than by hanging out in a mutual admiration society meeting with other high scorers, many of whom are reluctant to admit when they get questions wrong so the discussions you think will happen often don't. You gain a greater depth of understanding by teaching someone else and that is why the multi-level BR calls have been beneficial to a large number of students across many score bands.
Good question. Given everyone is at a different point in their studies, groups with correlated scores are more likely to raise and solve issues common to all. The benefits are mutual effectiveness and efficiency.
Along these lines, ideally I recommend different BR groups focused at different scoring bands, using manageable group sizes, each facilitated by a higher scoring "mentor". This way, everyone benefits and no one is left out.
The intent is maximizing everyone's time - and certainly not to exclude anyone - the same way everyone is welcome to select their own study buddies.
Subscribe to unlock everything that 7Sage has to offer.
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to get going. Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you can continue!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you came here to read all the amazing posts from our 300,000+ members. They all have accounts too! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to discuss anything!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to give us feedback! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to vote on this!
Hold on there, you need to slow down.
We love that you want post in our discussion forum! Just come back in a bit to post again!
Subscribers can learn all the LSAT secrets.
Happens all the time: now that you've had a taste of the lessons, you just can't stop -- and you don't have to! Click the button.
7 comments
Hey guys—this thread has gotten a bit unfriendly and that's definitely not the kind of environment we work to cultivate here at 7sage.
OP—I (and other top-scorers who will be present) hope you'll join us this Saturday for BR Group!
I agree with the general sentiment that teaching material to lower-scoring folks is highly beneficial to top scorers. But dismissing OP's desire to work with like-achieving folks as an attempt to create a "mutual admiration society" (and related implications) is unnecessary and disrespectful.
Mr. Pacifico laying the truth! But @wraith985-4026 my recommendation for you is to go to one of the scheduled BR sessions to see how useful they are!
Your argument is flawed in that you are taking for granted that people with correlated scores are likely to have similar issues, be comfortable raising them, and have adequate solutions for them that will work for everyone else simply because they are scoring in the same band. Furthermore, where someone is at in there studies is not really an issue when it comes to BR groups since everyone is in the PT phase.
I've been on calls with people with 170+ diagnostics and people scoring in the 150s after nine months. Trust me when I say you will get far more out of helping someone scoring lower than you than by hanging out in a mutual admiration society meeting with other high scorers, many of whom are reluctant to admit when they get questions wrong so the discussions you think will happen often don't. You gain a greater depth of understanding by teaching someone else and that is why the multi-level BR calls have been beneficial to a large number of students across many score bands.
Good question. Given everyone is at a different point in their studies, groups with correlated scores are more likely to raise and solve issues common to all. The benefits are mutual effectiveness and efficiency.
Along these lines, ideally I recommend different BR groups focused at different scoring bands, using manageable group sizes, each facilitated by a higher scoring "mentor". This way, everyone benefits and no one is left out.
The intent is maximizing everyone's time - and certainly not to exclude anyone - the same way everyone is welcome to select their own study buddies.
So—what's the benefit you hope to gain by segregating yourselves artificially?