Self-study
So I took my first timed section this weekend. I got a 150 on a full PT and feeling not great about it.
I have been studying seriously for 6 months straight. Any advice would help. I am considering getting a tutor. Any advice would be helpful, I can message my analytics.
My goal is a 165.
My best untimed sections at 19/25 for LR 21/27 for Reading. I will say from the beginning I have seen improvements but people on the internet make me feel like I am slower to learn the LSAT!
It could be a timing issue, the 4 star and 5 star questions are simply hard.
Lmk
3
10 comments
How far into the study plan are you after 6 months? I'd say having only taken a single timed section and one full PT, there shouldn't be grounds to make any real judgements about a lack of progress. If your fundamentals are solid and you can do it all in slow motion, you just need to begin to make timed practice of new sections/tests a bigger part of your studying going forward. Personally, I started by doing tests and sections untimed, in their entirety, and transitioning to more and more timed practice of both. Only after doing a few of the timed ones did my score really start to move. What was your diagnostic?
I finally broke into 160s recently, so here’s some stuff I did to get there:
Get a good grip on the foundations, CC. You need to be able to parse grammar in stimulus, passage, AC. You need to be able to recognise reasoning structures and what you need to do in those: conditional reasoning, causal, phenomenon hypothesis, reasoning by analogy, example, etc. You need to be able to diagram conditionals either on paper or in your head and be able to translate everything correctly. That’s means not mixing sufficient necessary, knowing difference of The Only and Only, knowing what “few” means, and the strength of conditionals. You need to be able to translate the stimulus into something you can understand.
Knowing, understanding, and habitually applying your question strategies. If you’ve been drilling great! But have you been applying the same strategy to your questions (Meaning treating MSS question strategies different from Strengthen question strategies)? You will need to have developed a strategy for answering questions and need to drill using them. This part takes a lot of time. I had to start with untimed drills and practice using these steps then habitually train myself to use them even when stressed on time. You need to re-wire your brain to see how to approach a certain Qtype and then switch gears when you see another. You NEED to approach the questions strategically. The only way to do this is consistently drill questions using your steps.
I noticed you wrote 4-5 stars are hard. Once you drill your strategies and you fully understand points 1 and 2, the questions won’t become easier but you’ll be able to navigate the AC better and get a gist of what the stimulus is trying to tell you.
Timing comes later. Right now your focus should be on points 1 and 2. That means getting yourself familiar and comfortable with everything. Timing isn’t in the equation. You need to get your tools under your belt. Same in RC. Need to get lowres techniques down (something I’m still working on untimed!) and practice going through questions in a faster form. Timing shouldn’t be considered. Once you master everything, then start the timing, gradually decreasing your time allocated. If you’re a bit in a timed frenzy, then start going through your techniques on some Qtypes, master them and do timed drills while you learn the rest!
Wrong Answer Journal & Blind review. If you haven’t done these yet, start now. Makes a big difference and you can see where you go wrong. A lot of your mistakes are patterns, and if you can spot what happened and why you made a certain decision, then you might be on a good path to fixing it. Recognize your mistake patterns and get yourself to fix them by WAJ. Blind review to reattempt mistakes on a fresh question and take time to apply strategies again. Really take time in BR to learn why AC is wrong, why you got it wrong, what stimulus is saying, etc.
Again, these are what worked for me. I’m still working through almost everything of what I commented here, but please reach out! I’m happy to explain questions you don’t understand!
@DaisukeKaga Hey I will respond to each one!
Get a good grip on the foundations, CC. You need to be able to parse grammar in stimulus, passage, AC. You need to be able to recognize reasoning structures and what you need to do in those: conditional reasoning, causal, phenomenon hypothesis, reasoning by analogy, example, etc. You need to be able to diagram conditionals either on paper or in your head and be able to translate everything correctly. That’s means not mixing sufficient necessary, knowing difference of The Only and Only, knowing what “few” means, and the strength of conditionals. You need to be able to translate the stimulus into something you can understand.
I think I have a decent of understanding the basics. I think i need to work on translation drills. For reasoning structures do you recommend I do follow the 7sage reading structures? I will keep that in mind I think I can diagram conditionals pretty thoroughly. Yeah I literally learned this yesterday! the only is a SA and only is NA. few is less than some?
Knowing, understanding, and habitually applying your question strategies. If you’ve been drilling great! But have you been applying the same strategy to your questions (Meaning treating MSS question strategies different from Strengthen question strategies)? You will need to have developed a strategy for answering questions and need to drill using them. This part takes a lot of time. I had to start with untimed drills and practice using these steps then habitually train myself to use them even when stressed on time. You need to re-wire your brain to see how to approach a certain Qtype and then switch gears when you see another. You NEED to approach the questions strategically. The only way to do this is consistently drill questions using your steps.
I have certain strategies on how I approach certain questions! maybe! I need to hone on the type more!
Thank you!
I hold a really extensive WAJ. I blind review on reading, however, maybe for LR?
Thank you so much form commenting!
@wylangao I saw that you uploaded a screenshot from the WAJ for PT114.S4.Q16. I think you should also include "What made you pick your Actual Answer?", "What made you change your answer in BR?", "What makes your Actual Answer wrong and how could it be a better answer?", and "How can I do better next time?". It's important to self reflect on everything, so you learn from your mistakes.
7sage reasoning structures are good because that's how the tags are formed.
I don't know where you picked up on "the only is a SA and only is NA. few is less than some", but that's incorrect. "The Only" indicates a sufficient condition indicator. Ex. The only way to water your plants is with water: Water Plants -> Water. "Only" indicates a necessary condition. Ex. With water you can only water your plants: Water -> Water Plants. SA and NA refer to Sufficient Assumption and Necessary Assumption, so don't get those question types confused with the sufficient/necessary conditions?
Few is "Some are AND Most are not". Ex. Few people go to the store nowadays: Some people go to the store (people <S> go to store) AND Most people do not go to the store (People -M> /go to store).
@DaisukeKaga
I saw that you uploaded a screenshot from the WAJ for PT114.S4.Q16. I think you should also include "What made you pick your Actual Answer?", "What made you change your answer in BR?", "What makes your Actual Answer wrong and how could it be a better answer?", and "How can I do better next time?". It's important to self reflect on everything, so you learn from your mistakes
oh will do that!
7sage reasoning structures are good because that's how the tags are formed.
I think I will use it more effectively from now on!
I don't know where you picked up on "the only is a SA and only is NA. few is less than some", but that's incorrect. "The Only" indicates a sufficient condition indicator. Ex. The only way to water your plants is with water: Water Plants -> Water. "Only" indicates a necessary condition. Ex. With water you can only water your plants: Water -> Water Plants. SA and NA refer to Sufficient Assumption and Necessary Assumption, so don't get those question types confused with the sufficient/necessary conditions?
what is the difference between sufficient condition indicator or SA. something I didn't consider.
Few is "Some are AND Most are not". Ex. Few people go to the store nowadays: Some people go to the store (people <S> go to store) AND Most people do not go to the store (People -M> /go to store).
duly noted!
@wylangao You should review your Foundations on Conditional Reasoning and also the Core Curriculum on Sufficient Assumption (I believe in Strengthening Section). A sufficient condition is something that triggers your conditional chain. Something that guarantees your outcome. It's often indicated by: If, When, Whenever, Every, Everytime, Each, In Order To, People Who, Any, Anytime, etc.
Ex. If the sky is blue, then it will be sunny.
Here, "the sky is blue" is your sufficient condition. Why? Because having "the sky is blue" guarantees your outcome of "it will be sunny". If we don't have "the sky is blue", let's say "the sky is grey", does that get your outcome of "it will be sunny"?
No.
We are told that "If the sky is blue, then it will be sunny". Given "the sky is grey", we don't have anything that can get us to the conclusion nor can we do anything with it. If you remember our Oldest Mistake in the Book, we CANNOT go from "If the sky is NOT blue, then it will NOT be sunny". If you tried to say, hey, "the sky is grey" is just saying "the sky is NOT blue", so we can get to "it will be sunny", then you've fallen for a conditional logic trap. You need to review the Foundations again.
So, to conclude, a sufficient condition is something that triggers your conditional chain; something that guarantees your outcome. If you don't have your sufficient condition, then we can NEVER get to the necessary condition or your outcome.
A sufficient assumption is different. A sufficient assumption is an assumption (or gap) in the reasoning between the premise and conclusion of an argument. In a sufficient assumption question, our task is to fill in that assumption 100%, so that the conclusion is guaranteed 100%.
Ex. In order to make orange juice, one needs sugar. Therefore, orange juice is unhealthy.
What's the gap in the stimulus? Why aren't the premises proving the conclusion? Well, we have our conclusion: "orange juice is unhealthy" and our premises "In order to make orange juice, one needs sugar". What's the gap?
The gap is that [Sugar is unhealthy]. So, our sufficient assumption (the assumption that guarantees our conclusion 100% true) is that "Sugar is Unhealthy".
So, sufficient assumptions are the gap or assumption in an argument's reasoning. Finding the sufficient assumption means filling in the gap or assumption 100%, which means that we guarantee the conclusion 100%
Going to second making translation your #1 focus for the near future. Good translation and making sure you are actively thinking as you digest the stim can easily carry you to high 150s. I'm sure 7Sage is more than good enough to set you up to do this but The Loophole has relatively cheap subscription that has translations and prephrases that can help you reflect with as you do drills for all of the practice tests.
The goal isn't to always have the exact same translation as another person or their prephrase (let alone actually always having a prephrase) but instead to get into the habit of not letting the test work you down so that they can easily trick you.
Added: I just glanced at your profile and it's clear that you've done a lot of drilling and putting in the work. Translation drills may feel like taking steps back but it's the foundation that will set you up to help you properly assess what you need to focus on next. You can't know what your real weaknesses when tackling a question type are if your time is getting consumed trying to understand the stim.
@DaisukeKaga
Thanks for clearing that up! I really appreciate it!
@Adam Let me look into the Loophole translation drills! This is actually really insightful thank you!
Yk, We ball!!