Advice for how far outside of the 'highlighted' word in the stem we should be looking, IF we g back to the text?

We haven't gotten to all the passage style, but it seems to be whatever the author's opinion is?

We're not allowed to talk or make noise during the test but E actually made me laugh out loud.

This one was tough. My advice to anyone is read each word slowly (like you're just learning to read) because lots of these hinged on one word POE

Any tips for how we can scribe some of this on paper, for online test takers?? Obliviously can't mark up the text well enough. Right now I'm just scribbling (1) intro (2)support. cred, resists pers, +old news).... but I don't know if this is enough.

anyone else have other things they're doing?

#feedback

This for me was 100% POE.

Tips on getting low res wording? I feel like I struggle to sum it in 2-3 words

Any recommendations for how to organize the low res, should we be doing it paragraph by paragraph or by speaker opinion (author/opposition). I have found the latter easier to understand the full argument but I could see in this question it would be good to know which paragraph it is in

Is there any benefit in studying the passage styles (like the Miro Board)? Or just using it as a guide to the best of your memory and solely ingrain the 'reading process'.

I hate that it sounds so reasonable when it's explained. sigh

I hated this question but in retrospect the question is asking a questions about the movie viewer. A is tricky because it plays key words (when under time pressure could trip you up) 'success' of a movie which relates to viewers enjoyment, but that's the reason for producing not for WHY the VIEWER enjoys the movie. The Financiers want to make the movies that the VIEWER ENJOYS.

So when you look at it like 'Why doesn't the viewer watch the multiple versions of the same plot' :

A - Finance people say these types of movies are more likely to be successful than original plots.

B- With changing few details, they seem different enough. I

C- There's multi standard plots, and if you only see two movies a year you most likely won't double up on standard plots.

D - theres a pleasure from watching movies in a standard plot.

C - Yeah we use standard plots, but most of them are taken from 1940-1950. A

A is the one that really stands out and if anything is a result of the viewers actions.

when you actually get one right, but you're a minute over target. Still worth it?

I took so long to answer this because it felt wayyyy too easy and I was falling for a trap. I read A and was like, nope I missed something int he stimulus. Nope was just that easy.

What has really helped me in these questions is practicing filling in the blanks in the abstract answers. And you can do it really fast and sloppy.

So take E: confuses a claim that under certain conditions a certain action should be taken with a claim that the action need not be taken in the absence of

those conditions.

and say 'confuses a claim that under certain conditions, ok people being upset, a certain action should be taken, action of label stuff, with a claim that the action need not be taken, don't need to label, in the absence of those conditions, not being upset.

And then it becomes more like a real example. Like Oh one person says people would be upset to learn the ingredients, so there should be labels. Then the response is 'nah people won't be mad about this specific product, so no need to do it'. Like clearly a flaw in the argument.

#Feedback - have no idea what points 2(play around) and 3 ('sticky' are providing.

This one got me like a double negative, could be true except. So eliminating all answers where it is possible that chel violated the rules AND stel followed. regardless of how weak the possibility is.

What if the school is only asking for grades, LSAT and personal statement. Would I then mention my GPA was impacted by working full time to pay for school (in a better way, dedication and discipline).

In questions like weakening, flaw etc. is it recommended to stop reading other choices when you identify an answer that works? I understand with MSS not to because it's a scale but to save time for other questions. Anyone have suggestions on the strategy?

Can anyone provide a clear distinction between a flaw and weakening question. I feel like its mentioned and loosely provided but not clear enough #feedback.

Aced this question cold. Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in

My trick: its always going to be sufficient, UNLESS it contains some version of 'require(d)(s), Depend(s)(ed), or Relies/rely/relied. Think of these as trump cards, that immediately change it to necessity.

I literally read this as 'the southern region of the earth' not a CERTAIN region. For anyone else that missed the key descriptor.

I got this wrong because I was focused on identifying the main point, not what could be drawn from the conclusion. Good lesson.

I had easily eliminated A and E. I can see that 'objectivity' kept C for me, in rereading it I should have eliminated but D seemed like I'd be way too aggressive. Any advice for understanding when it's ok to be so aggressive or is it default always? Like will the answers always be very clearly a 'yes' if consider both passages?

My first instinct was Split Approach sounds insane, but maybe it will be easier?