Yes, the goal is that there is overall less mental fatigue by the end of section 4.
Looking to build a little stamina come test day and so took two 3-section PT's back to back this week, 6 sections in total. Has anyone else tried taking more than 4 sections in the same day and seen any improvement in their score because of it? What is the most sections you have taken back to back before?
Is there any way to look at analytics of both obsolete tests and the new format on one graph? I just took my first Preptest under the new format and now I only see the modern preptest version, whereas I've taken like 12 preptests in the obsolete version #help
Took the June '24 as my second take after taking April '24.
On both occasions, I had to exit Prometric after being checked in and relaunch in order for LawHub to launch properly, which meant checking in a second time. Aside from this admin issue, I didn't run into any issues once the testing began. Dealing with a second check in is slightly nerve-racking, but definitely better than being interrupted mid test.
Overall, both tests felt very similar in difficulty to the later PT's in my opinion. I had been scoring in the low 160's very consistently and April wound up being two points higher than my highest PT with a 164. Going into the June test, my latest PT was a 165, fingers crossed on a 166+
There's still time! Drilling as much as possible before June!
from Imgflip Meme Generator
@ said:
@ said:
I’ve been scoring in the 160s and just took the April test. Overall I thought the test was quite balanced, and thought the LG section was below average difficulty. Only had to guess on ONE LG so hoping to go -0 to -1 there!
Did you have the art gallery game?
Yes, I had the section with the String Quartet / Art Gallery. It was a tough game but I had about 12 minutes to mess around with it to the point where I felt decent about most of the questions.
@ said:
7sage interface have spoilt me I never realized how outdated the lsat interface was, sounds silly but it really threw me off balance. I recommend practicing on the lawhub interface .
Take your PT's on 7Sage for the analytics but do your BR on LawHub for the practice!
I’ve been scoring in the 160s and just took the April test. Overall I thought the test was quite balanced, and thought the LG section was below average difficulty. Only had to guess on ONE LG so hoping to go -0 to -1 there!
I'm in the same situation. PTs have been consistently in the 159-161 range with BR ranging from 169-176 for the past 10 tests.
If taking a test with LG is part of your strategy, like mine is, I would not delay taking the April Test and commit to sitting for both April and June test. You never know if you will have proctor issues or some unforeseen circumstance pop up, and with only two LG takes left, I don't think it makes sense to delay even though I don't feel quite ready myself.
As we approach the April test, I am also tapering off of timed sections and PTs and am focusing on one thing for each section:
-Drilling easy games to increase my speed. The goal here is to allot more time for hard games.
-Drilling some of my weaker question types in LR. Hoping that this will allow me to continue avoiding some of the more prevalent traps on the test.
-One timed RC passage per day. I have spent the least time in this section and want to continue exposing myself to the section
Besides that, reviewing wrong answer journaling and mindset, getting enough sleep, looking for patterns in wrong answers, and editing a one page study guide with reminders of what strategies I want to implement while taking the test, such as skipping strategies, mantras, and overall testing approach to review right before taking the test have been my focus a week out.
Some of my most recent PT's I have taken, I feel like I have been exhausted by the study schedule and it has impeded my performance. Its a similar concept with endurance sports training: you are pretty worn down by the months long workout schedule because your body doesn't really have time to recover. Tapering before a race allows your body to fully recover and realize additional energy reserves not available during the week-to-week training. I have had to get up quite early to study and fit in work, and just sleeping in an additional hour or two instead of studying the past week I feel much more focused. I think the best performance I can hope for at this point will come down to being well rested and focused, not squeezing in a few more PT's
I just scored a 159 timed and 176 BR, so yes!
The fastest route to the correct answer is not the walkway (no pun intended) but focusing on the fact that Arthur reaches a normative conclusion without Marta making one.
Takeaway for me is realizing that Marta's statements do not confine her to any particular position, she could be interpreted in any of these ways if we assume additional conditions and they could be consistent with her statements. Its up to us to look to Arthur's statement to decide what piece of information he is adding to reach his conclusion.
I'm interested
I think it would be a useful feature in analytics to toggle off the correct answer choices and allow it to show only if we got it right or wrong. This would allow for another attempt after blind review before checking the answer key. Is there a way to do this?
I wanted to share an observation and concern that has arisen for me while working through the Core Curriculum Version 2, specifically about the Drill Generator. I'm about 70% complete with the LR section of the Core Curriculum V2. I started after V2 was launched so its my only point of reference for studying with 7Sage. I have, for the most part, generated a drill at the end of each section as outlined in the Core Curriculum to test my understanding of each topic.
After looking at the 'Show Existing Drills' tab of the Drills page, I noticed the drills generated while going through CC have been pulling questions from PTs as high as PT 76. The only way I see to restrict what tests are pulled from is found in the Drills section of the website; I do not see a way to restrict what PTs the Drill Generator pulls from when the Drill is generated in the Core Curriculum part of the site.
My most basic question is what tests should be pristine coming out of the Core Curriculum? I realized today I don't know the answer to this question. Ultimately, it is not that many questions that have been generated off of these tests, but my observation is that it is not intuitive that the drills at the end of each Core Curriculum section are pulling from a large number of tests. By default, the drills in the CCV2 diminish the number of pristine tests available when we complete the curriculum, which seems to be in opposition to major tenet of proper LSAT prep.
Short version - What tests are we supposed to keep pristine while in/coming out of CC? Do you use the drills feature in the CC on the first pass or start drilling after finishing? Is it set up different in V1?
Thanks!
Got it wrong, but do see how D negated completely ruins the argument. Negation absolutely clears up any potential C had.
Got it down to C and E and eliminated E because its sooo strong of a statement.
I feel like grammatically, B's necessity is obscured by the use of the word"much."I think if it had read 'It is not easier...' I would have picked it and got it right. Good lesson on how negating the statement can reveal the necessity.
I had to formally write this out which took quite a while, but once I did, the answer choice was very clear to me and felt confident enough in B to not read C through E
While we only need "Expressing a Worldview → Interpretation of Reality" to be correct, is B grammatically a biconditional? It seems like it would still be correct if it read "To interpret reality is to express a worldview"
#help (Added by Admin)
Picked the correct answer in 30 seconds, then on blind review reread everything and it looked like there were 3 right answers, I had confused sufficiency with necessity. Changed my answer and got an unforced underconfidence error
Answered correctly then changed to a wrong answer in blind review. Was definitely confused by the setup and thought it was two people with different arguments at first. If I understand the principle correctly, its saying that if there is an internal candidate, the decision on who to hire is not necessarily based on productivity as long as they are fully qualified and already working there. Because they are basing the position on productivity, we can infer that there is no internal candidate fully qualified.
Would the answer choice still be correct if it had said "an organization can have a property that none of its members possess?" I want to say it would be.
#help (Added by Admin)
If you can get better identifying the hardest questions mid test, you can spend less time on them and miss them on purpose in order to reallocate that time towards easier questions and in making sure you’ve worked through the easier questions thoroughly. I’ve started doing this because I was leaving points on the table from easier questions.