#help I thought the first three lines of the stimulus were context separated with a 'but' and then followed by the argument. How can you properly discern between context and argument, or if there just isn't any context at all?

I'm interested!

Most helpful lesson was "Writing 101: Kill Clutter." Thank you!

#help Is it safe to assume that comparative answer choices do not strengthen or weaken arguments?

Please, add me! Thanks!

If it is not too late to join, then I'm in too :smile:

@ said:

@ said:

I have 3 LR. The second one has a question about left half brain and right half and some comments on undiagnosed thing. That section has 25 question and the last one is a parallel question. The last LR has a question about native species going to extinct and initially thought it was the warmer water temperature but later determined that was the chemical. Do anyone who have 2 Lr remembers these two?

Second this. Also, with the warmer water question, was this apart of the section that started with the baboon flaw?

Was that section the experimental LR?

@ said:

Had LR-RC-LR-LR-LG

Did anyone have an LR with parallel flaw for the last question? I'm hoping that it was my experimental.

Was that LR section with the last question being a parallel flaw the section with 26 questions?

I would love to see a blog post about writing an effective LSAT addendum.

@ said:

I would try always identifying argument structure- make sure to locate the conclusion. Really understand what you are trying to strengthen, weaken... etc. Many times, trap answers don't really address the argument.

Those trap answers are really attractive and I sometimes fall victim to them when I misidentify/ misunderstand the question. Thank you for your comment! I'll do some practice questions and make sure to properly ID the argument structure and make sure the ACs fall within its scope!

@ said:

I agree with @ . As they say, the enemy of my enemy is my friend. The best way to increase accuracy is to manage your time wisely. You may be getting through the section with no problem on time, but at what cost? Slow it down a little bit, and your accuracy is sure to increase. I've found taking a little more time with the stimulus really improves accuracy. Consequently, it can increase your speed as well. A better understanding of the stimulus makes identifying the correct AC much quicker. Give it a shot! It may be slower at first, but your accuracy will improve. With consistent practice, you'll find an increase in both speed and accuracy.

I definitely see y'alls point, and that is probably the cause of my issue! I'm going to focus on taking it slow and truly understanding what the question is asking for before selecting an AC. Thanks for your comment!

@ said:

One trick I learned from one of the webinars is to do coinfidence drills. Take an LR section and write it under timed conditions. For each question, after reading the stimulus, go through the answer choices with extreme confidence: once you read an answer choice that sounds probably right, pick it and quickly move on. I took it a step further, and only allowed myself to consider each AC once (so if I got to E, that would be my AC and I would move to the next question).

It sounds weird, but this really helped with my speed and accuracy. It helped me to hone my ability to sense correct ACs and trap answer choices. I realized that if I was pretty sure about an AC, I was usually right. Also because I knew I'd only have one chance at each AC, it caused me to consider them more closely. Use a LR section from an older test and see if it helps you!

Another helpful technique is taking an LR section and, untimed, breaking down each stimulus and AC into abstract lawgic. This will really help with your ability to see through the distractions to the core logic at the heart of many of these problems, thus improving your accuracy.

I am absolutely going to try this out! Usually when I am taking a PT, I come across an AC and my gut instinct tells me its the correct answer, but then I overthink it and end up selecting the wrong AC. I'm going to start sticking with my gut! Thank you so much!!

@ said:

Well, this is a pretty wide open question. Do you think you are sacrificing accuracy in favor of speed? I'm wary of saying that speed isn't a problem but accuracy is. It's better to go slowly and carefully and work up on speed than to rush through questions and get a ton wrong. I'm more likely to think that you're possibly going through it too quickly, focusing on the clock instead of really thinking about the question. It would probably be helpful to forget about timing right now. Just do untimed questions, so you are focusing on how to answer them correctly instead of trying to get through the whole section in time.

Is there any sort of pattern to the questions you are getting wrong? A specific question type? You're falling for "trap" answer choices? You mis-read the stem or stimulus? This is where BR is so helpful. If you're doing BR slowly and carefully, you should be analyzing why you got the question wrong, and why the correct answer is correct. A lot of people say keeping a journal of questions that you get wrong and writing those out is really helpful. Writing helps your brain to remember something. It forces you to go a little slower and really think through the reasoning behind your answer vs. the correct answer.

Any more details you can provide can help us come up with some ideas on how to improve.

Thanks for your comment! Actually, that might be the case for me that I am compromising my accuracy for speed. I am very time conscience and I make sure I spend no more than 2 min on a question, and that's probably what I should start working on.

I've been taking lots of timed PTs, so do you recommend I take untimed PTs and see whether that helps with my accuracy?

The question types I mainly struggle with are sufficient assumptions, must be true, and most strongly supported.

Thanks for your response, @! The question I am looking at is 72-2-24, the library's collection on medieval manuscripts. There are about 7 lines of context followed by a 'however' and the author's argument. While the context includes a lot of relevant information to the overall argument, I thought we should only consider the author's argument-- everything else is just noise.

So if the context relates to the argument and is not irrelevant, should I take it into consideration when looking for the correct answer choice?

@ said:

When you read through the question stem and the stimulus, try to predict what the answer is going to be before moving on to the questions. If you get in the habit of doing this, you'll move quickly through the questions and you'll be less likely to fall for those trap answer choices that kill accuracy.

I'll try that out! Thanks so much!

@ said:

I broke the mid 160s hump by annotating the type of LR questions I was missing and then going over my old prep tests and working through those types. I wrote out a summary of the stimulus in my own words, then wrote out why each answer choice was either right or wrong. Took me from missing 5/6 a section to 1/3.

Definitely trying out this approach today! Thank you!

@ said:

Do you know the reason for the difference in your two LR section? That is a pretty big difference for it being the same section. If it is the first section LR that you struggle with then maybe you need to warm up LR pre-test. Do some LR problems before the test.

I always score better on the first LR section. Not sure why exactly, but it may be because I need to warm up! I will see how the warm ups help my score. Thanks!

Please add me too! Thanks!

#help I ruled out AC B for question 15 because it states that the alternative model had comparable support to the resource procurement model. Where is this AC supported in the passage?