I'm also in DC and aiming for plus 173

Diagramming varies per person. Some people are able to hold more in their heads confidently than others. Certain questions types generally require diagramming more often than others (sufficient assumption questions vs. main point questions). The best thing to do is to understand your limitations and diagram when it is necessary depending on how much you can handle in your head without making errors. No matter how often you have to diagram, it is wise for everyone to get as fast and as comfortable with diagramming as possible.

hey @ sufficient assumption questions usually rely heavily on conditional logic. I would visit all the lessons on conditional logic. Once you get a mastery command over these principles, sufficient assumptions questions should generally become "gimme's"

5 min and 10 minutes could not be a big difference. It could just be one question that really stumped you and you just decided not to move on (possibly because right now you are not timing yourself, which is completely ok if you are in the fundamentals stage) It will be rare for you to become one of the very few that don't have to skip questions throughout sections. Even the brightest have to skip. The high scorers get familiar enough with the test and with what their abilities are, to make that decision quicker than those who score lower (generally speaking). Get solid on the fundamentals, and then shorten the decision point at which you decide to skip

I think the larger issue they want to focus on is that if 999 people named the bible and only 1 named orwell, then it would be that orwell didn't really influence a significant amount of people. On the other hand if 501 people named the bible and 499 named Orwell, well then that is an argument that would support he had influence on people. and so knowing the distribution of orwell, the bible, and other options across the 1000 readers is what will most help us arrive at conclusion to the argument and not whether or not 1000 readers constitutes a "a great number" of readers. "A great number" of readers doesn't have to be relative to the total number of readers. Don't think of "a great number" as meaning "a great percentage of total readers" Does that help clarify the question for you @?

I think the best thing you are doing for yourself is being comfortable with a long term timeline. Slow and steady is the ideal way to go for many people

@ Best piece of advice I can give is use the old tests (pre-PT 35) to get really, really solid on the fundamentals of each section. Do not burn through valuable, "modern" PTs. When you do start taking simulated practice tests under realistic conditions, be sure to blind review THOROUGHLY.

Oh, and you will make lots and lots of mistakes. Don't let it discourage you. Blind reviewing will lead to fewer mistakes.

Good Luck!

Thanks Jonathan!

If you know you aren't applying until next cycle, I would wait until you are consistently scoring a couple points above your target score. This claim I am about to make is entirely unfounded, but I am willing to bet that most people on test day score a couple points below their practice average.

Remember that the curve for all PTs are pre-determined prior to the tests being administered. All LSAT questions were, at one time, experimental questions. And each question's level of difficulty is determined by the percentage of students who get the question right while also taking into account how well that student performed on the test. For example, say that 60% of test takers who scored a 170 get a particular experimental question incorrect. That particular question then, would likely be categorized as being of greater difficulty. LSAC has an idea of how many easy, medium, and difficult questions they are going to include in each exam.

With all that being said, the difficulty of each PT is, to a degree, subjective. Some PTs will have more question types that you are stronger/more comfortable with and less question types that you are weaker/less comfortable with. Other PTs will be the opposite. So while there is a certain level of consistency in terms of the difficulty of each PT, there will always be some degree of subjectivity involved in the matter.

Also, over time, due to technology, additional resources, the rise of test prep companies, etc. people have gotten better at taking the LSAT. Naturally it would only make sense for the PT curves to reflect that reality.

The best thing you can do is focus on your skill sets. Have a very solid understanding of what you are good at and what you are not good at. In both areas, always be looking for ways to get faster.

Let me try to be more clear.

Stimulus:

BHR (Brick houses on river street)

F (front yard)

HRF (Houses on river street that have front yards)

2 (have two stories)

Premise: BRH --> F

Premise: HRF ---most--> 2

therefore: BRH -most-> 2

JY says this is invalid argument form number 4 but I don't see how we are justified in connecting F --> HRF

My objection is that BRH and HRF are not the same. No BRH having front yards is consistent with most HRF having front yards.

Correct Answer choice:

L (legislators)

not R (have not run for office)

P (public servant)

Premise: L ---> P

Premise: P --most--> not R

Therefore: L --most--> not R

To me this is very clearly argument form number 4 (A-->B--most--> C therefore A ---most--> C)

@.hopkins actually a significant amount of thati information is from powerscore

LR Cheat Sheet Part 3

Resolve the Paradox Questions

General:

• Most stimuli do not contain a conclusion and will contain language of contradiction

• The correct answer must conform to the facts of the stimuli

Incorrect Answer Types:

• Explains only one side of the paradox

• If the stimulus contains a paradox where two items are different, then an answer choice that explains why the two are similar cannot be correct and vice versa

• Answer choices that do not conform to the facts of the stimulus

Method of Reasoning Questions

General:

• Identify the logical organization of the argument

• Employ the Fact Test: if an answer choice describes an event that did not occur in the stimulus, then that answer is incorrect

Incorrect Answer Types:

• New element answers: answers must be based on the info in the stimulus so new or rogue elements that did not occur in the stimulus are incorrect

• Half right, half wrong: often answers will start out well by describing something that happened in the stimulus, but they will end poorly. These answers are always wrong

• Exaggerated answers: these answers exaggerate the situation described in the stimulus

Flaw in the Reasoning Questions

Common Flaw Types:

• Uncertain use of term or concept: the author fails to use each term in a constant coherent fashion as the argument progresses

• Ad Hominem: attacks the person or source rather than the argument itself

• Circular Reasoning: “this essay is the best because it is better than all the others” in these cases the premises and the conclusion are identical in meaning

• Errors in conditional reasoning: mistaken negation/mistaken reversal (confusing necessary and sufficient conditions)

• Mistaken cause and effect- assuming causal relationship

o On the basis of sequence of events

o Assuming causal relationship when only a correlation exists

o Failure to consider alternate causes

o Failure to consider events may be reversed

• Straw man: author attempts to attack an opponent’s position by ignoring the actual statements made by the opposing speaker. Distorting or refashioning the argument, making it weaker in the process

• Takes for granted that a hypothesis has not proven to be true is proof that it is flase

• Internal contradiction: occurs when the author makes conflicting statements “everyone should join our country club, after all, it is an exclusive group”

• Appeal fallacies:

o Appeal to authority: uses the opinion of an authority to persuade the reader

o Appeal to popular opinion/appeal to numbers: states that a position is true because a majority believe it to be true

o Appeal to emotion: emotions or emotionally charged language is used to try and justify the conclusion

• Survey errors:

o Survey uses a biased sample

o Survey questions are improperly constructed

o Respondents to survey give inaccurate responses

• Exceptional Case/Overgeneralization: takes a small number of instances and treats them as if they support a broad, sweeping conclusion

• Errors of composition and division: involve judgments made about groups and parts of a group

o Includes part-to-whole errors and whole-to-part errors

• False Analogy: occurs when the author uses an analogy that is too dissimilar to the original situation to be applicable

• False Dilemma: Assumes only two courses of action are available when there may be others

• Errors in the use of evidence:

o Lack of evidence for a position is taken to prove that the position is false

o Lack of evidence against a position is taken to prove that position is true

• Time shift errors: assumes that conditions will remain constant over time and that what was the case in the past will be the case in the future

• Numbers and percentages errors:

o Increasing percentages automatically lead to increasing numbers

o Decreasing percentages automatically lead to decreasing numbers

o Increasing numbers automatically lead to increasing percentages

o Decreasing numbers automatically lead to decreasing percentages

o Large numbers automatically mean large percentages, and small numbers automatically mean small percentages

o Large percentages automatically mean large numbers, and small percentages automatically mean small numbers

Parallel Questions

General:

• These questions can be time consuming so don’t freak out

• Elements that DO NOT need to be parallel

o Topic of the stimulus

o The order of presentation of the premises and conclusion in the stimulus

• Elements that DO need to be parallel

o The method of reasoning: type of reasoning must be paralleled, for example: causal or conditional reasoning, then immediately look for causal or conditional reasoning in the answer choices

o The validity of the argument: stimulus is valid, answer must be valid; stimulus is not valid, answer must be not valid

o Conclusion and premises: the certainty level or intent of the conclusion and premises must match. Pay close attention to modifiers (most, all, some)

• If all else fails, rephrase the stimulus in simple, general terms

LR Cheat Sheet Part 2

Cause and Effect Reasoning

General:

• Causality occurs in either the conclusion (reasoning is then flawed) or causality occurs in the premises (no causal reasoning error exists, although argument may be flawed in some other way)

• Two scenarios that often lead to causal conclusions

o One event occurs before the other

o Two (or more) events occur at the same time

• When causality occurs in the conclusion, the author is assuming that there are NO OTHER possible causes that produce that particular affect!

Attacking Causal Conclusions (weaken questions):

• Find an alternate cause for the stated effect

• Show that that even when the cause occurs, the effect does not occur

• Show that although the effect occurs, the cause did not occur

• Show that the stated relationship is reversed

• Show that statistical problem exists with the data used to make causal statement

Supporting Causal Conclusions (Strengthen Questions)

• Eliminate any alternative causes for the stated effect

• Show that when the cause occurs, the effect occurs

• Show that when the cause does not occur, the effect does not occur

• Eliminate the possibility that the stated relationship is reversed

• Show that the data used to make the causal connection are accurate or eliminate possible problems with the data

Strengthen Questions

General:

• Focus in on the conclusion

• Many strengthen questions require students to find the missing link between a premise and conclusion. Often correct answer choices will help address these gaps between premise and conclusion

• Strengthen questions that contain analogies or use surveys that rely upon their validity. Answer choices that strengthen them are usually correct

• Correct answer can strengthen the argument either a little or a lot, this is what makes these questions difficult at times

Incorrect Answer Types:

• Opposite answers

• Shell Game Answers

• Out of Scope Answers

Sufficient Assumption Questions (Justify The Conclusion)

General:

• Requires you to select the answer choice that logically proves the conclusion of the argument

• Apply Justify Formula: Premises + Answer Choice = Conclusion

• Stimuli almost always contain conditional logic to allow for certainty in validity of conclusions once the correct answer is combined with the premises

• Stimuli are formulaic and questions can frequently be solved mechanistically by identifying the elements that appear in the conclusion but not in the premises

• Follow these rules:

o Any “new” element in the conclusion will appear in the correct answer. If the new element is not in the premise then it must be in the correct answer choice

o Elements that are common to the conclusion and at least one premise NORMALLY do not appear in the correct answer

o Elements that appear in the premises but not in the conclusion are USUALLY the correct answer

Necessary Assumption Questions (Assumption)

General:

• Two types of assumptions:

o Supporter Assumption: link together new or rogue elements in the stimulus or fill logical gaps in the argument

o Defender Assumption: eliminate ideas or assertions that would undermine the conclusion

o Employ the assumption negation technique to double check answers

Right, I undestand that its invalid reasoning. But JY equates Most houses on river street have front yards with being the same as most BRICK houses on river street having forn yards. Does that make more sense?

I think also, a very good reason to eliminate answer choice C is because we know nothing about the timeline associated with Mathlu's position. Maybe his position was that famine, war, etc was supposed to have already happened.

@ Generally, meaning take a few older ones, then take a newer one, take a few older ones, then a new one. I think you misinterpreted the way I meant generally. This way, you are not wasting all the new ones as you are continuing to improve in the begining.

GENERALLY, you want to work your way from older to newer. However, that being said it is a good idea to mix in some newer ones far enough before test day so that you can begin to familiarize yourself with the subtle differences.

@ The key to speed while minimizing a decrease in a accuracy is practice. The more you practice the faster you will get. Unfortunately practice alone is not sufficient. You need to practice in a way that is productive. And in order to practice in a productive manner you need to understand what skillsets the test is requiring of you. 7sage's course is a great way to start acquiring that understanding.

@ I would always read all the answer choices. You never know when you've been trapped! Reading that last answer choice might make you aware that you've been duped. On most questions you should be able to eliminate the wrong ones very quickly anyway. I wouldn't resort to not reading all answer choices as a way to save time. That being said, I would think that strategy is less risky on questions that are formulaic (for example, must be true questions driven by conditional/formal logic).

@.hopkins don't worry, it's completely normal to lose some speed after having taking a week or two off. Trust me though, the speed will come back quickly :)

@ it is much more difficult to come across gains once you start scoring higher up in the percentiles. Going from 150 to 160 is a lot easier than going from 165 to 170. The good news is that it's not as hard to maintain your level once you get there. You just need to keep practicing old questions from each of the sections LR, LG, RC of past PTs to stay sharp.

In terms of continuing to improve, you need to continue to fine tune your fundamentals. Get faster at what you are slow at, and also, get faster at what you are already fast at. Continue to blind review and continue to track your errors in reasoning. Also keep up a healthy lifestyle (eat right, work out once in a while, get sleep, etc).

Once I finally got to the point where I was consitently scoring over 165 I found that improvements were much harder to come by. Don't be discouraged if you find yourself plateauing for a bit. You have to be patient and continue to claw your way to the top. Good luck!

2 PTs a week I've found to be plenty, supplemented with days of reviewing and drilling in between. I found that 3 PTs was just a bit too much to retain all the lessons learned from mistakes.

2PTs a week for you will allow you to take about 14 more tests. Considering you already hit 170 on a properly timed exam, that should be plenty as long as you BR properly etc.