User Avatar
aydinjkarasapan488
Joined
Apr 2025
Subscription
Free
User Avatar
aydinjkarasapan488
Monday, Oct 17 2022

I'm signed up for the Jan LSAT. Study group is a great idea, I'd be interested in joining as well. I could set up a discord server for it if thats something others would be interested in.

User Avatar
aydinjkarasapan488
Thursday, Dec 15 2022

Sounds like a great idea, please add me to!

Started off with a -7 reading comp on my diagnostic and now I'm down to the 0 to (-2) on recent PTs with very little variability based on the section's difficulty. Thought I'd share what works for me.

The RC section is famously the least 'learnable' LSAT section, especially relative to the LG section. Even being good at RC, being thrown into a section feels a lot more shaky then starting a new never before encountered LG section. There is a feeling in LG that you have a reliable and consistent procedure that you can use to get the right answers, and the absence of a similarly clearly defined and reliable procedure for RC is easily felt and has shaken my confidence in attacking a RC section before.

I present for your consideration the VIQW (Vick-double-"u") method.

Visualize

Interest

Question

Write

This was largely adapted from the method outlined in the course sections on RC, with some additions of my own.

Visualizing helps occupy the mind while reading in a way that helps retain attention and focus on written details. Visualize here could be replaced with something like Imagination + Context. For example if I'm reading the passage discussing the merits of IP law protections for software to stop people stealing video game code I might pause briefly to imagine a scenario in my mind where I download a game that is clearly just a reskinned version of Minecraft with the same codebase directly ripped from it. Or in a passage on prescriptivist vs descriptivist grammarians I might play a little imaginative game in the background where I try to picture in my head what I think a prescriptivist would look like versus a descriptivist based on details in the passage. Maybe I'm crazy for this one, but this strategy really helps keep my mind engaged in the background in a way that creates additional interest in the material, and therefore helps with recall and drawing connections between different details in the text.

Interest is in my opinion, key to RC success. If you are not in the top 1% of intellectual curiosity and not innately gifted at RC, then your success in this section will depend on you becoming a master salesperson. I strongly believe that if you can answer this question "Why do I want to know about what this passage is speaking on?" in the affirmative honestly, this can make a huge difference. If you accept the proposition that you don't care what these passages say for the most part, that they suck and you just have to grin and bear it until you can start answering questions and be done with this section, you are 100% shooting yourself in the foot. You need to think about the things you think are worth considering and learning about, then figure out a way to quickly draw a connection between the passage and your interests and be able to give a one-two sentence answer for why what this passage has to say matters and is worth paying attention to--other than to just get you a good score.

The third pillar is Questioning. Ideally ask questions as you are going through the text. Did the author just make a claim--why are they making it--is it something they are trying to persuade us of, or is it being presented as a generally accepted fact that they are using to support some other claim they have made. At the very least each paragraph you should pause and ask yourself: "what is a question that is answered or attempted to be answered in this paragraph?" This will help contextualize the text, help you with main point and other question types, as well as with recall.

The last pillar is something I learned about LG recently which led me to go from -6 to -9 range to a consistent 0 to -3 range. The point of the methods you use in LG, such as rule translation and diagramming is to allow you to distribute the cognitive load of thinking through LG problems. The LG games method and procedure is actually a manually operated analog computer that you use to reduce the amount of computations you have to make in your head at the same time, and to reduce the amount of information you store in your head at the same time. Think of it like this--if your RAM maxes out your computer, its CPU slows down--in other words when its short term memory is full is becomes slower at computing information, slowing down your performance. What you write down in an LG game reduces the amount of information you need to have concurrently and readily accessible in your short term memory at any given moment, and gives you a way to solve for some problems through writing out scenarios on gameboards--reducing the amount of stress on your internal mental processing and improving the quality of what you are computing in your head.

So long story short, I think this same logic can apply to RC. So I recommend getting scrap paper and writing jot notes per paragraph. Every time you read a line and it interests you write out a short jot note (no more than 5 words) that will remind you of that thought when you look at it again in a minute. Likewise when you notice a claim that seems like a conclusion of an argument the author is making, or a claim that answers some question raised earlier in the passage make a short jot. Writing helps improve recall, that's a given. But my shot in the dark is that this actually helps you think through the material as you read it as well.

Sorry for the wall of text, just wanted to write a post that would have helped me if I saw it a few months back. Best of luck to everyone, especially fellow January LSAT writers! We can do this :)

User Avatar
aydinjkarasapan488
Sunday, Dec 11 2022

I'd recommend checking out the 7sage admissions predictor, in which you can input the month you intend on applying as well as LSAT score and GPA, and it will give you a rough idea of your chances for each law school. Its obviously very limited as your softs (experience, essays, etc) are not taken into account, but can give you a good ballpark of your chances.

I'd recommend checking with your original score and GPA against what score you project you will get in February.

User Avatar
aydinjkarasapan488
Monday, Jan 09 2023

Last comment summed it up well.

Intuitively the difference makes sense that the two are different.

For example I could say that you took for granted that there was some meaningful difference between the statements "the author overlooks the possibility" vs "takes for granted that." The LSAT seems to imply there is a difference, so you assume there is a difference, at least insofar as the LSAT is concerned.

But it wouldn't make sense if I said that the question you asked in this post overlooked the possibility that there is a difference in meaning between these two sentences--because if you ask me if what the difference is between X and Y, then you are taking it for granted there is a difference, and so must be aware there is a difference.

For example think of a loaded question: "Do you still underreport your taxes?"

This question overlooks the possibility that you have never before underreported your taxes by taking for granted that you have before underreported your taxes.

However now consider this prompt.

It had been previously uncovered that Jason's neighbor had been underreporting their taxes for years, so everyone in the neighborhood knew. Jason asked that neighbor "Do you still underreport your taxes?"

Now Jason is not overlooking the possibility that his neighbor has never underreported his taxes, nor is he taking it for granted that he has. Since one of the premises in this fake stimulus now tells us for sure that the neighbor "had been underreporting their taxes for years" and that "everyone in the neighborhood knew" we have to take it as fact that the neighbor had been underreporting his taxes, and that Jason, as this guy's neighbor, also knows that his neighbor has been underreporting his taxes.

Obviously this is nothing like any stimulus you would get on an LSAT, but hopefully this helps with the difference in meaning between overlooking a possibility versus taking something for granted.

User Avatar
aydinjkarasapan488
Thursday, Jan 05 2023

I had to make the same choice this past December and its hard to find clear answers. Consensus as I gathered it seemed to be that it was best to send applications ASAP, even before you do your LSAT. Makes sense to me as admin staff will see you submitted it earlier and I believe have access to info like your personal statement and application form, but your CAS report, including your transcripts (and LSAT score obviously) will not be released to the Law school until your LSAT score is released.

However, I kind of regret sending out applications early now as I have improved my Personal statement and Resume since. If you feel confident about your application material being final, then I'd say apply. Otherwise I don't think it makes a big difference if you apply now or after your LSAT score is released so I'd take the time to perfect my PS and any other docs.

User Avatar
aydinjkarasapan488
Thursday, Jan 05 2023

Definitely possible if you can put in 2-3 hours a day 5 days a week like another poster suggested. Length studying is imo an advantage--allows time for processing concepts.

My advice is to start off with lawgic and intro LR, then really focus in on logic games until you can get a really high score. LG is a section where basically everything comes down to procedure, and all right answers are provable.

Once you get LG down then focus on LR because it seems more learnable than RC for most.

Just a suggestion but that formula has worked well for me.

User Avatar
aydinjkarasapan488
Thursday, Jan 05 2023

I was batting at around a -9 on Logic Games for a while, got to around the -4 to -6 ballpark a couple weeks ago, and now finally am consistently scoring 0 to -2 on LG.

The key was what everyone says--procedure and practice. Have a procedure for everything. Do you read the stimulus then draw the gameboard, then write out the rules? Or do you do it in another order? From what I've heard and seen in my own experience, the best order is read stimulus and rules, then write out the rules, then draw the gameboard.

The point is everything should come down to procedure so 100% of your focus and decision making goes to the game, and so that you can be sure you are using a consistent and reliable method for going through each game that has served you well in the past.

The biggest factor for me I resisted for a while--redo old games over and over and over again until a game that took you 12 minutes the first time takes you five minutes to perfect. It feels less rewarding then doing well on a fresh game, but it absolutely exercises your inference making muscles and makes you way quicker on new games.

Another thing that helped was adding procedures to help fill in the gaps where I tended to make careless errors. I would sometimes misread, and thus mistranslate a rule, and then bomb a section because of it. Now after I write the rules, I read them from the stimulus again and tap my pencil on each rule in the stimulus as I check it against what I wrote down. Another issue was misinterpreting the question or forgetting I was answering an exception question (ie. All must be true EXCEPT). So now before I answer a question I write down MBT, CBT, MBF, CBF on my paper depending on the question type, and then when I get the final answer I check the paper to make sure I am answering the question at hand. (ex. for "All must be true EXCEPT" Q's, I would write CBF, for could be false).

A final key is this, add extra time for your timed drills, make it time and half or double. However long you need. Just get used to doing logic games and getting them perfect with time pressure. The next day do the same game again with less time, and then again a few days later with even less time and repeat until you can perfect it in less than 100% time. This works by getting you used to working with that time pressure to start and then incrementing it up to increase your confidence--at the same time engraining the procedure of answering LG questions into a reflex.

Hope this helps and best of luck!

User Avatar
aydinjkarasapan488
Wednesday, Feb 01 2023

@ I mean question sets you have already done in the past. Drilling new material I found to be less productive if I did not drill and redrill old question sets. I would do a drill (for any section), then the next day redo it (and so on until I got perfect). Then wait a week and redo it again with slightly less time, and repeat until I could get it perfect in less time than regular.

The errors you make redoing a drill can be really telling as to your most ingrained bad habits in approaching/solving for questions. Thats where the wrong answer journal comes in handy, What error did I make which led me to get the q wrong -> What could I have done differently such that I would not have made that error -> What can I do differently when I approach questions like this in the future to avoid that error.

User Avatar

Wednesday, Feb 01 2023

aydinjkarasapan488

159 diagnostic -> 172 on the real deal

Feeling grateful for this fantastic resource. Blind review, wrong answer journal, drill old question sets until you get them perfect in under time. These aren't just buzzwords and sayings--they won the day for me. Phew--feeling relief. Time for donuts and big chilling time.

(technically got a 164 on the diagnostic but I had already done the LG section on that PT and blind reviewed it on another platform, my next test where I went in fully blind was a 159)

Confirm action

Are you sure?