@ Well, I'm glad you've had a breather. I did the same thing, and I wouldn't have survived without taking a several month break. Here's what I'd say about your situation.
I'd get that LG under control. I'm not sure what kind of time you've got for studying or when you are planning to test (August?), but I'd start working through as many LG puzzles as humanly possible and being really strict with your foolproofing (if you get anything other than -0 and the 7Sage suggested time, do it again--and again and again--until you do).
Look up a list of the 10 most difficult logic games and tackle a couple per week leading up to the test. This will help prepare you for curveball games.
I can DM you about RC.
Oh and don't forget to take of yourself. Start meditating, exercising, eating well. These things should help you better cope with the stress of having to attack the LSAT one more time.
@ I'll Dm you.
@ Zou I recommend slowing down with the prep tests. That's one of the biggest mistakes I made as I studied for the LSAT. The best and biggest growth comes from your drilling. I wouldn't take a timed test more than once a week with a few timed sections in between. Take a look at your weaknesses, spend time figuring out what you are not understanding, and then make a drill set. Doing one after the other will help you make serious progress. (As opposed to jumping around from section to section, question type to question type every day as you do prep tests).
Take a look at my comment on LR drilling for an idea of how to approach this drilling.
@.kang, I'll send you a DM
@ That's a great question. A few things: 1) I studied each section, each drill day. However, I rotated the section I started with so that each section got attention when I was at my freshest. I was already strong with LG so I only started with it about once per week. 2) I took one PT per week. The rest of the time was focused on drilling and shoring up the basics. 3) On drill days, I did about 1-1.5 hrs with LG, 2-2.5 hrs for LR, and 2-2.5 hrs for RC. (I was able to take off work for the final stretch). *See the lengthy comment above for some of what I was doing during LR and LG practice time.
LG/ LR/ generic timing Qs I can easily answer here. But for big RC improvement, I’d suggest a new method I’ve developed. But I can’t lay that out in a few paragraphs. I need to be able to walk through passages with you.
Otherwise, this forum is better suited for some quick general tips or info about LR/LG.
@ I'll DM you.
Here's my response to someone who messaged me with these details: LG= -1, LR= -3/-4 (timing an issue), RC = -2/-3:
Sounds like you're doing pretty well!
My tips, based on your situation:
LG:
Tip 1) Don't let up on LG! Many students get their LG score where they want it (or close) and then redirect their LG study time to weaker sections. Makes sense, but it's a big mistake. Work on those weak sections, but the last thing you want is for your LG skills to grow soft in the days/weeks leading up to the test. You've gotta keep up regular LG practice to maintain that shiny -1/-0.
It's very common for test day LG to feel harder than normal. It's a lot easier to be thrown off with all the stress and pressure. Plus, you might be thrown a truly crazy puzzle. You don't want any of this to mess with your results. I prepared for this my last three weeks by looking up a list of the 10 hardest LG games of all time. The absolutely brutal ones. And I foolproofed the hell out of 3-4 of them per week. This prepares you for any LG curveballs on test day.
LR:
Here's what helped me go from -3/-4 to -0/-1 in LR during my last few weeks: I wrote out a list of all the LR question types. I then spent time thinking about and reviewing content on each one. I wanted to get to the very nature of the question type. It's easy to assume you already get it. But in my experience, students--my former self included--often have little misapprehensions they're not aware of. So, it was essential that I took another look at each question type, digging into their very roots: What is it asking me to do? What does it want the correct AC to achieve? When I come across a question of this type what should my instinct be (how will I read the stimulus? how will I pre-phrase?)? After writing out a full explanation for a question type, I'd drill that question type again and again until reacting to a question of that type became second nature. The goal was to make everything as automatic and instantaneous as possible. I didn't have even a second to lose (because they add up). I also memorized the question stems for each question type so I could instantly recognize the question type when glancing at the question stem (which, as 7Sage suggests, you should read before the stimulus).
I started playing a game where I'd try to get the first 10 Qs done in 10 minutes. If I needed an extra few seconds on one question, I'd try to zip through the next question to bring the average back down to 1 minute. I made sure it was a game, not something stressful. I'd then try to get the next 5 done in another 5 minutes. Once I got good at it, I'd end up with 20 minutes for the last 10 Qs.
One reason why this game is important is that too often we spend more time on the easiest questions (which are front loaded in an LR section).
Don't make the mistake of spinning your wheels on questions. Something that helped me with timing was being honest with myself about being stuck. If I knew I was in the weeds 45 seconds to 1 minute in, I marked an AC, flagged it and planned to come back (as opposed to making that decision after 3 minutes). Better to come back to those questions with fresh eyes.
RC
I've got plenty to say on RC improvement. However, it's advice that would also require substantial changes to your RC approach. They're shifts in strategy that made a big difference for me during my final weeks. But I was at -6/-7 with RC. And I needed to get that down to -1/-3. So it made more sense for me to transition to a different approach. Given that you're already at -2/-3 with only 3 weeks to go, I'd say maintain what you're doing.
@ I'd say a mix of both. I studied on and off for over a year.
Sounds like you're doing great with your study time. If possible, I'd suggest trying to get some study time in before work. You're going to get the biggest bang for your study buck when you are at your freshest.
To answer your last question: What I mean is that RC is more formulaic than most students realize. And you can exploit that formulaic nature just as we do with LG and LR. For example, what makes it possible to go from complete bewilderment with LG puzzles to slick mastery? It's learning that the puzzles really just come down to a set of repeating games that play out again and again. Once you learn each game type, you've got a shortcut to help you with each new puzzle. That's the kind of recurring pattern I'm talking about. What may be surprising is that I'm suggesting that those kinds of patterns exist with RC.
@ Answering your questions in order: 1) It probably took me a couple of months to hit 170. Breaking into the 175+ is what took me the longest time. I had to overcome some serious plateaus with RC and LR. 2) LG tricks? For me it was just the 7Sage curriculum and then drill, drill, drill. Foolproof method, etc. I did literally every released logic game. Not sure if you're putting in that level of practice. 3) See my comment below for a bit of LR advice. 4) For RC, send me a DM.
It was in the last three weeks that I finally started hitting the 175+ mark consistently. I’m happy to talk to anyone about their unique situation and offer tips for making the most of these last three weeks. Leave a comment or send a dm and we can chat.
Not sure what you ended up deciding. But definitely worth doing it right the first time--which, in this case probably means postponing your test. Finish the CC, take a couple of PTs, assess your strengths and weaknesses. Then, drill, drill, drill.
The first thing is to take the practice seriously. I think many students who struggle with RC aren’t tackling it the way they do LG/ LR.
The second thing is to have really good strategies. I found that the strategies and approaches that've been around for a while didn't really help me. It wasn't until making some of my own discoveries about how RC works that I started to see serious improvement. For starters, RC is far more formulaic than most students think it is. Which means that there are patterns you can learn to recognize and approaches that are best attuned to RC’s formulaic nature.
I will be doing the same. I really can't imagine why they would care about anything but the score you eventually receive.
@ When you drill games (and it's important that you drill a lot of them), my advice is this: After completing each puzzle, check not just the answers but also check your time against 7Sage's suggested time. And if you didn't complete the puzzle at or under that time, then do it again--and again and again--until you do. Then move on to the next game.