Bedouin, I think the point of this method was to spend a little more time on the hard questions, then when you get to 1-10, you can read quickly through those and finish those in 10min or under. I just tried this method tonight, and I got more right in the 11-20 than I normally do, but I did find my self having to not finish 23-25 (granted, I still can't seem to finish the LR sections, I usually have a lot more to guess on, but tonight I only had to guess on about 3 questions, so I think I will keep trying this method, to see if it pays dividends, it can't hurt to try.
After trying this method tonight, I had about 3 min to spare on 20-25, hence I had to guess on the last three, but one thing I did not do was skip any questions I had a hard time with, which I normally do, so maybe I'll skip any tough ones that tend to take too much time..
Let us know how you fare, Ctham001
Something that really helped me was:
With LR, starting from questions 21-25/26, then do 1-20, this really helped a lot. Like you I wasn't finishing the sections, until I switched to this format, also I find that I am scoring higher because of this. I spend about 8 Min max on those questions because they tend to be harder or longer, they stack parallel questions here....with LG, you just have to practice. and RC, well, I still struggle on this one....but give the LR a try and let us know how it works...
Just came across a discussion where LSAT takers were saying they start at the middle of the LR sections, essentially getting the hardest questions out of the way first. then working on the easier ones last (1-10/11), since you can speed read those quicker. Do you recommend this approach? I've never heard of this before, they say this is where they saw their biggest jumps.
This question type is by far the hardest to understand. These may be the question types that I skip and come back to. So in this question types, are we just trying to find the premise to link to the conclusion?
The answer to this question doesn't make sense. How does the restaurant owner decide to show intent? He didn't know what he did would disappoint Jerry. I think E shows more intent than C. Can you please explain how C shows intent, even though the restaurant owner had no idea it would disappoint Jerry?
First time I've seen a question like this. A SC/P that was tricky
I can't seem to get these disagree/agree questions between two people right.
I am confused on question 19 in section 3. What is the assumption? To me it seems that the assumption is that politicians will reduce government intrusion, but the conclusion states that that rarely happens, so how can the politician keep their promise? What are they promising? Or am I reading this incorrectly?
Paulfan2011...I think this only pertains to the LR section....but your method could work also, I think it depends on each individual comfort level.