Hi guys, it's coming down really heavy in my area. I know it's very unlikely that the exam will be cancelled due to weather, but I've heard that it has happened in the past when certain test centres close. Does LSAC send out an email? How are we notified of weather cancellations? Thanks!
The biggest principle that I think will help you is to read for understanding, not for detail. Essentially, it is not necessary (nor helpful) to read to memorize the details of a passage. Don't get lost in the details. Instead, try for read for understanding and then ask yourself critical questions. The best question, I found, is "so what?" When I ask this question, it allows me to let the details fade into white noise so I can get a better understanding of what the author is trying to show or demonstrate or prove in using this detail. Is it an example? Is it an example illustrating a previous premise? Is it a premise in support of a counter-argument? How does the counter-argument play into the author's overall argument? Are they trying to argue that this counter-argument is a better approach than the currently accepted view? Etc.
For example, if the author says "there are 40 billion neurons on the transcranial optic nerve of the fifth lobe of the amydala in the brain of an octopus" (total nonsense, I made this up), forget about it. You do not need to remember how many neurons are in X part of an octupi's brain. If you do need to remember, you can go back and refer back to the passage later. What's important is that you know that the author is discussing the brain of an octopus and why (i.e., what is it's purpose in the argument?).
Now that you know what the author is talking about, ask yourself, "so what?" So what there are 40 billion neurons in X part of an octupi's brain? Oh well, the author says that this is why/because/how blah blah blah. So what? This is not necessarily because you're trying to critique the author's argument, but rather, you're trying to understand where they're going with it.
In terms of reading materials, while books like Explaining Postmodernism are excellent in the sense that they force you to parse dense prose, I do think they will be "harder" to read because they're really fucking boring. I'd recommend reading difficult fiction instead. Lord of the Rings is a good place to start. Tolkein may be a genius but man his prose is thiiick. You could also try The Count of Monte-Cristo by Alexandré Dumas or even Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen if you're feeling frisky. Interspersing these books with articles from news sources or magazines like The Economist or The New York Times would be a good idea as well. No need to read each issue cover to cover, but try and read one or two articles a week. Not only will you gain more confidence in understanding convoluted passages, but you'll also stay informed about current events.
Keep in mind as well, it's not just about reading these books, it's about frequency of exposure. To get the most bang for your buck, you should be reading at least half a chapter per day, in order to allow your brain enough exposure to re-train itself. Remember: practice makes perfect. When I read Pride and Prejudice it took me about two weeks to finish, and the first week was rough. But the more often I read, the easier it became to understand and the faster I was able to get through it.
Here are some other tips that may help you:
If there is a sentence or idea that you don't understand, stop. Go back and read it again, starting from end of the last sentence/idea you did understand. Still confused? Think about what is being said. Picture it in your mind. Think about how this builds/adds to what the author was previously talking about. Repeat these steps until you feel like you understand (or at least, feel not confused).
Try and make use of little strategies that help you keep track of information. For example, when I read a passage that discusses multiple authors of something, I use the highlight tool to mark the name of each author the first time it is mentioned in the passage so that I can easily find it if I need to refer back to the passage. Maybe that tip is not for you, but experiment a little. See what helps you best.
Finally, regarding question types, keep in mind that for specific questions, it is okay to go back and refresh your memory by referring back to the passage. I definitely do and I think that as long as you are getting the questions right, there's no "wrong way" to go about answering them.
I hope this helps you! Good luck :smile:
Hey friends, I just got my LSAT score back. I was looking through my item response sheet and two questions were blank where my answer was supposed to be. I know for a fact that I answered every singe question because I remember having time at the end of each section to check my answers. Should I contact LSAC about an error? I know there's probably very little to be done but damn.. I swear to god I answered every question.
My PT scores are stagnating in the low 160s while my BR keeps increasing with each test (now in the mid-170s) and I don't know why! Any advice you have about how I can get this improvement to show in my PT scores would be really helpful. Currently my strongest section is RC and most inconsistent/weakest is LG.
I saw a lot of improvement in RC very quickly. On my diagnostic, I was -14, but since finishing the core curriculum I have been scoring around -3 on my PTs. It's now consistently my best section.
I don't actually use J.Y.'s method. I found that it really slowed me down and didn't help me much in answering the questions. My approach differs depending on what type of passage I'm reading. If it's a science passage with lots of different names, I'll highlight the name of each scientist/theorist mentioned the first time their name appears in text. This helps me for quick reference if I get stuck on a question and to keep each theorist (and their corresponding theory) straight in my head.
For comparative passages, I'll focus on figuring out what the central topic or thesis statement of the first passage is (e.g. role of social norms in regulating comedy vs. legal idea protection). This is because the second passage is usually about an element/piece of content from the first passage or something parallel to the main idea of the first passage (e.g. role of social norms in regulating idea protection for chefs vs. legal protection). That helps me to separate the parallels and argumentation/perspective differences between the two passages in my head.
Overall, as I read, I try to get a sense of the big picture idea of the entire passage (though more so for the science passage since, as a social science grad, I have a weak background in natural sciences). This doesn't necessarily mean the main thesis, but sort of the general structure-- I guess in that sense it's similar to JY's method. At the end of each paragraph I stop and think for a second to almost map the passage as it unfolds. For example (mapped from PT50):
Introduction: X's finding = seemingly contrary to general principle of science
2nd paragraph: X's model analogy
3rd paragraph: details of analogy
4rth paragraph: distinguishing analogy
5th paragraph: impact of X's model on general principle / science
For really difficult science passages, I try to visually picture the information in my head. For example, there is a murderously difficult passage at the end of PT50. The information in each paragraph is ridiculously confusing and dense. Here's how I scored -0 on my first try during a PT:
read and re-read sentences (over and over and over again) that I didn't understand until I could picture it in my head
formed the "big picture" idea of the passage overall (i.e., distinguished details from the main point of the passage)
referred back to the passage and re-read certain passages to answer questions when stuck between answer choices.
Honestly, don't be afraid to re-read confusing/dense sentences, even multiple times. Sometimes it takes a few rounds for the information to sink into my brain and for me to connect it to other related ideas. That's okay! I'd even argue that, since the passage builds on the information contained in previous paragraphs, moving on to the rest of the passage without understanding the previous paragraph or idea will result in further confusion. Focus on understanding each idea/sentence before you move on.
Besides these tips, I would recommend reading more. I read A LOT in my spare time, it's a huge hobby of mine. To be fair, most of what I read is rubbish fiction, but I do read the Economist and the NY Times regularly as well. If you're really struggling, start reading one article or chapter of a a notoriously dense newspaper or book (hello Lord of the Rings) every day. And practice! Figure out what works for you. There's no "wrong way" in my opinion to RC, as long as you get the right answer.
I hope this helps! Best of luck! :smile:
@jinnie871791 said:
@angelieortizao751 said:
@yuyuecarly468 said:
Any guesses on the curve for this one?
If September was a -13, this was -10. Maybe -11 if we’re lucky.
Powerscore predicting -11
What does this mean -11?
Would be possible for the site to display the target time for each game in the analytics summary after each problem set or PT rather than just on the explanation page for each game? No worries if not, I just thought I'd ask!
By far my worst section is LG. My performance is very inconsistent, sometimes -2/-4 other times -9/-11. I think part of the reason my PT scores have been low is because my anxiety about doing well in this section impacts my thought patterns. There's one week left before the November test, and I thought I'd spend this week working through the hardest (4- and 5-star rated) games to improve my confidence. Do you think this is a good strategy? Is there anything else you recommend I do to improve?
@hinkletwinkle111546 yes, same! It's such a hard decision to make.
@gwendolynwest346 I heard the September LSAT was killer on the games, I'm sure you're not the only one who has to retake. I've also heard conflicting advice-- it's so hard to know what the right choice is.
@gof3962 that's really good advice. I registered for January and will do everything I can to work on weak spots this week, but if I have to retake it's not the end of the world
@gwendolynwest346 I definitely want to do at least one more PT this week, but I know my weakest section is the games. I thought I'd try and tackle the hardest ones this week and see if that improves my confidence.
If you're really set on taking it next week, I recommend that you focus on whichever section you're consistently weak in. For me, that's LG (mine is inconsistent) so this week I'm drilling all of the really hard LG games. Do timed sections. Review the core curriculum. Do whatever you need to do to work the problem.
That being said, I don't know if it's possible to increase that much in a week. Of course, everybody is different, but personally I think the chances are low, so I'd recommend considering taking it in January instead.
With the exception of my first, my PTs have been staggeringly low (150s) though my blind review hits the high 160s (one 170). My most inconsistent section is LG (I can be -2/3 or -10/11) and though I've tried foolproofing, I'm still not seeing much improvement. My LR is also somewhat crap, as I can score anywhere from -4 to -8/9. I'm beyond frustrated and crestfallen-- I'm putting in the work (I've been studying nearly full time since June) and am not anywhere near where I want to be.
Here's the problem: taking the January test would significantly reduce my chances of getting accepted this cycle because of the delayed review of my application. And yes, I'd lose $200 which sucks but that's the least of my problems.
Any advice you have here would be hugely helpful.
@sammiturco525 yes that helps so much, thank you :smiley:
This flaw sucks. I've been trying to understand the logical gap, but it's so subtle. I've made up this example to try and explain how I think it works (because J.Y.'s example in the core curriculum made no sense to me) but I'm still confused.
Example: A cat is a small predator that murders its victims for food and pleasure. Anna knows that Brenda owns a cat named Voldemort. Therefore, Anna knows that Voldemort is a small predator that murders its victims for food and pleasure.
What I think is going on here is that flaws of this type are exploiting a subtle assumption we make about what something is or may be and what the subject believes to be true. In the context of this example, maybe Anna thinks Voldemort is a fluffy tabby that purrs when cuddled and eats food dished out of a can (i.e. V is not a murderer). So, if this were a stimulus, the correct answer choice would be something like: "Fails to distinguish between Voldemort being a small predator and Anna's believing Voldemort to be a small predator..."
Is this right or am I totally off the mark?
Thank you @nikkici377 that was super helpful! :smiley:
Hi everyone, I'm consistently getting hammered on flaw questions and though I've been trying to drill them for the past week, I'm not seeing much improvement. Any improvement strategies or advice you have would be really helpful.
@danielhillshafer574 said:
Foolproof that game and focus on that game type until you're very comfortable. Think of this as a positive: you've identified a weakness that will no longer be a problem on test day.
This was really helpful and encouraging, thank you :)
@hrhemmac86 said:
In the same boat - but got a whole month to nail it down. Definitely some time. Good luck!!
Thanks, you too!
I bombed this section so so badly. I guessed about 15 questions and I’m pretty sure the ones I “answered” I got wrong. I’m so frustrated because I practiced LG for two days before my PT and was doing so well!! I’m crushed. Any advice would be really helpful.
Do schools penalize you for being under the word count? The majority of the schools I'm applying to have the same general prompt so I'm tweaking the same personal statement for each school. Currently, I'm just below 5,000 characters (which is the limit for School A), but School B gives a limit of 6,000. Will it be a bad mark against me for not using the entire character/word allowance?
Hi friends, I just finished my first PT after finishing the CC. I scored a 162 (165 on BR) and my best section by far was RC (-3 raw, -0 BR). I found that there were quite a few questions that I got wrong solely on blind review. Does anyone have any tips to help remedy that? Any tips in general on how (or if it’s even possible to) increase my score to the high 160s by the November test?
I changed the names in mine to acceptable basic pseudonyms, such as "Jane Doe," "John Smith" etc. You can also include a footnote as well.
Hey friends, I've been working through the CC since June and between work and illness, it's taken me much longer to complete than I'd planned. I've registered for the Nov 25th LSAT and I now have six weeks or so to PT and about 22 hours left in the CC.
I could change my test date to January; however, while the schools I'm applying to accept it, it would be very late in the cycle. I've also contracted out for much of December because I'd planned to be done by the end of November, so I doubt I'd have much time to study then anyway.
For context, my diagnostic from 2 years ago was a 146 (BR 156) with my lowest scores in RC. I've seen quite a bit of improvement overall from the problems sets in the CC, but I won't have an accurate estimate of my current average score until I PT.
Any tips on how to maximize the time I have left?
@wraith985-4026 said:
BUT, /N -> K says that any time you don't have N, you have K. In two groups, that's not a problem; the group without N is necessarily the one with K. But if there are three groups, you'll end up with one N and two groups without N, meaning you're going to have to place K in each of those groups according to the rule, which is obviously not correct. In four groups, it's even worse, and so forth.
In three groups, the rule should be K -> /N, because that indicates properly that in the one place where you see K, you won't see N, and the contrapositive says that in the one place that you see N, you won't see K. This is the proper manifestation of "always apart" in 3+ group scenarios.
Hope this helps.
This was super helpful, thanks so much!
For the harder lawgic questions, I have to do it the same way, otherwise I get lost (especially on parallel and flaw method of reasoning questions). Just keep writing it out as quickly as you can and doing PTs over and over and let your brain memorize the patterns-- the more you practice, the better you'll get at doing it in your head.
Hope this helps! Good luck :smile:
I found it really helpful to track my BR for LR in a Google spreadsheet. That way, I forced myself to review every question, even the ones I felt confident about. Doing this helped me improve a lot on LR (from -6 to -2 ish) because by forcing myself to write out my thought process for each answer choice, I brought to the surface a lot of unconscious assumptions that I made. That way, if I got an answer wrong on a question I was very confident about, I could go back to my spreadsheet and easily identify and learn from the mistake.