Just wanna say congrats to all the first time test takers who've been studying for months (years?), going through all the resources & tutoring to bolster knowledge of how to think in order to be successful on the test. And also major congrats to any of the "later in life" test takers. :) For some of us it took a long while to come to a decision about moving in this direction. This was a major step. Needless to say, I was emotional after finishing it.
RC got a little WTF at the end -- I can't even remember the topics after Af. Am cultural literacy, Everything started ok and went south by the middle of passage 2, not even because the content was so hard or densely worded -- THE QUESTIONS just left me feeling like "What are you even asking me?" Gaining an understanding left little time for questions. Luckily it had the least amount of questions.
LR - mixed bag but doable, as long as exposure to question type and practice leading up was thorough. Nothing memorable. For myself I felt the traps were jumping out at me... Only the score will tell.
LG - the museum game, definitely brute forced my way through the layers of possibility; seemed like I had to do it for each question and the last question was like HUH until I got to the Econ game and since I saw the pre-req condition for that one was gonna be hairy I went back to the museum and beat down the last question until the answer revealed itself bc frankly I'd just put too much time into the whole game to leave it to chance. The Econ game was gross (aka all about deductions) and barely left enough time to answer the questions even though there were fewer than in the other games. I think it was definitely designed that way to f*** with you mid-section. Had to re-focus, re-draw boards and tell myself "it's ok... it's ok..." LOL
I feel like the test was medium-hard. Not a bad experience, no technical issues. Fingers crossed on the outcome.
Yes. Trust your process.
Automaker brags on FE numbers under Normal driving conditions (←red herring)
Columnist can't corroborate FE numbers based on three cars.
Automakers lie.
A. ? yeah seems so, still other AC's need scrutiny
B. do "normal" driving conditions = "same" in every geo. region? normal /= same + every geo region is out of scope / a jump we cannot make
C. the columnist does NOT overlook this possibility ; he's actually pretty much calling them liars
D. this claim is too far out
E. they ran out of wrong answers
A is the only logical answer.
a. "required?" this is not stated
b. "the only" --> big jump, too strong/extreme and therefore unsupported
c. who has problems? arg generalizes about what could help different health problems but does not specify down to one or two or any number of individuals...also, just bc they are on a fad diet, they have health problems? flawed reasoning
d. most fad diets, bc they are narrow, don't allow for different kinds of foods that could satisfy the dietary needs that vary from person to person, aka "of some people". YES
e. goes off on a tangent again with limiting & extreme language
Starting to notice the big jumps, logical flaws (broad generalization ↔ too specific, v.v.), & [unsupported] extreme language (the only/every/etc.) are often a flag for bad MSS answers.
Perhaps postpone if it makes sense for and doesn't throw off your application timeline and you can devote the study time to hardcore blind review and re-review of some test sections. But don't let it keep you from your ultimate goal. We are going to law school. 7Sage, PowerScore bibles and private tutoring are our common rites of passage. Stay the course! (I am also registered for June and unsure of whether I will sit... and I feel like things are just opening up to me in terms of understanding. With some more time I'm sure I'd feel more confident.)
I struggled with this question as well and got it wrong twice on BR; so I'm taking it apart a bit.
Key is the question stem:
"..situation..most nearly similar.. blah blah to which of the following with respect to the relationship between the declared INTENT of a gov't practice and a CIRCUMSTANCE RELEVANT TO IT {aka THAT INTENT]"
So the intent and its relationship to something in or about it (that's hopefully relevant) figures into the (causal? wishful?) logic even if you diagram it.
The best I can make of the stimulus is this:
Intent: A-->B (subsidy --maintain--> adequate agricultural production)
Unintended byproduct: A intensifies C (more intensive farming aka agricultural production, a circumstance related to all of the intent A-->B)
Final Result: C --> ~B (opposite effect)
Answer choice (C) does something like this:
Intent: A --> B ( build strong AF --maintain--> peace)
Unintended byproduct: A maintains some sort of unintended relationship to the intent A-->B, call it "C"
Final Result: C --> ~B (opposite effect)
This allowed me to see (B) was definitely wrong and (E) just doesn't diagram the same way. Unfortunately, the word "periodically" is thrown in to lead you away from the most legit answer but the question stem does leave room for loose approximations by the qualifier "most nearly."
Logical mashed potatoes. Yuck.
We face the same hurdle. From what I gather, it just takes time (cliche answer), but it's also super important to keep a positive attitude toward the test -- literally talk back to whatever negative thought is causing anxiety, e.g., for RC you might tell yourself, "I'm excited to learn about something new/something possibly from a different perspective than I'd considered." For LR, you might reframe yourself as a detective solving crimes of faulty reasoning presented in each stimulus. You mentioned slow reading as a challenge; I'm right there with you. For RC, succinct (sometime copious yet organized) annotation seems to work for me; test prep calls it "tracking viewpoints & information." I'm still trying to find efficiency, but when I've done it, it takes me to near perfection on a passage. I'm only getting 3/4 done under timed conditions to give you an idea. As it pertains to LR, the skill that 7Sage teaches right up front--namely reading for the subject and predicate, and identifying the conclusion (by rearranging info in the stimulus to verify if necessary)--has helped increase my own comfort with parsing blocks of text without feeling like I'm missing the point. If you can do this, you start to notice how much fluff there is. To be honest, I don't read every word of the stimulus first. I look at the question briefly to see what the test makers want me to do, then break down what is being argued. With games, it's all about the rules and deductions; there are only so many variations and ways to arrange a fixed number of items; you just get better at recognizing the setup by practicing them over and over -- even old ones you've done before -- and watching various videos to see how others approach them. Often there is a key deduction. Hope this helps! Take your time. Meditate! Stay strong!
Think of it also as "the analogy has to work in all directions" both between the items in the question stem as well as between each item in the question stem and its corresponding part in the answer choice. So not just across but also up and down. I had to generalize away from the specifics to see why (C) is correct.
Question Stem:
strengthen copyright law --> restrict access by password
[ make something (existing) more restrictive ] --> [ rely on an alternative that mitigates problem/lessens risk ]
A) allow? NO
B) outlaw.. ok... & outlaw? not an alternative NO
C) prohibit a sport = restrict something --> use safety gear = alternative YES
D) passing a new law NO
E) allow unrestricted? NO (but the badge! = TRAP ANSWER ) no no no
Indeed. The question asks for the MAIN POINT. It's totally arguable that the very last sentence is an excellent conclusion--to the last paragraph (and even ties back to the opening paragraph somewhat). However, notice the question posed at the end of the 2nd paragraph. Let the question mark draw your eyes. Scanning up, you start to notice the structure because the first line of par. 2 starts with "The debate arises..." -- so you know prior to that, paragraph 1, was probably context and setup. Although delayed, the main point indicator is the question wedged between paragraph 2 and 3. A question is posed; the next full paragraph goes on to attempt to answer this question and a very clear answer is given on line 42 starting with "Hence..." I would say (B) is a very attractive answer in its opening phrases because of the last sentence. Even if one still felt that sentence encapsulated the main point, all of the answer choices apart from answer choice A have problems. (A) is nearly an exact match to what the author has stated. Further, when I think about "why" they author wrote the passage, it was primarily to answer a question. So, yes, we must identify what the question stem is asking us to do: we are to identify the main point of the overall passage not the literal conclusion (last statement) however strong. Even if these things go back and forth as synonymous, by close reading/POE of the answer choices, only (A) is reasonably (most accurately) supported.
A) Line 42 -- YES
B) unless..amplify.. in a democracy -- NO
C) seems like a detail, strong enough to be the main point? -- NO
D) commonsense principles, was such defined? - NO
E) small # individuals -- how many? who? radical alteration? seems extreme -- NO
If you get through that erroneously appended condition starting with UNLESS (as I did) and are still not put off by the answer (as I wasn't), answer choice (B) can be ruled out because of the last four words "necessary in a democracy." Nowhere in the passage are any types of government mentioned. One could understand how the last sentence's reference to "free exchange of ideas" suddenly puts the reader in that mind frame. But the two concepts are not equivalent.
Also note, the last sentence seems like the conclusion.. but is it the MAIN POINT? Notice Line 23, although delayed, begins a convention of effective writing: the author poses a question which s/he immediately begins the next paragraph by suggesting an answer. The MAIN POINT of the passage is to answer this question and the answer is the sentence beginning on line 42 "Hence...." While the last sentence is a compelling conclusion to the final paragraph, the point of the passage is to answer the question wedged between paragraphs 2 and 3.
My performance: I selected (B) on the first pass under timed conditions because of overlooking the last 4 words. I selected (E) during online BR bc this was the section I started with and I wasn't hardcore POE'ing and I got stuck on this idea of free exchange of ideas in the last sentence, though "small number of individuals" and "radical alteration" are extremes that don't tie back neatly to the passage and should be red flags. So, as I am printing the thing out to go over individual questions with ink and highlighter, the question mark at the end of paragraph 2 jumps out at me and instantly the MAIN POINT is obvious as a I scroll down and see the author has answered the question posed. Thus, choice (A) is hands-down the correct selection, the most accurate match to what the author has stated.
What is the difference really? Is pre-phrasing universally helpful across LR/RC question types or only selectively applicable? I.e, what makes it/when can it be most valuable? Thoughts, counterexamples, and battle-tested opinions welcome!
@arianalotulelei733 Interested as well. I'm in my 40s and also returning to school. My target is August (or October if need be) . Would love to join!
Hey @renebermudez226 which PT is this?