I have recently come across a challenging hurdle for me in setting up game boards. I have been splitting boards when i get an X/Y inference but when I watch the explanation video JY doesnt do it, but he will for other games. Is there a clear cut way to know when to split a game board? and if not is there something I can infer off the bat from the rules that would hint whether or not I needed to split it?
So would you recommend against pairing the 7sage curriculum with the Bibles?
I originally started out LR by just drilling here and there and not paying too much attention to it until recently. I have been reading books, watching the videos about logic, and drilling a lot but I seem to be getting nowhere. It almost feels as if I understood it more knowing less about it. All of the different question types and how to solve them are getting jumbled when I take timed sections now. It also seems as if I need an entirely different approach for every single different question type. I am in need of ANY help or pointers to guide me in the way of properly studying for LR. (For reference, my PT is usually -12 and BR is -8ish, but now that I am only doing LR, performance has dropped a bit). Thanks in advance
BR is generally a few questions lower, typically -8 to -11. Thank you all for the help!
I average anywhere between -10 to -15 on RC which is by far my worst section. But I feel as if I understand the passage fairly well, even confident when finishing a timed section. Is this a misunderstanding in the questions and what they are asking? It is puzzling.
After having took 5 practice tests and done probably 50 different logic games, I have come across my number 1 enemy: drawing the initial board. Not even figuring inferences, but simply figuring out if it’s sequence or grouping and drawing a board accordingly. Does anyone have any tips for figuring out the kind of board to draw?
@ said:
I was averaging between -5 - -11 on RC until I changed my methodology. I have always actively read in the sense I highlight, annotate, and mark anything I find important. However, I watched a few youtube videos and LSAT gurus on how to improve on RC and most say to ditch the annotating. RC is not testing us on memorization of facts, names, dates, etc. I completely changed my methods and instead I read it once through with minimal annotations (annotate if its a theory, hypothesis, opinion etc.) and answer the questions without looking back to the passage... Huge difference. I noticed my confusion lay in going back and forth from the question stem/answer choices and the paragraph. Also, trap answers will be answers that make logical sense, but pertain to information not in the passage. In other words, it will trick you into assuming and deducing right answers. Not to mention, PTs 1-35 have harder RC because it was changed in the 90s to fairly easy passages. So I saw RC scores in the PTs 45-60s get really high and then dropped again in the 70s to current. So I abandoned older PTs RC sections because they are drastically different from modern tests. Last point, when doing comparative passages, JY says to read passage A alone and see how many questions you can answer like that and then read passage B.
Best of luck! Youtube, JY live test taking videos, Powerscore, and Reddit have great resources on how to improve!
Thank you! I think most of my confusion stemmed from looking at the difficulty of the RC sections I took and from all of the 1 or 2 stars to the 5 stars I missed the same amount, and while reading they didnt seem any more difficult than others. So upon further review I think it is just misunderstanding question stems and falling for trap answers.