I know this conversation was really a long time ago, but it's an interesting topic of discussion. It's something that I've often wondered about as well. (How specific/non specific should a prephrase be)

So I just wanna start off by saying that I'm not an expert at the LSAT. I've been studying for a long while with little test day results, especially on logical reasoning. ( although my practice scores have been reasonably good) I will say this, RC has turned around for me. I got a 148 on the September LSAT, but I got +18 on RC. That basically saved my score. I still have some improvement to make,but I'm really encouraged with how far my RC score has come. For me, I was very similar to habeas porpoise and you in that I'm a slow reader. I was good with reading and understanding what I read when I was growing up, but of course the LSAT was a different beast. So because a lot of good information has been said already, I won't waste time repeating it. Slowing down, doing untimed sections, focus on the structure of the passages are all important. I will add something to it however. At times people may have a foggy understanding (like I did) of what looking for the structure of an LSAT passage means in terms of the actual execution of it.

When you look at the structure of a passage, focus on the points that are emphasized in the passage. These points are often indicated by the same argument indicators that happen In LR. (Examples: Thus, therefore, in addition, for example, also, because, furthermore, but, as a result, however, yet, etc.) These should serve as road maps for you. If you see one of these indications, slow down and make sure you understand those parts and how they relate to the overall main point of the argument. A lot of the time, the main point will often be signaled by one of these indicators. These are where the answers will most likely come from or be around. When you go back and look for answers to verify your chosen answer, this is where I believe you should look first. You also need pay attention to strong language. (Should, require, without, unless, must, etc) I don't know if you circle words, but I find that it actually helps me to stay focused on the entire structure of the argument.

Most of the time I only circle those words and it allows me to tie everything together. I think at that point you can basically call what I'm doing the memory method. At each point, I'm using each indicator word as a reference point for the next set of information, which then builds on another. So if I see an argument that has the word "thus" in it,I think about the point that's being made and what the reasoning is for it. In a short amount of time, I have the point that's being made and the reason for why it's being made. I do it again for the next paragraph or point, still circling the words that I know to be important, and then I tie it back to the overall structure. At times I think they try to fool the test taker by adding an excessive amount of argument indicators. It can be confusing, you may be tempted to circle too many words which may basically point to the same idea, but that's when you have to use your judgment to figure out what's pertinent to the overall structure and argument of the passage. For me doing those things got me to the point where I wasn't worried about how slow I read. It was simply a matter of focusing on the points that I knew would matter most and filtering out everything else.

Ok thanks a lot @

Ok, so you can think of it in terms of conditional reasoning? (a little)

Thanks, but I'm still a little lost. So I totally get what you're saying, but there wasn't anything that broke down the structure like this P-->C??

The community. I haven't rally improved my score like I wanted through 7sage, but the resources are there for help . There is a great community of people who help as much as possible. As my membership ends, I think that will be the best part of my experience here.

Yep, this what I was asking for. Thanks

Thanks GSU

This is a comment left by Brna0174, a 7sage mentor. This illustrates my point. Almost everyone else who does games really well says the same...I hope he/she doesn't mind me quoting them, but this is at the core of my frustration with games at certain times " Consider sticking with one type of game until you've mastered it instead of doing full sections. You're trying to drill into your brain the idea that they're all essentially the same. "This is a double layer sequencing game. I've seen a million of these." The key is to see that the same types of games call for the same types of inferences.

I get everything you said, but the purpose of us grouping games into categories is so that we can see how certain game types are similar to each other, especially in terms of making the inferences....right?

My original target score was 165. I've studied for YEARS (3) with little improvement. (In part due issues like anxiety) I took the September LSAT and I got a 148. I received a 144 last year and I have been through basically all the practice tests, but I'm not giving up... I'm looking for any help I can get, especially on logical reasoning. I'm not apart of the 7sage community anymore in the sense that I have a paid membership, but l would love to FaceTime/ communicate with those studying for the test. I've self-studied for all this time and I recognize that I have to do things differently. I really wanna hear/see how others who are good at the test and especially LR think about the section. Maybe I can get some tips. Either way, I just wanted to say that Sami's story is inspiring and not unique. We all struggle and we can all overcome! I still believe I can, and you guys shouldn't give up either!

Ok, thanks for your advice

Yeah, I know you should do it. I'm asking whether you get better at doing it overtime. So in other words, since I'm able to elminate two, will I be able to eliminate more on each question. I think you guys have answered it from what you're saying tho.

Thank you for your service

I think I'm in this boat too

@ great, I would love the help as well lol

I think LeoA1994 got this question answered in his/her own discussion thread so I think I'm good for my question, unless anyone wants to add something

I would love to talk about game 2 and game 4 when we're allowed. I had no clue what to do on those after I diagramed the game. Of course, three was something to behold in itself, but I really had trouble with these games. I'm usually at least comfortable with the approach I should take, but I wasn't with 3/4. Game 1 was the only one I felt I could handle.

That's freakin awesome! I've actually seen Johnathan's example on YouTube and it was extremely helpful for me personally to see the process in real time... Can't wait to see the other videos. I think some of us are just visual people. While the lessons help you get familiarized with the concepts/ideas, there is really nothing like watching a professional going through the process in real time. It helps to get you in the mindset of someone who has done really well. I hope you guys consider making these videos a part of your curriculum if you have not already. Extremely helpful.

I've been studying for a while, and I already knew this but it's so annoying to hear family members say"well I too standardized test back in the day, and there are more than one answer that could be right. You just have to pick the answer that's seems most correct, and hope that it was the answe"...so annoying lol.