Hey guys, just running by a study idea I am having. I did a course previous to this one, and when doing some of the earlier PTs, I'm noticing a lot of questions that are familiar. I was thinking of using a system such as every time that I recognise a question, taking off a minute of time, or something like that, to obtain a more accurate PT score. Does anyone else do anything like this? I'm recognising about 3-5 questions in a LR question, so I'm thinking of cutting my time down to 30 minutes a section. Anyone else do this? Cheers.
- Joined
- Apr 2025
- Subscription
- Free
I got this right, but wasn't confident because I thought since it was missing the stated assumption, it would be invalid.
I got this one right, but couldn't figure out how; this video was helpful, thanks!
Context dependent memory applies to music as well. Unless you can convince your proctor to play music during the exam, I would power through it without.
I brought a thermal sweater with me since I was told this building is usually super cold. Maybe it was, but with a resting HR of 140, I was fine with a t-shirt and sweat pants. I always make sure to remember to bring pants. -Mike
I had the guy in line in front of me argue with the proctor for about 5-10 minutes about bringing his cell phone in, because he had no where else to put it. He also had a giant backpack. For someone who wants to be a lawyer, he showed a very poor attention to detail. I noticed he left the exam in section 2, and I was not the slightest bit surprised.
LR 2/5 2/5
RC 3/5 (i froze up, it was my first section, does not seem to be majority view at all)
LG 4.5/5
Thanks for the heads up, I've been looking to try some more unconventional games after the last couple LSATs. Cheers.
Great, thanks for the help guys! I tend to only get the occasional diagramming question wrong now, however, it's usually the same one's that I can't figure out how to diagram in the time conditions. I will work on improving those.
Okay, I tried searching, but couldn't find anything. It's a pretty basic question. I found diagramming at first fairly challenging, yet have gotten much better. I find it helpful when doing the blind review to confirm my answer. However, on actual timed PTs, I find there just isn't enough time. Often the arguments have far too many wordy concepts that are difficult to diagram, and I end up just confused between terms. I find, more often than not, diagramming eats up a lot of my time, and I am getting better and better at just seeing the answer by reading the questions. Although I still diagram the questions that have many conditional statements and are very simple sentences, anything that is very complex, I find diagramming under the time pressure doesn't help me. Is it fair to say that diagramming LR questions (e.g. parallel, PF, and especially SA questions) is mostly for just learning the conditional statements, and strengthening the learning so that it becomes somewhat intrinsic? It seems to be working for me so far since I have had significant improvements, but just wanted a second opinion on this.
Just making sure I understand this one correctly, because I'm having trouble with NA's, although I did get this one right. We need to build a weak bridge because it's missing a sufficient assumption to make the argument, and if we made the answer too strong it would be sufficient. Therefore the sufficient assumption would be "All actions that involve ignoring the rights of others are transgressions". Yet by saying "at least some", we need it to be true at least one time in order to link the premises to the conclusion?
This question is driving me nuts. I got it right after failing on the diagramming, but can't articulate how. I'm just moving on, but it's very frustrating since I want to know how I get everything.
This is one of the hardest early questions I have ever seen.
Thanks for the information!!
I'm wanting to make sure I get rid of the wrong answers with the right rationale, and I'm starting to write little notes on all the wrong answers and then watch the video afterwards, to see if my rationale is the same. Also on the less obvious ones I'll write a tiny note on why it's right. Anyone else do this?
Any thoughts on reading recommendations for people with a strong science/business background, but weak in the arts?