Hi, I recently started taking my wrong answer journaling much more seriously since my last PT rather than just doing a somewhat brief and quick BR of the questions on the site due to the anticipation of my PT score. I think I have a good grasp on my LR incorrect answer journal based on what a previous tutor told me on a post of mine a few weeks ago, writing in my explanations for new or kept answers during a BR, so I can then evaluate my thinking when I see whether I was right or not, and what other inferences/tidbits of info I may have missed even if I was right, based on JY's explanations. Though for RC I am not really sure what to do, as I find it harder to remember what my reasoning was typically, due to it being more intuitive rather than cookie cutter in contrast to LR due to the nature of reading longer texts and passages, I find for my self at least. Maybe this shows a glaring flaw in how I approach RC.

P.S: Are there any recommendations for a good and free screen recording software that I can use during PTs?

So last night when I was in bed I randomly thought of a statement and tried to decipher whether or not it could be translated into logic in a traditional LR question.

The statement is: Excessive yelling and/or screeching tends to deteriorate vocal cords.

Could one translate this as (EY/ES-> DVC)?

I'm wondering if the word "tends" works as a sufficiency indicator or if it's more like a way to introduce an implied (probably flawed) correlation, though not definitely sufficient to bring about the condition discussed.

I think the statement itself would likely serve as a conclusion in any or most questions and it seems like it'd fit better as a flawed reasoning or parallel flaw statement. I have trouble thinking of premises that would lead to an arguer in an LR question coming to a conclusion that uses the word "tends" rather than some stronger indicator unless "tends" really is a sufficiency indicator.

Would love to hear thoughts from others!

What LGs, preferably in/out games, are good for practicing embedded conditional statements and dealing with them when they pop up?

Hi, so I've been done the LR section of the curriculum for a while now, and LR is pretty much my best section at the moment, but I have always wondered one question and it's whether or not mapping out hard 5 star LR questions like MBT or parallel method of reasoning is a good habit during PTs and even on test days. JY has typically said to be able to manage it in one's head from what I remember, but I wanna hear if anyone thinks otherwise. This would be on the given scrap paper, obviously.

Hi, so I'm wondering whether one should practice taking the test on the LSAC's actual website and software before test day? I'm just wondering since it seems rational to think that one should at least be somewhat acclimated to the actual software that we'll be taking the test on. Obviously, this has drawbacks since I believe we get our results right away on the LSAC's testing software when taking PTs, but maybe we can take PTs in the 1-34? A response would be greatly appreciated!

Recently in tests, with regards to the LR section, I've been scoring perfect or near perfect on all the four-star/five-star "curve breaker" questions, though been getting some three star and two star questions wrong, and on the occasion a one-star question too. What could the possible cause be you think? Seems like an odd pattern I want to fix as I really think I can master LR once I fix this issue. Note, I almost always get more 3 star and 2 star questions wrong than 4/5 star questions.

Hi, I'm having trouble with this passage's last question, which discusses what statement is more likely to be made by a member of Third Party, rather than the Popular Front. I chose C because I think the Third Party focused more on racial issues for African Americans, rather than the Popular Front's retreats on attacks from White Chauvinism. I'd like to know why B, considering that it is more general and less racially focused, would be more in line with the Third Party rather than the Popular Front, who seem more broad and general. My only possible answer is that the Third Party is less appealing to moderates, and the AC B really doesn't appeal to them. But, this does not inform me of why AC C is wrong.

Hi, so recently I've had a sort of issue regarding taking Prep Tests, namely that of some anxiety with regards to it. I've been scoring fairly well as of recently and do feel as though I'm steadily improving, but recently I've felt more anxious with regards to taking another prep test, for some fear of doing very poorly and feeling as though I've lost a bunch of progress because of it. I had this fear during my last prep test, though scored my highest prep test score ever. Any tips or recommendations for helping with this current anxiety?

Say you swapped "fatalities" to "head injuries" in AC D, would this constitute a necessary assumption? My feeling is probably no because it was never mentioned how many injuries, proportionally, were prevented by the new laws for motorcycle helmets, only that some were prevented. Head injury was also never mentioned as the most common injury for motorcycle riders. Please let me know if I am wrong!

Admin Note: Edited title. Please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of question”

Is anyone else every afraid/hate it when they have to seemingly brute force questions? It makes me feel like I messed up gravely on something and I start to panic

Hi, I've recently improved quite a bit in reading comp in my past practice tests, scoring in the -0 to -4 range in timed and/or BR typically. However, sometimes I feel as though I take too long on certain passages and especially questions. At times I only have a handful of minutes when I start the last passage in a set, sometimes not being able to get through all the questions with a proper analysis and answer attempt. I usually get the hard and hardest questions right when I do invest the time but I still just always spend too much time it seems. I like investing a lot of time into understanding the passages I'm reading, breezing through questions quicker than the marked expected time according to the analytics, but taking longer than expected to read the passages.

Should I simply be more willing to lower my odds of getting some questions right in order to get a proper attempt at every passage and question in a set?