Subscription pricing
Is anyone else aiming for perfection? I realize this is a very remote possibility, but I feel like it's really helping my prep just to have such a lofty goal, and I'll benefit from it even if I don't actually pull it off on test day. It's forcing me to address every possible weakness.
From Dec '09 to Dec '12 the frequency of the most questions missed to still hit 180 was:
-1 (30% likely)
-2 (40% likely)
-3 (30% likely)
Obviously, this is would take a confluence of skill and luck on the actual test, as well as not getting stuck with a -1 test. I have scored 178 three times over the past 5 tests, but these were PTs in the 20s, and those were raw scores of -5,-7,-4. On the Dec '12 test, those raws would have only been 177,175,178 respectively. So, I still have a long way to go to have a chance at accomplishing the impossible dream. I've got just under 2 months of prep under my belt, and I just signed up for this site a few days ago. I already feel like the "Lawgic" lessons are helping me. Thus far, I have not been diagramming conditionals in LR. I think that is going to net me a question here and there. I'm going to go through the entire curriculum to see what else I can pick up.
I am scoring -0 or -1 on most LG sections, anywhere from -0 to -2 on each LR section, and consistently -2 with a few -1 on RC sections.
In order to pull this off, I will need to first not pull a -1 test, and then on test day come up with a -0 LG and -2 over both LRs and RC (-3 if I am lucky enough to pull a -3 test)
Again, very unlikely, but a handful of people do pull this off every cycle.
One thing that helped me avoid mistakes with LR is to process the question stem twice. First, read the question stem as you normally would and note your initial reaction. You now know what it wants you to do, right? Now read the stem again and look at every word exactly. Ask yourself, "What EXACTLY it is asking me to do?" Consider ever word. For most questions, you probably will not notice a difference, but there will be some that you do notice one word here or there that can make the difference between the correct answer and the main distractor.
For example, you may see a stem that says "If all of the evidence offered in support of the conclusion is true, which of the following must also be true?" Many times, I would read something like that quickly under timed conditions, and interpret it to mean that everything in the stimulus is true. But, of course, it told you that only the evidence supporting the conclusion is true. The conclusion itself could still be false.
It does take some more time, so you may not want to start doing this when you are taking a timed PT. I started doing it while not under timed conditions and after a while it sort of became automatic. I would see every little detail the first time I read the stimulus. Now it doesn't take any additional time. Hope that helps.