Preparations

AshleighK

Hey all!

I took a 2 1/2 week break from the LSAT while I was on vacation out of the country. It was much needed since my whole summer has consisted of nothing but LSAT studying ~30 hours a week. My break has obviously side tracked my original plans and I'm wondering if my new approach is a good one.

I originally wanted to take 2 PTs a week starting this week until the first week of September. I took PT 38 before I left and scored 8 points above my diagnostic score. My BR score for this PT was 5+ points from the raw score. I was up to PT 4 in the FP stage with around 3/4 tries until I hit perfection.

Now, I'm thinking to do 1 PT a week giving me about 6 PTs left to take. With this in mind, I was planning to do 1 PT from each group saving the rest for intense drilling and experimentals. For example, I already took a PT from the 30s. So my next one will be ONE from the 40s, 50s, etc.

My concerns are whether or not this is effective enough to expose me to the different tests and if I can't get through to PT 36 for FPing if this will be something worth concern. I can typically get through 2 PTs worth of FPing but in the event I can't make it to PT 36 - I wanted to know if this could drastically shift my goal of hitting a perfect score in LG.

Thanks to those who respond and best of luck studying

AshleighK

Oh I forgot to add: I'm planning to upgrade to Ultimate to access the other PTs along with its explanations. And worst case, I'll retake in November.

Nedra C.

I think you sound very prepared and dedicated and you are on the right track! Just do what you can, but be careful of burn out Good luck!

AshleighK

@"Nedra C." said:
I think you sound very prepared and dedicated and you are on the right track! Just do what you can, but be careful of burn out Good luck!

Hi Nedra,

Thanks for the reply! You don't think the issue with FPing will be too much of a concern? I was worried that if I couldn't get through PTs 1-36 it would hurt my LG score.

keets993

I think it depends on your actual score and br score in relation to your goal score. That will tell you whether what you're doing is sufficient or not, and whether or not foolproofing all of 1-36 will hurt you.

cgracia12

If you’re sitting for the exam in September, why don’t you use tests in between the 70-80 range for your last 6 or so PT’s before the September exam?

AshleighK

@keets993 said:
I think it depends on your actual score and br score in relation to your goal score. That will tell you whether what you're doing is sufficient or not, and whether or not foolproofing all of 1-36 will hurt you.

I drilled two timed sections (RC and LG). I took sections from PT 36 since I didn't use it for my diagnostic and I had an impressive jump in RC (my highest yet actually) and I did awful in LG. I got thrown off by the misc and in/out game. I realized I'm having issues with finding a game board to use in misc games and I have to re-visit my conditional logic lessons for in/out games.

I'm thinking to spend an entire day tomorrow doing in/out games to brush up and spark my memory in an intense way. I just feel like FPing is great and all but actually doing drilled sections of LG aside from the FPing might have a better result since it's new content...

AshleighK

@cgracia12 said:
If you’re sitting for the exam in September, why don’t you use tests in between the 70-80 range for your last 6 or so PT’s before the September exam?

I was thinking of doing that but I wanted to make sure I had enough exposure to the older tests in timed conditions. I have this weird anxiety about jumping into the 70-80s range without proper exposure to older tests because I did this when I first took the LSAT and I feel like I jumped the gun. Plus I feel like it'll give me more practice before I dive into the modern stuff.

keets993

I'm thinking to spend an entire day tomorrow doing in/out games to brush up and spark my memory in an intense way. I just feel like FPing is great and all but actually doing drilled sections of LG aside from the FPing might have a better result since it's new content...

So that's true in the sense that it might be more beneficial to do sections so that you're used to doing LG as a section and getting used to dealing with the uncertainty and panic that accompanies a LG section and not fool-proofing. In terms of it being 'new content' I don't think LG changes as much as the other sections aside from the substitution rule. That's why foolproofing is so beneficial because of how repetitive it is.

samantha.ashley92

If it were me, I would be concerned about not getting in enough PTs in the 70s and 80s. I'm going to start taking them, leaving a few untouched in case I retake in November. But as long as you can get in a few PTs from the 70s and 80s, you'll be fine.

AshleighK

@keets993 said:

I'm thinking to spend an entire day tomorrow doing in/out games to brush up and spark my memory in an intense way. I just feel like FPing is great and all but actually doing drilled sections of LG aside from the FPing might have a better result since it's new content...

So that's true in the sense that it might be more beneficial to do sections so that you're used to doing LG as a section and getting used to dealing with the uncertainty and panic that accompanies a LG section and not fool-proofing. In terms of it being 'new content' I don't think LG changes as much as the other sections aside from the substitution rule. That's why foolproofing is so beneficial because of how repetitive it is.

Since I'm kind of pressed for time, should I skip around PTs or just keep going in order?

AshleighK

@"samantha.ashley92" said:
If it were me, I would be concerned about not getting in enough PTs in the 70s and 80s. I'm going to start taking them, leaving a few untouched in case I retake in November. But as long as you can get in a few PTs from the 70s and 80s, you'll be fine.

Yeah that's my concern too. The first time I took the LSAT I did the opposite. I was exposed to everything from 50s-80s and I neglected the 30s-40s for basics. I'm thinking of either skipping the 40s or 50s and just jumping straight into the 60s.

I've pretty much honed down on RC so I want to get exposure to the comparative passages. I do remember hearing there's a bit of a difference in LR with the question types and types of assumptions you need to make for the correct AC so I definitely want to get exposure to that.

samantha.ashley92

@AshleighK I also need some more comparative practice! It just sucks that you have to randomly go through the PTs to find them. And I'm totally skipping PTs in the 40s and 50s-- just using 50s to drill.

samantha.ashley92

Btw, I'm getting a BR Skype call going on Sunday if you're available! We could always look for a PT with a comparative passage to go over.

AshleighK

@"samantha.ashley92" said:
Btw, I'm getting a BR Skype call going on Sunday if you're available! We could always look for a PT with a comparative passage to go over.

What time? I'll have to let you know because I usually reserve Sunday as either an off day. I had the preptest work books that I bought from amazon and the one I was looking at today for some LG drills - had comparative practice. It was from 52-61!

Yeah I think I'm gonna make the jump to the 50s because I was exclusively using the 30s the last few weeks and after doing a LG section in 52, I noticed it feels a lot easier. I was doing terrible in LG despite the fact it was my strongest - the misc games really killed my scores with a max of -3 in games such as grouping or seq with a twist. Yet today I hit 19/23 my highest LG score yet on the LG section in 52! So strange how that works lol

ExcludedMiddle

@"samantha.ashley92" said:
@AshleighK I also need some more comparative practice! It just sucks that you have to randomly go through the PTs to find them. And I'm totally skipping PTs in the 40s and 50s-- just using 50s to drill.

Every PT from 52 onwards has comparative reading.

samantha.ashley92

@39845892535 thanks!

And @AshleighK I’m open to different times and PTs. I made a discussion post about it, so you can always leave a comment with a time you’re available. And congrats on the -4!

eRetaker

Part of the difference in your LG score difference for PT 36 and 52 is that PT 36 had one of the toughest LG sections. In general the LGs in the 30s are the toughest in LSAT history while PTs 39-54 had the easiest LG sections. Since you're rushed for time, I'll suggest just fool-proofing the LGs from 31-38 and use PT 70-84 as full length practice tests (of course you should also fool-proof those sections).

AshleighK

@eRetaker said:
Part of the difference in your LG score difference for PT 36 and 52 is that PT 36 had one of the toughest LG sections. In general the LGs in the 30s are the toughest in LSAT history while PTs 39-54 had the easiest LG sections. Since you're rushed for time, I'll suggest just fool-proofing the LGs from 31-38 and use PT 70-84 as full length practice tests (of course you should also fool-proof those sections).

It's funny you mention that because I did pick up on that after I did some drilling yesterday. I was beating myself up for a few days until I realized those LG sections were particularly easy. How is the difficulty for the 60s? I'm going to take a PT from the 50s this week just for exposure but I'm debating whether or not to jump into the 60s and end at 84 or skip the 60s entirely and just focus on the 70s and 80s. I'm sitting at September.

eRetaker

I think you should skip the 60s since you only have a month before your LSAT and go through 70s and 80s as your full length exams. Also, PTs 55,57,61,62,66,68 had some tough LG sections if you wanted to test yourself. I personally noticed that the LGs in the 80s have been pretty easy and I would expect September to be fairly moderate in terms of LG as well. However, in exchange, the recent RCs have been rough.

AshleighK

@eRetaker said:
I think you should skip the 60s since you only have a month before your LSAT and go through 70s and 80s as your full length exams. Also, PTs 55,57,61,62,66,68 had some tough LG sections if you wanted to test yourself. I personally noticed that the LGs in the 80s have been pretty easy and I would expect September to be fairly moderate in terms of LG as well. However, in exchange, the recent RCs have been rough.

Thank you for this! What was rough about the RCs? Is it the dense content? Or assumptions for questions? Or unclear wording of ACs?

eRetaker

The RC questions themselves have been getting tougher with more "most strongly supported" types of stems. The passages have been fairly consistent throughout all PTs but you'll find that PT 79 and 82, for example, have questions that leave an uncomfortable amount of wiggle room for what could be correct. In general, the RC questions started to look more like LR questions, except the stimulus is now the entire passage.

AshleighK

@eRetaker said:
The RC questions themselves have been getting tougher with more "most strongly supported" types of stems. The passages have been fairly consistent throughout all PTs but you'll find that PT 79 and 82, for example, have questions that leave an uncomfortable amount of wiggle room for what could be correct. In general, the RC questions started to look more like LR questions, except the stimulus is now the entire passage.

Wow just drilled LG PT 55 - WRECKED lol. But I think it'll be good practice so thanks for that. And I'll definitely take a look at those PTs for RC. Thanks so much for your help!

eRetaker

Yeah np and good luck in September!