Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- 32.1K All Categories
- 27.1K LSAT
- 16.5K General
- 5K Logical Reasoning
- 1.3K Reading Comprehension
- 1.7K Logic Games
- 72 Podcasts
- 193 Webinars
- 9 Scholarships
- 193 Test Center Reviews
- 2K Study Groups
- 108 Study Guides/Cheat Sheets
- 2.4K Specific LSAT Dates
- 4 June 2024 LSAT
- 1 April 2024 LSAT
- 11 February 2024 LSAT
- 23 January 2024 LSAT
- 37 November 2023 LSAT
- 41 October 2023 LSAT
- 12 September 2023 LSAT
- 38 August 2023 LSAT
- 27 June 2023 LSAT
- 1 August 2024 LSAT
- 30 Sage Advice
- 4.8K Not LSAT
- 3.9K Law School Admissions
- 11 Law School Explained
- 9 Forum Rules
- 574 Technical Problems
- 275 Off-topic
Related Discussions
High 160s Plateau..
Logic Gainz
Alum Member ⭐
My most recent fresh preptest was PT80 during which I scored a 167. My score seems to hover in that region. Any advice on piercing that veil?
General Information
- I still struggle with time, oftentimes not having enough of it to do "multiple rounds"
- I'm equally competent in all sections. I can put up anywhere between -5 to -1 in all sections depending on the preptest.
- TIME!!
- I do choose answers and move on when I'm confident so it's odd that time would still be an issue for me. I get caught up on difficult questions and it's still hard to skip them, but I do eventually. When reviewing the questions, the ones that end up wrong are the ones that I was caught up on.
- I don't read with my pencil. I found it to be distracting as I was more concerned with its pace than understanding the text on the page.
Comments
congrats! that's amazing. just keep at it. i'd also reuse old PTs in which you scored your avg on, ones where you may recognize one or two questions but generally have forgotten most of it, and see if you score into the 170s with doing those the second time around. i find that that helps a lot in seeing my potential -- then i re-review the questions from it and what i got wrong. also, do you have the trainer? i plateaued similar to yours and i decided to get the trainer to see if some of the exercises in it would help propel me to the 170s and it definitely helped. also are you getting -3 or less on LG?
Following this post! @ladymacbeth can you elaborate on how the Trainer helped you?
@beezmoof i ordered it after i had completed the cc already and was taking PTs following the syllabus. i started to get super annoyed after my score plateaued. like, 5 preptests of all the same score except maybe 0-2 point differences between some of them. bc of that i decided to take a break from PTs, like 2-3 weeks where i only did the trainer and foolproofed games and reading articles. it felt like a breath of fresh air to me for a bit.
basically, my plateau just made me feel compelled to change my strategy up. at the time, i was just taking PTs every saturday, BR'ing them afterwards, grading, then watching JY's explanation videos for whatever i wasn't sure on. then during the week, i'd do timed sections and foolproofing, etc. it all began to feel really cyclic for me and my score plateau was discouraging. i had no idea how to remedy it. like what more could i do that i didn't already? sign up for some tutoring class? nah. so i got the trainer, and i only went through the LR and RC stuff in it. although i practiced the logic games in the book, i didn't actually consider the actual LG lessons in it. LG is my favorite section by far and no strategy beats 7sage anyways. i really like mike kim's tips on RC. perhaps my increase after the trainer was due to the quasi-break i took from PT'ing, who knows. but i'd be lying to say the trainer didn't do anything for me while i was flat lined.
i reset my watch quickly at the beginning of each section. although i know i have 35 minutes, i tell myself i only have 30. this way i have at least 5 minutes for reviewing. even though sometimes that's not enough for me and i still run out of time. i kinda follow the "15 at 15" rule. like have 15 questions completed at least after 15 minutes into testing. i still struggle with time as well. so if anyone else has any good tips on timing, i'd love to hear those as well
@"lady macbeth" My avg LG is -3 right now. That comes from not finishing a weird game or silly mistakes throughout the section.
I have taken retakes and they're consistently in the low to mid 170s but I'm not letting that stroke my ego since they're retakes from on average 4 to 5 months ago.
I've read about a third of the Trainer. I liked his LG approach but honestly I haven't given it a thorough read from front to back. I guess I'll have to revert back to the materials.
Thanks @"lady macbeth" !
ditto about the LG. the july 2018 game was horrible and i'm scared to know my score really. i think the trainer helped me the most and then reviewing topics i struggle with in the cc also helped a bit. but really, when i was in a plateau, i just tried a fresh approach and switched things up a bit.
also, have you tried taking a break from studying? like anywhere from a couple days to a couple weeks? i never really believed breaks helped. but once i tried it, i came back higher than before
@"lady macbeth" I'm sure you did fine on the test. I agree, the junior/senior executive circular game was such a time suck. I guess we'll see what we see!
I'm not fond of taking a break right now. I'm not burned out. If anything, I'm more motivated as ever to keep studying and I don't want to relax in this momentous state!
I appreciate your advice, though. I'll be sure to keep you posted if I make progress on the timing front, so I can pass my strategy your way.
Hi @"Logic Gainz" I feel your pain. I've scored in the same 2 point range over my last 5 PTs and I really want to break 170 on the September test. @"lady macbeth" I'm curious about the LSAT trainer - i haven't tried any materials other than 7sage or just practice tests. Do you think it would be worth it to buy now to prep for the September test, or am I going to be wasting time relearning concepts?
At a glance, this looks like your timing issue right here. Moving on "eventually" just means that you're really not moving on. If you're going to bank time on these, you've got to recognize the situation sooner and try to get out of there in under 60 seconds. Moving on after nearly a couple minutes isn't going to cut it.
This is why you can and should just cut your losses on these and get out of there as quickly as possible. There is always going to be a correlation between the questions that take you the most time and the questions that you're most likely to end up missing anyway. That's really bad for those questions, but it's actually really good for you because you're packing up all the worst things you are going to encounter into tidy little bundles of awfulness. If you just move on from these, you're moving on from the ones you're probably going to miss. Take that time and apply it to the ones you can actually make some better progress on. Picking up those extra points should go a long way towards pushing you towards the top of your range with greater consistency.
Realistically, that’s really damn good and I would honestly just try to maintain that so you can score something close to that on test day. You don’t necessarily have to hit 170’s in your pt’s to hit 170+ on the real thing just some food for thought. You could even get into YLS with a score in the high 160’s...just kept it up. In terms of technical advice, are you able to quickly identify the arguments conclusion? Are you making artsy graphs are truly making succinct diagrams? How much of RC are you actually absorbing and are you able to quickly identify pivotal points in the passage? Progression isn’t always linear but usually the jump from 167 to anything is just doing a lot of the small things much quicker according to my friends who scored at or above that range.
I apologize for the length of my reply, but I wanted to be thorough.
@Nunuboy1994 My 167 is nothing to shake a stick at. I was ecstatic, but at the same time it's not as catchy as that sweet sweet 170+ club. It's also not on a legitimate administered test, so really all this doesn't mean much if I can't duplicate during the actual test.
@"Cant Get Right" Hmm... my ego wants to say you're wrong, but I think you're right. In my mind I'm always given that 5-minute warning with about 3 more questions to answer so I think I really don't have time to come back, but that's probably due to my stubbornness with not skipping some questions. I'm going to have to run through some sections and try this out.
@Nunuboy1994 You know how to make people feel awesome! I appreciate the encouragement. I don't think my boards are super artsy or elaborate. With logic games it feels like I'm missing key inferences and having to brute force kills time. Although, there are games that I try to split and make inferences upfront, but I feel like it wastes more time than if I attacked the questions with my rules diagrammed in a neat list that I keep my finger on (for a reminder technique). Geeeeez I wish I could upload a video! This stuff is hard to diagnose retroactively!
I will say that when I approach the LR section and immediately begin looking for the conclusion, I tend to not comprehend the words on the page because I'm too concerned with trying to find the conclusion. It's like my mind can't multitask in that regard. I don't know, I'm still trying to lock down an approach (bringing back my pencil point, visualizing the stimulus and then breaking it down after I have a general understanding of the argument, hunting out the conclusion first, etc.)
My RC is -4. I think I just read the passages for the gist of them. I try to visualize the words, but I rarely summarize the paragraphs or notate the passage as I find the section difficult to finish if I do those things. When I search for the main point I again feel as though I miss pertinent details.
Sorry if none of this is particularly helpful. I guess I just need to keep pounding the pavement.
It seems like besides the intentional time sink LG, your missing points are from LR. What has helped me significantly is abandoning the reading the stimulus first beforehand, and getting to really understand what it is you're reading. It's not necessarily a lack of ability from your part, as any 160 scorer is already doing well on the LSAT, but inaccuracy due to what seems to be you focusing on time, and how much time is left. The LSAT is designed in my belief to have questions designed to take more of your time, besides the obvious parallel / match the flaw type questions. The method that has helped me is being confident in your answers for easy questions, saving you time in the end to answer the 6 or so difficult ones in the middle and end. I may run out of time sometimes, but that sacrifice allows me to be more accurate.
RC is different from LR in that you can sift out a lot more information, and get the structure and purpose of each paragraph to answer questions directly.
For your RC, a quick outline isn't always necessary, but it will help you answer questions more quickly, similar to how we reference our diagrams in logic games. The reality is that even though there is 35 minutes for each section, the first and second passage are usually easier than the comparative, and last passage. The same thing with LG sections, and LR questions in the middle and end.
Tl;Dr prioritizing accuracy has allowed me to perfect the questions that I would normally miss due to the stressful nature of the test. The stimulus first strategy is useful, (and the one I had originally used) but for your obviously harder questions, just really get to know what it is you are reading. Give your self time to slow down, and be patient if the answer doesn't immediately reveal itself.
hmm personally i don't think it'd be worth it to buy now just because it's a super hefty book and there's nothing really in it that 7sage doesn't have. it's just the change of scenery that seemed to have inspired me if that makes sense. have you tried to change the approach in the way you have been studying?