Struggle with LR

ajstephens93

Hello all! Hope your studying is going well. Mine is a perpetual struggle filled with endless disappointment. In spite of that, I am determined to change that soon!

I recently took or "wrote" (Canada shoutout) PT 36 after a few months of CC. My score was a 155 and my BR was a 171. Additionally, I have not finished the ultimate plus CC. I am really striving to make my BR perfect and increase my actual score to a 165+.

I am missing at least 6 questions in my BR for LR type questions, however I am perfect on LG and -1 on RC. Clearly, I am not understanding the fundamentals of LR.

What worked for you? How I should approach this next portion of studying?

I was aiming to take the Nov 17 test, but I am not sure if that is viable at the moment. I took the test last December and scored a 156. I took up studying again this past March, but I have been working full-time until mid-July. I am worried that I am rushing through the CC and PTs in order to meet the Nov 17 deadline.

Any insight would be greatly appreciated!

MissChanandler

A couple of things. First, when you say that you're rushing through the CC and PTs, do you mean that you're doing them at the same time? If so, you really want to go through the whole CC before you start PTing. Second, is there a particular LR question type (or types) that you tend to miss in BR? If so, you can drill the heck out of those problem types and maybe rewatch the lessons on them. What is your LG score on your actual test (not the BR)? If you could speed those up and get the -1 or -0 then that would help your score for sure. Same thing with RC. Are you skipping really hard problems?

ajstephens93

@MissChanandler

I am not rushing through PTs. I have only taken one thus far. I do feel like I am rushing the CC because I was working full-time and consistently falling behind my study schedule. I am about 68% finished with the ultimate plus CC. There are so many problem sets, that I feel like my studying is not varied enough. I am currently trying to vary my schedule so that I do not become rusty in crucial areas.

As far as BR goes, I am missing Flaw, SA, Method of Reasoning, NA, Strengthen and MSS. My BR for both LR sections was a combined -9. My actual score on LG and RC was -4 and -8 respectively. I did not do any practice sections in preparation.

I am skipping really hard problems. I think part of my problem was not getting enough sleep the night before, lacking endurance to take a full test and not understanding the fundamentals of LR well enough yet.

Thanks for the response! I hope your studying is going well.

keets993

It's only one PT, its your first exposure to anything timed so try not to be too hard on yourself. That's a fantastic BR score as well.

As far as BR goes, I am missing Flaw, SA, Method of Reasoning, NA, Strengthen and MSS.

The most obvious suggestion would be to drill each of those question types. With that in mind, it's clear that there seems to be some gap in your understanding of the nature of support. How does the premise(s) support the conclusion? SA, NA, Strengthen and Flaw all deal with those and that's how they are related. You are having trouble identifying the gap between premise and conclusion and critically analyzing them.

Flaw and Method of Reasoning are also related in that they both deal with descriptions. For Method of Reasoning, I suggest you start describing in your own words other LR stimulus. It does not matter what question-type they are, your purpose is to describe how the author is attempting to provide support for their conclusion. Are they using an example, an analogy, providing a hypothesis for some phenomenon. Describe how each stimulus is flawed as well.

For flaw questions, memorizing the common flaw types and attempting to actually lay eyes on how the argument form appears on the LSAT will probably be beneficial to you. This also allows you easily eliminate wrong answer choices on questions as well because you will know whether a stimulus is not commiting a flaw.

SA questions are generally more formulaic so if you have the valid argument forms memorized and are good at translating english to lawgic they become easier over time. For NA, do you remember the two specific types - bridging and shielding - and do you make sure to negate answer choices to see if the negation would wreck the conclusion for the argument?

MSS also deal with the nature of support however the nature of support flows downward. Are you choosing answer choices that are too strong? For MSS, I try to link each sentence to the next. While they generally seem to be just a set of facts, I refuse to allow myself to belief that the LSAT is not advancing an opinion of sorts. I try to think of these are more subtle opinions.

Hope these tips help! Let me know if you have any questions.