How important is CC?

Zeke21HeEatin

Hi Everyone,

I'm new here (second day studying for the LSAT) and I'm just wondering how important the CC/theory is in order to progress? I'm a computer engineering major so I'm not really used to a lot of theory. Don't get me wrong, we of course discuss concepts and theories, however, the way I've been learning the past almost 4 years now is to jump in and start solving problems right away. If I'm struggling with something, the answer is almost always to just keep solving as many problems as you can until it clicks. This, by the way, has worked well.

All that to say, the LSAT is completely different than anything I've been doing for my degree, I honestly don't even remember the last time I was asked to read a passage and answer questions on it or solve a problem that didn't involve the heavy use of math.

But after doing a couple of untimed LR sections, I'm kind of getting the sense that just jumping in and attempting problems probably isn't going to work for the LSAT. This is kind of scary to me, it's something that's worked so well up until this point.

I've taken somewhat of a logic class before (discrete math) but the logic on the LSAT seems to be a much different type of logic than what I learned in that class, so unfortunately I don't know how much help that will be.

Anyways, just kind of wanted to reach out and see if I could get some opinions on how important it is to go through the theory lessons JY provides. I don't want to keep attempting LSAT sections and get discouraged by lack of improvement if there is indeed a better way.

Sorry for kind of rambling.

Thanks,
Ryan

Tim Hortons

I think you answered your own question!

@ryanshort8883 said:
I honestly don't even remember the last time I was asked to read a passage and answer questions on it or solve a problem that didn't involve the heavy use of math.

@ryanshort8883 said:
I'm kind of getting the sense that just jumping in and attempting problems probably isn't going to work for the LSAT.

@ryanshort8883 said:
I've taken somewhat of a logic class before (discrete math) but the logic on the LSAT seems to be a much different type of logic than what I learned in that class, so unfortunately I don't know how much help that will be.

As a 7Sage alumni, I am thoroughly convinced of the CC's indispensability. Without it, I would've continued making the same rookie mistakes I picked up during my pre-7Sage self-prep sessions. Even if I wasn't a CC-proponent, all of the evidence above would prompt my recommendation that you go through the CC at least one time to see what you know, what you don't, and which of your existing approaches you can improve.

The LSAT is a beast, so going through JY's approaches will help you master it much quicker than heading straight into practice tests without a solid approach or any sense of familiarity with the recurring patterns and concepts. Also, burning through practice tests prematurely is an arrow to the foot insofar that you have less material to practice with in the future.

Tl;dr - Don't skip the CC.

fycw2068

My personality is exactly the type to attempt problems until I figure it out and like you, it's been very effective for me thus far. With that said, I used the PowerScore books to try and self-study and it got me to the upper 150s/lower 160s. However, my target is upper 160s+ and I realized I hit a wall with pure self study. I paid for the starter course from Sept-Dec of 2018, but I barely went through CC because I was in the "I'll prob figure this out mode..." I only picked and chose certain lessons I felt like I was "weak" in. I saw no improvement (literally, Nov 2018 LSAT 161, March 2019 LSAT 161 haha).

After reading an excellent discussion from other 7Sagers who went from 160 to 170, I repurchased the starter in March and decided to try going through the CC in its entirety: it has boosted my PT scores consistently to 165+. I seriously regret not doing it "right" the first time!

I can't specifically pinpoint what about the CC helped me. There wasn't any one thing. There's something about the way JY teaches in that the lessons build on top of each other and eventually everything just kind of melded together in my head. Also, one critical mistake I realize I made was skipping the video explanations of problems, especially for LR. What's different about his explanation videos vs. other resources (text or video) is he isn't necessarily teaching, but he's talking through his own thought process out loud. Actually, the way he teaches/goes through lessons is largely walking through how you should frame your thought process. It is a great point of comparison to critique my own thought process and recognize where I went wrong

Zeke21HeEatin

I couldn't agree more about the videos. You could get an answer right but your thought process be completely wrong. What better way to learn something than understanding the thought process of someone who has mastered the subject!

I purchased the PowerScore bibles and The LSAT Trainer and the LSAT SuperPrep and of course 7Sage so right now I'm feeling a bit overwhelmed as to the best way to go about learning the core concepts and honing my thought processes lol. Although I do believe, when learning material that is conceptually difficult, it's great to have more than one resource because sometimes the way one person explains something may just speak to you more than another way, but at the same time I'd like to have some consistency, especially starting out.

But I guess that's just kind of how it goes with the beast that is the LSAT, smh lol.

drbrown2

@ryanshort8883 said:

the way I've been learning the past almost 4 years now is to jump in and start solving problems right away. If I'm struggling with something, the answer is almost always to just keep solving as many problems as you can until it clicks. This, by the way, has worked well.

Luckily the CC is formatted in a way that the theory behind individual question types is presented and then you get a bunch of question explanations from that question type. I used to read through the stimulus and try to figure out the question on my own first before listening to JY's explanation. This is pretty close to "jumping in" except you will be given brief instructions of the ideal approach to that question type. The very beginning of the CC has a lot more formal theory, but once you get past conditional logic the CC focuses heavily on each question type from the LR section.

Similarly, the games portion of the CC sets you up with a way to diagram efficiently and set up different game types.

Don't skip the CC! When you need a break you should check out the webinars in the resources tab. Those discussions on Blind Review methods, skipping, etc. are really valuable early on in your prep to make sure you are on the right path.

pepperismydog

nvm