Huge Gap Between Blind Review and PT's

UTLawWannabe

let me give you some context before I ask you questions. I have been studying since early-mid August until now, but I really started studying in October. I have taken 4 practice tests and have only BR'd two of them. I have done multiple LR sections. I am naturally good at LG. Anyways, I take PT 54 and make a 152....my freaking diagnostic score....after all this studying. Then, I take a 1 day break and BR. My BR was a 167, but here is the weird thing. I remember on this 1st try for PT 54 I spent so much time thinking about answer choices, passages, ect. and I really think that is, in part, one of the biggest factors to why I am missing so many questions on the real timed exam. Timing isn't an issue either, in fact, in the BR I used a different strategy to approaching the passages, where I cared more to understand the structure of the passage rather than the content. In BR for LR, I trusted my gut on the answer choices and critiqued the wrong choices AFTER picking a right one (I usually critique AC before choosing a right one). Obviously if in my critique I think something is right then I analyze my 1st pick. All in all, I went from -13 RC -9 LR and -5 LG to -7 RC -2 LR and -1 LG.

Can someone explain if my though process is right on this? Do I simply need to practice, understand the material, and trust my instinct more? In BR the 1st AC I chose usually looks blatantly wrong so why doesn't this happen when I am actually taking the test?

wilsonnn

I don't know a whole lot, but I think you're on the right track. I have had huge gaps between PT scores and BR scores, but they slowly close the more tests I do. Most importantly, both those scores are trending upwards. Really taking the time to review why answer choices are right and why others are wrong has been hugely beneficial for me; it helps me to understand those question types better for future tests. As for choosing answers that were blatantly wrong (been there and often still there), it's probably the stress of timed conditions and a lack of confidence, just keep working and you'll be able to trust your instincts more and more.
I think you should stick with your process of careful critique and be sure to take the time for BR with EVERY single PT, it just goes to show how much more potential you have!

canihazJD

Deep review after BR. IMO that is where the majority of improvement comes from. Ironically most people don't do this. At the very least a comprehensive wrong answer journal... like not just a list of questions.

UTLawWannabe

@canihazJD said:
Deep review after BR. IMO that is where the majority of improvement comes from. Ironically most people don't do this. At the very least a comprehensive wrong answer journal... like not just a list of questions.

Thank you so much! What is the best way to do the wrong answer journal?

canihazJD

@UTLawWannabe said:
Thank you so much! What is the best way to do the wrong answer journal?

Write out as much as you can. Get as deep as you can. On a curve breaker that gave me problems, I could easily get to 2 pages for the one question.

Don't think of it as a list/record, though that is one of the ancillary benefits. It's the act of writing everything out... being forced to articulate it, that promotes growth. I rarely refer back to my journal, but when I do, its most often to see how I was thinking at that time, and if I've made the improvements I prescribed to myself. Similar to writing public explanations on the site, or teaching someone else something. Taking that extra step beyond just thinking in your head "ok I got it" is so much more significant than most people realize. I also would include more than just wrong answers, as that excludes much if not most of the value you could be extracting from the test by doing this.

Maybe some prompts to start:

Why am I reviewing this question? Over on time, over/underconfidence error, couldn't eliminate last wrong answer, etc..?

What was my time? Was there any significant lag?

What was the translation of the stimulus I had under time? What is it now? If there is a difference, why?

Any tricks the test writer employed in the stimulus? Did I see it under time?

What are the assumptions and flaws?

What was my task for this question and did I have a clear understanding of it?

Translations for each answer choice and why is this right or wrong?

What is the test writer trying to target with each wrong answer choice?

How could I make a wrong answer into a correct answer?

What made the right answer choice unattractive?

What made the wrong answer choice attractive?

Is this a time sink? What parts of the stimulus/answers are speed bumps? What about AC sequence?

Can I convert this question into a different Qtype? Weaken to RRE, Flaw to SA, etc..

What am I going to do differently in order to avoid these mistakes again?

Not nearly a comprehensive list, but you get the idea. I'll paste a screenshot of the actual question in there as well for reference.

Anyone else please add more if I missed something. @UTLawWannabe hope this helps. Let me know if you have questions!