Stupid idea but could it work???

7sagelsatstudent180

I've regressed back into my plateau range of high 150's low 160's. It's disappointing as I thought I had made progress and now I have around 15 of my 21 total preptests in this range. In other words I have been in a consistent plateau my whole testing period with a few beneficial and not so beneficial outliers. Nonetheless, I have thought of a possible solution. Would it work if I took and retook preptests 62-72 until I was able able to score 175+ consistently on all of them. That way I would be able to master some inferences in LR, fine tune my RC, and increase inference making ability and speed in LG. I would keep 73 and 74 fresh to check to see if I made any real progress afterwards. I know it is highly likely I would be remembering a lot of answers, but hopefully I would also be remembering why the respective answers are correct and why the incorrect answers are wrong. I may increase the range (from 62-72 to 57-72) to encompass a few more possibilities for questions but you get the major gist. I really want to break out of this plateau and hit a higher range so that I may have wiggle room on the next test day. My new goal for myself is 165-180. Is this idea stupid or just dumb enough to actual work???

brna0714

It may very well work. Retaking, IMO, can be a means of review. What are your BR scores like btw? I was able to break out of my plateau(s) due, at least in part, to focusing on getting my BR score as close to 180 as possible. I'm talking about extremely thorough blind review over the course of multiple days if need be. I realized I couldn't really expect a 180 timed if I couldn't hit it consistently untimed. Just a thought.

7sagelsatstudent180

I'll typically get 7 raw questions right on BR so not a significant bump

7sagelsatstudent180

Well I will be the human guinea pig... I will update periodically with results.

NYC12345

@7sagelsatstudent180
Truthfully, I am skeptical about the effectiveness of your plan. You will most certainly remember the answers to the questions; therefore, even if you analyze each question and look for ways in which answers are correct and incorrect, you will have prior knowledge of the correct answer, which is counterproductive. Your goal should be to analyze why each answer is right and why each answer is wrong without knowing the correct answer, which points to one and only one solution--blind review.

7sagelsatstudent180

I'm basically gonna attempt to foolproof the LSAT... Take each of the recent ones over until consistent perfection. I have some free time so why not...

Pacifico

I would agree with @alexandergreene93 that this is likely not a good idea. Foolproofing works for LG because it develops your inference making skills, and even though you might remember some things, the nature of LG forces you to go through and make your game boards and make your inferences and go from there. Having inclinations towards one answer over another on RC and LR is not going to be helpful to you and will in fact be counterproductive because if you were to do the same PTs too many times in too short a time span you will have way too much information coming back to you.

This is similar to a post someone made about a huge gap between their timed score and BR score, but it turned out that the person was scoring the whole exam, marking the questions they got wrong, and then going back to do BR. So of course their BR was amazing, they only had to choose from 4 ACs and they were probably down to just 2 on a lot of those questions. Even though they thought they were great at BR, it turned out the review was not blind whatsoever.

If I were you I would get more PTs, save the most recent ones for the end of September, and then do a few that you then BR the whole test in depth. Don't worry about circling questions, just take a full timed PT and then do it over again untimed, maybe even with a fresh score sheet. That way you can take your time to really analyze what it is you're having trouble with, and what you don't need to worry about. If you were to take the same 10 PTs and do them over and over, eventually you would get a 175+ but it would give you no indication of your actual skills and development. And then what would you do the last week of September if you get a 157 and 159 on the two most recent PTs? My guess is you would freak out and postpone or freak out and do poorly.

Instead of that, I think you need to take a step back, delve into the analytics of your PTs, and hit some drilling hard for a while with maybe one PT a week for the next month or so. Plateauing in that range means you still are likely making some fundamental errors on non-curvebreaker questions. You need to shore up your weaknesses and go back to basics before trying anything crazy. I know plateauing or getting a disappointing score can be demoralizing, but just take it for what it is: a signal that you do not have the understanding that you think you do. Just let it humble you and use it as motivation to get back to building and solidifying your skills. If you don't already have one, pick up a copy of the LSAT Trainer for an alternative perspective if you need something fresh.

NYC12345

@7sagelsatstudent180
@Pacifico
LR tests how you think-- your ability to reason and evaluate arguments. That's why it's imperative that you take new exams, and not recycle previously taken exams. Every LSAT tests you on the same thing. They are very consistent, which makes PTs an invaluable tool. If the 7sage group's consensus is skeptical, it's really not worth it. Don't fix something that's not broken. Don't be a guinea pig and ruin you chances of getting into your dream school. There are only a finite amount of PTs available, so cherish them.

Pacifico

While I think repeating a PT 2-3 months or more after taking it initially can possibly be helpful, especially if scarcity of PTs is an issue, to repeat the same ones over and over is what I really have a big issue with. But both of these approaches should be unnecessary given there are almost 40 PTs to use. And as @alexandergreene93 said, "Don't be a guinea pig".

7sagelsatstudent180

In my humble opinion, it seems like the preptest 65+ are fairly different from the other test especially in reading comp. Most of the tests I haven't completed are in the 40's and 50's. My concern is I have been plateauing for 2 full months. I went from a 148 diagnostic to a 159.7 current avg. I'm stuck but I need to take the next step but no progress has really been made since my 3rd preptest. My 3rd preptest is the same as my average after 21 preptest.

NYC12345

You need to change your approach to how you attack questions. Have you read The Trainer? If not, please do so. It has worked wonders for me.

sururfatema

I had a similar experience with plateauing and regressing. I found doing reviews of the lessons to be the best - because I needed to realign my test taking with the theory and strategy presented!

7sagelsatstudent180

I do have The Trainer and I will spend more time analyzing it. I am just trying to figure out ways to make my brain work more accurately and efficiently.

LoraxMan

I think it is usually preferable to take a fresh test to one you have already taken. When you retake a test, you often have already (at times subconsciously) memorized some answer choices. Instead of running through logic to solve the questions, you repeat correct answers you remember.

That said, if you have run out of PTs to take, you really have no choice other than to retake tests.

7sagelsatstudent180

Mike Kim, author of The Trainer, is a big fan of repeating questions and tests... Almost in a similar fashion to what I described earlier.

7sagelsatstudent180

He has posts on tls to back it up

Pacifico

He also supports doing PTs while you learn logic and reasoning skills, which I disagree with, as do most of the instructors on 7Sage it would seem. Neither 7Sage or Mike Kim are infallible, and some of their beliefs are contradictory, so most of us just try and take the most sensible solutions from each of them.

DumbHollywoodActor

I don’t think it’s a bad idea to repeat questions. I actually think it’s fine to fool proof the LR questions you got wrong because there can be genetic cousins (rather than brothers or sisters of LG) of those questions in later tests. I actually cut and paste every question I get wrong on a test to a Word document and drill those questions a week or two later to make sure I’ve remembered the reasoning. I may even repeat the process a third time for good measure. The best way to review is in the form of practicing, very similar to the philosophical underpinnings of the Blind Review. I have also found that I’m gaining more speed in my process this way once I get to new problems.

I think the other posters may be objecting to the focus you seem to have on the score of a repeated test. That score, even if it were a 180, would be meaningless. Nor do I think you need to re-take the entire test over. Focus on your weaknesses, the questions you got wrong and the questions you didn’t have 100% certainty. Don’t worry about the rest.

7sagelsatstudent180

I like the tip about copying missed LR questions into a word document and reviewing. That's a good idea. I'm obviously lacking something but hopefully in some time I will be able to give feedback on what happened. I now plan to retake each test 65+ once, copy LR questions that I missed and see if I can spot trends.

DumbHollywoodActor

Happy to help!

7sagelsatstudent180

I spoke to some LSAT tutors this week who scored in the 170's when they entered law school. They say although they were good at the LSAT when they applied, they experienced there highest growth after repetitively teaching the same tests over and over to clients. Even if it were just preptests 29-38, just reinforcing the same concepts again and again with different clients gave them the ability to be able to score near perfect with solid consistency. By understanding the format and question structure, repitition of the same material caused them so enhance there scoring ability exponentially.

Pacifico

I think you're drawing somewhat of a false analogy because the greater benefit was likely from developing a level of knowledge and expertise to be able to teach it to someone else, rather than the repetition itself. Being able to teach something effectively necessitates a deeper understanding than one usually achieves to perform on one's own. Regardless, it seems like you've made your mind up since you keep providing justifications to counter some of our arguments. At this point you may as well just do your thing and see how it goes and then share you're experience. Good luck!

nicole.hopkins

@alexandergreene93 said:
ou will most certainly remember the answers to the questions;

Sorry, @alexandergreene93 , I have to disagree with you here. I've retaken many tests, some of the them three times. Do I occasionally remember a question because I wrestled with it for an hour in blind review? Yes. Does that happen often? No. And as I like to say ... I ain't no dummy. Now, the interval between retakes does affect this (if I took a test on Monday and retook it on Saturday, I'd probably remember more, but I ain't got time for that). But I might miss questions for different reasons on a retake, and thus have more data on my process to scrutinized. Perhaps I have started to focus on the wrong things for different QT's, or am using a timing method that isn't working. Etc.

@7sagelsatstudent180 I'd say you should move forward with your plan up to PT71. Let me know if you'd like to join our Friday BR group (PT68 this week), or you could just sit in for part of it if you'd like.

@Pacifico said:
If you were to take the same 10 PTs and do them over and over, eventually you would get a 175+ but it would give you no indication of your actual skills and development.

I do agree with this. Retaking without enough time in between or too many times might lead to this kind of score inflation.

@Pacifico said:
If I were you I would get more PTs, save the most recent ones for the end of September, and then do a few that you then BR the whole test in depth.

Yes to this as well. With PT's generally, I'd say ... more is more.

@7sagelsatstudent180 said:
I like the tip about copying missed LR questions into a word document and reviewing.

You can also "star" questions you want to return to in the 7sage LSAT analytics. @"Alan Cheuk" basically changin' lives with these features, srsly.

@Pacifico said:
Being able to teach something effectively necessitates a deeper understanding than one usually achieves to perform on one's own.

Teaching can be one of the best ways to learn more deeply. You'll discover what you don't really know well enough to explain to someone else, etc. This is a lot of what happens on the BR groups. I'll realize I don't really full understand what the flaw in an argument is once I try to explain it ... etc.

7sagelsatstudent180

I plan to take PT 68 tomorrow so I should be able to BR it with you guys on Friday... And I'm retaking these tests from around 1month ago so I really don't remember too many questions but I'm more cognizant of my thought process.

nicole.hopkins

@7sagelsatstudent180 said:
I plan to take PT 68 tomorrow so I should be able to BR it with you guys on Friday... And I'm retaking these tests from around 1month ago so I really don't remember too many questions but I'm more cognizant of my thought process.

Heck yeah! Look forward to having you on. Have I added you on Skype already?

7sagelsatstudent180

Not yet. I will have to figure out my skype name (been so long) when I get back on my computer. This 7sage iPhone app is the best thing ever though.

nicole.hopkins

Cool! I'm nikkers625 .