did you do this?

goalis180

I am interested in knowing what people, who had/have the 7sage curriculum, did during the curriculum. I am particularly interested in if those individuals drilled during the curriculum. I also do not mean drill as in doing the 5 questions at the end of every section, I mean full on drill a section of those specific question types then BR them. I recently purchased the 7sage ultimate, and I am now at 40% finished with the course, however the only reason I am not further in the course is because when I had the starter package I went through most of the curriculum without having the extra problem sets that come with the ultimate. Essentially, I was about 70% done with the core curriculum when I had the starter. Now, however, I have to go back and do all the other problem sets that come with the ultimate package. I do not mind doing this at all, however I was thinking of finishing the core first, which I do not have much of, and then going back to do all the rest of the problem sets as drills. Is this a good idea? I just feel that I will truly never finish with this course if I continue to drill in the midst of learning the core. My drilling is too precise, I mean I can literally take about 4hrs to understand every nitty gritty detail of a 5 question problem set for LR, as well as LG,this includes the ones I already understand, which means finishing this course will not happen anytime soon, and although the fundamentals are extremely important, I am not going to get any better at this test if I do not start drilling sections, and PTing. What advice do you guys have for me?

tanes256

I thought the higher pkgs just included extra problem sets. Isn't the curriculum the same? I think doing the problem sets is necessary but maybe not all of them right now. I'm sure you'll get to them when you start PT. You could use the extra problem sets from the higher pkg to drill later on. I would just do as many as it takes to get you comfortable and move on. You'll get to them sooner or later during your studies.

nicole.hopkins

When I first saw the title of this thread, here's what I thought of:

@goalis180 said:
Is this a good idea?

It depends on where you're at and how much time you have. If you feel shaky on the fundamentals, then firm those up before wasting PT's. Keep in mind that certain deficiencies will only be exposed once you're taking PT's (and progressively as you take more and more). But definitely don't move on if you feel you haven't double covered your bases. I did ... a lot ... of drilling before I started PT'ing (using the LSAT Trainer schedules twice, first the 50's sched and then the 29+ sched). So I definitely did more than even what's in the Ultimate (and there's a lot of overlap with the PS/drill sched as well).

You could start doing timed sections from the earlier tests (like ... 1-28 or something). I dunno where you're at in terms of comprehension and when you think you want to take the test (or what your overall level of readiness is at this time). How long have you been studying overall?

Pacifico

Focus on the forest and stop getting lost in the trees. 4 hours is an insane amount of time to focus on 5 questions.

When I went through the curriculum I went in order as it is presented in the syllabus. For every practice LR question with an explanation video I would do the question and pick an answer before I pressed play to gauge how well I was understanding the skills and strategies that were in play. If I got -0 or -1 through all of the videos in a particular section then I moved on. If I got two or more wrong I did the first problem set, if I got -0 on that problem set then I moved on, if not then I moved to the next problem set. I did this strategically so that I could save the problem sets to drill problem areas later on during my pt phase. I don't think I ever ended up doing more than two problem sets because I was really focused on the quality of work and the development of my skills rather than just trying to max out the quantity of problem sets I finished. Now that I'm a third or the way into the PTs I will take before October I found this strategy really paid off in terms of assessing my skill set and addressing problems as necessary. I think if you go overboard with the problem sets it can distract too much from learning the macro level skills needed to succeed on the test.

nicole.hopkins

@Pacifico said:
4 hours is an insane amount of time to focus on 5 questions.

... Yeah ...

nicole.hopkins

@Pacifico said:
I think if you go overboard with the problem sets it can distract too much from learning the macro level skills needed to succeed on the test.

So true. Don't burn out on drilling when the hardest part of the marathon is before you (in taking manymany PT'S).

c.janson35

+1 for @Pacifico's advice about the potential pitfalls of overboard drilling. At some point your drilling has to be in the form of drilling PT (meaning taking lots of PTs). I think sometimes people are worried about using up preptests too soon, but there's plenty of preptests to work through (and retaking is beneficial anyway) and preptests also offer you a great way to work on your skills.

nicole.hopkins

@c.janson35 said:
I think sometimes people are worried about using up preptests too soon, but there's plenty of preptests to work through (and retaking is beneficial anyway) and preptests also offer you a great way to work on your skills.

Yeah ... We collectively need to get over this. I mean, it's important to do a certain amount of drilling and not to prematurely start taking PT's. But even if you do that ... big deal. Or not. So you take 5 PT's and realize you haven't learned as much or as well as you thought. Ok, cool. Go review fundamentals and maybe do some drilling.

There's no magic formula and you're not screwed if you deviate from various prescribed courses of action. It's blood/sweat/tears no matter how you cut it. But we're too often guilty of the "one way is the only way" flaw.

c.janson35

@nicole.hopkins couldn't have said it better. I think it's important to note that we as LSAT students are really lucky we have SO many real PT to work with because idk of another standardized test that provides nearly all of their previous exams like LSAC does (and for some exams there aren't any real questions for you to do before taking the real thing...which is terrifying). If there weren't this wealth of information, then I would be more cautious about using the tests up before being "ready" (even though it's pretty hard to tell that you're ready to start taking tests if you haven't taken any); luckily, though, we have over 80 tests to work through so I don't necessarily think it's that big of an issue. Either way: one way is not the only way!

goalis180

@Pacifico @nicole.hopkins @c.janson35 To be honest the amount of material is probably one of the most over whelming things for me because one of my personal characteristics is being a perfectionist. This personality kicks in while I am drilling. When I do not achieve a score of -0, I get super irritated, and end up spending time on each question literally nit picking why I got an answer right on one question, but not the other, and with the amount of material available you can see where this is a problem. Also pacifico I like your idea, however the deeper you get into the problem sets, the more the difficulty is increased, so if I did not get a -0 in PS 1 or 2, then I surely will not get a -0 in PS 3.I usually go -0 on the video questions, but do 1 or 2 problem sets and move on. I think you guys answered my question anyways lol. I feel as if I have a grasp on the fundamentals, meaning I know what to look for for each question type, and for some of the answer choices I can tell why the 4 answers are wrong and 1 answer is right, however I need to asses my skills properly by PTing. Even if I do 3 PT's and see I am not doing so well, I can look at my problem areas and see if I am lacking fundamentals, problem with timing, or just lack of fundamentals and then work my study schedule around what I lack. I am taking the LSAT in December I am currently studying 15-30hrs a week depending on my work schedule, but come September I will have no job (I quit for the LSAT) and will be dedicating my time to the LSAT meaning 40+ hours a week.

ramster1

Thanks for asking this question, goalis180. I also get bogged down with trying to get all the drilling questions perfect and wind up going very slowly through the curriculum. The responses were very helpful.

nicole.hopkins

@goalis180 said:
When I do not achieve a score of -0, I get super irritated, and end up spending time on each question literally nit picking why I got an answer right on one question, but not the other, and with the amount of material available you can see where this is a problem.

You must let this go. It will be the death of your LSAT study if you maintain this mindset.

@goalis180 said:
Even if I do 3 PT's and see I am not doing so well, I can look at my problem areas and see if I am lacking fundamentals, problem with timing, or just lack of fundamentals and then work my study schedule around what I lack.

Careful. Given the perfectionistic mindset you described, I can pretty much guarantee you're not going to see anything close to perfection on your PT's. With that mindset, even if you saw only 180's between now and test day (which, by the way, you can be fully assured will not happen ... And if it does then I am willing to throw my shoe on the BBQ and take a bite on camera), you would still not be satisfied.

So ... embrace progress, not perfection. Perfection is not a necessary condition for anything, nor is our version of perfect every really going to fulfill the sufficient condition for success. So just let it go and trust the process. Every wrong answer you see between now and test day is an opportunity to learn more, more deeply.

c.janson35

"So ... embrace progress, not perfection."

Especially because you can get a 180 without being perfect lol. Being upset cause you don't go -0 is wasted energy--don't worry about it, hakuna matata.

nicole.hopkins

@c.janson35 said:
Being upset cause you don't go -0 is wasted energy--don't worry about it, hakuna matata.

and like, be kind to yourself ... have an ice cream or something ... don't abuse yourself because you're not perfect.

goalis180

@ramster1 anytime haha.

@nicole.hopkins said:
And if it does then I am willing to throw my shoe on the BBQ and take a bite on camera), you would still not be satisfied.

Might have to fabricate 180 from now till December LOLLOLLOL! But on a serious note, I agree with you guys, it was worse when I started studying, but as my studying moved along, I had to learn that -0 every go around is not going to happen because this test is meant to be challenging. As for what you what you said Nicole, I was not expecting perfection on my next three PT's I can already tell from my studying perfection is not gonna happen yet lollol, but I am looking to use my scores as evidence for what I must do, and what I should not do.

nicole.hopkins

@goalis180 said:
studying perfection is not gonna happen yet

Or ever AND THAT'S OK. Because you don't need to be perfect!!! I also struggle with perfectionism and it led me to do too much for too long. So now I'm planning which ice cream and beer I am going to purchase this evening because I am in day 2 of a 5 day break/intervention by @c.janson35 and @Pacifico . So uh ... more is not more. Enough is more. And less is more sometimes too. Put that onyour BBQ and eat it.

Pacifico

@goalis180 said:
however the deeper you get into the problem sets, the more the difficulty is increased, so if I did not get a -0 in PS 1 or 2, then I surely will not get a -0 in PS 3.

You need to pick up a copy of the Trainer and work on your flaws bro, because this argument is flawed in that it overlooks the possibility that you will learn from your mistakes and successes in the earlier problem sets, thereby improving your performance on later problem sets. If your argument was valid, then you would be pretty much hopeless on the LSAT no matter what you do since the test will invariably include harder/hardest level problems.

@goalis180 said:
one of my personal characteristics is being a perfectionist.

This is going to sound wicked harsh but this is one of the worst personality traits someone can have, and I should know, because I used to be like this. All it does is set you up for a life full of failure that you can't handle and regret that could've been avoided. It's life, you're going to fail and you're going to lose and all of that is okay and in fact it's great because that is when you can grow and develop the most as a person. You need to cut this stuff out now because it's only going to make life worse for you as a lawyer because you are going to lose cases and you are going to fail many times on your way to success. If you don't then it means you played it too safe and that just leads to a boring life. Don't be boring...embrace failure...embrace learning...screw perfection. Good luck!

Also, everything 175+ is pretty much the luck of the draw on any given LSAT. Your real score exists on a spectrum/band and so once you get to the top the only place for that band to stretch back to is down. Even if all your PTs are 180/180 timed/BR, there could still be some craziness that doesn't jive with you on test day and you get a 175 and now your life is over because you have some crazy expectations in your head. No school has a median over 173 so just chill out and enjoy life a bit, and stop all this crazy nitpicking of right and wrong answers. Find the problem and move on with your life or you'll be stuck doing the LSAT for the next 50 years.

goalis180

@Pacifico said:
You need to pick up a copy of the Trainer and work on your flaws bro, because this argument is flawed in that it overlooks the possibility that you will learn from your mistakes and successes in the earlier problem sets, thereby improving your performance on later problem sets. If your argument was valid, then you would be pretty much hopeless on the LSAT no matter what you do since the test will invariably include harder/hardest level problems.

I assumed too many things there regardless of the flaw or not lol.

@Pacifico said:
This is going to sound wicked harsh but this is one of the worst personality traits someone can have, and I should know, because I used to be like this. All it does is set you up for a life full of failure that you can't handle and regret that could've been avoided. It's life, you're going to fail and you're going to lose and all of that is okay and in fact it's great because that is when you can grow and develop the most as a person. You need to cut this stuff out now because it's only going to make life worse for you as a lawyer because you are going to lose cases and you are going to fail many times on your way to success. If you don't then it means you played it too safe and that just leads to a boring life. Don't be boring...embrace failure...embrace learning...screw perfection. Good luck!

The perfectionist in me comes out in only in academics, but I already moved on from that, however sometimes when I do not understand something I lose focus and get to the perfectionist state of mind, but again, I know how to get myself back on track because I have already overcome that obstacle in my life.

@Pacifico said:
Also, everything 175+ is pretty much the luck of the draw on any given LSAT

90% skill 10%luck.

Also I do not like to suck at important things, which is why I am so anal about the LSAT, a goal of 170+ is high.