Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In Apply for Membership

Categories

Discouraging & need advice after a -10 LR section

sjiang666sjiang666 Alum Member
edited May 2018 in Logical Reasoning 157 karma

I just finished PT 47 and got -10 in section 3, LR. -3 on the other LR section. Having study for LSAT for a year.

It is simply so discouraging that I still get -10 in an LR section after studying for a year and ton of drill. Especially that LR is the section that I spent most of my energy on, because it has 2 sections in the exam and it is almost impossible for me to get 170+ with -3/-4 per section. (-0 in LG but not strong in RC)

-10 is not normal performance for me. Most common performance for me is around -4/-5/ per section. But, in a set of PT, I often have a good LR section (~-3) and a bad one (~-8). Sometimes I do pretty well when I thought I was not in good mood (e.g. feeling sleepy at night), and sometimes I do pretty bad when I thought I was in good shape. I don't quite understand what my performance is telling.

For timing, I finish a 26-qiestion LR section for 30-35min (yes my speed also fluctuate). I always try to apply "low-hang coconut" rule, but I never finished quick enough to have a full 2nd round, and I still feel stressed on the 2nd round. Plus, most of my errors hide in the questions that I did not circled.

For the questions I got wrong, I can recognize the error of 90%+ of them pretty quick and without watching explain videos. I think the problem is not that my logic is weak, but my mindset/approach to the questions is problematic. As to question type, I do worse in argument-type questions, and better in RRE/Disagree/labeling questions.

I think I am on a changing in my understanding of argument-type questions. I used to seriously read every single word in the questions stimulus, try to understand the topic. But a week ago I start to realize that what really matter is the relationship between P & C. It's all about logic reasoning structure. But I haven't convert this understanding into a test strategy. Should I go on PTs or should I do some drill? (for the question from PT 40 or earlier, I am so familiar with them that I almost remember them...) Would love to hear some advices from somebody that have gone though the process.

Thanks a lot in advance!! :)

Show Related Discussions

Comments

  • OhnoeshalpmeOhnoeshalpme Alum Member ⭐
    edited May 2018 2531 karma

    Based on what you've stated above, I recommend that you try doing a series of argument-part drills. You can follow this with timed LR section drilling. As you state above, you often neglect to circle questions the questions that you are getting wrong. This might have something to do with speed - the faster you go the more likely you are to fall in to a trap.

  • keets993keets993 Alum Member ⭐ ⏰ 🍌
    6050 karma

    Try warming up with an LR section before you take a PT next time. Treat that first LR as an experimental. I'd be interested to know what your second (but first on PT) score would be like as compared to before. I've had this fluctuation happen with LR too (it still does) and it's so strange because I feel more tired during the second section of LR yet it's always better. I think it's due to lack of proper warm-up. For the experimental/warm-up try to make sure that it's a section you either haven't done before or in a long time and treat it as the real thing.

    For the questions you've missed and didn't circle really dig deep and figure out why. Was it because you didn't understand the stimulus (content and/or structure), the answer choices, or the question stem? Every question is built with traps and when you get questions wrong it just means that the traps the LSAT writers put in there were successful. Analyzing the reason for your mistake will help you get better at recognizing the trap. For example, if it's a topic you're not too confident about and they give you an AC that you think sounds like it could work because it sounds right and not because of the skills you've acquired then you fell into that trap.

    As for your issue with argument part type questions, take questions you've already done before and make them into an argument part question. Choose a random sentence from the stimulus and describe the role in the argument. Try not to be superficial and go beyond stating that it's premise or conclusion. Go into the details and try to expand your vocabulary use that way. See how many different ways you can describe the role of a sentence. Do this with 4 or 5 questions everyday and see if that helps you become more fluent in it. You can do this with any question type, weaken, strengthening, sufficient assumption, etc.

    Also, have you done any untimed LR drills? If not, try it and see how that affects your score and whether you still more over-confidence errors. Is so, what are the results like?

  • sjiang666sjiang666 Alum Member
    edited May 2018 157 karma

    As for your issue with argument part type questions, take questions you've already done before and make them into an argument part question. Choose a random sentence from the stimulus and describe the role in the argument. Try not to be superficial and go beyond stating that it's premise or conclusion. Go into the details and try to expand your vocabulary use that way. See how many different ways you can describe the role of a sentence. Do this with 4 or 5 questions everyday and see if that helps you become more fluent in it. You can do this with any question type, weaken, strengthening, sufficient assumption, etc.>

    It 's such a good idea! Will try.

    I think a big issue is that I am not familiar with reading for structure. And for those curve-breaker questions, there are trap answers that sounds relative but actually not addressing the gap. So now I am drilling LR questions and ask myself to identify every question's structure. But for those easy question, I can get right even if I don't have a firm catch of the reasoning structure. And because I am not fluent in identifying reasoning structures, I actually slow down myself in doing easy questions by this seemingly overthinking process.

    Also, have you done any untimed LR drills? If not, try it and see how that affects your score and whether you still more over-confidence errors. Is so, what are the results like?>

    Yes I have done a lot of untimed drill. I used Cambridge package of LR from PT 1-20 and 21- 40 for drill. I have also finished 7sage's LR problem sets. Average speaking, I get 1 error out of every 20-30 questions. But I remember a lot of them and it is untimed. I don't think I'm much slower than I was during timed sections, but obviously I don't suffer from time pressure when it is untimed.

    Thanks for replying! @keets993

  • sjiang666sjiang666 Alum Member
    157 karma

    Based on what you've stated above, I recommend that you try doing a series of argument-part drills. >

    Both of you recommend argument part questions. And I think method questions will also help. I revisited JY's "How to approach method of reasoning questions" and he mentioned that those questions are very important because they trend to have the most complex reasoning structures. Will drill both of them.

    As you state above, you often neglect to circle questions the questions that you are getting wrong. This might have something to do with speed - the faster you go the more likely you are to fall in to a trap.>

    But I am still not quick enough to have a full 2nd round...

    Thank for replying! @Ohnoeshalpme

  • keets993keets993 Alum Member ⭐ ⏰ 🍌
    6050 karma

    I think a big issue is that I am not familiar with reading for structure. And for those curve-breaker questions, there are trap answers that sounds relative but actually not addressing the gap. So now I am drilling LR questions and ask myself to identify every question's structure.

    Yeah reading for structure is really important and it could underly your issue with AP since the question type tests your understanding of structure. Method of reasoning questions used to be the bane of my existence but once I started applying them to all different question types I realized how helpful they are for almost every question type.

    I used Cambridge package of LR from PT 1-20 and 21- 40 for drill. I have also finished 7sage's LR problem sets. Average speaking, I get 1 error out of every 20-30 questions. But I remember a lot of them and it is untimed.

    Try it with a PT from the 40s or 50s where you haven't seen the material and see how you do. Apply the analysis for structure method to the easier questions too. Doing it untimed and BR-ing it that way will help you get to a point where you naturally do it during timed conditions. It can be discouraging but that -10 does not represent your intellect or your end-point for the LSAT.

    Good luck!

Sign In or Register to comment.