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

Another 7Sager asking for Post-CC advice

hurdlehopper101hurdlehopper101 Alum Member
edited December 2018 in General 102 karma

Hi Everyone! I finished 7sage CC at the end of Nov and took a post-CC diagnostic. I have been studying on and off for logic games proofing (only a few days worth) and have decided to push my Jan 2019 LSAT to March. I'm trying to figure out what I want to do between now and March but I'm kind of lost. My post-CC diagnostic is between 10-20 points from my goal score and I noticed that timing is an issue for me too. I have only taken 1 PT since the CC, tried to begin foolproofing, got tied up doing job interviews and I guess now I'm at square one again. However, I am ready to hit the ground running again and especially now that I am giving myself more time.

Q: Should I take a few more PTs now to determine where I'm at curriculum-wise before jumping into logic game proofing or just go right into LG proofing?

With a little more time, I can take more PTs before the real deal but I'm not going to have time to commit to a robust logic games proofing schedule (section a day, Pacifico's method, one whole month).

Q: Is it possible to get the benefits of foolproofing from just doing the logic games from the PTs I take? JY's or Pacifico's Method?

I also start taking classes at the beginnng of January, have a two-week sping break in March and the week after that I have the exam. I made sure that my schedule wasnt going to be to rigorous to make time for the LSAT but I see these three months as my "PT and rigourous BR" phase of my studying (1-2 test per week for 12 weeks). My post-CC diagnostic was pretty average but it may or not be the best indication for where I am right now (those were the first and only-timed sections/questions I've done since I started 7Sage).

Q: Is more or less PTs in my situation better? Timing is an issue for me, but it's not like I scored a 180 on the BR of that post-CC PT.

So what's the best course of action I should take? I plan to reboot my LSAT studying on Sunday (Dec. 23).

P.S. I had a chance to checkout the Post-CC webinar and that was pretty helpful too but wondering if anyone has any advice to drive home, add or tweak from what was advised.

Show Related Discussions

Comments

  • Cant Get RightCant Get Right Yearly + Live Member Sage ⭐ 🍌 7Sage Tutor
    27899 karma

    What is your target score?

    Adding 10 to 20 points is an enormous feat at any range, but it takes on slightly different qualities depending on which 10 to 20 points it is.

  • hurdlehopper101hurdlehopper101 Alum Member
    102 karma

    @"Cant Get Right" said:
    What is your target score?

    Adding 10 to 20 points is an enormous feat at any range, but it takes on slightly different qualities depending on which 10 to 20 points it is.

    I got a 145 on that PT. ~50% accuracy for all 3 categories. BRd 156.

  • Cant Get RightCant Get Right Yearly + Live Member Sage ⭐ 🍌 7Sage Tutor
    27899 karma

    @hurdlehopper101 said:
    Q: Should I take a few more PTs now to determine where I'm at curriculum-wise before jumping into logic game proofing or just go right into LG proofing?

    With a little more time, I can take more PTs before the real deal but I'm not going to have time to commit to a robust logic games proofing schedule (section a day, Pacifico's method, one whole month).

    If you don’t have the time to do an intensive, I’d try to spread it out over the course of your studies in hopes of ultimately getting through as much as you can. If you can swing two sections a week, I think that’d be a good ground floor. Quality not quantity. Two sections done well is better than five half-assed.

    Q: Is it possible to get the benefits of foolproofing from just doing the logic games from the PTs I take? JY's or Pacifico's Method?

    No. Studying LG is largely about building experience. Growing yourself into a veteran LG student is the function of intensive FPing, and there’s no other way to accomplish it.

    Q: Is more or less PTs in my situation better? Timing is an issue for me, but it's not like I scored a 180 on the BR of that post-CC PT.

    Right now, less. If done properly, following up your PT’s at this point is a huge task which likely puts you below the one PT/week range. Really focus on the analysis. What is resulting in your errors? Scores are largely determined by the level of depth and insight with which we answer this question. From there, follow up and strengthen those areas and use the next PT to, well, test yourself.

    So what's the best course of action I should take? I plan to reboot my LSAT studying on Sunday (Dec. 23).

    I think one of two things.

    1. Take a couple weeks for an LG intensive to get that ball rolling. If you hit it hard up front, you may be able to create some important momentum for when you switch to a more balanced study regimen.

    2. Launch a new PT cycle; start fresh.

    Just remember the quality of your studies will equal the maximum potential quality of your score. Whatever you do, do it well, and you’ll see results.

  • hurdlehopper101hurdlehopper101 Alum Member
    102 karma

    @"Cant Get Right" said:

    @hurdlehopper101 said:
    Q: Should I take a few more PTs now to determine where I'm at curriculum-wise before jumping into logic game proofing or just go right into LG proofing?

    With a little more time, I can take more PTs before the real deal but I'm not going to have time to commit to a robust logic games proofing schedule (section a day, Pacifico's method, one whole month).

    If you don’t have the time to do an intensive, I’d try to spread it out over the course of your studies in hopes of ultimately getting through as much as you can. If you can swing two sections a week, I think that’d be a good ground floor. Quality not quantity. Two sections done well is better than five half-assed.

    Q: Is it possible to get the benefits of foolproofing from just doing the logic games from the PTs I take? JY's or Pacifico's Method?

    No. Studying LG is largely about building experience. Growing yourself into a veteran LG student is the function of intensive FPing, and there’s no other way to accomplish it.

    Q: Is more or less PTs in my situation better? Timing is an issue for me, but it's not like I scored a 180 on the BR of that post-CC PT.

    Right now, less. If done properly, following up your PT’s at this point is a huge task which likely puts you below the one PT/week range. Really focus on the analysis. What is resulting in your errors? Scores are largely determined by the level of depth and insight with which we answer this question. From there, follow up and strengthen those areas and use the next PT to, well, test yourself.

    So what's the best course of action I should take? I plan to reboot my LSAT studying on Sunday (Dec. 23).

    I think one of two things.

    1. Take a couple weeks for an LG intensive to get that ball rolling. If you hit it hard up front, you may be able to create some important momentum for when you switch to a more balanced study regimen.

    2. Launch a new PT cycle; start fresh.

    Just remember the quality of your studies will equal the maximum potential quality of your score. Whatever you do, do it well, and you’ll see results.

    I don't have the logic games bundle so in my case is it best to foolproof games 36-59? I would then have 60-72 to work with as PTs. As my test date approaches I will purchase the 10 Real LSATs 73-84 on Amazon.

Sign In or Register to comment.