Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- 33.4K All Categories
- 28.1K LSAT
- 17.1K General
- 5.2K Logical Reasoning
- 1.4K Reading Comprehension
- 1.7K Logic Games
- 70 Podcasts
- 191 Webinars
- 11 Scholarships
- 194 Test Center Reviews
- 2.2K Study Groups
- 112 Study Guides/Cheat Sheets
- 2.5K Specific LSAT Dates
- 31 November 2024 LSAT
- 18 October 2024 LSAT
- 9 September 2024 LSAT
- 38 August 2024 LSAT
- 28 June 2024 LSAT
- 4 April 2024 LSAT
- 11 February 2024 LSAT
- 22 January 2024 LSAT
- 38 November 2023 LSAT
- 43 October 2023 LSAT
- 14 September 2023 LSAT
- 38 August 2023 LSAT
- 27 June 2023 LSAT
- 30 Sage Advice
- 5K Not LSAT
- 4K Law School Admissions
- 13 Law School Explained
- 10 Forum Rules
- 641 Technical Problems
- 286 Off-topic
Related Discussions
Blind Reviewing Every Question
Burden.of.Floof
Core Member
So, when I Blind Review right now, I BR every single question, even the ones that I don’t flag. I take note of the answers that I change that I didn’t flag, but I just started timed tests and to me it doesn’t make any sense not to do an in-depth analysis of the entire test. I mean, I guess I could go through the step of just flagging every question, but it kind of feels silly to do that just so I can give myself permission to go over the entire test. Plus, I genuinely want to know which questions I had doubts about in the moment and if I flag everything then I probably won’t remember.
I get that the whole point is to test the accuracy of your confidence, but to me at this stage it feels more valuable to be analyzing every question. I figure at some point after I’ve gained enough experience, I’ll stop BRing questions I feel confident in, and that’s where the method of just reviewing flagged questions will kick in.
I’d love to hear other people’s thoughts on this. Am I putting myself at a disadvantage, or does it not matter at this stage? I think there’s stuff to be learned from every question, even from the super easy questions I probably got right. Why not take the opportunity to look at those as well?
Comments
I personally like a full BR - I found a question or two that were way off base and I was convinced I had them in the bag. I think it's a great way to catch some over-confidence errors and ID potential gaps that you may not be aware of.
The flip side is that you have to have enough self-awareness to figure out when to start skipping those because you are not getting ROI. When I went back to timed practice after a couple of months of drills, I was struggling to finish LR on time, because I was so focused on breaking down all 5 answer choices. Clean and effective process is key and that develops best with slow, consistent grind. After a couple of tests, I started confidently picking on certain Q types and got within the 35 min. The Qs where I break down everything really put undue pressure, but I like that. If I can finish on time, spending all the extra time on analysis, then I can finish way below time with confident picks and transition to a more aggressive approach with plenty of time to spare for review and the hard Qs.
Edit: lost a piece of the text here somehow.
Every type of practice that helps you ID gaps and manage those effectively, based on your needs at that particular point of the studying process, is worth it, in my opinion.
Blind reviewing every single question, for sure. To BR first ten questions can take you just a few minutes. But not BR them can take you hours. For example, a few weeks ago, our buddy suggests comparing the rest of the questions after we were done with flag questions in a BR call. It turns out several people had made mistakes in questions that we were "confident" about. Now to get "confidence" back, we need to take PT and repeat it all over again. Instead, you can get 175+ on BR review and know that there is no question out your league. Again, an opportunity to learn from the question drops close to 0 once you know the answer chose. That's why you need to open this opportunity by taking another PT.
This reminds me of when I was doing untimed sections. In the beginning, my fundamentals weren't good enough for me to bother worrying about over/under confidence. My initial goal was to start easing into the sections by allowing myself as much time needed to finish the section. Let's say that I took 45 minutes to finish an LR section. I am highly confident of my answers at that point, but obviously 45 minutes is too long. Then, the next time I do the same thing, my goal is to improve my accuracy and decrease the timed needed. Maybe I could get the same number of correct questions, but if I employ a better skipping strategy, I can increase my efficiency. So for example, maybe after working on my skipping, I did everything in 42 minutes this time. Repeat until one can comfortably get down to 35 minutes per section. Look for places of inefficiencies and find ways to improve on them.
I think that what you are doing right now is similar to what I was doing untimed. It served its purpose in a specific period of my study. Obviously at some point, you should move on to NOT blind reviewing every single question, because the calibration of over and under confidence is important for the skipping strategy during timed. But if you aren't there yet, you aren't there yet.
BR your flagged questions. Review in depth anything that gave you trouble after you get your scores. The two aren't the same process and serve different purposes.
Edit: https://7sage.com/lesson/the-blind-review-is-a-habit/
The timed run gives you performance data. Your BR gives you skillset proficiency indicators. After you get your scores you review to interpret that data into an actionable plan to improve.
You could BR everything but I recommend against it for a few reasons:
If you are doing the whole test all over again, chances are you are not being as vigilant as you would be with only your flagged questions. It's just tedious and we are lazy. Also it takes a long f-ing time.
BR'ing everything can conceal overconfidence/underconfidence errors. Hitting only the flagged questions gives us a bit more very useful data.
You should be reviewing anything that gave you trouble anyway after you see your score. When you BR, if you're doing it correctly, regardless of which questions you do, you don't even know if your reasoning is right nor not yet. That's why you need to hit it again after you check your scores. That is where the significant learning takes place.
To each their own... there is no one right method, and we all learn differently. Some people are very successful just blasting out PT after PT with no BR at all. To me the above way maximizes the value you can squeeze out of a PT.
Blind review:
What is the stimulus saying?
What is each answer choice saying?
Why is each answer choice either right or wrong?
In depth review after checking scores:
Why am I reviewing this question? Over on time, flagged, wrong answer, wrong on BR, over/underconfidence error, couldn't eliminate last wrong answer, etc..?
What was my time? Was there any significant lag? Was is warranted or not?
What was the translation of the stimulus I had under time? What is it now? If there is a difference, why? Did I bring anything I didn't need with me?
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? Is this different than what I did in BR and if so why?
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?
and on and on... anything is game here, and IMO you can't get too deep.
For me, I blind review the entire reading comprehension and logic games section, and only flagged questions in LR. This is because for RC and the games, I understand the content, it's just a function of time. LR, on the other hand I definitely don't have mastery over. Personally, I think the shock of seeing a wrong answers you were so sure about in LR really cements in your head that you're not where you think you are, and you need to pay extra careful attention to what kind of trap answers you're falling for.
I'm with Daniel/@canihazJD on this one. Before I had a Study Group to go through each question with, I used a combo of reviewing my flagged questions and Ellen's 'Camo Review' (https://elementalprep.com/camo) to determine what I'd go over before submitting my test and getting the results.
It helped me to recognize the question types I had false-confidence in (if it wasn't flagged, but part of a Camo Review that it turned out I had gotten wrong the first time), as well as the question types that I had a better grasp of and didn't need to second-guess.
It's an iterative process regardless.
Wow loving all this great feedback, thanks everyone!! This gives me a lot of good stuff to think about.
I BR the whole test. I basically more do a validation check for my non-flagged questions, because I like to confirm the processes that are working for me. That way I solidify why I got an answer right. Doing this does not take up much time for me. It’s also very rare for me at this point to change a non-flagged answer. Then, for any questions I’ve flagged, I go into an in depth look and take more time.
I had hit a plateau, but I started to see a boost in my score when I switched to this method. I think because it helped me fine tune and calibrate my instincts and knowing when they’re spot on vs uncertain. But I don’t recommend painstakingly full on blind reviewing a whole test. I tried it and it burnt me out.
How much time does it take you to do a full BR of each question for the whole PT (assuming a 3-section PT)?
I definitely just redo the whole LG section for BR, but I've only been BRing the flagged questions in LR and RC.
Afterwards, though, I do review every single question when I do have the time to do so. Lately as my test date came closer I stopped doing this since I had to make the most of my remaining time. But I do think that there is some value in reviewing every single question on a PT provided that you do have enough time to do so.
To be honest, though, I'm still not really able to articulate what the BR process does for me. Do you guys mind sharing what you get from BR, besides knowing where you can potentially score having taken away the time element of the test?
@"Learned Astronomer", I've actually changed my methods because of the feedback I received from this post! It used to take me a few 10+ hour days to do a thorough BR of the entire test. This is a great way to ensure a high BR score, but it actually wasn't giving me the information that I really needed. BRing flagged questions is a better way to learn where my weaknesses are, and it gives me a lot more time and energy to review the actual performance of the test after I know the correct answers, which is more valuable for me at this point.
I think BRing the questions that gave you trouble is still very valuable though, outside of knowing your scoring potential. For me personally, it allows me to take another crack at the question outside of the timed conditions of the test, to really think about what the question is saying and come to conclusions on my own, without the bias of knowing what the right answer is. I think that it's more conducive for learning, not to mention doing better on a question like it in the future.
I agree! @"Burden.of.Floof" I BR every question too, but the time I spend on the one I got correct and the ones I did not flag is way less than the ones I flagged and the ones I got wrong. (BR on flagging and more analysis/explanations once I get the analytics back) I also look at the time bar to see if I was not sure on an answer choice which then I would do more analysis of the question than if I got it correct or did not flagged it. But I do think BRing every question is beneficial even if that is a quick premise, conclusion run down then move to the ACs and point out why they are incorrect and move on. Versus really diving deep into the stimulus and ACs. almost all of the ones I flag/give me trouble are the 5 star ones that I have trouble parsing the language or ones that I miss the description of, meaning that I misread or do not recognize what comes after the words 'that' or 'which' and I pick the trap answer that has the wrong description.