I have been prepping for the LSAT for around 5 months and have broken the 160 threshold. How can I continue to improve upon my score to reach high 160s. I plan to take the LSAT in June.
hello,
People tend to find it easier to increase in LG and most of the time it is the section that has the most linear return for your time. We also need to take into consideration is lets say you're getting -3 in LG it take more time to get from -3 to -0 than it would to go from -15 to -5. This is true across all the sections. So I would look at the analytics and see what is causing the problems in LR and RC and drill those types of games/RC questions that are giving you trouble. Yes I would focus my time on the places where I struggle the most.
I agree with @kkole444 You should drill the questions you struggle the most with. LG Is probably the one you can see fastest return per hour spent studying b/c of repetition of games and inferences. On the other hand, I've experienced that the RC section has a more gradual improvement over time.
Drill full LG sections until it's second nature and you get -0. That will help your score a lot. For RC same thing, drill full problem sets until you get used to the timing. Not sure what your current strategy is now but if you're in the 160s I'd say you have a good grasp of the material and now need to start incorporating good timing strategies if you want to get into the high 160s.
Like what many said here acing LG is one of the best ways of getting your goal score
Yup, just want to echo everyone's statements that LG is the easiest section to improve if you're not already scoring -0 there.
I read on another LSAT forum that questions heavy on conditional reasoning are easiest to tackle in a short time frame. You might have better results getting the +5 points in LR than in RC. Types like sufficient & necessary assumption are mostly dependent on diagrammable logic. If you get those fundamentals down, you should be able to get a few more questions right. YMMV of course, because everyone has different strengths and weaknesses.
This isn't to say you can't improve in RC. Here you would focus on low-res summaries, structure, and main point. Nothing beats continued exposure to these annoyingly convoluted passages! You start to see argumentation/structural patterns after a while.
Comments
You answer probably depends on which section is giving you the most difficulty.
@vdoggggg do you recommend focusing more energy on sections that give the most trouble? I personally struggle most with LG and RC.
hello,
People tend to find it easier to increase in LG and most of the time it is the section that has the most linear return for your time. We also need to take into consideration is lets say you're getting -3 in LG it take more time to get from -3 to -0 than it would to go from -15 to -5. This is true across all the sections. So I would look at the analytics and see what is causing the problems in LR and RC and drill those types of games/RC questions that are giving you trouble. Yes I would focus my time on the places where I struggle the most.
I agree with @kkole444 You should drill the questions you struggle the most with. LG Is probably the one you can see fastest return per hour spent studying b/c of repetition of games and inferences. On the other hand, I've experienced that the RC section has a more gradual improvement over time.
Drill full LG sections until it's second nature and you get -0. That will help your score a lot. For RC same thing, drill full problem sets until you get used to the timing. Not sure what your current strategy is now but if you're in the 160s I'd say you have a good grasp of the material and now need to start incorporating good timing strategies if you want to get into the high 160s.
Like what many said here acing LG is one of the best ways of getting your goal score
Yup, just want to echo everyone's statements that LG is the easiest section to improve if you're not already scoring -0 there.
I read on another LSAT forum that questions heavy on conditional reasoning are easiest to tackle in a short time frame. You might have better results getting the +5 points in LR than in RC. Types like sufficient & necessary assumption are mostly dependent on diagrammable logic. If you get those fundamentals down, you should be able to get a few more questions right. YMMV of course, because everyone has different strengths and weaknesses.
This isn't to say you can't improve in RC. Here you would focus on low-res summaries, structure, and main point. Nothing beats continued exposure to these annoyingly convoluted passages! You start to see argumentation/structural patterns after a while.
You all are the best, thank you so much! )