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

Worthwhile for a 170s taker to go through Core Curriculum or LSAT Trainer?

Excellent.FondueExcellent.Fondue Member
edited May 2021 in General 273 karma

I've been PTing in the 170-178 range, with quite a bit of fluctuation in this range. I scored a 170 on the actual exam and I'm aiming for a score in the high-170s.

Given my personal schedule/commitments, I'll basically have to take 4 months away from studying for the test. During this time, I really won't be able to study with the exemption of possibly one day per week. I will have time to study after these 4 months, though. I'm not in a huge rush to retake the test.

I think I know the fundamentals very well, with the exemption of some topics: I'm not 100% solid on Formal Logic yet and I haven't really spent a lot of time working on the rare game types, namely pattern games, mapping games, circular games (according to the PowerScore classification).

I'm not quite perfect on any of the sections yet, but I have gotten in the -0 to -3 range for each. I probably need more work on all three sections.

After about 4 months away from the test, I might need some refreshing of the fundamentals. I'm not sure exactly how much I'll have forgotten. But I'm sure I can get the knowledge/speed/fluency back quite quickly even after 4 months away from the test. I've been on 7Sage for a while now, but I've just never used the Core Curriculum. I've mostly just watched the explanation videos by J.Y.

Is it worth going through the entire Core Curriculum? How long does it take to do so? And will someone scoring in the 170s already find value in doing so?

Also curious about those of you who have gone through Mike Kim's LSAT Trainer. I've already read the PowerScore LG and LR books and the Manhattan RC book. I've watched a lot of J.Y.'s explanations for all three sections. I bought the Trainer a long time before I actually started studying but I've barely touched it. I've heard good things about it. But I'm just wondering whether this is just far too basic for someone already in the 170s.

Thank you all!

Show Related Discussions

Comments

  • feistyhorsesfeistyhorses Core Member
    53 karma

    If I were you I'd focus on nailing LG every time more than anything else. As you probably know, that's the easiest section to get to -0 consistently.

  • Lime Green DotLime Green Dot Member ⭐
    edited May 2021 1384 karma

    I think CC took me a couple of months. Maybe even 2.5 months. I was working full-time+ at the time, however, and I was also doing every single problem set, which I heard from a recent 7Sage podcast episode wasn't necessarily the intention, though it might of course be ideal. I do still revisit the CC when I need to, not so much for question types but more for when I need a refresher on the more complicated aspects of formal logic. I think with your next test 4 months out, you'll want to invest wisely and may not find value in necessarily doing the whole CC.

    It might be worthwhile to explore where those -0 to -3 misses tend to be coming from. If there's a pattern of question types, passage/passage Q types, or game types you can identify, I think it makes sense to perhaps revisit lessons that relate to those specific weak spots. I agree that if formal logic hasn't been solidified, and you've seen that working to your detriment on any games, it's a sign to go back and nail this down.

    If they're just more or less scattered misses/flags on very difficult questions, I think your time is better spent exploring those individual misses in much greater depth than you had before. I'd still go over to the explanation videos' page for the PTs that have them for these misses as you have been, but you can go a lot deeper. Try responding to any unanswered #help comments and posting your own analyses there if you haven't already. This helps in stretching your analyses further.

  • T14plssssT14plssss Member
    134 karma

    I wouldn't unless it's games that's tripping you up maybe. I mean if you can get a 178 I don't think you really need to sit down and learn the basics.

  • Jonathan WangJonathan Wang Yearly Sage ⭐
    6869 karma

    You probably need to sit down with a tutor, pinpoint your issues, and determine from there whether a curriculum will help you. My bet purely from your scoring range is no, but it's impossible to say without seeing you work problems. And work on your conditional logic! There's no excuse for that one.

  • neroliherbsneroliherbs Free Trial Member
    2 karma

    Understanding the core may give you that extra boost in score you need. It’s worth the shot

Sign In or Register to comment.