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

Are the old PTs useful for LR drills?

citizenkanyecitizenkanye Member
in Logical Reasoning 74 karma
Can we use the old PTs (7 - 18, 19 - 28) to practice timed LR sections, or are they so completely different from the newer PTs as to be irrelevant?
Show Related Discussions

Comments

  • SprinklesSprinkles Alum Member ⭐
    11542 karma
    The general rule is the newer PTs are used for full length timed practice tests and the older ones like the ones you mentioned are meant for drills.
  • Nanchito-1-1Nanchito-1-1 Alum Member
    1762 karma
    Yes. 35 and under for drills, the logic is the same.
  • citizenkanyecitizenkanye Member
    74 karma
    Thanks so much for your responses!
  • AlexAlex Alum Member ⭐
    23929 karma
    @montaha.rizeq said:
    The general rule is the newer PTs are used for full length timed practice tests and the older ones like the ones you mentioned are meant for drills.
    Yeah, the skills the old PTs tests and the new PTs test are the same. Though, the way the test them might be a bit different. They still are extremely useful and you'll have 36-78 for pristine full length tests :)
  • citizenkanyecitizenkanye Member
    74 karma
    So basically, the language is different but the underlying logic is the same? That's great to know, because I was worried about spending valuable time focusing on earlier PTs only to find out that they were completely different from the newer ones. Thanks for your response! :)
  • SprinklesSprinkles Alum Member ⭐
    11542 karma
    Yup you got it exactly right :)
  • AlexAlex Alum Member ⭐
    23929 karma
    @citizenkane said:
    So basically, the language is different but the underlying logic is the same? That's great to know, because I was worried about spending valuable time focusing on earlier PTs only to find out that they were completely different from the newer ones. Thanks for your response! :)
    :) No problemo! And like Montaha already said, exactly right! Same skills and underlying logic, but different wording is basically what it comes down to.

    Nothing you practice doing from any of the official LSATs will be a waste.
  • citizenkanyecitizenkanye Member
    74 karma
    Thanks guys :) Somewhat unrelated but could you say the same of the usefulness of doing earlier RC sections? I've heard that they're a lot easier in the earlier PTs, so is it better to focus on drilling RC sections that come after, say, the PT 35 mark?
  • AlexAlex Alum Member ⭐
    23929 karma
    @citizenkane said:
    Thanks guys :) Somewhat unrelated but could you say the same of the usefulness of doing earlier RC sections? I've heard that they're a lot easier in the earlier PTs, so is it better to focus on drilling RC sections that come after, say, the PT 35 mark?
    Yup, I think the same goes for RC. While some will find the older RCs easier, they are still testing the same skills. They are perfect to learn/test strategies on, without burning pristine practice tests.
  • citizenkanyecitizenkanye Member
    74 karma
    Thanks, Alex!
  • katherine.tkatherine.t Alum Member
    101 karma
    Quick query - after the curriculum, is there an average number of PT's people go through before they hit the high 160's/170's?
  • Cant Get RightCant Get Right Yearly + Live Member Sage ⭐ 🍌 7Sage Tutor
    27902 karma
    There's no magic number @katherine.t . I'd suspect a majority of 170+ scorers take basically all of the PTs, but I think that's just what high scorers do, not that that's necessarily what it takes to become a high scorer. Everyone's rate of improvement will be different. What's important isn't how many PTs you take, it's how well you utilize the ones you do take. Getting 100% out of 10 PTs is far better than getting 80% out of all 78. Focus on that. That's what differentiates top scorers.
Sign In or Register to comment.