Has anyone had major jumps with the following scenario

Comments

• 1 Like

  Alex Alum Member ⭐

  December 2016 23929 karma

  @vduran1988 said:
  I have read a couple success stories with people who had issues with logic games and jumped enough to increase their overall scores to the 170's from the 150's.
  
  My case is that I was scoring -8 in LG, -7 in RC, and -20 in LR to begin with. My improvements have come through slowly, and I do believe it is because I am working to improve on a more difficult section.
  
  With that said, is that normally the hardest route to take in terms of improvement? Are any of you guys faced with the same situation? If so, how have you attacked jumping your LSAT to your desired range?
  

  
  My biggest improvements have come after going through the core curriculum thoroughly, taking notes to actively learn, and doing timed section with blind review.
  
  Games are also something I constantly work on. It is truly a never ending process to master games and stay sharp. Just keep following the Fool proof method if that is your problem...
  
  There aren't any "easy" or "hard" ways per say to achieve your desired score. There is only right and wrong ways to do it. So as long as your following the 7Sage method rest assured you are doing it the right way.
  
  
• 2 Likes

  Wind-Up Bird Alum Member

  December 2016 284 karma

  Similar to your diagnostic, I scored a 153 with a -10 on LG, -15 in LR, and -9 in RC. Like the situation you described, I managed to jump 17 points to score a 170 on the September test. Before going through the core curriculum, I thought sufficiency and necessity were the same thing, and believed that Logic Games were bloody impossible. However, mastery of the core curriculum and reinforcing your skills, habits, and raw test-taking abilities through PTs/practice will eventually bring you closer to your target score.
  
  That said, improvements were definitely slow, and often occurred in plateaus of PT scores. I don't think there's a particular shortcut to jumping your scores, but mastering Logic Games is definitely a start. While practicing LGs throughout the curriculum, I took over double the suggested time to complete each game. Consequently, "jumps" in my PT scores were directly correlated with my progress in learning the games, with gradual improvements in RC and LR after each exposure to similar questions in PTs.
  
  One caveat is that newer LSATs have at least one "unique" game. Mastering all the traditional games covered in the curriculum will prepare you for roughly half of the newer LG sections, but going -0 on all the PT LGs might not accurately reflect how you'll score on the real test.
  
• 1 Like

  jennilynn89 Alum Member

  December 2016 822 karma

  I was in the same boat. It took me about a year to really improve. I started out with around -10 or more LG, -15 RC, -15-17 on LR.
  Before the Dec. LSAT I was able to get -1 to -3 on LG (so that one was my biggest improvement, and I really banked on LG for my score), -5 - to -8 on RC, and -8 or -9 on LR.
  
  I saw the fastest improvement with LG. I went through the Powerscore book for LG and thought it was ok... the curriculum on here (and the foolproof method) really helped reach close-to perfect LG scores on almost every recent PT I've taken. I just drilled games like crazy and did them over and over again until I understood the pattern of diagramming and understanding the different game types and how to tackle them.
  
  I actually got myself a tutor for LR. I could just not wrap my head around some of the question types (even after going through JY's curriculum a bunch of times) and just needed that extra push and personal explanation and time of a tutor to really make me understand some of those questions types and I drilled them like crazy.
  
  RC I thought was the most difficult to improve upon. I still had some weird PT's were I'd still get -15 or so on RC. I started reading heavy things, like the Economist, to force myself to read through dense information that I was unfamiliar with. I did drill RC with my tutor as well, and he's given me some great advice on how to improve my reading, speed, and overall comprehension.
  I thought it was the weirdest phenomenon to basically re-teach myself how to read and comprehend what I read all over again.
  
  
• texvd1988 Member

  December 2016 605 karma

  It seems like LG is truly the one section that can be improved on with drilling of questions and overall understanding of diagrams.
  
  LR is more conceptual, and you have to have an understand of grammar/logic/ and paragraph structure in order to succeed.
  
  RC doesn't seem to have a direct method to it, outside of measuring your brains ability to soak information in. Your strategy with dense literature is EXACTLY my strategy in regards to RC.
  
  I took my first LSAT diagnostic in college at got a 150 flat. Funny enough, RC saved me. I had a -2 on RC, but completely bombed LG and LR.
  
  The diagnostic I took 6 months ago (153) was different in the fact that I improved in LG, did the same in LR, and dropped in RC.
  
  Being out of college for 5 years has allowed my RC skills to drop off. It's funny, but that's a real time measure of how much being in school full time can impact certain skills you have.
• 180pronto Free Trial Member

  December 2016 58 karma

  My diagnostic score was in 137. My past 5 PT's were in the high 160's and low 170's range. Every person has a different set of skills starting to study for this test, but it is the consensus that LG is the easiest to learn. For me, LG was the worse from the 3 sections but once I learned the techniques I usually aced the games section. Some people may take 2 months to reach there target while some other people take 2 years, but I believe that if you put in enough effort and have the right tools, you will succeed.
  
  You're off to a good start being involved in a community that is very helpful and prep that is very adequate for conquering the LSAT.