Advice for Second Take

Comments

• 1 Like

  Alex Alum Member ⭐

  June 2017 23929 karma

  @"Pink Dust" said:
  Hi guys, So I have my eyes set on September and don't plan on retaking the exam after that. I did take the exam in June but I do want to rewrite.
  For the June exam, I took around 8 PT, my highest score being like 160 and BR in 170. but I usually averaged mid 150s. My goal is 160+
  But I don't think I have grasped the timing concept of the exam.
  The first three sections feel really rushed. After the break I feel like I have a handle of things. Does anyone have advice on how to over come this?
  Sometimes I also have to stop a PT because I literally start feeling light headed. This didn't happen on the June exam, but I'm worried it may happen in September. I did go for a blood test to see whats up, probably low iron or something.
  I do plan to write two PT - idiosyncratic and Saturday. and review them during the other days. I really didn't think 8 PT was enough for me.

  Also, for RC. I have decided to do 1 section of RC a day in the morning from PT 1-35. I feel like my reading ability is really lagging behind so I have also started to read books instead of watching Netflix. Is there anything else I can possibly do to improve? How is someone supposed to blind review RC? I can go back to the passage, find what I'm looking for then go "oh yeah, i get it" but when I am timed, thats not really how it goes. I have watched the notation strategy (doesn't work for me too much because then lose focus) and same with the memory method. That didn't help too much. My recent PT i did -7 on RC, Which is improvement from my usual -12 or -10. It is honestly a hit or miss for me, I either understand it and can answer the questions or I just can't. I have read the LSAT trainer. So I am kind of stuck as to what else I could possibly do besides practice? Instead of novels, should I read the economist during my spare time?? This summer is going to be dreadful -_-

  Any advice for the second take is really appreciated since I really need this to be my last take!!! Thank you

  Be wary of setting a somewhat arbitrary PT schedule. It's very hard to just say you're going to take a test on each Wednesday and Saturday because you never know how long doing a proper BR may take. Sometimes for me it can take a full week after a PT to address everything I need to work on revealed to me by the last PT.

  So, besides RC where else are you missing points? Have you fool proofed the logic games bundle (the games from PTs 1-35) I truly believe that was quite instrumental in my LSAT improvement. I was missing nearly 8 scaled points on LG alone before I decided to dedicate months to getting games down to only missing a couple here and there.

  As far as improving on reading comprehension, I find that what works for people here tends to be a bit idiosyncratic vis-a-vis the other sections. For me, I found the memory method and the LSAT Trainer's reading-for-structure approach worked well for me. Although I didn't have any major break throughs with RC until I started to force myself to be interested in a lot of the passages. They clearly try to give you the most dry and boring passages they can in an attempt to get you to become bored and apathetic. Once you start feeling that way, then they win...

  As far as BR for RC, I essentially redo the entire section untimed.

  First I re-read it, then write a summary of the passage paragraph by paragraph. I spend a lot of time during BR returning to the passage and writing lines cites next to the correct answers. So if the credited response for question 3 is found in lines 18-20, then I'll write (18-20) next to the correct answer choice for that question. After I do all of that to the best of my ability I watch JY's video on the passage. It is time consuming but it doesn't have to be dreadful, haha.

  Here is an excellent comment on another thread by Sage/Tutor Daniel that I thought was extremely helpful and well written, chock full of great RC tips and strategy.

  @danielznelson said:
  Your issues may well primarily or at least significantly in the answer choices. But before I get to that, I'd have a few, additional recommendations for the reading of the passage:

  • Focus on purpose and relationships rather than "details."

  The "details" aren't so much random tidbits as they are relevant pieces the author decided to bring up. These smaller pieces connect with other ones, whether they're a restatement of a previously expressed idea, providing a distinction/contrast, or are foreshadowing something ahead (these are just some examples). If ever confused about a detail, ask yourself why it's there. Getting the purpose can be a helpful start for understanding what its saying and why. And again, the author didn't bring it up just for fun. It's there for a reason and 99% of the time has a relationship with other parts of the passage. So in the end, there really isn't much to "remember" outside of a few key terms that play off of one another (i.e. relationships).

  • Adjust as you read.

  This is a broad tip, but I'll make it easiest to understand by contrasting what NOT to do: reading straight down from line 1 to the last line. You will generally be doing that, yes. But there are times you'll want to stop, refer back, connect back, and then move one. In other instances, you will have to slow down in order to understand a confusing passage. When this is the case, don't try to understand the entire passage as a whole all at once. Comprehend the paragraph line by line - failing to understand a line before another one will generally separate you from a full understanding, as each line plays off the next. If you still can't understand a line, identify its purpose, recognize you're not fully aware of what's being stated there, and move on. When questions and AC touch on this idea, be wary of selecting or eliminating anything that touches directly on that which you're not sure about, for obvious reasons. Eliminate/verify everything else.

  I could go on for days regarding the questions, but I'll note a few important points that apply pretty universally to all questions, especially the difficult ones. One thing first - understanding really, really well the passage is just not enough. The right ACs are not easy pickings. They require scrutiny and nitpicky analysis just like in LR.

  The correct AC will often not be worded in a way you would expect, even if you have a vague anticipation. This is because the correct AC is frequently clouded with referential phrasing, odd and unattractive wording, unexpected synonyms, and unassuming, insignificant content (i.e. the AC really isn't stating a whole lot).

  These answer choices are easy to pass over. Just realizing that the correct ACs aren't going to pop out at you every time may alone be helpful. The incorrect ACs, on the other hand, are generally more transparently right in the pieces that are in fact right. Of course, as with all incorrect ACs, something in it is also unsupported or contradicted. But it's easy to cling on to what looks good before eventually justifying the part that isn't correct, especially if it's "merely" unsupported.

  There's another key issue regarding the wording of the ACs - that we fail to recognize and identify the difference between the reasoning and the descriptive content in questions. When we don't like an AC, we need to know why that is. Is it because the tone/reasoning/structure is off? Or is it because of some word that you're not sure about? The latter is very often the case, and it can lead us to disregard that AC, even when it's right. In these cases, ask yourself if it's a word/phrase on its own (i.e. the descriptive content) or the reasoning as a whole. If the former, try linking up that word/phrase with what it is ostensibly supposed to be linked up with in the passage. Or provide synonymous terms for that unappealing word/phrase to see if it's actually more acceptable then you think it is. Maybe it's merely a referential phrase. If the descriptive content is acceptable, the AC is probably right, assuming your reasoning is correct, as well.

  Finally, there's a persistent need in RC and in all other sections to stick with an AC, reasoning through its content, before moving on to the next AC. Especially in RC, you just can't do this. It's so easy to run out of time, momentum, and endurance because of this one mistake. If in an Inference Question, say, you start debating whether "A" is correct or incorrect, move on to "B." One of the answers may very clearly be right. Why spend time eliminating an AC before seeing the rest? Now, of course, if you can knock out an AC very quickly, that's fine. But if you're hovering over an AC without moving on, you're wasting your time. It's great that you can employ high-level reasoning, and we need to improve that reasoning as much as possible. But on a timed test, we need to employ that reasoning only as much as we need to.

  And for many of these questions, anticipate and scan. You can get a broad sense of the AC in MP Questions, Analogy Questions, (Specific) Inference/MSS Questions, Purpose Questions, and Weakening/Strengthening Questions. Even if your anticipation is vague, it's orienting you in the right direction, which can help you bypass attractive ACs that will only waste your time.