Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- 32.3K All Categories
- 27.2K LSAT
- 16.6K General
- 5.1K Logical Reasoning
- 1.3K Reading Comprehension
- 1.7K Logic Games
- 73 Podcasts
- 193 Webinars
- 9 Scholarships
- 193 Test Center Reviews
- 2K Study Groups
- 108 Study Guides/Cheat Sheets
- 2.4K Specific LSAT Dates
- 15 June 2024 LSAT
- 3 April 2024 LSAT
- 11 February 2024 LSAT
- 23 January 2024 LSAT
- 37 November 2023 LSAT
- 42 October 2023 LSAT
- 12 September 2023 LSAT
- 38 August 2023 LSAT
- 27 June 2023 LSAT
- 7 August 2024 LSAT
- 30 Sage Advice
- 4.8K Not LSAT
- 4K Law School Admissions
- 12 Law School Explained
- 10 Forum Rules
- 581 Technical Problems
- 277 Off-topic
Related Discussions
timing/accuracy strategy
Andres Cardenas
Member
I'm looking for a timing/accuracy strategy for my timed LR sections. I've noticed that I'm a notoriously slow starter; that is, it takes me some questions to fully focus on what I'm reading and to fully analyze what I'm reading. Since the LR questions don't get particularly difficult for me until question 12 or so, I only then notice that I'm not fully engaged in what I'm reading. This leads me to get questions wrong that I don't think I should be getting wrong; I believe this because during BR I'm surprised that I wasn't able to get the correct answer. This has hurt me specifically with Weakening, Argument Flaw, and Necessary Assumption question types from about question 12 through question 20, more or less.
Also, I do realize that I'm not getting these questions correct because my conceptual understanding of them isn't strong enough. In an effort to address this, I'm going back to the curriculum and reviewing these specific question types. Additionally, I believe that I’ll just need to spend more time on these question types. That means I’ll likely need to exceed the average 1 minute and 24 seconds on the questions. So, what I'm considering trying is circling these questions and skipping them during my first round through LR thereby allowing myself to get fully engaged and making sure I have enough time to complete them.
If anyone has any thoughts on this approach, then I would greatly appreciate it.
Thanks!
Comments
I think you will end up skipping a LOT of questions if you do that, which isn't exactly the best strategy. I had this exact problem too and recently managed to crack the code. Try this, first go and review how to do every type of question. Make it like flash card speed information. Ex: "This is a main conclusion question, I need to find the main conclusion. Its most likely in the first couple sentences..." As soon as you see the question stem, you should be able to recall how to address that problem regardless of what the stimulus/answers are. Once you firm up your basic understanding of each question type and being able to quickly classify the question type based off the stem your ready for real practice. Now read the questions slowly. Engage with each word and reread a sentence until you understand what it says before you move on to the next sentence. KEEP in mind what you are suppose to be doing with that question. I find I spend around one minute and 30 seconds now on each question and I'm actually engaging with what i'm being asked. Before you look at the answers, try to imagine what the answer should be. All of this will clean up your speed and accuracy. Don't worry about making the time, just focus on accuracy. Also learn to leave confident questions quickly.
You've definitely got to know exactly what the task is and have a strategy for accomplishing each one, but I think this is a particularly key takeaway from Victoria's comment. Frequently, worry about time causes us to try and move fast. Funny enough, this can really slow us down and ding our accuracy. If you want to go fast, relax. Take your time in the stimulus to read at a natural pace and focus on attaining a deep and intuitive understanding of the argument. Your ability to do this rests on your logical foundation, of course, but a solid foundation is not enough. I've seen tons of students who are really strong on the logic who make tons of errors simply because they didn't take the time to understand the argument.
So if speed doesn't come from "speed," it comes from the second element of Victoria's comment: confidence. When you think you've got the answer, you need to call it a day and move on to the next one immediately. This also goes for skipping. Do it quickly and confidently. If you don't understand the stimulus or if you get through the ACs and nothing makes sense, get out of there fast. Bank that time and come back to it on your second round. On your second round, fresh eyes frequently--and qiuckly--clarify whatever key element you were missing. If not, then you're dealing with one of the questions you're most likely to miss anyway and which is not going to be a great use of your time. Either way, better dealt with at the end.
Great advice! I'll say the single most transformative strategy besides skipping that has helped me with similar issues in LR is leaving questions I am confident on quickly. From old recording I have seen that I can easily tack on 3-5 minutes per sections by always trying to have to be 100% accurate when 90% is enough.
@"Cant Get Right" and @"Alex Divine" are my favorites
Thanks a bunch for your insight!
I understand what you mean about skipping too many questions during my first round through and developing a deeper understanding of what’s being asked of me in each question stem. If I don’t have a strong enough understanding of what’s being asked in the stem, then I’m unlikely to take the proper approach to the stimulus and I’m more likely to be unsure of myself when I get to the answer choices.
Also, I like what you mentioned about engaging the stimulus- that is, rereading if necessary. I’ve been guilty of getting too fixated on time and compromising my comprehension of some stimuli and therefore my accuracy.
Since I began this discussion, I’ve gone back and taken a look at my last 5 PT’s. I looked at each of their LR sections and from there pulled all of the ones that I’d gotten wrong both under timed conditions and during BR. Then I just started grouping each of the missed question types. From this I’ve been able to prioritize which question types I was most susceptible to get wrong. Finally, I went back to the curriculum and began reviewing all of these specific lessons. This has helped significantly in developing a more comprehensive understanding of these question types, building my confidence in these question types, and understanding when I need to skip questions.
Thanks for reiterating some of @Victoria14 's points!
Specifically, I like your points on timing and confidence.
It seems ironic- as you mentioned- that time could turn into a paradox for me while completing an LR section: thinking that I have to go “fast,” not taking time to fully comprehend the argument, and perhaps getting some questions wrong which I should be getting right. I realize this during BR because I have this, “What was I thinking?” moment.
Confidence is also key. I like how you elucidate knowing when you’re right and knowing when you’re wrong but being confident in both. You’re definitely right about doing this and being able to bank time during your second and doing so with fresh eyes.
I think I understand what you’re saying about confidence.
However, can you elaborate a bit on what you mean with, “…always trying to have to be 100% accurate when 90% is enough?”
Sure thing!
I realized through reviewing recordings of myself taking timed sections that I was spending too much time on questions where I was pretty sure I had the right answer. I would just spend an extra 20 seconds or whatever really mulling over questions I was 90% sure I had answered right. After I finished the section and blind reviewed/scored the sections, these same questions I was confident on but took a bit too much time on, I ended up basically never missing. Sometimes it was that I spent time trying to disprove an answer choice and other times I was simply double checking my work by re-reading the argument/question choices themselves. In any case, it became increasingly clear, as this pattern continued, that I should just be more aggressive in pulling the trigger and moving on when I am 90% confident in my answer. Now of course this is based off of my own subjective feeling of what being 90% confident feels like. In short, I would just say when I'm confident I have the right answer, there's not always a need to be absolutely 100% confident. This is especially true if it's going to require an extra 30 seconds of just sitting there making sure an answer choice I've already found a good reason to eliminate isn't somehow right or just to re-read the stimulus.
Hope this helps
@"Alex Divine"
That explanation definitely helped!
I like that you pointed out the idea of “subjectivity.” What you may be 90% sure is correct is not the same for everyone else. Subjectivity v. comparing myself to others is certainly a struggle of mine but one that I’m slowly overcoming. I’m still finding that balance between knowing what I know and recognizing what I don’t know so that I don’t fall into a time sink during timed PT’s.
Thanks for explaining that idea further.