Dude, I would love to be your friend, for real. Great fucking work! Also, when you are thinking about your ex, just remember this fine piece of advice:



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Jesus, did you also run into a supermodel who offered to make you forget all about your ex if you took her home?

Great idea - RC is one of the most interesting things to teach, too. One issue--and I apologize that this has a bit of an upsell sound--is that we'd have to choose whether to gear this towards folks that have our RC book and know our approach or towards introducing that approach. If you want to go ahead with an RC session, it'll be a bit more focused if you tell us which to do.

I'm definitely interested in a RC session. It's by far my worst section and the one I'm least confident in. I read the MLSAT RC book, so I'm familiar with the scale approach, but I'm more interested in a way that we can apply this method quickly enough to still finish the section on time. That's my biggest problem with RC, it takes me like 4-5 minutes to just read the passage itself, so I don't have any time to visualize the scale and hang things on it. Maybe I just need more practice, I don't know, but I'm definitely open to methods for improving RC speed.

The method is actually designed to help you speed up. If you're reading for the scale instead of details, you can move faster.

When you time yourself next time, see where you're losing time.

Some basic ideas to consider:

1. Move faster on the easier passages. It's easy to slow down and "enjoy" easier passages.

2. Focus on getting a productive read to speed up your work on the questions.

3. Set a section goal, and start making the hard choices about moving on for harder questions -- "B, seems good, but I'm unsure" - so that you get all the easier questions right, and the hardest ones wrong (instead of sinking too much time into a couple of really tough questions, MAYBE getting them right, but not able to get to some super easy question later on)

Definitely a good topic for a session!

Today's PT was the lowest I've had since I started studying for the June retake.

PT 47
LR1 -3
RC -3
LR -1
LG -0

Raw 93/100 / Scaled 173

There were a lot of distractions going on for the first two sections, but that's no excuse!! I thought I had LR and RC on lock! LG was actually REALLY easy for me this time. Not sure if it was the particular games, but I wasn't so obsessive about watching the clock and instead of trying to diagram out as many hypotheticals, I just looked at the answer choices and tried to see if they would work or not with the rules.

Edit: on review of this test, I found two mistakes that I feel certain I wouldn't have made under normal testing circumstances. But I must prepare for ALL TESTING CIRCUMSTANCES, so I won't be too bitter.

Tomorrow I do my first five section PT. Haven't made myself do them with five sections yet.

Took PT 49 today. Didn't break 175 like I had hoped,

LG: -1
LR1: -2
RC: -4
LR: -2

Raw 91
Scored 171

Bleh.

I am trying to be positive in that I found this test to be above avg in difficulty. So I hope this proves that even if June is a difficult test I will still make it into the 170s which is my minimal goal

LR1:
It was difficult in that it had a lot of tough questions. Usually I only have to really stop and thoroughly process on 3 or 4 but I to stop about 7 on this section. I ended up finishing with only 10 sec left. I was pretty happy I only missed two

LG:
None of the games were extreme but all 4 were medium difficulty which was time consuming

RC:
3 passages were not bad but I got turned around on the last passage and missed two because I misunderstood something

LR2:
Was pretty avg

Pulling a double tomorrow at work so won't be back to studying until Sun

I just need to tighten up a little more on RC and try to stay consistant on everything else. What do ya'll think is the best way to do this?

Just section drilling and heavy review?

Where are you taking your PTs? I am taking mine in the middle of the library with people moving around, talking, phones going off and what not. I would assume my LSAT testing location will not be like this. I am taking it at the same place I did last time, so that will be nice.

Just finished PT 40 and PT 21 (PT 21 is my experimental -- broke the sections up and inserted them in my last four PTs).

PT 40
LR1: -0
LR2: -0
LG: -1
RC -3
Raw 97, scaled 177.

Did a stupid thing during my 10 minute break between S3 and S4 -- I scored the first three sections of the test. After seeing I had done well in the first three sections (and having convinced myself that I was about to get my first 180 on a PT), I psyched myself out and lost focus on the fourth section. Not doing that again.

PT 21
LR1: -1
LR2: -0
LG: -0
RC: -2
Raw 98, scaled 180.

Not sure if this really counts, since the sections weren't taken consecutively (each one was the fifth section to the four other PTs I took this week). But still pretty happy with the scores (except RC, FML).

I take them at home or at work. Yesterday, I took it at work, and my coworkers were singing and goofing off bc the server was down for the first two sections and they kept coming in to bug me.

@Max
Why would you score your test while still taking the test? Isn't the point of taking a PT to simulate actual conditions as close to the real thing as possible so that when you take the actual LSAT it just seems like another PT? That did seem like a pretty foolish thing to do.

I'm so hungover, somebody help. I need to be rescued.

That was me on thursday. Made me decide to give up drinking til after the LSAT. That and I made a fool of myself at my favorite bar.

I decided to focus on review of old PTs and doing LR and LG drilling today. Going to do a PT tomorrow only. Crossing my fingers for a 177+.

God damn...

Now for the antithesis of your awesome story, I took PT 60 yesterday with snot running all over my face and scored 167...

LR: -2
LG: -3
LR: -6
RC: -6

Timing was a huge issue, my RC accuracy was 100% until I had to start rushing. Hopefully the 12 RC passages/day will drill my ability to read quicker and improve my accuracy. For the LG, I didn't really know how to diagram the 3rd and 4th game when in hindsight, they were pretty standard setups. Not sure how I messed up so poorly on the 2nd LR, but I'll review it. Overall, a fail around. I really need to pick up on these minor things if I ever want to score a 172+ on the real deal.

I stopped drinking Tuesday. Made it too hard to stick to my schedule. Gives me another reason to look forward to test day -- the martinis and single malt scotches I'll have once I get out.

PT 31

LG (-1): One stupid mistake. That fourth game (crew of workers) was a bitch. I just brute-forced it. Anybody know what a good setup would be for a game like this one?

LR (-0): It feels pretty good to double bagel one of these things.

RC (-3): I actually enjoyed reading a RC passage for once. (Thurgood Marshall's strategy to take down "separate but equal"). Still don't care about the feminist perspective on the history of science. Sorry.

179 (-4): I love these old curves.

I still feel like the honey badger. It seems like I do better on PTs when I don't really care what I score. Maybe the PTs are like beautiful women, they can smell desperation.

It was a mistake for sure, it affected the rest of the test. I don't worry too much about simulating conditions for the break, I just set a timer for ten minutes, and do whatever. I'll probably be stricter closer to test day.

On the upside, just discovered during my review that I misread the answer key, and marked an answer I got right as wrong. So I feel a little less crappy about last night.

Anytime I see the phrase "philosophers/historians of science" I want to stab myself in the face. Nice score!

Just took PT 57.

LG: -3
LR1: -3
LR2: -4
RC: -6
SCALED: 166

Content with the (albeit small) improvement from my 165 last week, but RC continues to be my biggest weakness. Ran out of time on the last passage again.

Pretty happy that I went -0 on the mauve dinosaurs game, since I've heard a lot of bad things about it. I skipped it and did it last, but when I got to it, I really didn't think it was that hard. That said, I did make 3 stupid errors on the the rest of the LG section.

I have the MLSAT RC book and know the approach as well. So I guess we have at least two willing participants, anybody else interested in an RC session? This is almost always the weakest section for most high scorers so I'm a little surprised more people aren't jumping at this opportunity

<< LSAT withdrawal. thank you, finals week.
Hoping to squeeze in PT 57 sometime tomorrow. Here's to hoping for my first 180!

so just to sum up this entire thread:

"just got a 175 now I'm drunk... cocktails and shit...oh yea and my hangover....that -2 I got on my LR is making me feel like a real weakling. Having nightmares about getting a 173... also im drunk... later pussies."

TITCR

In Vegas now, friends wont let me get near some logic games. Hope everyone's killing it!

I'd be down for an RC session as well. I couldn't make it last week. I have the MLSAT book and have read through it.