180 on February 2018, happy to answer questions

Prepare for the LSAT or discuss it with others in this forum.
deventine

New
Posts: 12
Joined: Sat May 05, 2018 6:54 pm

180 on February 2018, happy to answer questions

Postby deventine » Sun Sep 02, 2018 5:47 pm

I took the LSAT for the first time in February 2018 and I got a 180, I'd be happy to answer questions about test prep etc. if anyone has any. My main strategy was taking a full timed practice test a day, 5 days a week for the 2 months before the test. During that time, I also woke up every day at the time I was going to on LSAT day and started the test at the same time that the real one was going to start. On day 6 of every week I did 5 logic games sections, usually timed but sometimes I'd do a set untimed.

BrainsyK

Bronze
Posts: 141
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2016 5:37 am

Re: 180 on February 2018, happy to answer questions

Postby BrainsyK » Sun Sep 02, 2018 6:21 pm

deventine wrote:I took the LSAT for the first time in February 2018 and I got a 180, I'd be happy to answer questions about test prep etc. if anyone has any. My main strategy was taking a full timed practice test a day, 5 days a week for the 2 months before the test. During that time, I also woke up every day at the time I was going to on LSAT day and started the test at the same time that the real one was going to start. On day 6 of every week I did 5 logic games sections, usually timed but sometimes I'd do a set untimed.


How long did you study in total?

What score did you diagnose at?

Do you believe that some people are literally incapable of getting certain scores?

breathbecomesairr1

New
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Dec 20, 2017 8:44 pm

Re: 180 on February 2018, happy to answer questions

Postby breathbecomesairr1 » Sun Sep 02, 2018 7:49 pm

What testprep materials did you use, and what made you finally, "grasp," certain sections of the LSAT that you had difficulty in?

How long was your overall prep time? Just two months?

deventine

New
Posts: 12
Joined: Sat May 05, 2018 6:54 pm

Re: 180 on February 2018, happy to answer questions

Postby deventine » Sun Sep 02, 2018 7:53 pm

BrainsyK wrote:
deventine wrote:I took the LSAT for the first time in February 2018 and I got a 180, I'd be happy to answer questions about test prep etc. if anyone has any. My main strategy was taking a full timed practice test a day, 5 days a week for the 2 months before the test. During that time, I also woke up every day at the time I was going to on LSAT day and started the test at the same time that the real one was going to start. On day 6 of every week I did 5 logic games sections, usually timed but sometimes I'd do a set untimed.


How long did you study in total?

What score did you diagnose at?

Do you believe that some people are literally incapable of getting certain scores?


I studied for the month of September, not for October or November, then back at it December, January, February. So in total 3 1/2 months. From December on I treated it like a full time job (I'd quit my job a while before which gave me a big prep advantage).

The first test that I took I got a 160 and I really struggled with the AR. It took me a while to get my feet under me with those, especially with timing. After I'd read the AR section of the Barrons LSAT prep book, my scores were all 174+ but that was still my worst section and sometimes I'd do a practice test and I'd finish with 3-4 AR questions unanswered. Of the 40+ practice tests I took, I only got a 180 on 3, so there was definitely some luck involved.

I don't have more perspective on this than anyone else but it's probably true that some people just can't think through problems fast enough to get a super-high LSAT score. That being said, I think a lot of people also don't know how to prepare for something like this correctly and that really holds them back. I have some experience competing as an athlete and I treated preparing for the LSAT like preparing for a sport, which worked really well for me.

deventine

New
Posts: 12
Joined: Sat May 05, 2018 6:54 pm

Re: 180 on February 2018, happy to answer questions

Postby deventine » Mon Sep 03, 2018 12:52 am

breathbecomesairr1 wrote:What testprep materials did you use, and what made you finally, "grasp," certain sections of the LSAT that you had difficulty in?

How long was your overall prep time? Just two months?


I got the Barron's LSAT prep book and I signed up for an online course but I didn't like the lectures, although it was still worth it as it gave me access to every LSAT that had been administered so far which became the majority of my preparation. My overall prep time was 3 1/2 months.

What really 'solved' LR and RC for me was the point made in the Barron's book that there aren't answers with different degrees of 'rightness' on the LSAT. There is a right answer and there are answers which are demonstrably wrong. That changed the way that I approached questions in those areas in that when I came to a question with one or more seeming 'possibilities' my approach was to scan my remaining choices for possible 'vulnerabilities' and then test those based on the text or setup. It definitely helped that I am a naturally fast test taker, as this approach could otherwise be too time consuming.

For AR it really was about understanding different types of questions, being able to quickly assess how much work is worth doing in the setup vs. per/question, and practicing the section both timed (speed & accuracy) and untimed (because of the nature of the AR section, with unlimited time, anyone should be able to get a perfect score. You can prove every wrong answer wrong. It's important to not get too used to working in a rush and making sloppy mistakes.)

yungfenix

New
Posts: 2
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2018 9:29 pm

Re: 180 on February 2018, happy to answer questions

Postby yungfenix » Sun Sep 30, 2018 10:42 pm

Hi there. By AR, do you mean Logical Reasoning?

AJordan

Bronze
Posts: 426
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2016 3:48 am

Re: 180 on February 2018, happy to answer questions

Postby AJordan » Mon Oct 01, 2018 3:47 am

To your LR strategy about scanning for vulnerabilities:

I did not 180 but I was within 5 questions so reasonably close. I tutor and I often find my students seem too focused on main conclusions when answering LR questions along the assumption continuum (NA, Weaken, Strengthen, PSA, SA) and I'm wondering how you approach those questions. Are you viewing relationships as a whole when dealing with arguments or are you more focused on a singular aspect of the argument? I have a theory that most available prep test material is designed to get people to 160 and is almost a hindrance above 170.

Specifically as you look for vulnerabilities in answer choices, are those mostly related to relationship between given support and conclusion or looking for individual vulnerabilities in individual parts of the stimulus? I understand this is kind of nebulous. I'm more thinking of questions at the more difficult end of the spectrum. I'm trying to get better at explaining/teaching that.

deventine

New
Posts: 12
Joined: Sat May 05, 2018 6:54 pm

Re: 180 on February 2018, happy to answer questions

Postby deventine » Wed Oct 03, 2018 10:39 pm

yungfenix wrote:Hi there. By AR, do you mean Logical Reasoning?


By AR I mean logic games

deventine

New
Posts: 12
Joined: Sat May 05, 2018 6:54 pm

Re: 180 on February 2018, happy to answer questions

Postby deventine » Wed Oct 03, 2018 10:44 pm

AJordan wrote:To your LR strategy about scanning for vulnerabilities:

I did not 180 but I was within 5 questions so reasonably close. I tutor and I often find my students seem too focused on main conclusions when answering LR questions along the assumption continuum (NA, Weaken, Strengthen, PSA, SA) and I'm wondering how you approach those questions. Are you viewing relationships as a whole when dealing with arguments or are you more focused on a singular aspect of the argument? I have a theory that most available prep test material is designed to get people to 160 and is almost a hindrance above 170.

Specifically as you look for vulnerabilities in answer choices, are those mostly related to relationship between given support and conclusion or looking for individual vulnerabilities in individual parts of the stimulus? I understand this is kind of nebulous. I'm more thinking of questions at the more difficult end of the spectrum. I'm trying to get better at explaining/teaching that.


I'm not sure I understand everything that you're asking, but I'll try to answer. I looked for vulnerabilities only within answer choices, not within setups. I would read every answer choice that I hadn't immediately disqualified and look for every assumptions/implication, then evaluate them in terms of 'what would make this definitely false?' Then I'd see if what pulled that trigger was present/implied in the setup. This approach applied equally well to RC and LR.

AJordan

Bronze
Posts: 426
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2016 3:48 am

Re: 180 on February 2018, happy to answer questions

Postby AJordan » Thu Oct 04, 2018 3:04 am

deventine wrote:
AJordan wrote:To your LR strategy about scanning for vulnerabilities:

I did not 180 but I was within 5 questions so reasonably close. I tutor and I often find my students seem too focused on main conclusions when answering LR questions along the assumption continuum (NA, Weaken, Strengthen, PSA, SA) and I'm wondering how you approach those questions. Are you viewing relationships as a whole when dealing with arguments or are you more focused on a singular aspect of the argument? I have a theory that most available prep test material is designed to get people to 160 and is almost a hindrance above 170.

Specifically as you look for vulnerabilities in answer choices, are those mostly related to relationship between given support and conclusion or looking for individual vulnerabilities in individual parts of the stimulus? I understand this is kind of nebulous. I'm more thinking of questions at the more difficult end of the spectrum. I'm trying to get better at explaining/teaching that.


I'm not sure I understand everything that you're asking, but I'll try to answer. I looked for vulnerabilities only within answer choices, not within setups. I would read every answer choice that I hadn't immediately disqualified and look for every assumptions/implication, then evaluate them in terms of 'what would make this definitely false?' Then I'd see if what pulled that trigger was present/implied in the setup. This approach applied equally well to RC and LR.


That actually makes a lot of sense. I'd never considered doing it that way. I'll try it out. Thanks!



Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum�

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests