How to consistently get -0 to -1 for LR? Forum

[mandrewsf]

I've been getting stuck on a fluctuation of -1 to -3 per LR section for the past couple of PTs, and despite my efforts for a couple of weeks now I haven't been able to get that fluctuation down to a consistent (lower) level, nor manage -0 sections.

What I tried include reviewing each LR section I completed (any question that I got wrong or felt doubt, even if I got those right), analyzing the question types of my wrong answers (which are quite varied), and collecting questions I answered wrongly and redoing those same questions, making sure that I argue out the reason for selecting an answer and rejecting competing answers (if any). Time strangely enough has rarely been a concern for me; I'm generally on the pace of 1-1:05 mins per question which usually leaves me with 5-7 mins to review at the end of the section. I tried the so-called "blind review" method a couple of times (ie reviewing the section question-by-question after you finish the section, w/out regard for time constraints) and I found that I couldn't ID the questions I answered incorrectly.

Any critique of my method, suggestions for new methods, and general advice on cracking the LR section would be much welcomed. Thanks!

[AJordan]

I had this discussion with a few students over the years. I think the best advice is just to make peace with it. Understand that a 173 puts you at/above median at all schools and that an average of -2/section in LR puts you on path to get that number.

LSAC has to have a methodology to separate 170+ scorers. Increasingly, since test 71 or so in my opinion, that is happening by increasing the amount of "newish" LR questions where the same question type is used but a new or very rare logical analysis is required to get it correct. You can only prepare for that by taking these tests and understanding why you got there, but there are only so many tests so these will, by necessity, remain unfamiliar. For instance, I've seen an increase in "strengthen" question types where the answer is of the "eliminate a weakener" variety. Once you learn what that is, you have a check on that type of question. But is it worth worrying about on actual test day? I really don't think so. -1 to -3 is a healthy range on LR. Get your -0 on LG and your -3 on RC and you have your 173. I'm really not sure any extra stress over what new trick LSAC plans to pull on 170+ scorers is worth any stress.

[mandrewsf]

Increasingly, since test 71 or so in my opinion, that is happening by increasing the amount of "newish" LR questions where the same question type is used but a new or very rare logical analysis is required to get it correct. You can only prepare for that by taking these tests and understanding why you got there, but there are only so many tests so these will, by necessity, remain unfamiliar. For instance, I've seen an increase in "strengthen" question types where the answer is of the "eliminate a weakener" variety. Once you learn what that is, you have a check on that type of question.

Thanks for your response. For the last 7-8 PTs (all of which were post test 69), all of my scores have fallen between 172-174, and I think what that tells me is that I've got solid fundamentals for everything else, and I'm just looking for the LR breakthrough to take me into the promised land of 175+ (I'm a splitter). The "newish" LR questions you mentioned might just be what I am looking for. Do you tutor LSAT? Would you mind chatting further on whether you could do tutoring on these types of new LR questions, your hours, and your rates?

[AJordan]

Increasingly, since test 71 or so in my opinion, that is happening by increasing the amount of "newish" LR questions where the same question type is used but a new or very rare logical analysis is required to get it correct. You can only prepare for that by taking these tests and understanding why you got there, but there are only so many tests so these will, by necessity, remain unfamiliar. For instance, I've seen an increase in "strengthen" question types where the answer is of the "eliminate a weakener" variety. Once you learn what that is, you have a check on that type of question.

Thanks for your response. For the last 7-8 PTs (all of which were post test 69), all of my scores have fallen between 172-174, and I think what that tells me is that I've got solid fundamentals for everything else, and I'm just looking for the LR breakthrough to take me into the promised land of 175+ (I'm a splitter). The "newish" LR questions you mentioned might just be what I am looking for. Do you tutor LSAT? Would you mind chatting further on whether you could do tutoring on these types of new LR questions, your hours, and your rates?

I'm sorry, I don't teach anymore, and I wouldn't feel comfortable taking your money to just tell you the same thing over and over again anyway. Why don't you send me a pm with a few of the questions you've missed, especially if they're of the same type, and I'll see if I can spot anything glaring.