LSAT and Law School Admissions Forum

Get expert LSAT preparation and law school admissions advice from PowerScore Test Preparation.

 mp1224
  • Posts: 11
  • Joined: Jul 21, 2018
|
#48242
Hi,

When solving complete variable list questions, why do we first check for rule violations and then look at Not Laws, as opposed to first looking at the answers that contain Not Laws and then checking to see if the remaining answers contain variables that violate any of the rules? Wouldn't eliminating the answers that contain Not Laws first be more efficient?

Could someone please explain this to me?

Thanks in advance!
User avatar
 Dave Killoran
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 5972
  • Joined: Mar 25, 2011
|
#48629
Hi MP,

Thanks for the question! It's because of confusion and duplication that we do it that way. If you check just the rules, then you know for sure you will have each individual rule covered, which eliminates any confusion or uncertainty. If you check Not Laws, then most people go back t the rules, which then often causes them to recheck one or more of the rules that lead to Not Laws. that can be confusing and time-wasting. Plus, of course, there will be games without Not Laws to check, so you'd go to the rules anyway.

Either starting point can work, but in my work with students I saw fewer errors and a generally faster, more confident outcome when starting with the rules.

Please let me know if that helps. Thanks!
 mp1224
  • Posts: 11
  • Joined: Jul 21, 2018
|
#48669
Hi Dave,

Your explanation definitely helped! Thank you!!

Get the most out of your LSAT Prep Plus subscription.

Analyze and track your performance with our Testing and Analytics Package.