Strategies to study for a retake

[marcnash]

Hi,
I have written my lsat last weekend and I think I did okay, whatever the score is; I might expect somewhere in the high 150s or low 160s.
However, I think I have the same problem that I have had a while ago when I was studying earlier this year, is that I solve the questions intuitively, I rarely diagram any question, I rarely apply any PS techniques, especially with LR. The only thing that PS has taught me well is how to find the conclusion, which I can spot pretty fast, then I try to use common sense to match the answer to the question; and it is accurate to some degree, but of course not to the 180 accuracy level. Not sure if my speed is also a problem, I usually finish all questions with a couple of minutes to spare, I average 1min/question for the first 17 questions on the LR cause I tend to read pretty fast (sometime i get to reread through)
I started with cold score of low 150s, and I haven't improved much, most of them improvement is mainly in the LG which I have obviously learnt how to set up with the PS techniques, but again I don't use the book's method in going fast through the questions, making me lose some precious points. My LR has always been the same since I first started.
In my opinion, and correct me if I am wrong, I think I have a big room for improvement, especially that I was busy the last couple of weeks before the test and I was rushing through the prep tests but I would always review my mistakes then move on.
Regardless of my score and even before it appears, I think I am gonna start studying again, but slowly and in depth starting next week, but I am not sure what's the right approach. I finished the Type specific questions for LR and there isn't a specific type that's causing me grief, my mistakes are spread throughout different types.
There are a lot of past PTs that I haven't used yet, including all 70s and 50s.
What do you recommend? I was thinking of enrolling in an online PS course but then I don't wanna learn the material again. I am not sure how to diagnose my problem and work on becoming better at it? Not sure if I should focus very much on LG and tryna get a max of -2. my average for the past month was about -8 per section, with the majority that I can easily spot the correct answer myself after the test is over. What do you suggest I should do to get more ready for June, considering that I will be studying and/or working full time, so probably 2-3h/day of studying

[Dave Killoran]

Hey Marc,

Thanks for the questions, and thanks also for the detailed info on how you have been performing—it really helps! A few thoughts for you:

I think you do have room for improvement, and from what you told us, you have a solid base. You also recognize that there are limitations in how you are approaching things right now, which is essential for improving.

Let's start by talking about LR, which is one of the two areas I think you should focus on (LG being the other). Your LR performance (no particular question type being a problem) suggests that the issues you have aren't in any specific area, but stem from a more generalized fault. That usually means that somewhere in your process you are glossing over a step, or not really locking down something important. It's hard for me to know for sure without actually seeing you do questions. Regardless, the LR approach we use has two main parts to it: first, there is a general but systematic approach we use to attack any question, and second, there are additional strategies and techniques that come into play when certain ideas and concepts appear. So the first part is always there and consists of things like determining if it's a fact set or argument, recognizing premises and conclusions, eliminating answers using Contender/Loser, etc. You may be doing all that to some extent already, but if you aren't, then review the steps (which I call the Primary Objectives) and make sure you aren't missing anything obvious. those are all what I consider to be basic elements, and if you are weak in any of those areas, it will cause you to repeatedly miss questions.

The second part of our approach is what I sometimes call the air traffic controller role, where it's incumbent on you to recognize when a concept is in play. Conditionality is a good example of this idea: when conditional reasoning is present, you have to recognize it and often account for it. When it's not there, you never even have to think about it. My suspicion is that it's this phase that you are referencing when you mention not using our techniques, but please let me know if I'm correct about that. If I am, this is one area where you can truly increase your score while at the same time not sacrifice any speed. Really good test takers recognize when advanced concepts appear, and use the knowledge to their advantage to not only move quickly but also to move decisively.

By the way, your natural speed in LR is an excellent advantage, and it will help you increase your score going forward. However, you may see a slight speed dip as you begin to implement some more structure onto your studies. This is a natural result of the learning curve, so if/when it happens, don't be concerned. As you become more comfortable with the ideas, you'll begin to get faster, and ultimately return to your natural speed but with the added benefit of being more knowledge and solid in your approach.

With LG, there's clearly an opportunity here to increase your score. -8 is not a bad score at all, and it shows that you aren't overmatched by LG. Most of LG is about creating an optimal setup and making key inferences, and since you can understand what happened after the section is over, I suspect you need more focus on game recognition, rule diagramming, and especially inference-making. That's general advice, but if you go through every LSAT game out there and then start to line them up next to each other, the patterns they use get a lot clearer. And since the past is prologue on any standardized test, if you can see what they have been doing, you will be in an improved position to attack it when they do it on the next LSAT.

Let's last talk about how to study going forward. We've had several prior questions about your preparation, and you've been in kind of this same spot for at least 6-7 weeks now. Back in mid-December, we talked about some similar things, and at that time I mentioned to you that:

• "Especially because, as you noted, "I haven't really used much of the techniques." In a sense, you read everything, but these are tools that have to be used in order to be effective. In class, I've often said that it's like being given a 50-pound sword. Sure, it's a big strong weapon, but at first it's heavy and ungainly, and if attacked, you won't do a very good job of fighting. But, if you give yourself time, you will get better and better, and soon it becomes second nature. That's when it becomes truly effective! "

You mention not wanting to take a course because you don't want to learn the material again. I think that's a very reasonable position, but as I was reading your message and then some of the past discussions we've had, I thought to myself that a course would actually be perfect for you because it would allow you the opportunity to see these techniques in action and to understand why it is so important to have a solid, strategic approach to each section. Plus, you mention difficulty in self-diagnosis, and a class and the instructor can help with that (the Hotline too). Tutoring would achieve the same end-result, but obviously it's more of a financial commitment. Anyway, it's something to think about. you clearly are willing to do the wok and you have the desire to improve. those are essential pieces of the puzzle. I just think that self-study has you in a rut that;s hard to break out of. I usually am not the guy who is pushing taking a course or tutoring on anyone, but in your case I think it's exactly what would help.

Anyway, that's lot to think about If you have questions about anything, let me know. And if the course does interest you, I'm sure we can make it work out for you. Thanks!

[marcnash]

Hi Dave, thank you for your thorough response.

Actually, when you told me that I should focus on studying the questions per type to apply those techniques, I actually did that and started practising with the focus of using the tools that I have. however, with more practise, I kinda dropped that sword and started using common sense and intuition, so I would just juggle the ideas in my head and choose an answer that will fit, regardless of the concept is. Also, one reason that I have probably non-consciously stopped using the techniques is that I felt it affects my speed; as let's say for assumption, I would use the mechanistic approach and look for repeated and non-repeated items: that requires me to find the main conclusion and the premises and compare, which takes time, rather than just look at the answers and see what would me it complete. Do you think I should start applying the technique and eventually my speed will catch up? so yeah, I guess you're correct about the phase that I am missing.

most of my LG mistakes comes from questions that kind of require you to create a setup for each answer choice, like asking which of these cant come together, in an undefined game, so question that I need to diagram every response. they're speed and time killers that I try to use my guts feeling but it's not always accurate.

So practising on forward, should I start again redoing the Type questions problems. I have finished many of them as you've recommended, like 30 questions at least for some types, but those questions are seen already. I should practise fresh PTs and keep jumping from a question to another but have all techniques in hand? or just practice PTs and review it the way you've recommended in many posts? not sure how to exactly approach that/ it's kinda like studying all over but cause i know the material beforehand it probably won't be as productive, I don't know.

I think I may consider a course, I found one that ends just before the test, I'll take into consideration if the books were not enough to get me where I want by this time.

[Dave Killoran]

Hey Marc,

I'm going to pull a few comments out of your message and answer them directly. I think that will be easier and clearer,

Actually, when you told me that I should focus on studying the questions per type to apply those techniques, I actually did that and started practising with the focus of using the tools that I have. however, with more practise, I kinda dropped that sword and started using common sense and intuition, so I would just juggle the ideas in my head and choose an answer that will fit, regardless of the concept is. Also, one reason that I have probably non-consciously stopped using the techniques is that I felt it affects my speed; as let's say for assumption, I would use the mechanistic approach and look for repeated and non-repeated items: that requires me to find the main conclusion and the premises and compare, which takes time, rather than just look at the answers and see what would me it complete. Do you think I should start applying the technique and eventually my speed will catch up? so yeah, I guess you're correct about the phase that I am missing.

Ok, I see what has happened here, and it's a trap that a lot of students fall into. When you first start applying new techniques, you quite naturally slow way down. This is normal, but it feels like you are suddenly far worse, which shakes your confidence. This is the learning curve in action, and what you have to do is not stop using the techniques but instead practice with them even more. The eventual outcome is that your speed returns, but you then have the additional enhancement of being more mechanically and conceptually sound. So, yes, you do need to go back into the techniques and pick them back up. Don't stop until you are proficient.

most of my LG mistakes comes from questions that kind of require you to create a setup for each answer choice, like asking which of these cant come together, in an undefined game, so question that I need to diagram every response. they're speed and time killers that I try to use my guts feeling but it's not always accurate.

These types of questions are designed to be time-consuming, and there are also plenty of them, so you won't be able to avoid them. But, the better your setup and inferences, the more of these questions you can solve without diagramming. A good setup is the embodiment of the old adage that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. So, focus on your inference-making in order to lower the number of questions that you have to solve using brute force.

So practising on forward, should I start again redoing the Type questions problems. I have finished many of them as you've recommended, like 30 questions at least for some types, but those questions are seen already. I should practise fresh PTs and keep jumping from a question to another but have all techniques in hand? or just practice PTs and review it the way you've recommended in many posts? not sure how to exactly approach that/ it's kinda like studying all over but cause i know the material beforehand it probably won't be as productive, I don't know.

I think I may consider a course, I found one that ends just before the test, I'll take into consideration if the books were not enough to get me where I want by this time.

I still think a course would help you quite a bit, mainly because it's techniques and concepts that you need to work with, not simply doing a lot of questions (I'm all for doing tons of questions, but they have to be done in service of learning and improving your methods and strategies). As far as having seen the questions before, just having seen them isn't enough to give you all of the information in the question. I wrote about this more on our blog: http://blog.powerscore.com/lsat/bid/239 ... -questions. And, 30 questions of a type is not many questions at all. In short, the fact that you've seen some questions isn't a problem, mainly because when you first did those questions you didn't approach them in the optimal way.


I hope the above helps, and I see it as good news: we know you never really fully studied and then applied the techniques. That means there is still room for improvement

Thanks!