LG Inconsistency Keeping From Higher Scores

[cdwinell]

Hi,

I'm currently doing the 3-month self-study plan with the 3 Bibles and am planning to take the September test. I've just finished "Week 6" and I've begun to notice that Logic Games has been causing me a lot of problems. My diagnostic score before studying was a 156 with -5 on LG and the most work to be done on LR and RC by far. I feel like LR and RC have become a lot easier for me in the last few weeks (although there's variation RC is around -2 to -4 and RC is between -2 to -6/section), but I oddly have barely changed in LG performance.

As someone who studied math in undergrad (and I'm currently doing a Master's in econ), I originally thought that LG was going to be my strong-suit in that it felt the most natural to me before taking the exam, and my untimed tests/games generally show that I can do the games well. However, I've realized that my performance varies drastically section to section. I've taken recent tests that have put me at 165, 161, and 164 with LG performances of -8, -3, and -9 (although the middle test was an odd one because the first sections were incredibly distracted). What concerns me is that after a month and a half of studying I'm still consistently struggling to finish the sections and don't seem to have made a substantial improvement on LG even though I felt it was going to be much easier to get close to -0.

My goal is to hit 165+, but I would really be much happier with something closer to 167/168+ and I'm worried that LG is going to stop me from hitting that by the time September rolls around. Any help is appreciated, thanks!

[Jonathan Evans]

Hi, CDWinell,

Yes, I completely concur that we need to establish consistency in your logic games. I'd like to know a little bit more about your approach to LG and what areas are giving you difficulty. Would you please reply to this message and let me know which of the following areas present difficulty?

• Identifying LG game types
• Setups and diagramming (especially rule accuracy)
• Dynamically observing inferences
• Understanding questions/knowing when you've got the right answer
• Difficult question types
• Pacing

How is your reviewing going?

• Are you doing a blind review of your games on your practice tests before you check your answers?
• After consulting the answers, do you attempt to work through the games again to establish ownership/mastery of the concepts presented on a game?
• Have you noticed patterns in which game types give you difficulty?
• Are you noticing which games are more challenging and saving those for later in the section?
• Are you able to get 100% accuracy on games if untimed? If not, how and why do you miss questions?

There are a variety of different challenges students face on logic games. I look forward to your reply and will do my best to address your needs. I hope this helps!

[Adam Tyson]

We get how frustrating that can be, cdwinell! LG is, for most folks, the hardest section when they first encounter the test, because our intuition isn't as useful there as in the other sections. Then, as you learn techniques for diagramming the games, it typically shows more substantial improvement relative to the other sections. But not everyone gets there at the same pace.

The first thing I would suggest you look at is what you are doing immediately after diagramming the rules. Are you moving quickly to the questions, or are you taking a little extra time to search for and diagram additional inferences? The mistake a lot of folks make is hurrying to the questions before investigating what inferences can be drawn, because it's really those inferences that you will be tested on more than the rules as originally presented. I would encourage you to invest more time in the setup phase of each game, and not to concern yourself too much about the timing - everyone worries at first about wasting precious time on the diagram, and so they "cut and run" before they have done enough work to prepare themselves.

Some inferences will be obvious, but that doesn't mean you should take them for granted or leave them out of your diagram. If P is some time before W in a linear game, that means P cannot be last and W cannot be first, so perhaps include "not-laws" to reflect those inferences. Then, go a step further, and ask yourself "what if" questions. What if P is second to last? That will force W to be last, but will it have additional impacts on other variables? What if W is second? Then P will have to be first - what follows from that? Those are the sort of questions that will lead you to find additional inferences, inferences that are likely to be at the heart of the questions you are about to face. Make that investment in your diagram, and you will typically see big dividends in the form of questions that are easier to answer quickly and confidently and, most important, accurately.

Another thing I see causing students to be held back in their games process is "staring". When asked a question, do you find yourself staring at the diagram, hoping to see whatever it is you need to see in order to answer it? That can kill you for time, and means you are probably doing too much work in your head, which leads to inaccurate answers. Whenever you find yourself stuck, don't stare - draw! Think with your pencil, and draw out whatever it is you are thinking about in a mini-diagram. You're more likely to find the answer quickly, and with fewer errors, if you put your thoughts on paper where you can see them (and, as a bonus, can use them again to answer additional questions). Not sure what to draw? Draw anything! Just get the creative and logical juices flowing, and you're going to find yourself getting unstuck a lot faster.

See if the situations I just described might apply to you, and if so, try these strategies to get yourself moving. If you are already this stuff but still having problems, let us know more about where you are getting stuck or making mistakes, and we'll see what we can do to help you over that hump. Improvement will come, have faith! We'll be here to help you when you need it along the way.

[cdwinell]

Thanks for the responses!

I would say that right now my issue is mostly coming down to pacing. If I'm untimed, I can usually figure out all of the questions pretty well (with the occasional error). I've definitely had problems with staring - one issue is that when it comes to questions with 5 options (either the "if A, then B" answer choices, or "if this is true which of the following can be included: A and B, B and C, etc." types) which occur relatively frequently, I don't have a quick strategy for dealing with them. So I either get into a mental mode of "this is going to take forever" or try to work through the options, both of which take up lots of time.

One thing I've realized is that a lot of those above questions have 5 answer choices that are all based around the same rule: if A can't be next to B, then 4 of the answer choices in some way force A and B together. In other words, the question tests ONE rule, not a different rule with every answer choice - which was kind of a revelation to me. The trick is finding the right rule haha. I tried to use this to my advantage on the last PT I took (163), and didn't see an improvement. I finally finished the section on this last PT, but did about the same as I have been.

In general, I don't think I tend to struggle with any particular type of game more than any other. It's largely circumstantial and based on the complexity of the game/setup. I imagine a lot of that comes from not making secondary inferences, which I can do given the time, but under time pressure has proven difficult. The "what if" idea may help with this. I also have basically been going through the games in order since I haven't pinned down one type that's harder (although maybe I should just start by attacking the basic linear ones first).

Also, I've heard the term "blind review" used before, but is that just the idea that you work through the games again, knowing your score but not the correct answers? Also should these be timed (I haven't been doing that)? If so, I have been going through the games again after the exam.

Thanks again!

[Jonathan Evans]

Hi, CDWinell,

Good observation about the structure of the questions! Yes, that's exactly right: the questions that are seemingly "wide-open" aren't so wide-open after all. There is usually some principle or inference that is tested on such questions. There are often also ways to eliminate two or three answers off the bat because they clearly violate a certain rule or inference.

However, at the end of the day don't beat yourself up looking for the missing link as the be-all-end-all of getting such a question right. As long as you're maintaining efficiency and focus throughout the section, it's not going to make or break your performance just to start churning through the answers. It is quite possible that this missing link will occur to you after one or two runs through the possibilities. Keep your pencil moving and maintain your momentum and focus to achieve your goals.

Yes, blind review is a core PowerScore strategy. After you have finished a practice test before you have scored it work through each section untimed—zero pressure—to determine whether you are satisfied with your answers. Don't spend the whole time second guessing yourself; just work through the process and determine whether your reasoning was sound. If there's something you would have done differently, go ahead and give it a shot. Then, after you have scored your test (using your initial responses of course), you may review your work a third time to see which mistakes you caught and which ones you missed even during review. Thence you can make a game plan for what you plan to do differently on the next practice test.

I hope this helps!

[cdwinell]

This is very helpful, thanks! I'll start using that blind review strategy for sure.

Since I generally have few issues with the problems untimed, it seems like the pacing is the biggest issue overall (which leads to subsequent mistakes) - is this something that most people get better at closer to the exam? I guess my concern is mostly that with six weeks left I don't want to be struggling to finish sections or have to guess on multiple questions by the time September rolls around. Since my untimed games are usually pretty solid, I'd like to be in a place where that's actually reflected in my score when the test comes (because it isn't right now!).

[Who Ray]

Hello Cdwinell,

Yes, it is something people get better at! We have noticed a whole score increase pattern of "late bloomers." These students sometimes even see a drop in their scores as they first learn Powerscore techniques and then a significant increase in the latter portions of their study. Stressing about your speed will not help you, but continuing to practice LG will!

Keep up the good work—it's incredible how much you can accomplish in any given amount of time!

Cheers,
Who Ray

[cdwinell]

Update:

I'm still struggling to handle time well on games and I'm still averaging around -8 to -10 per section, no matter how I review them. However, I just did a 6 section test using sections 3 and 4 from the December 2010 test and only had -4 on games which is a big improvement (but it was experimental so it didn't count). What is really confusing me is that is considered one of the hardest games sections by people that took that exam (based on what I've read in other posts like this one: https://blog.powerscore.com/lsat/bid/15 ... y-Happened).

What is going on here - is there any reasonable explanation for why this section felt easier to me than most other LG sections when I took it, but that my processing speed with all games is just slow even for easier ones? When I got to the "easier" section (the scored one) later in the exam, I went back to scoring poorly again.

Thanks!

[James Finch]

Hi CD,

There are all kinds of factors that could go into your score on one test. Maybe you were feeling especially energetic that day, or you quickly understood the necessary inferences that you usually miss. I wouldn't put too much stock in any one single test performance. With that said, you did well, and that should give you extra confidence going forward. If you're studying hard and understanding why you're arriving at incorrect answers, you'll keep improving, and the logic games tend to be the section with the biggest A-Ha!/Eureka! moment, where a student has an epiphany and begins scoring consistently excellent in that section.

That said, if you're finding that you're consistently making the same mistakes, and can't seem to correct them, you might want to look into tutoring. In my experience, even a couple hours with a quality tutor can help change your way of thinking and break through score plateaus.

Hope this helps!