Law School Discussion

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Topics - dubsy

Pages: 1 ... 21 22 23 24 25 [26] 27
Hey, I just wanted to make sure that the conventional thing is to indeed, select what your ethnicity is regardless of whether you're URM or not when you register for the LSAT and are filling out the applications.  I wasn't sure because i keep coming across the option of NOT including my ethnicity, but i don't know if that's looked at weirdly if i were to choose not to do it?  i'm asian, so i really don't care whether they know or not, but i don't know if it's something that's pretty much expected like checking off the waiver agreement on your recommendations.

If I'm fairly confident I can break 170 but need the time till December to do so, am I better off waiting to submit my application then, or is that risky in terms of where my application will fall in the rolling admissions process?  Is it better for me to rush my LSAT and take it in October and get my app in early, but at the risk of not breakin 170?  I'm looking at T14 schools, reaching for HYS.

Law School Admissions / LR question: Type 3
« on: July 31, 2007, 01:23:37 PM »
Recently discovered prehistoric rock paintings on small islands off thenorthern coast of Norway have archaeologists puzzled. THe predominant theory about northern cave paintings was that they were largely a description of the current diets of the painters. This theory cannot be right, because the painters must have needed to eat the sea animals populating the waters north of Norway if they were to make the long journey to and from the islands, and there are no paintings that unambiguously depict such creatures.

Each of the following, if true, weakens the argument against the predominant theory about northern cave paintings EXCEPT:

correct answer: the cave paintings that were discovered on the islands depicted many land animals.

Answer I chose: once on these islands, the cave painters hunted and ate land animals.

Is my answer wrong primarily because it is targeted at what happened in the past (irrelevant) rather than addressing the content of the theory itself?  I'm a little confused, please help if you can.

Studying for the LSAT / LR Question
« on: July 26, 2007, 08:08:38 AM »
This summer, Jen, who has worked at KVZ for just over three years, plants to spend with her family the entire four weeks of paid vacation to which she is entitled this year. Anyone who has worked at KVZ for between one and four years is automatically entitled to exactly three weeks paid vacation each year but can apply up tot half of any vacation time that remains unused at the end of one year to the next year's vacation. 

if the statements above are all true, which one of the following must also be true on the basis of them?

Correct answer: Jennifer did not use two weeks of the paid vacation time to which she was entitled last year.

My confusion:  how do you know she did not use two?? i don't see the math in that. didn't she use two weeks out of the three last year, and push that unused third week to this year to make it a total of 4 paid vacation weeks this year?  this question seems so simple, and i'm bugging out that i am totally clueless as to why i don't understand the right answer!!!

I'm doing the logical construct drill in lesson two of TM, and am confused as to the difference between some of them. 

here are the answer choices we can use:  must be true, not necessarily true, could be true or cannot be true.

here is an example of a question on this drill that we're supposed to identify what the correct answer choice would be:

"Which one of the following cannot be validly concluded from the stated rules?"
the correct answer choice would be:  not necessarily true
the incorrect answer choice would be one that is a: must be true

I, on the other hand wrote that the correct answer choice would be: cannot be true (didn't it say "cannot be validly concluded?") and wrote that the incorrect would be: could be true.

I'm confused. what's the difference?? can someone explain???  and why are these distinctions important for knowing on the LSAT when i get what i should be looking for in the correct answer choice anyway?????

Studying for the LSAT / testmasters lesson 1 LR HW
« on: July 24, 2007, 08:10:29 AM »
are the LR type 1 questions that we're given in this lesson supposed to be forcing us to need to diagram on almost every single one to get a hang of identifying sufficient/necessary conditions?  i've been finding it difficult to solve any of these without diagramming at all, and just want to make sure that this is the point of this exercise and that i'm not going to have to diagram every single question on the lsat!

Studying for the LSAT / december test takers?
« on: July 23, 2007, 03:24:32 PM »
hello - i'm not a newbie to this site but actually registered last year thinking i'd take them then, but ended up not feeling ready for the tests.  i also never really got familiar with how to navigate this site, especially in terms of figuring out how the hell i can tell if someone has (MOST LIKELY) asked redundant questions like the quick one i am going to ask:

how many people are around on the same track as me - maybeeee taking the october lsat but chances are i'm going to need till the december LSAT to get to my target score??? just looking for people in the same boat to ask advice/share with!!!!!!

i took testmasters last year, and i always felt that the biggest flaw in their method was that my instructor (maybe different from other TM instructors) ALWAYS made us diagram, and emphasized that as the first method even for seemingly un-diagrammable arguments.  that definitely got me into a robotic rather than conceptual way of approaching the LR, which i'm trying to overcome the habit of doing this time around because i'm much more comfortable digesting concepts than with symbols/arrows, but of course, time is an issue and i know sometimes diagrams are indeed the best way to work through these.  does anyone have any advice on how to identify when it's best to try to digest a statement conceptually vs. know it's worth it to diagram it in order to be time efficient in LR?  please let me know, thanks!!

Studying for the LSAT / for anyone in Testmasters: Extra diagnostics?
« on: August 28, 2006, 05:12:23 PM »
Is anyone who's currently taking testmasters also taking extra diagnostics that are not provided by testmasters? If so - do you have any books to recommend that don't overlap with course materials? Also - does anyone know about how extensive all the homeworks are in terms of the total amount of practice tests we will have taken by the end of this course (not including the proctored/supplemental diagnostics)?  Thanks!

Studying for the LSAT / Numerical Distribution Technique?
« on: August 26, 2006, 01:45:14 PM »
Hey guys,
I was wondering if someone could explain how to systematically/efficiently figure out a numerical distribution- I tend to just stare at the paper and figure out which numbers I haven't used yet.  Sometimes I can see the pattern, but at other times I often lose track of what I've already written, and what I have yet to figure out.  If possible, could you explain to me how you'd figure the example below out step by step in your head? (Ex: start with the highest # on teh left, then decrease by 1, etc. etc.)

Below are two sets of variables, and the variables in the first set must be distributed amogn variables in the second set. Use the conditions to figure out the numerical distribution:
First set: 12 books
Second set: 4 shelves
Conditions: There must be an odd number of books on each shelf.

Just in case you want to check- here's the answer, but I would like to know how you got there step by step, and how you knew what to do next after each distribution/eliminating a possibility:


Pages: 1 ... 21 22 23 24 25 [26] 27