« on: August 20, 2007, 03:49:14 PM »
I always seem to miss 7-12 questions on my Practice LSATs (~167-174), but it's over silly, careless mistakes that I'm hoping test day stress will alleviate. Did anyone have this experience?
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.
Messages - Visual Dictionary
« on: August 19, 2007, 03:50:00 PM »
I've began making a list with a fellow test-taker:
1. Necessary and Sufficient conditions.
This is vital for adequate performance.
Be able to read a prompt an pick out the causes. Notice casuality buzzwords.
3. Assumption Negation Technique
Be able to weed out necessary conditions that compromise answer choices on assumption questions.
4. Agree/Disagree Test
Be able to use this on "two-speakers-disagree" questions to determine what's the crux of disagreement.
5. Principle - a broad abstraction that specifies what you should do in particular cases.
. . .
I'll continue later.
« on: August 19, 2007, 03:26:51 PM »
Since virtually everyone I spoke with advised me against buying a copy, I undermined their argument by borrowing one from the library.
I love its introduction. Perfection motivates me. But are its questions taken from actual LSATs or not? I've been working through it and some of the questions seem a little fuzzy.
I haven't found a sure-fire way of answering these. Sometimes I diagram/abstract the logic or search for key words like "must" or "most" or "could be," but I flounder just as often.
Is anybody recklessly proficient with these? How?!
« on: August 17, 2007, 05:16:04 PM »
« on: August 17, 2007, 12:19:29 PM »
I've heard a variety of opinions on this board, but a superb test-taker told me that once a day is the best preparation for the LSAT. Three weeks of that, he said, and you'll begin solving RC questions in your sleep.
Granted, that's flimsy "testimonial" support, but it still sounds correct. What do you think?
I just solved the June 2007 RC section (timed), and I missed a surprising four questions. The Rita Dove analogy question should have been more obvious, and the "evolutionary origins of music" prompt was somewhat rough, but I didn't think that the passages and questions were radically different than anything I had seen before.
Can any proponents of the "harder RC" interpretation explain their viewpoint?
« on: August 16, 2007, 11:35:34 PM »
I know it sounds like a Seinfeld routine, but the extra "101" cushion seems helpful on the old tests, while "100" is such an exacting, terrifying number.