Law School Discussion

So how did we do?

Tracy T

  • ***
  • 45
  • I'm defying gravity and you can't pull me down !
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: So how did we do?
« Reply #110 on: October 04, 2008, 06:19:51 PM »
I haven't posted for a while, but I did take the LSAT today.  My sections were LR RC LR LR LG.  I feel absolutely drained.  I don't feel so bad about the test, but by the 3rd section of LR's I thought my hell...enough already !

I am SO not looking forward to 3 weeks of waaaaaaaaaaaiting.

Re: So how did we do?
« Reply #111 on: October 04, 2008, 06:46:58 PM »
I had the experimental LR.

Oh man... I always felt pressed for time during that test.

ME too. I always finish LR/RC with extra time. Not so today. I want to blame it on time speeding up, extra rotations of the earth or something. Pisser.

Re: So how did we do?
« Reply #112 on: October 04, 2008, 07:03:56 PM »
For the second one (what weakened the authors conclusion) I said it was she wasn't representative of Chinese-American writings. I stayed away from the one about the book because the book was just as example of a larger point whereas I thought the point he was trying to make was that she had a literary lineage if you will. If she's not representative then she may not have that lineage. I'm probably wrong though.

I actually chose the opposite as you, though I did narrow it down to those two. To me, it seemed as if the book not being representative of her work undermines the author's claim that her writing as a whole has a base in the whatevertalk tradition. That book is the only example he gives of her writing, so if that's nothing like her other writing, then she probably isn't heavily influenced by the whatevertalk roots.

Yeah but I don't think that was the claim. I remember pausing on that one, and while I don't remember what I picked, I remember NOT picking the one about it being unrepresentative of her work. Claim is that she is influenced by the tradition, and this book is evidence of it; even if no other book of hers is like that, the claim could still hold, and now that I think about it, it could arguably even be strengthened by that fact--the style is one of evolution, change, reflecting nuance and variation, right, the way oral traditions do--so you might not even expect her other work to look just like this book.

But I may be stretching that a bit...

Re: So how did we do?
« Reply #113 on: October 04, 2008, 08:32:05 PM »
I think one thing that helped me HUGE today is that the proctor put his digital timer up on the LCD projector screen (it was at my school, and we have those projectors that basically transmit a color video of what is sitting on their screen onto the big screens) and so we had the minutes and seconds up. it made my timing a lot more accurate...i think i would have done slightly worse if not for that, since i have troubles timing with my analog watch.

meggo

  • ****
  • 581
    • View Profile
Re: So how did we do?
« Reply #114 on: October 04, 2008, 08:36:02 PM »
^
wow that's lucky. I like the watch I have, it's very precise and better than the other cheapo watch I had but that would have been nice. When I was standing in line to register this (annoying) guy in front of me was chatting with his friend and he was like 'it's so annoying not being able to bring in a timer. There is no way I'm going to buy an analog watch just for this.' And I was like what?! You'll spend $140 writing this test, but not $20 at Walmart to get a cheap watch? then when we were in the room they were looking around for a clock. I was like um....right.

I still don't think that is the claim the passage was making. And I could be really off here, but from what I understood the claim was she was influenced by talk-song-whatever and this is clearly indicated by this book. If this book is not representative of her work, than it's an anomaly, and she is not heavily influenced by this tradition. But I could be remembering everything wrong. I still think the trickiest question on the passage was the argument part question.

Re: So how did we do?
« Reply #115 on: October 04, 2008, 08:50:36 PM »
I think (?) that the question wasn't "which of the following would most weaken the entire passing?" but was "which of the following would most weaken the last paragraph?".

yes, the entire passage was about being influenced in general. but the last paragraph was specifically an example of how she was influenced by the tradition given her one book. so obviously the CR is the one about the book not being typical of her work.

Re: So how did we do?
« Reply #116 on: October 04, 2008, 09:10:38 PM »
Quote
yes, the entire passage was about being influenced in general. but the last paragraph was specifically an example of how she was influenced by the tradition given her one book. so obviously the CR is the one about the book not being typical of her work.

It was the entire paragraph. I remember wondering this when I was stumped on the question and went back to read it explicitly looking for a paragraph reference but there was none. If it was "last paragraph" that would mean a lot of people misread because most were stumped on it and I think we can all agree that if it referred to the last paragraph the book answer would clearly be right because, well, the last paragraph dealt 100% with her book.

meggo

  • ****
  • 581
    • View Profile
Re: So how did we do?
« Reply #117 on: October 04, 2008, 09:19:19 PM »
It's so hard because even though it only happened earlier we all remember it differently  :D

I was almost positive that it referred specifically to weaken the author's claims in the last paragraph. But meh. that's how I remember it, and that's how it better be  ;)

Re: So how did we do?
« Reply #118 on: October 04, 2008, 11:42:00 PM »
I felt much better this time around. When I took it in June I felt uncertain and few days after had appendicitis so I was in terrible shape. This test I was much calmer since surprisingly I did well in June, so I came into this test with the mentality that I was already fine and this was just nitpicking.
Overall I don't think the test was hard. It had its parts but the sections themselves weren't overly difficult. I only had a problem with one part of the LR but I plowed through it. The RC was fine up until the damn China Talk story. I spent an hour reading one of the question and finally just gave up and up some Native American answer choice down. But overall the other stories weren't bad.  The games were fine up until the last one were I just froze and couldn't find a way to attack it. I answered the first two questions since they were easy enough, but just steamrolled down the D's for the last three. Damn Buses...

Re: So how did we do?
« Reply #119 on: October 05, 2008, 12:35:33 AM »
I had a different test, but I think I did OK.  I had LR-RC-LR-LR-LG.  I don't think I did too well on the first two sections, but the last three were easy as cake.  I finished both LR sections early, which is almost unheard of for me except for on PrepTest 48, and the LG weren't too difficult.  This has  me a little worried that there might have been a curve similar to PrepTest 48, but I guess I'll never know.  Overall, I feel really good about it and am prepared to accept whatever score I get (provided it's a 167 or above haha).