17 replies to this topic

[Neo]

Hey folks,

I am just starting to study for the LSAT and was thinking of adopting a three-step approach on each previously-released LSAT question. First, I plan to do each question untimed (and in the process try to understand what mistakes I made). Second, I will keep doing the same question until I get it correct. Third, I will do the same question (once I got it correct) again but try to do it in less time. The only down side is that I would be repeating these questions several times. Does this sound like a sensible strategy?

Thanks!

[theiva4]

not really, but do whatever works for you!

[gridiron]

you will find that even with an honest attempt to act as though you don't already know what the correct answer is it will guide your behaviour in redoing it.

find you errors, understand them and why you made them, then move onto the next test.

[theiva4]

yeah what gridiron said. And limit the # of untimed tests you do because they are not representative of actual LSAT conditions. For example, Im sure most people would get near 100% on the Logic Games doing them untimed but the difficulty in the logic games is the time constraints.

[Neo]

Thanks, gridiron and theiva4. If I just review the mistakes I made on questions that I do under strickly-timed conditions without redoing them afterwards, would I be able to avoid repeating these same mistakes when I do other questions? Part of the reason why I want to re-do them in the first place is so that I know I won't fall for the same trap again when I move on to the next question that is of the same type.

[theiva4]

There is really no reason to redo the questions once you know the answers. Just understand why you got it wrong and move on. Im pretty sure you can buy answer keys to the practice LSAT's that give full explanations of the correct answers.

[Neo]

Got it. I trust you, theiva4. Suppose that I am doing a section (not necessarily logic games) and I run of time due to the strictly-timed condition, should I continue and finish off the section even though I had already used up my 35 minutes? If not, what should I do with the remaining questions in that section? I was thinking that maybe I can give myself a minute and fifteen seconds for each of the remaining question and do them individually. Does that make sense? And thanks again for the tips.

[theiva4]

If you run out of time. Still do the questions as quickly as possible like 1 min each but dont count those questions in your practice score. If the time runs out you have gotten those questions wrong. This will reinforce the idea of doing the questions as quickly but as accurately as possible. With practice you will see that for most questions of the QR you can do them within a minute except for the really tough/long questions (i.e assumptions, parallel reasoning ones).

[marie03]

I don't think your 3 step method would work for me because I tend to memorize answers. If you want to learn from your mistakes and apply them to new questions get a study guide. I know Steve's study guide has questions arranged by type. You can do a question once, re-do it, learn from your mistakes, then apply what you learned to new questions of the same type.

[Neo]

Great suggestions, theiva4; appreciate it.

Marie03: Just so that I am clear, are you recommending that I re-do the question once (and only once) after finding out why I made a mistake and then move on to a new question?

[KER_2012]

Everyone seems to prepare for the LSAT differently, so if this approach works for you, go for it. Personally, I've never found redoing old LSATs to be especially useful. I find that I'm usually too familiar with the questions, even if I don't remember the exact answer.

Starting with untimed sections can be helpful, especially if you have a particular area of weakness. That's what I did to improve on LG.

Reviewing your wrong answers is helpful, if you don't review them you won't be able to pick up any patterns in the questions you're answering incorrectly. But there are so many LSATs out there I would use redoing old questions as a last resort.

[marie03]

Neo, on 13 January 2012 - 12:54 AM, said:

Marie03: Just so that I am clear, are you recommending that I re-do the question once (and only once) after finding out why I made a mistake and then move on to a new question?

Yeah, I would only re-do them once. Different things work for different people though. If you won't remember the answers then you can re-do them.

[Catalyst]

Here's what I did:

1. While writing a PT, circle the question numbers that you aren't sure about. Flag the answers for those questions that you think are possible.

2. When taking up the test, divide your wrong answers into two categories - circles and uncircled.

3. Try and identify why you got each question wrong.

4. Identify trends in both question types and wrong answers. Did anything consistently trip you up?

5. Revisit wrong answers later. See if you circle new ones this time, and see how you do on uncircled vs circled answers.

Of course, 5 really depends on your memory. I found revisiting old questions unhelpful except for using as a warmup if I was starting early in the AM or as a way of getting going if I was feeling burnt out.

This method helped me identify trends in not only my mistakes, but my confidence level. I found I was overconfident and not circling some types of questions consistently and getting them wrong.

Not sure if this helps or is much on topic at this point, but there it is. Good luck!

[Neo]

Fantastic recommendations and suggestions. Thanks!

[johnalm]

Your method will work well for games- assuming you dont take any "logical shortcuts" in repeating the answer.

Your method will 50/50 work for LR- because the trick is understanding where you messed up in your train of reasoning. You can look at the answer and say "oh, ya that makes sense", but obviously when you were thinking it out, you made a mistake that led you to the wrong answer. The trick is to really think very hard and see where you messed up. Sometimes you have to leave a question a while and then comeback before you can really wrap your mind around it.

As for RC, not sure it'll work very well. RC is more like "oh this answer makes sense- obviously", like doesnt take as much thinking as LR, so in your rewrites you might be already strongly baised towards the right answer

I like Catalysts method though

Edited by johnalm, 14 January 2012 - 02:41 PM.

[Neo]

johnalm, on 14 January 2012 - 02:40 PM, said:

Your method will work well for games- assuming you dont take any "logical shortcuts" in repeating the answer.

Your method will 50/50 work for LR- because the trick is understanding where you messed up in your train of reasoning. You can look at the answer and say "oh, ya that makes sense", but obviously when you were thinking it out, you made a mistake that led you to the wrong answer. The trick is to really think very hard and see where you messed up. Sometimes you have to leave a question a while and then comeback before you can really wrap your mind around it.

As for RC, not sure it'll work very well. RC is more like "oh this answer makes sense- obviously", like doesnt take as much thinking as LR, so in your rewrites you might be already strongly baised towards the right answer

I like Catalysts method though

johnalm: I too like Catalysts' approach and agree with your assessment although I am not entirely certain as to what you mean by "logical shortcuts." For Logic Games, if I was going to redo a question that I had trouble with (and probably no more than once based on the feedbacks that I received), I would tackle it like a new game that I have never touched before.

[jin45]

I'd say try the following:

1) Attempt each item timed the first time. The experience of seeing a new LG and going "Oh shit, what I do, the clock is ticking!" is important as a sort of psychological preparation for the real thing.
2) Review mistakes, look for ways to improve efficiency
3) Do the item timed again, review
4) Wait a few weeks
5) Do the item timed one last time

Edited by jin45, 16 January 2012 - 04:53 PM.

[Neo]

Thanks jin45; I appreciate your input.