Jump to content
legallynotblondee

Restarting studying after months off

Recommended Posts

Hi everyone! 
due to some unforeseen changes, I will be tackling this lovely test again. I wrote it in November and got a 162, and haven’t studied since. 
Just wondering if anyone has any advice for starting up my studying after such a long break. Does the test come back to you pretty quickly?

If anyone has any suggestions or tips on how to maximize my time, I would really appreciate it! I’m honestly not sure where to even begin, but I’m hoping to get to a 167+ by July ish :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I took a 5 year break from the test and forgot everything other than a tiny tiny bit about the way logic chains worked. It's actually a blessing in some ways -- you'll have forgotten some of the material so you have more to work with in practice sets and the like. 

Funny enough, I got back into studying for this test in Feb 2020 and wrote in July 2020. I think the most important thing for my success was to create a plan of attack and really stick to it. I knew I was weak in LG, and after doing some practice LR sets I knew I had some types of question types I was weak against and focus fired on those. I kept a detailed journal to track what I was getting wrong and why I was getting wrong, and also utilized analytics on 7sage to really nail in what I had to work on. I did LG almost every day and watched some of those explanation videos on 7sage probably 5+ times. 

Every week I'd sit down and evaluate what went right and what went wrong, and make notes about specific things that seemed to always trip me up, take too much time, etc. I was very honest about anything I wasn't 100% certain on and that really helped me build up fundamentals to tackle the test intelligently. 

February was devoted to just section/question type practice and reading RC passages from early PTs/articles from The Economist/Scientific American/etc., occasionally slotting in RC sessions and peering over the lessons where I needed the most work. I started doing 1 PT a week around the middle of March, taking a lot of care to again review very deeply. The review always took longer than the tests themselves, sometimes double the time. From the middle of April onward, I was doing 2 PTs a week with review. I did LG sections or games in some capacity 6x a week because I internalized the idea that it was the most learnable section, and it really paid off for me in my July 2020 take. I don't know if your LG was as bad as mine but I would sometimes do 3 sections of LG (12 games) in a row (mixing sets I'd done before, but not perfectly, and new sets to conserve prep materials).

TL;DR: Figure out your weaknesses, focus fire on them, and remember to heavily review and be honest with your faults. A long break can be a good thing.

and FYI, I got a 161 back in 2015, did a diagnostic in the beginning of 2020 and got a 159... ended up with a 168 in July and was getting 170+ in PTs by June. 

Edited by goodisgood
i am not properly remembering my timelines lol
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/22/2021 at 4:17 PM, goodisgood said:

I took a 5 year break from the test and forgot everything other than a tiny tiny bit about the way logic chains worked. It's actually a blessing in some ways -- you'll have forgotten some of the material so you have more to work with in practice sets and the like. 

Funny enough, I got back into studying for this test in Feb 2020 and wrote in July 2020. I think the most important thing for my success was to create a plan of attack and really stick to it. I knew I was weak in LG, and after doing some practice LR sets I knew I had some types of question types I was weak against and focus fired on those. I kept a detailed journal to track what I was getting wrong and why I was getting wrong, and also utilized analytics on 7sage to really nail in what I had to work on. I did LG almost every day and watched some of those explanation videos on 7sage probably 5+ times. 

Every week I'd sit down and evaluate what went right and what went wrong, and make notes about specific things that seemed to always trip me up, take too much time, etc. I was very honest about anything I wasn't 100% certain on and that really helped me build up fundamentals to tackle the test intelligently. 

February was devoted to just section/question type practice and reading RC passages from early PTs/articles from The Economist/Scientific American/etc., occasionally slotting in RC sessions and peering over the lessons where I needed the most work. I started doing 1 PT a week around the middle of March, taking a lot of care to again review very deeply. The review always took longer than the tests themselves, sometimes double the time. From the middle of April onward, I was doing 2 PTs a week with review. I did LG sections or games in some capacity 6x a week because I internalized the idea that it was the most learnable section, and it really paid off for me in my July 2020 take. I don't know if your LG was as bad as mine but I would sometimes do 3 sections of LG (12 games) in a row (mixing sets I'd done before, but not perfectly, and new sets to conserve prep materials).

TL;DR: Figure out your weaknesses, focus fire on them, and remember to heavily review and be honest with your faults. A long break can be a good thing.

and FYI, I got a 161 back in 2015, did a diagnostic in the beginning of 2020 and got a 159... ended up with a 168 in July and was getting 170+ in PTs by June. 

Thank you so much for all your help & detailed journey. I’m ready to get back in the metaphorical saddle !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I found the best way way for me to study after a few months off was to just hammer out a ton of non-timed practice tests for a week without watching any videos or study guides. Forcing myself to figure out the problems with no aids brought the info and strategy back in a super helpful way for me. After that I turned to videos and my books in order to figure out the info that I really couldn't do myself and then do timed tests. Bear in mind I only had two weeks to pull it together so you could extend this timeline quite a bit if you have the time!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Recent Posts

    • I'm not completing undergrad right now but u of a recently sent an email saying they would be reviewing Indigenous applications March 9th I believe and hopefully having decisions being sent out for March 16th... 
    • This was quite clearly not my point, which I know you understand considering you felt the need to caricature my position. I do not think it is "bizarre" to assume that if financial security is present for a given student, other factors than employment prospects will come to the forefront in their decision making process - these other factors could simply be one's interest in a subject (as I have already discussed), but they could also very well be a lower difficulty level.  Also, it is ridiculous to construe my point as saying that "elite undergraduate programs and internships are full of disadvantaged students" when my overarching theme is accessibility to those elite institutions for disadvantaged students in the first place. 
    • Some firms are replacing meals/receptions with 30 minute "coffee chats", either over the phone or video calls. For most large firms your second interview will not occur on the same day as your first. I know of at least one mid-size firm which has said they may invite candidates back for second interviews on the same day.
    • I appreciate you writing about your experience! I'm also glad you were able to overcome all the hurdles associated with having a foreign degree. As a recent LL.B. graduate that's currently going through the NCA process, your post definitely serves as an inspiration that it can be possible to find success in the Canadian legal market regardless of your legal education background. I do have a number of questions that I would be curious to hear your unique input on.  I am curious to know if you have any advice on how recent graduates with no undergraduate background can differentiate themselves in the articling market? Also, having practiced in a few firms and having started your own solo practice, what markets/areas of the law do you think foreign graduates should target in order to have the best opportunity to gain employment/articling in?  Finally, I'm curious to hear what your NCA equivalency experience was like. I understand that at one point Bond did not have NCA requirements. Did you have to do equivalency exams at all?  Thanks for sharing your experience! 
    • An essential part of 1L is arguing about pointless things 

×
×
  • Create New...