Last week, the results of the September 2017 LSAT were released. The feedback we have received from students has been quite mixed, with only a few consensus observations so far. We previously broke down the Logical Reasoning section of the test last week and the scoring scale yesterday, and will be addressing the Logic Games section in the next couple of days.Read More
Back again for part 3 of the LSAT regimen. I hope you enjoyed part 2 that broke down the best possible way to master Logic Games. Here we are to talk about the skills that are rewarded in Reading Comprehension and Logical Reasoning.
The skill that the LSAT makers reward you for having..... BEYOND understanding VIEWSTAMP and all the wonderful teaching PowerScore has showed us, what they reward you for having is SHORT TERM MEMORY. Now that may seem obvious. And you may think that this skill cannot be strengthened, but it can.
But before I break that down...Read More
Well, the results are in. Overall, the June 2017 Reading Comprehension section proved to follow the general theme found elsewhere on the June 2017 test: the section was fairly average. While the Psychology passage in Passage 2 was challenging, the remaining three passages were all moderate to easy. There were no big surprises with passage positioning, as the easiest two passages were located in Passage 1 and Passage 3, so most test takers probably found enough time to reach both of them. There were seven questions in each of Passage 1, 2, and 4, while Passage 3 only had 6, for a total of 27 questions. The difficulty and types of questions were also fairly balanced throughout although again, Passage 2 seemed to have a bit more of the difficult questions. One interesting anomaly was that every single passage included a Parallel Reasoning question. That equals the four total Parallel questions found on the two Logical Reasoning sections.
Taking notes on Reading Comp passages can be a challenge for many students, especially because RC on the LSAT is so unlike RC on other standardized tests. Most students either forego note-taking altogether in favor of trying to “just get it,” or else they go crazy underlining everything they think might be important somehow.
Neither of these strategies lends itself to the evidence-based approach you should be taking to answering the questions. Instead, what you need is a roadmap.
Now that the December 2016 test has been released, we can take a preliminary look at the Reading Comprehension passages and see how they stacked up compared to other tests, and see what new twists (if any) they threw at us this time around.
Immediately after the test, when the twittersphere lit up with all the usual comments and complaints and exclamations about what students around the world encountered, all the talk was about the Logic Games section (“The third game took so long!” “What the heck was with that fourth game, and would someone please kill me now?”) and a few specific Logical Reasoning questions (“Iguanas on a raft?” “What’s up with teenagers and their driving accidents?”).Read More
In Part I of this blog, I discussed why we use cover medallions on our books to indicate the year of release. The short answer is that they exist in order to help students identify the most up-to-date versions of each book and to avoid accidentally buying a book that might be years out of date. In this continuation, I'm going to discuss each book individually and provide an overview of some of the changes through the years, compare the 2016 versions to the 2014 and 2015 editions, and also discuss when the 2017 editions will come out.Read More
Although people don't think that Reading Comprehension and Logic Games have much to do with each other, the truth is that they have something very important in common. The most obvious thing that the sections have in common is their structure.
Both the sections have four main units. The Game section has four games and the Reading Comprehension section has four passages. And the number of questions associated with each game or passage is similar too. That similar structure creates another similarity - timing.Read More
The October 2015 LSAT has just been released, and the Reading Comprehension section provides an interesting mix of passage topics and types. Presented first in the section is a Humanities passage that explores the music of Arnold Shoenberg, an early 19th Century composer who pushed the bounds of music so drastically that listeners of the time commonly considered his work “incoherent, shrill, chaotic, and ear-splitting.” The author is clearly an adoring fan of Shoenberg, though, and compares the composer to Beethoven, another controversial figure who extended music’s “expressive range.” Additionally, both composers had an evolving musical style that recognized tradition while breaking new ground (a common LSAT theme). The author of this passage does reference some potentially foreign musical concepts, such as pushing “unstable harmonies until they no longer had a tonal basis,” or “bringing a new system of order to nontonal music and stabilizing it,” but if you can avoid getting bogged down with these unfamiliar specifics, the rest of the passage, and the questions that follow, are not particularly difficult.
Topics: LSAT Reading Comprehension
A student recently wrote in to ask about the relationship between Logical Reasoning and Reading Comprehension on the LSAT, and more specifically whether he should be looking to apply the lessons from the Logical Reasoning Bible to the Reading Comp section of the test. This is an interesting question, and one that I’ve heard before from students seeking to clarify the relationship and distinctions between the various sections of the test.Read More