Definitely came out of my diagnostic exam, my first ever run through the LSAT, whining – and I quote – “I’ll never get Logic Games – there’s just too many moving pieces!”
While I maintain that I’m right about the second part, I couldn’t have been more wrong about the first. Consistent with most of what I’ve found with the LSAT (except with respect to pesky Reading Comprehension), it’s a matter of recognizing the type of question being asked, knowing which formula to apply to it, and executing– and all the while being on the lookout for the token LSAT booby-traps. That first day’s formula – showing how to set up the simplest Ordering games, was probably one of the largest leaps in my LSAT studies, and primed me to know what to look for in future lessons.
So as someone who’s experienced and overcome some serious LSAT frustrations, here’s a word of advice for all you future-lawyers similarly situated. Two things, outside the curriculum you can find right in the textbooks, that I’ll recommend:
1. Take untimed practice tests. Not untimed like taking breaks or not keeping a serious; the key is just to not be missing questions as a result of being rushed/ out of time at the end. Instead, when you grade your exam afterwards, you should be regarding any questions that you miss as concepts that need more work. Not just more drilling, but more consideration of the concept.
2. Keep a note in the last couple weeks of alllll, every single, questions that you miss (if this is impractical because you’re missing too many, then abort and postpone your exam). You should be reviewing and perfecting those questions to make sure you never miss a similar one on test day. There’s really not too many different ways to put most of the questions you’ll see; there’s lots of variations and name-switches to basically a few dozen Qs. Go back over a few dozen in the last fortnight before, and guarantee you’ll see some of those same questions when it’s real.
Another suggestion for the teaching repertoire? Comment below!