numbers on the last, never done before, 4 LR sections:
-5, -7, -5, -6
still haven’t been able to consistently cut the minor mistakes and break into the -3/-4 category (and still just as frustrated), but i think i can put my finger on it now. as noted before, i’d miss at least -2/-3 easy questions that i could have easily solved, but seemed to trip up for some reason. but as i’m noticing now, i don’t apply the strategies on those questions and it’s something i really need to do on every question. just as an example, i missed a strengthened question that i got tripped up on the latest section when i didn’t identify the conclusion, which would’ve led me right to the answer. i missed an assumption question where i didn’t relate the answer choice back to the core, which becomes so obvious upon review. and finally, something’s that bothering me for a while, is choosing a wrong answer choice in which i understand it’s meaning as opposed to not choosing another answer choice where i don’t understand what it’s trying to say (and unfortunately, usually correct). this happened to me on the latest section on a flaw question, in which i knowingly picked the answer choice i knew was wrong. it sounds silly i know, but it’s really hard to explain and happens more often than it should for some damned reason. i also know that stamina plays a huge part in this as well, so i have to shore that up. really gotta clamp down on this stuff and be mentally tuff.
again, if i eliminate these mistakes, and given i miss no more than 2 questions on logic games (which i’m totally confident in now and thoroughly look forward to), i’ll be in the 167-170 range - depending on how ugly RC is for me (between -5 and -8). i think i mentioned before that i picked up new tips on how to do RC, but i haven’t had time to do that section at all because of LR. since i firmly believe in drilling now (it’s the BEST way to study for this test BY FAR, although the most grueling…), i can only imagine what my score would be given the time to drill this section. if i could cut this to a consistent -4/-5? with a -6 on both LR sections and -0 on LG (which i totally believe i can do)?
oh boy.
"What I really like to learn how to do is to build sentences that are equal to mental states."
(Source: theparisreview)
argumentative strategy types done:
difficulty 1 - 52/55 (94%, i missed my first 2 out of 3…)
difficulty 2 - 30/37 (81%)
difficulty 3 - 11/16 (68%)
difficulty 4 - 8/16 (50%)
overall - 103/126 (81%)
this was the only question type (that i’ve encountered), that wasn’t covered in the Manhattan books, so i really didn’t have a strategy going forward. obviously, the more difficult ones were dysmal for me, but in reviewing these mistakes, i’ve sort of come up with a strategy of my own on how to approach these questions. luckily, there also seems to be way less of the more difficult question types, with 3 and 4 combining for only 32 questions (all the questions were from PT’s 1-38), so if i see any particularly hard sounding questions of this type in zone 3 of LR, i’ll probably be more inclined to skip it if i don’t immediately understand it.
can i also just say that missing those questions in the later part with that much frequency was a bitch to try and continue to keep moving forward. it’s definitely become my least favorite question type (well, the harder ones anyways)
