Consistency

[andrewgong01]

I am noticing my LR score fluctuates too much. I want to target 3-4 wrong per section max and sometimes I can achieve it but sometimes I get 7-8 wrong per section. Do you have any suggestions on further increasing my LR score because I have been averaging 5.5 wrong for a while now and these few extra questions to get right is proving a lot harder than I thought it would be. I have been doing the review in the course syllabus and I am able to bring down my error to around 2-4 consistently before scoring but it seems like during the test sometimes certain questions just don't "click". Is there anything you would suggest I should practice on - should it be more drills or more timed sections?

[ohthatpatrick]

It's tough to know exactly what to do, and it's hard enough for a student to diagnose where the missed opportunities are coming from, let alone for a teacher to do it from afar with almost no data.

There will rarely be a noticeable pattern by Question Type, but if there is, then you certainly could re-read strategies/chapters/advice for that type and then practice those type for 30-45 mins at a time (as a study session).

More likely, you're just missing the trickiest reads / hardest correct answers. Often this is because:
- the correct answer choice wording was weird
- the correct answer doesn't fit your normal expectations for this question type
- the correct answer you were expecting didn't show up
- you didn't notice a dealbreaker with the trap answer you picked

You want to try to write down what sort of error / missed opportunity you had with each miss, so that you can try to be more aware of little things you're missing when the time crunch is on.

If you're missing 7-8 questions, you don't need to hold yourself accountable for getting ALL those. Pick the 2-4 of them that you know are REALLY get-able, and think a lot about what led to you getting those wrong.

Do you wish you had read the stimulus a different way / noticed something you didn't? What reading habits would help you next time?

Did you anticipate an answer? Could you have? Were you too rigidly looking for one thing when the correct answer gave you something else?

Did you have a concrete reason you could articulate for why each wrong answer was wrong?

What's "clicking" during blind review that didn't click during the initial section?

==========

I would suggest dividing up LR sections into two different practice regimens / goals, (don't exclusively practice this way -- just mix it in):

1. 1st 10Q's in 10mins (maybe as far as 1st 12 Q's in 12 mins)
GOAL: take advantage of easier questions by trusting your gut and looking for your right answer. Move briskly, without sacrificing any points to careless errors

2. Do the rest of the section UNTIMED for 100% accuracy. Consider writing down prephrases and writing down justifications for why you're eliminating other answers.

The art of LR often comes down to learning how to crush easier questions in order to build up a time cushion that we can then spend re-reading / re-thinking the trickier ones.

Chances are, if you're able to "save" a few misses during blind review, that you're being stretched a little too thin on these questions during your actual timed performances.

That normally means that you need to get faster at easier questions, so that you're not draining brain power / time on them.

Unfortunately, it's often very hard to draw concrete takeaways about where the missed opportunities are because we often just feel like we're missing tricky questions. But pay a lot of attention to stuff like
- am I good enough at Conditional Logic?
- am I good enough at Causal Arguments?
- do I know how to handle abstract language in Flaw answer choices?
- am I good at using the Negation Test on Necessary Assumption?