Posted on January 21, 2013 by Anthony Ritz
A few months ago I wrote some words about qualifiers. These little words — words like “some,” “many,” “most,” “few,” “maybe,” and “probably” — somehow manage to be both often-critical and often-overlooked on standardized tests like the LSAT, the GMAT, and the GRE. I discussed spotting these words and went on to point out the existence and importance of hierarchies among the various qualifiers.
There’s one more twist, though, that we have yet to address…
Read More
Be the first to comment »
Tags: Formal Logic, GMAT, GRE, Logical Reasoning, LSAT, Qualifiers
Posted on October 29, 2012 by Anthony Ritz
It’s an ugly, rainy, windy day in Washington and all of my lessons are canceled. I’m going to dig into 10 New Actual, Official LSAT PrepTests and do a logic game to pass the time. Let’s try PrepTest 57, Section 1, Questions 1-5 (10 New LSAT, page 188).
This looks like a relatively straightforward ordering game. The items are G, H, J, K, L, and M. I’ll shorthand the rules as follows:
(1) HG
(2) K-G
(3) M-L
(4) JM or MJ
The repetitions of G between rules 1 and 2 and M between rules 3 and 4 are surely not accidental.
Read More
Be the first to comment »
Tags: Analytical Reasoning, Complete and Accurate Lists, LSAT, Ordering Games, Question Analysis
Posted on October 22, 2012 by Anthony Ritz
Here’s an easy way to pick up an extra point or two on your LSAT score (or 10 or 20 on your GMAT score): When you’re reading logical reading questions, pay close attention to the qualifiers attached to the statements they make.
Simple little words like “some,” “many,” “most,” “few,” “all,” “maybe,” “probably,” “often,” “usually,” and so forth may seem interchangeable and are easily overlooked, but in fact any qualifier can critically change the meaning of a statement in which it appears. Furthermore, because the test writers know that these little words are so often overlooked, qualifiers are a favorite trick to lead unwary test-takers astray.
Read More
Be the first to comment »
Tags: GMAT, GRE, Logical Reasoning, LSAT, Qualifiers
Posted on October 10, 2012 by Anthony Ritz
Today’s question comes from the GMAT. It’s Critical Reasoning Practice Question #7 in The Official Guide for GMAT Verbal Review, 2nd Edition (page 118).
A researcher discovered that people who have low levels of immune-system activity tend to score much lower on tests of mental health than do people with normal or high immune-system activity. The researcher concluded from this experiment that the immune system protects against mental illness as well as against physical disease.
The researcher’s conclusion depends on which of the following assumptions?
Read More
Be the first to comment »
Tags: Assumption (Necessary), Correlation versus Causation, GMAT, GRE, Logical Reasoning, LSAT, Question Analysis
Posted on September 17, 2012 by Anthony Ritz
A couple of weeks ago I did an LSAT reading comprehension passage, but I threw my timing off by taking notes for my blog post as I worked. I’m going to try it again with a new passage, but this time I’m going to treat it exactly as I would on the actual LSAT — and skip the notes. We’ll see if my time improves — and whether I maintain accuracy in the process.
Alright, let’s get to it! I’m doing PrepTest 60, Section 4, Questions 1-7 (10 New LSAT, page 316-317). There are 7 questions here, so our target time is around 9 minutes. See you in 9 minutes!
Read More
Be the first to comment »
Tags: ACT, GMAT, GRE, LSAT, Question Analysis, Reading Comprehension, SAT
Posted on September 10, 2012 by Anthony Ritz
I recently ran across a fascinating article about test prep that I’d like to share:
http://psychcentral.com/news/2012/08/24/prep-for-law-school-admission-test-alters-brain/43665.html
A somewhat more-detailed version from Berkeley itself:
http://newscenter.berkeley.edu/2012/08/22/intense-prep-for-law-school-admissions-test-alters-brain-structure/
The full study is here:
http://www.frontiersin.org/Neuroanatomy/10.3389/fnana.2012.00032/full
TL;DR: LSAT preparation structurally alters students’ brains in ways that seem to fundamentally improve reasoning, learning, cognition, and perhaps even IQ.
Read More
Be the first to comment »
Tags: LSAT
Posted on August 30, 2012 by Anthony Ritz
Let’s do some reading comprehension!
To make this as authentic as possible, I’ll pick a passage I haven’t seen before, time myself, and try to comment on my thought process as I go. Okay? Good. Reading comprehension is a staple on pretty much every major standardized test, but I’ll be doing one from the LSAT: PrepTest 57, Section 4, Questions 6-12 (10 New LSAT, page 210-211). Here we go!
Read More
Be the first to comment »
Tags: ACT, GMAT, GRE, LSAT, Question Analysis, Reading Comprehension, SAT
Posted on August 13, 2012 by Anthony Ritz
Building off the formal logic posts of the last two weeks, today we’re going to discuss the LSAT logic game found at PrepTest 58, Section 3, Questions 7-12 (10 New LSAT, page 241).
This is a fairly simple In-and-Out game (also known as a Selection game). Such games often involve heavy doses of arrow diagramming, and this one is no exception. Take a quick read of the setup and then let’s turn our attention to the rules.
The rules of this game can be diagrammed in straightforward fashion as follows:
1. R→M
2. M→T
3. !S→V
4. !R→L
5. T→(!F and !V)
Let’s turn to the questions now.
Read More
Be the first to comment »
Tags: Analytical Reasoning, Complete and Accurate Lists, Counting (In-and-Out), Formal Logic, In-and-Out Games, LSAT, Question Analysis
Posted on August 6, 2012 by Anthony Ritz
Last time, on Formal Logic:
* We learned that formal logic is an important part of the LSAT.
* Arguments were broken down into propositions, which were shorthanded by capital letters and manipulated using operators.
* Finally, negation and arrow diagrams burst onto the scene, leading to a shocking revelation: A→B says nothing about what happens in the “not A” case!
But what other arrow diagram is equivalent to A→B? How can arrow diagrams be combined? Will we ever finally see an LSAT question example? Does Anthony have his umbrella?
These questions and more will be answered… tonight.
Read More
Be the first to comment »
Tags: Analytical Reasoning, Formal Logic, Logical Reasoning, LSAT
Posted on July 30, 2012 by Anthony Ritz
The facts are the least important part of the LSAT.
It’s one of my favorite refrains, because it challenges students to rethink their approaches to the test and create real change in their results. And sure, it’s a slight exaggeration — the facts do matter, at least in some ways — but it’s more true than you might think. A successful approach to the LSAT starts with consideration of logical structure and runs through qualifiers, connecting words, and question types before ever arriving at the sort of fact-based considerations by which too many test takers live and die.
Read More
1 Comment »
Tags: Analytical Reasoning, Formal Logic, Logical Reasoning, LSAT