Why You Should Focus on High-Yield Questions (Intermediate) with Rob

You Hey, nice to see you guys, you know, we'll get started in a couple minutes as we do and You get any questions feel free to throw those in the chat.

I'm I'm gonna give you guys a second But I'm gonna walk around my apartment and I turn some lights down, so I won't be able to hear you for the next minute You

You Well, all right, let's get moving nobody had any questions, or maybe you did I just didn't hear them all right?

Well last call Let's do it. Thank you for tuning in you are here on a lot. I've clocked class on high yield questions, what they are, how to do them, why you should do them.

tends to be one of those live classes where the title, sometimes kind of tells you need all you need to know, there are a couple other live classes like that, where you read one sentence and you're like, oh, that's the insight.

My name is Rob, I'm a tutor at LSAT Max, I do essays also and admissions consulting and I'll let you have.

So, you know, it's there's somebody who does something here that isn't management, would be me. All right. So, today we have a good one, we're talking about high yield questions.

There's, under no circumstances, does this plausibly require an hour to talk about, but it's a fun one because it we can get into a lot of health.

set, you know, just logical reasoning, studying why you should be doing what you do. And a lot of it's going to be focused on how you go questions, but there's a lot of room for some theme and variations.

So if you have questions, anything, throw them in the chat, that's the easiest place for me to find them.

But if you don't, you're along for the ride, that's great. I'm not going to call directly on you. And if you need to ask a question out loud, because it's particularly cumbersome to try to type it out, please like have like those zoom little hand thing.

And then I'll just call on down that way. Anybody got any questions before we start? I doubt it. Let's do it.

But if you do, now's the time. Anybody do anything like really cool for labor day. I'm going to be super.

Oh, see, yeah. Okay. I'm going to typically not something where people do the coolest things of all time. But, you know, it's good to be outside.

You know, some people are doing some boating. Wow, it feels like this almost didn't work for a second. Okay.

We're here. I yield questions. All right. So as I explained yesterday, if you weren't yes, if you weren't here yesterday, no worries about this, because I'm going to just repeat exactly what I said.

There are, I think, you know what? I actually don't know. But I've heard that I think the perspective that LSAT Max had, at least when I started working here and probably, you know, still has to some degree, is that there are 17 question types and logical reasoning.

17. Can you name them all? I can't name them all. Some of them I disagree with in terms of I don't believe that that's a question type.

Some of them I think it's like a needless model of categorization that doesn't really prove helpful to people because it gives you the idea that you need to study, you need to learn 17 different things.

That's not true. So my belief is that what you are seeing on logical reasoning is there's only a couple of things.

You will see a must be true question. You will see argument structure questions. You will see assumption based questions.

And you will see what's the, what's the other one is, I should do like a Kahoot quiz, you know, one of these, somebody suggested, you know, if not, not today, but in the future.

What's the, what's the last question to I didn't think I'm going to say. I actually don't know what to call this.

There is a term for it, but I don't, I don't know. It's maybe like, well, what's the question type call where two people are talking to each other and you have to figure out how one responded to the other?

Like, you know, sometimes they split those into like point at issue or point of agreement. What was that? Alright, if not, just clean the sound up there, I mean to like, that wasn't like a passive aggressive muting, like most of the time, if I meet you guys, it's because I think that you guys don't know that you're volumes on.

Okay, so I I think that there's a lot that falls under the umbrella of two people talking to each other, because they're, you know, it asks you different things, sometimes it's like, what do they disagree on, what do they agree on, how does Paulina respond to Jerome?

Like, you know, that that's the kind of a really interesting step to get on the LSAT. I'm going to call this, and I'm going get rid of this Sharpie, because that's gross.

Oh, can't do it, can't get rid of it. And I'll call these conversations. Oh, how does that sound? Argument exchange.

Oh. Oh, yeah, yeah, that's way better. It's way better than what I just wrote. OK, arguing. Yeah. Conversations. Now, everyone's going to see it.

be like, Rob, what are you talking about? One thing that you might want to take away from this is how important do you think it is to know what things are called?

Apparently not very important. So here's why I think that there's these five. And here's what I think falls under all of these.

So it must be true to my mind incorporates a main point question because a main point question is it's just main point question might even just be argument structure.

It might be placed in the lavos. If you really needed to, you could say, like, oh, you'll get a main point question, too, because it doesn't really matter.

But you have types of questions. where they feed you an argument, and there's like pretty much three things that you can do with an argument where just one person gives you one, you can either find the main point, tell the test tickers how it's put together, or you can do some assumption work.

Like, that's it. That's all you can do, right? And these assumption based questions. is a huge umbrella. This encompasses sufficient assumption, necessary assumption.

What else? Strengthen? Just like raw strength. Oh, Lord. So, sometimes I use the term like raw strength in question.

I mean is in certain parts of the platform, you see, like, we'll talk about strengthening with the necessary or strengthening with this efficient.

That's how you kind of gibberish. The more that I think about it, the more I think it's like plainly.

wrong to describe strength and with the necessary, because what you're doing with the necessary assumption is you're pinpointing something that already exists in the stimulus, just happens to be invisible, but you're not like putting it in.

And the whole point of a strength in question is like, you take something that's not in the stimulus and put it in the stimulus and make it better, necessary assumption does not work like that.

Sufficient assumption does, but necessary does not. So that's why I have a little bit of beef with the way that that's classified.

You know, and today, what is this class about, like talking about how things are classified? A little bit, actually.

Strength and weekend and flaws. So all of them, you know, and I think that this falls under one question type.

You guys probably noticed that sufficient assumption, strength and questions are like the same. For more on that, you're going to have

to watch another live class. But in theory, they're slightly different in practice than all. That's a too long, didn't read, and then also so that.

Necessary assumption, obviously an assumption. We can, we can, is kind of the same as a strength in question. Is it not?

So I shouldn't have to prove why we can question and incorporate an assumption. What about flaw? Why is flaw in this list?

Every argument that is incomplete has an assumption. And the way that you strengthen it is by making that assumption true.

The way you weaken it is by making that assumption run. And the way that you find the flaw is by exposing the assumption.

So like, that's why they're all connected. And that's why you do a very similar process for all of these.

Okay, your next one is paradox questions. So there's not a whole lot of paradox questions are there. Like, there aren't.

I think they're kind of unique because they're not really argument. They're not really must be true. You're putting something in there so it's like the assumption-based questions, but they're not giving you something that's wrong.

So I would classify differently. But you guys can do what you want on this. Different tutors are going to have different classifications.

You can be somewhat responsive to some of the more academic exercises where I'm saying, like, hey, I don't think, you know, a strength in with a necessary promise is conceptually proper.

But that's OK. I'm one man. And then you get conversation questions, which somebody in the chat correctly pointed out have a much better name.

It's called argument exchange, which moves us to high-yield questions. So if I think that there are really only six question types, like, do anybody want to be for this?

Anybody think of a question type that I'm missing You feel free to shout it out I'll write it on if I miss and if I'm if I'm not missing it I'll explain you why it actually falls into one of these I'm not missing anything I'm like if some of you're gonna say parallel reasoning The other one I you know as I was baiting you guys with this one I don't believe principal questions are their own kind of question.

I Don't If you can find me a principal question that isn't either a main point a Strengthen a weekend a sufficient or like a Flaw you know like like there are all other types of questions You know what I mean like for instance if you click on the principal module It's just it's just bananas that the test can get away with this and

Like, you know, you guys can like live in this world where you this if this is like, I mean, this is like the Matador putting the red cape out there.

Like there's nothing behind it. You don't even need to know what principle is to do the LSAT. In theory, I'm sure like you can sit here and someone will tell you like, oh, what's a principle?

Well, it's something like this. So you're looking for something like this. No, no, If you see any question that says which of the following principles strengthens the argument, you can answer that question more effectively by just taking the word principles, throw it in the trash, and then having the rest of it say, which of the following strengthens the argument and just pick the thing that strengthens.

I've never been in a situation where I'm like, oh, this strengthens the argument, but they were asking for a principle and this isn't technically a principle.

Yeah, see what I mean? It doesn't work like that. If you want to see me go off on Prince

Like, go into the live classes where I spent an hour talking about how I don't believe in principal questions.

Uh, I'm not going to do this head again today because it's like, you know, it's a little off script.

Um, but for those of you who find principal questions, I am going to talk about just a little bit more for two reasons.

One, for those of you who find principal questions challenging, all you got to do is just figure out what other question type it is and just do that instead.

Second, if I don't think that a principal question requires a skill separate from these other question types that I have on the board, you can infer from that the principal questions are not high yield questions.

Like what? If you know how to do a strength, then you can do a principal question, a principal question that's really just a strength.

question. If you know how to do main point, you can do a main point question. You know, you can do a principal question that like, it's a main point question disguised as a principal question.

Same is true with the must be true, you know, are most strongly supported or paradox or whatever. So like, my advice is like, that's something maybe to not spend a whole lot of time on because it's not high yield, you're not developing like an actual skill.

Yeah, yeah, exactly that in the chat. Yeah, you're right. Like, it's, it occurred to me. So I so like, one I never learned principles is a separate thing.

Like that just didn't make sense. I was like, well, they just looked like other things. And then when I had to do a live class, like I signed up to do a live class in principle.

And then like the day before I was like, well, I like, asked you guys, was like, I'm gonna just do this off the cup.

I asked people, I like, what is the principle? And it occurred to me like I did. did not have a working definition of what a principal was in the LSAT.

So rather than saying, OK, going make something up to teach you guys nonsense, I realize that a working knowledge of what a principal is is not helpful to you on the LSAT.

It's not only unnecessary. It's just legantly unhelpful. If a 180 square can't tell you what a principal is, why are you trying to figure it out?

So, moving on from that, notice how I put these things in the red under high yield questions? It's my belief that if you spend a lot of time learning how to do these assumption-based questions, like anything in this family, like if you spend some time doing, for instance, you're like, hey, want to practice sufficient assumption right now.

When you practice sufficient assumption, Sometimes you are learning skills that are going to be helpful here and here and here and here So like a high-yield question tends to be like tends to have a couple characteristics like in terms of practice, it's like you know You look at a question and you think Does practicing this type of question enable me to get better at other types of questions too?

Like to me, I think when you every time you work on L.R. you'll get a little bit better reading code You

Well that was really unfortunate guys I'm sorry about that that was a yeah like a little glitch in the matrix thanks for sticking in anyway screen sharing is back okay here's high yield questions have a couple characteristics you know practice on high yield you know practice on question helps with other cues okay there's a couple so we're gonna say we're not just gonna talk about this so

One of the things that happens Quite a lot like put a couple other just I mean I hate to do this teaser, but like you guys are like ah, what's the other one?

Hey, there's the second major characteristic with it You guys have any idea what the third is You This is kind of like maybe the most obvious part of it appears frequently as in Helps you get a lot of points This can't actually these these characteristics can vary little bit

Like, it is possible for some, for like, for me, I think every time that I worked on the LR, I was learning skills that would be transferable to reading comp.

in that way, you know, LR had a higher yield of studying. So I'd like probably put more time into LR because it would bleed into RC.

But if I put, you know, our time in RC, wouldn't go the other way. Um, for those of you who have like a different relationship to LR and RC, where maybe the thing that you're like, you're really good at strength in a weekend and that kind of stuff, but you're bad at, at just like making inferences and doing must be true stuff, then the more time you spend on RC working on that, like, because RC is like, most thing, most be true.

Uh, RC is like all must be true in argument structure. So, you know, then if you're working on RC, like, you're going to maybe get some dividends paid and

into our most features too. So high yield questions can vary a little bit depending on your certain skills and where you are along that process.

Generally I think that they don't vary that much because it's fairly established which questions are easiest to improve on and which questions appear most frequently on the exam.

So like my advice like don't spend all your time on paradox questions. Why like well a paradox question is not applicable to any other kind of question like your practice on a paradox question doesn't improve your skill anywhere else.

So like you already kind of you lost this one. Is it quick to improve on a paradox question I don't know maybe like do you guys think so?

I mean I feel like I work with people who I just think they're really hard and really easy and

Like, I'm not, I'm not really sure where I stand on that, uh, do parallax questions appear frequently now. No, they do not, right?

So it's like parallax questions not high yield. Meanwhile, these questions in the red just to go through this over like sufficient assumption is going to help you work on weekend, uh, and flaw and like any kind of sufficient necessary skills.

So like sufficient assumption is going to be really, really helpful for, uh, parallel flaw and parallel reasoning because parallel reasoning and parallel flaw like lean heavily into formal logic, uh, putting things together.

So that's really good for that. Is it quick to improve on sufficient assumption? I think so. I think sufficient assumption is a type of question where we can give you a lot of strategies that are implementable.

You you get the sandwich method, you get learning to anticipate, you get like, you know, missing premise drills, like there's, there's a lot to kind of push you.

Into the pool a little bit into their into their the end that you want to be on and do sufficient assumption questions appear frequently Well, yeah, they do right so it's like that's how you'll question Okay Perilow recent questions, what do you guys think I yield not I yield That's Yeah, someone's gonna take it someone's gonna say no is there usually one or two per section.

Yeah, that's about right right, it's like they don't two per section it's like You know, I mean, I feel like three per sections a lot of something one is not many two is like wow What's the thing between three and one two?

Who's not like horrible? It's just kind of like what it is You Is it easy to improve on parallel reasoning questions?

No. Like, I'm not saying you can't. I'm just saying like the main method that people get better at parallel reasoning questions is by getting better other types of questions.

Like the better you understand a strengthened question, it means that you just understand arguments on a better level. And then when you get to parallel reasoning, you're so much more comfortable.

Like, one thing that you guys may not notice, but some instructors may have drawn your attention to, is that probably parallel reasoning in tutoring sessions is like one of the highest priorities for people who are scoring like 140s and like 150s.

You know, if you're scoring lower than that, I'm looping you into the 140 category. Like, why? Because if you're scoring 150,

for 140, you don't really understand arguments very well. Like, that's the beginning of your outside journey, like you're not supposed to for the record.

But because you don't really understand arguments very well, it's like extremely disorienting, having to read like six arguments. Like, that's what's hard.

When you don't really understand an argument, seeing six of them is just like, oh God, I'm done. But by the time you start understanding arguments really well and say you're like, now you're like a 160 score, like hitting a high 160s, nobody in that group, very infrequently in that group, do I work on parallel reasoning with these people?

Why? Because they understand arguments, so like seeing six of them doesn't really vex them that much. parallel reasoning questions, like the hardest parallel reasoning questions are easier than the hardest-ranking questions.

Okay. You may have an instructor that might say something different on that and like that may be a matter of opinion, but it's something that seems to hold with the people that I talk to.

So, parallel reasoning is an extremely low yield question for several reasons. One, when you're bad at them, you can't like you don't get better at them by doing them.

You just kind of get better at them by getting better at other stuff and then you just find yourself better at parallel reasoning at some point.

That's an oversimplification. If you are struggling with parallel reasoning and you're taking a test, it's not the September exam.

Then feel free to watch the live class that I did on April 22 of 2022 on parallel reasoning. But, you know, it's not something that helps you like it does help you get better at other questions like you're too.

You're probably very frequently when you need to develop a necessary and sufficient skill is going to say like, all right, let's do parallel reasoning because this is just like pushing you into the deep end of necessary and sufficient a lot of the time.

Because you have to see like six arguments doing totally different things. got to be like on your game. So sometimes parallel reasoning like at the beginner level, I think it's good for this very bad for this.

And like, not really worth that because it's like even when it appears like you guys are so pressed for time that it's just like not worth touching them for a while.

So probably not high yield. So what we've decided must be true questions. I'll weigh in on that. I must be true questions.

Do they help you with other questions? Honestly, like I don't really think so. I think that they get they help you be like a little bit better at RC, but like I don't must be true.

So I don't really have a click. ability to other LR questions to me again some you know other instructors may disagree with that diagnosis are they easy to improve on no no I think they're like the hardest question and LR to improve them like the hardest do they appear frequently like yeah yeah they do like you should see like three of those but like enough to like override these problems I doubt it so what we have so far is like we figured out kind of which questions are high yield and some of the characteristics that enable you to like ask yourself if you think something is high yield because you know at the end like it's kind of up to you oh these these conversation questions not like you're not gonna get like better at strength than doing argument exchange you will get better at argument exchange doing strength in questions so what I want you

What do guys have to do? Is to first figure out the high yield questions. Hopefully, I just gave you a clue.

And you can feel free to rewind the tape when this comes out to say, wow, Rob went over a lot of those.

But he didn't write them down. Why did he not write them down? Well, because you've got to do some of your own reflection on it.

But now that you know what the high yield questions are, the next thing that's important is like, well, how often do practice high yield versus something else?

Why? So I would say high yield questions serve different roles at different parts of the study process. So one role that they serve is a classic week before test.

if you guys are trying to do parallel reason questions two days before the test like you're just gonna make me upset you know like everybody tries to do that not everybody but some people do it's just you're not gonna get it's a bad idea really it's a gross misuse of time so you know when you have a week before the test and you have to decide wait I need to focus on you know two or three things what are the two or three best things for me to focus on it ends up being this stuff in the red the assumption based questions I don't see I think must be true is like really nasty I don't it's like if you if you could get really good at must be true really fast then I would recommend that all the time to you guys I just it just doesn't work like that and I wouldn't spend a lot of time on main point questions like you know you

I don't know if I look on, but knowing with the main point of an argument is like, you know, requisite to even being able to deal with any of the assumptions.

hopefully you figure that out. That's like learning how to conjugate a verb in early Spanish lessons. So the week before your test, you focus on high yield, duh.

But how does that change if, say, we're like, I don't know, six weeks before the test? Now, how much time should I be spending on high yield questions?

I mean, you know, like I said, said, a week before the test, like kind of all your work is high yield, six weeks before, guess I have an idea?

It could be four weeks, you know, four weeks, obviously it's going to get you a little closer to the week, but like I just put six out there just to throw it out month and a half.

It's like the ends in sight, you've registered for an exam, you know when you're going to take it, you know that like, you're only going to get so much better in six weeks, what should you be doing with that time?

We can do it as a percentage, but somebody throw something out there, you know, you think might make sense.

If you guys ever watch the videos of these in the archives and think like, wow, that chat must have been like super engaged.

Oh yeah, yeah, let the record show. This is another one where the comments keep flying and it's like, how do you know on those that I'm not just like, you know, talking to myself and then making up questions like I'm like, I just got DM'd and

Another great question, just something to think about. You know, next time you hear me answering questions on something, okay.

So six weeks from the test, your calculus is going to look little bit different. Um, I think that you still, like you always want to be in the space where you're giving reference to high yield questions.

A week before the test is like full, you know, it's like, um, full attention. Maybe two, three weeks before the test is like high priority.

Maybe a month before is like priority. Six weeks is like reference, like preferential treatment. Like you see how that's a little bit of, you know, the scale kind of keeps going.

So like we could graph it like this. Okay. This is, um. You should always make the bottom time, right?

Time until test. Oh gosh, for those weird stems, obviously, this is measured with zero, and then this is zero plus an or something.

And then this top one is what, this is percentage of time high yield question to a little h, y, q's.

Okay, so, you know, eventually we're gonna be out here. I'm just gonna throw something crazy out here. Ready? What do you guys, have any idea how this is gonna work?

And then what do you think is this axis is you think that's like 40% like it's gonna make it you know if I call it like 10% and the whole game is changed it really matters what this little thing is tell me what that number should be it's like one of those graphs in the SAT that you know is like clearly not drawn to scale just to screw with you 25% okay it's interesting guess anybody got something else you

maybe 50, yeah, yeah. So I think, I think both of those are right. I think it's a little trickier than what this graph is.

This graph's a little bit misleading. But you could put this probably anywhere between like, I think, I honestly think it's probably like 50 right here.

That's, that's what I, my guess is. But you know how earlier I said must be true. Questions are like really nasty and like sometimes like, you know, I've seen people just bang away at those.

And you know, it's, it's very frustrating because you don't have a lot of tools to combat them like you do for almost every other question type we give you.

Right? there's the conclusion test for main point. I don't really know if there's a great test for argument structure, but there is, you know, the assumption based questions like, we're giving you so much to chew on.

something like, you know, can show you to do those without reading them, you know, some other stuff. There's must be trues are hard to improve on progress is kind of slow.

So like for that reason, I think must be trues are difficult to do at the end. I don't recommend doing them like, you know, three days before your exam.

But must be trues are so, well, they show up, they're going to help you with reading comm. There's kind of no way around it.

So like, they need to be part of your early planning. More so, more so than like, honestly, these conversation questions, argument exchange.

You could, you could justifiably take the LSAT, even if you only spent like, I don't know, three hours doing those.

Sorry, that's high. If you spent one hour doing those, and was like, I only did one hour, but like, I've been studying for the test for five weeks, I only did one hour on these.

You think I'll be okay, I'd be like, yeah. If you said, I have six weeks to study, and I only spent an hour on must be curious, I'd say, no, no, no, no, no, no, no.

No, you need to do this. So if you said, I only spent an hour on paradox questions. Yeah, I know some test takers that literally only spend an hour tops on paradox.

Like over your entire, you know, 180, 200 hours of chess. know, like one hour is paradox. It seems honestly high.

Like I feel like I spent zero percent of my time like working with paradox questions unless I just like happened to see one, was like, I guess I'll answer that now.

So that's not me really working a lot. So hopefully like this is crude, this graph on the screen. And it's crude partly by design and partly by like, you know, I just like don't know how to make it not crude.

But When you are beginning your LSAT journey, it is immensely frustrating to feel like you have to learn all of this stuff.

And you're like, Oh my God, like, now I got to learn this question type. And what for what like two questions out of 25?

Now I got to do this one for like, this is going to show up once. This is going to show up twice in reading comp.

You know, you guys know what the ultimate, like the least high yield question of all time is. It's a little bit of a trick question.

If you were part of the game crew, you're going to be like, Yeah, I agree with that Rob. That was terrible.

mind bendingly hard. It didn't help, you know, it was like not worth nearly what I put into it, and I always got this wrong anyway.

So here, high yield questions, it's like you want them to be part of your arsenal, like at minimum, they get preferential treatment.

At maximum, they get like full attention. When you're beginning, I highly recommend that you focus on these high yield questions because when you spend your time on flock questions, and you're doing it in the, if you're doing flock questions the right way, and you know, I mean, it's like, if you're doing flock questions, whether I teach you how to do flock questions, you will be able to take that skill to strengthening questions and to weaken questions and to the assumption based questions.

So when you're starting, instead of feeling like, okay, I just checked one box out of 17, it's like, you know, I got a little bit better.

like a third of the question types on LR just by spending a little bit of time in flaws like like I feel like I'm progressing I'm moving I'm seeing a lot I really like where I am so like that is the value of giving these preferential treatments to these high yield questions out of the gate so there's two you know like the whole point of this and then you know we're gonna be done like you know there's a lot it's like basically the last point before we're just like frequently with Q&A is high yield questions have an important role at all stages of your studying in the beginning they help you improve quickly and that's good for like a number of reasons in the end they help you focus on the stuff that's like going to be the most impactful in getting you the most points and in the middle like they continue to help you you know develop skills that you know can cross questions and

They show up all the time and they're you know like like they're good in mail to like honestly, you could even draw this Another way like you guys could draw a graph like this I mean, that's another interpretation like they're super important in the end They're very important in the beginning and then in the middle like you know, can kind of take pot shots wherever So it's up to you whether if you want to take you know Like the red approach to it or whether you want to take the blue approach to it But the points remain that I mean the the big big value in high yield questions is going to come here and going to come here so This has been the lecture On high yield questions.

I would love to get down to specifics on this. We got 15 minutes for Q&A Okay, where does Oh, what does NA stand for?

Yeah, necessary assumption. Okay. Okay, good questions Alright. How long has everybody been studying for? Q&A is, I ask the questions.

You answer the questions. I question your answers. Okay, so starting since June, with LSATMAX, okay. little more than half of your area.

Okay, so somebody's been working since June. It's like, you know, beginning of June to be three months. Three months or less.

More than half a year, that's a while. Using the books in smart. Yeah, I started with with the Kaplan books.

It's like, oh boy, is that something that just belongs in a Twitter. beginning of August? Yeah. Awesome. Um, the other, you know, like,

An important thing to say on how you have questions is that for a lot of us, the LSAT journey takes longer than you think it's going to be.

I mean, I really feel like there's only two ways that this goes down. It's like either people look at this and they're like, this is what I'm taking here.

I have six weeks or people are like, I'd like to take this one. I have six weeks to study and then oh my god, it takes so much longer than I thought.

That happened to me. I thought I'd be wrapped up with the LSAT in like, you know, three weeks. That didn't happen.

doesn't really happen for anybody. I know I know couple people have been able to get away with that, but they'd already taken the GREs or already like, you know, we're dialed in, had a very high diagnostic.

Um, you know, I don't know. I mean, to me, the sheer amount of studying for that just, it does, it doesn't pencil.

I mean, I I was a friend of mine who used to be a tutor here who did it in three weeks and he studied nine hours a day.

Um, I think that doesn't make sense. He studied nine hours a day, but he like, he never tutored like more than four hours because it sapped his energy.

So I'm like, it really like we're like, I'm the opposite. Like I'll tutor a limited hours, but I don't study for more than four hours a day.

I get no way. So, um, that's a, that's an interesting situation. really common. The point is like, it's probably going to take you longer than you expect.

But if you're the kind of person that's like, well, only have six weeks or, um, I'm studying for the LSAT and I signed up for the test and I'm taking it in a couple of weeks and like, I just now got this platform because like a salesman successfully got me on into it.

like, awesome. Like, you're, you're in good hands here. I do. I feel like I don't have time to look at reading comp.

I'm gonna be like, yeah, okay. You know what's more high? You know, like, you know, LR is significantly more high yield than reading comp.

Or like, probably 99% of test takers. Just, you know, I feel like I haven't said that yet. That's worth saying LR should take most of your study time.

Obviously, because there's one, it's just, there's two LR sections and one RC that are graded. So, yeah, I would say LR should be taking like at least 66% of your study time.

If not like more, because it's, yeah, that's a whole other thing you're going to. But LR is more high.

If you're doing reading comp half the time, I'm going to really have to see that your scores would justify that.

Like, you have to have like a. Smoking high. Yeah, like that to me only makes sense if you're getting consistently better than 21 out of 25 an hour And then I'd be like, okay, I get it.

get it, but You don't have to So yeah, uh some of the stuff like Honestly, it's so low yield That I wouldn't recommend it to anybody who is like only has a month to study like if you only have one month to study I should you like not be doing?

I don't know probably like you should just be skipping parallel resetting Uh, you should probably be skipping parallel flaw.

That's nasty Must be true is it's like you're gonna do them, but you just like don't You You just gotta do it.

It's a little bit of a slog I really I really feel for you on that and like if you don't even want to study Try to get really really good at the argument base question

questions. Like, which are not must be true. Yeah. Yeah. Another thing in the chat took more time than I anticipate all almost a year.

It's like, yeah. Yeah, it's part for the course, you know, it's really weird because a lot of people who are taking the LSAT, it's like, you've already, or like, clearly been good at something in your life.

It makes you think that, like, I'm be aware, you know, like, no one's like, I've been really bad at everything I've ever done.

I think law school is going to be where I stand out. You know, that might be true. I've just like never, it's a funny train of thought.

So what happens is you have a lot of high achievers and being a high achiever, like, not all things come easy to you, but like, something's probably do.

So like, it's really weird for people to be like, oh my gosh, like, I didn't get the score that I wanted and now I have to invest more time and it's particularly challenging for those of you who are in school and you're trying to take it so that you can go into law school immediately after undergrad and that timeline doesn't quite work out because you're not ready to take the exam and then you're staring into the abyss of having to get a job for a year and not knowing what to do with yourself because school is all you know and you have really high parental pressure and it doesn't really matter what I say to you when I'm like oh like less really roughly I really feel for you like it doesn't matter you're not my parents that is challenging and it takes a while but it is really worth it putting yourself in a position where you can get the best of sets where you can or not the best that you can but like you know you want to have the right conversation you know like if you if your goal is to attend a law school and

the median law school there is like a 155 then like you don't need to get a 170 you know right but if you're trying to like you know really maximize all your options some of you actually this is a totally new group I don't think you guys know anything about me so I wanted to go to law school in fall of 2020 that got derailed one covid kept pushing the test back but I wouldn't have been ready to take it in March of 2021 I actually wanted to and then you know I apply like I ended up taking it in November of 2020 I did very well and I applied to schools admissions didn't you know I didn't get the results I wanted so by the next year I got like better results committed to school that I currently attend Washington

University in St. Louis and and then you know in May after I deposited they said you know Rob will give you even more money if you for a free year so I deferred for a year and the net result of that is like I could have gone to law school in fall of 2020 and I could have gone to like a school with a lot less opportunity and I would have taken out a lot more debt and I could have gone to school in 2021 same thing is true 2022 I could have gone to the same school for a lot more debt and now you know in terms of financially in terms of you know legal opportunities like the best possible case has happened and it's like yeah well you know I mean I was kind of on a delayed program it kind of took forever to to come to being so for those of you who are like dang like this time

like this is going to really upset my program, trust me that it's really unusual where people are like, I have to go right now, like I don't.

Very unlikely. So happy to talk about a lot of what admissions looks like and how to maximize your potential on your law school admissions or, you know, your, you know, financial aid and grants and scholarships and all that kind of stuff and talk numbers with people.

I'm like, happy to do that. But I just put that out there to say that like, different people are in different positions with the LSAT.

And a lot of what's happening on this platform is like, the system is like designed for people who are like taking like a year to study.

I think technically, it may be like seven months. Like, but you guys can see those little study plans. You can, you know,

You can see how that kind of varies a little bit. But the systems design probably for people like between like three months and like a year.

If you have less than that, it's going to be overwhelming the kinds of content and like all the resources and all the stuff that you see here where you're like, oh my god, you're even if you study for a year, but like you don't have opportunity to just like sit around and do nothing for a year and study the LSAT, then it's still overwhelming.

You know, mean, you could just like watch live classes on archive for like a year of your life, you know?

I mean, there's so many of them. Like, I remember doing like, yeah, I mean, there's a lot. There's a lot.

So at any level of your studying, it's going to be very important to focus on the high yield questions, figuring out what those are, and, you know, I mean, kind of trusting.

for, you know, why not should give you some confidence while you're studying, but also it should make you like better at stuff.

Whether the graph truly goes in this red line or the blue line is unknown to me. And I'd love to have another instructor speculate on that, but this is, that's what I got right here.

So thank you for joining, you guys have been great. And this has been the live class for how you have questions.

Hopefully, hopefully you guys learned a few things. I'll be back on Monday, I think. you know, I am, I am tutoring.

You guys, you guys do know that. But I keep saying it because like everybody, at least one person DM's me this every time.

And I've been putting you guys off forever. they're like, oh, don't know. No, I'm back. I'm back now. All right.

See you guys later. Have a, have a great evening.