You Know You've Been Studying Too Much For The LSAT When...

I posted this status update on LSAT Blog's Facebook Page last week. Many of you commented with your own jokes and experiences.

Here are some of my favorites:

"EVERYTHING you read or hear turns into a logical reasoning question. :P"

"You are asked to leave a wedding because you insist that Bob can't sit next to Nancy because Nancy can't sit next to Bob's sister. And you'll be damned if that rule is violated."

"You dissect your friend's argument and proceed to tell your friend how you could strengthen or weaken it."

"When you can't seem to separate yourself from it. When you are not doing it you feel weird, empty, like the earth stopped moving...............sike. I really can't wait to be done with it."

"I still wonder what it'll feel like to study too much for it! :D"

"You go through the TSA security line with silver-lined underwear, just to get some human contact with the outside world."

***

You know you've been studying too much for the LSAT when...

Leave a comment and let me know!

The Most Common Answer Choice on the LSAT

LSAT Blog reader Brett recently analyzed the LSAT PrepTest Answer Keys to find the best answer choice to guess on the LSAT.

I've done similar analysis in the past.

However, Brett has a better understanding of statistics than I do, and his results are summed-up and organized much more nicely than mine. He also included answer key data from the June 2010 LSAT (PrepTest 60).

Here's what he found (click to enlarge):






















Basically, "D" is the best answer to choose when guessing randomly, and "B," "C,"and "D" come up more often than either "A" or "E."

Please thank Brett in the comments for sharing his analysis!

Photo by cwhatuc

Logic and Games

* If your grandmother's funeral were this Saturday, would you skip it to take the LSAT? [Above The Law]

* Get pumped for Saturday's LSAT with 40 inspirational speeches in 2 minutes. [YouTube]

* Also, some dude's bro made him an LSAT-themed remix of "I Gotta Feeling." [YouTube]

* I love pizza, but it's still not good for keeping time on Test Day. [Why Did You Buy Me That]

* "Polar bears are white. I am white. I am a polar bear." [imgur / reddit]

* Kentucky governor promises he's backing Noah's Ark theme park because it'll create jobs, not because he believes in creationism. [NYTimes]

* Linking to defamatory statements online clearly isn't the same as publishing them, but the Canadian Supreme Court's still going to think it over. [Canada.com]

LSAT Logic: The TSA's Body Scans and Pat-downs

If you traveled by plane for Thanksgiving, I hope you didn't get patted down too much (unless you wanted to be, of course).

I'm against the TSA's pat-downs at airports nationwide. Not because they're invasive, but because they deny lonely people their once-yearly groping as they travel during the holiday season.

There's been a lot of controversy over the pat-downs and body scans lately, and the holiday travel season's coming up. Let's take a quick look at a few flawed arguments on both sides of the debate from the LSAT perspective.

False Analogy

In favor of body scans:

"What's the big deal? If you don't complain when a doctor X-rays you, you shouldn't be complaining now."

The difference, of course, is that a doctor is someone you implicitly trust (I hope). A doctor is well-trained in operating X-ray equipment and usually X-rays only a specific portion of your body (placing a lead apron around other parts of your body to protect them from the radiation). Further, the X-ray is taken for the purpose of learning information that may help you.

In contrast, body scanners may expose your entire body to potentially-harmful doses of radiation and are operated by people who may be poorly-trained. Further, you've never met them and little reason to trust any of them over a random stranger. Additionally, you don't really stand to gain from having your own body screened in the first place. It's the screening of others screened that you stand to benefit from (since, dear reader, I presume you're not a terrorist).


In opposition to body scans:

"These scanners are like allowing strangers to see you completely naked."









Sadly, they don't seem to be quite that exciting, judging from the above photo supplied by the TSA.

In both examples above, the speakers are treating different situations as if they're similar.

In LSAT language:
"treats as similar two cases that are different in a critical respect."

Examples of the same flaw in actual LSAT questions:
PrepTest 29 (October 1999 LSAT), S4, Q25 (p43)
PrepTest 31 (June 2000 LSAT), S3, Q5 (p97)
PrepTest 33 (December 2000 LSAT), S3, Q15 (p172)




Ad Hominem Attack (Personal Attack)

In favor of body scans and pat-downs:

"These body scans and pat-downs can only make us more safe. All of you who are against it must just be ashamed of your own bodies."

There are plenty of reasons to be against the body scans and pat-downs aside from being shame of one's body.

Even if some opponents are ashamed of their own bodies, maybe they are also modest, have religious reasons for not having strangers touch them or look at them almost-naked, or simply don't want random people touching them or looking at them in intimate areas.

(Additionally, maybe the new security measures can make us less safe by directing attention and money away from more effective security measures.)


In opposition to body scans and pat-downs:

"I just saw a TSA employee leafing through Playboy, so there's no real security reason for these pat-downs and body scans. The TSA employees just want to grab our junk and see us all almost naked."

First of all, leafing through Playboy doesn't necessarily make one a pervert. After all, it has great articles.

Further, even if it makes that employee a pervert, that doesn't necessarily mean all TSA employees are perverts. (This is a different flaw - the fallacy of composition.)

The major flaw in the above argument that I want to address here is simply that even if the TSA is filled with perverts, that doesn't guarantee that there aren't sufficient reasons for the pat-downs and body scans. It probably just means that, if they are perverts, and there are sufficient reasons for the pat-downs and body scans, you probably want someone else conducting them.

In LSAT language:
"rejects a claim by attacking the proponents of the claim rather than addressing the claim itself"
"attack employers' motives instead of addressing their arguments"
"criticizing the source of a claim rather than examining the claim itself"

Examples of the same flaw in actual LSAT questions:
PrepTest 19 (June 1996 LSAT), S2, Q14 (p24)
PrepTest 26 (June 1998 LSAT), S4, Q4 (p241)
PrepTest 32 (October 2000 LSAT), S2, Q6 (p139)
PrepTest 34 (June 2001 LSAT), S2, Q1 (p194)



Appeal to Popular Opinion

In favor of body scans and pat-downs:

"The public has demonstrated its willingness to subject itself to these security measures. Therefore, it's fine to go ahead with them."

In opposition to body scans and pat-downs:

"Everyone hates these new TSA security measures. The TSA must stop them immediately."

Whether the public is in favor of, or in opposition to, the security measures has no bearing on whether they are effective or necessary for airport security.


In LSAT language:
"taking evidence that a claim is believed to be true to constitute evidence that the claim is in fact true"

Examples of the same flaw in actual LSAT questions:
PrepTest 28 (June 1999 LSAT), S1, Q9 (p324)
PrepTest 32 (October 2000 LSAT), S4, Q13 (p141)

LSAT Test Day: Breakfast and Snack Recommendations

An LSAT distance tutoring student of mine recently emailed me:

"Any tips on what to eat for breakfast the morning of the LSAT? I know you say to have a big breakfast, but what? And what do you suggest for the break and to drink?"

At least one of the items pictured above is not part of a healthy LSAT breakfast.

If you guessed FourLoko, you're on your way to a top LSAT score. Congrats!

(McDonald's probably isn't part of any healthy breakfast, but there's a reason I didn't go to medical school.)

More about food in a bit, but first, coffee and cigarettes (breakfast of champions?).

I've already gone over whether coffee, cigarettes, and gum are allowed on Test Day. Now, the question remains, should you drink coffee or have cigarettes in the morning before the exam?

Answer: Do whatever you normally do. If you normally have coffee or cigarettes in the morning, don't try to go cold turkey now or you'll almost certainly find yourself with a pounding headache.

I don't know why you'd suddenly take up smoking, but now's not the time to start (if there ever was). Coffee will probably empty your intestines in the middle of the exam if you haven't had it in a while, so it's probably not a good idea for folks new to it.

You want to be fully alert, so a pre-test wake and bake isn't a good idea. What you do after the test is up to you (assuming it's for medicinal purposes, of course). Maybe California will vote to legalize next time, folks.


Oatmeal with bananas, raisins, or cranberries is probably about as healthy as it gets, while mild enough that it shouldn't give you any stomach issues. Eat it well before the exam starts so that you'll have time to go to the bathroom (oatmeal has lots of fiber).



Perhaps I misspoke - yogurt and granola might top oatmeal and fruit for "healthiest breakfast of the year." Again, it's mild and has carbs, but unlike oatmeal, yogurt has lots of protein as well. (Perhaps the nutritionists can chime in with their recommendations.)


Eggs have a lot of protein. However, depending upon how you cook them, you might also end up with lots of fat. Fat can make you sleepy. For this reason, lay off the butter and oil. Consider eating them hard-boiled, perhaps with a little salt for flavor. Alternatively, you can go the Rocky route and drink them raw, but don't blame me if you get salmonella.



Pancakes, waffles, muffins, bagels, cold cereal, etc. are also all good, just make sure you have also some protein.

Cold (or warm) pizza is probably good too (cheese has protein), but this is coming from a guy who sometimes eats leftover burritos for breakfast, so you may not want to listen to me on this one.

The bottom line is that you'll want to eat some carbs to give you energy, and some protein to improve your mental performance.

(This site appears to have some simple, yet comprehensive, nutrition advice. This link on it is also good.)

***

LSAT Snacks For During The Break:

Try not to be the guy who brings this:










Here are some more practical alternatives that the proctors will probably allow:

Granola bars: quick to unwrap, easy to eat, sugar

Bananas: quick to peel, easy to eat, sugar

Water: reduces thirst

Juice: reduces thirst, sugar

Coffee will likely be cold by now, but I suppose it's ok if you don't care about that sort of thing.

With all beverages, don't drink too much in order to avoid bathroom breaks. Your test center may have a water fountain, which would eliminate the need to bring a water bottle. Or maybe you're one of those people who's paranoid about tap water or lives in a part of the U.S. / world where the water's unsafe to drink.

***

See all LSAT Test Day tips.

***

Discuss the best breakfast foods and snacks in the comments. I'm sure that most of you know more about nutrition than I do. If you know something, please comment!

LSAT Diary: Prep in the Final Week Before Test Day

If you want to be in LSAT Diaries, please email me at LSATUnplugged@gmail.com. (You can be in LSAT Diaries whether you've taken the exam already or not.)

Please leave Kerri some encouragement and advice below in the comments!

Kerri's LSAT Diary:

A little more than one week until I take the LSAT. It's unreal to me. I took a practice test (under distracting conditions) and had only improved my score by two points. This week was so outrageously busy with an exam, a paper, a group project, work meetings, and on top of that I seem to have contracted bronchitis so I have a coughing fit that can last up to like 2 minutes like twice an hour - it's awful. Finally got to the doctor today and got some steroids to clear me up, but I was so adamant about getting better that I demanded she give me a back up plan.

So, in case the steroids don't work by Monday, I have a prescription already written that I can fill and get Monday to be better by Wednesday. I seriously stressed how important the LSAT was to the doctor and I told her that if I coughed that much during the LSAT that they'd tie me up and shove me in a closet because the test is that important to everyone.

I've only taken one practice test this week (yikes, I know) but I am about to take one now. Here's the thing that I learned, and it is so simple, but I bet a lot of you would make the same mistake. I have taken ~7 practice tests and graded them. I have scored in an 8 point range (and my highest is 4 points below my ideal score boo). I thought all I have to do is take timed practice tests to be ready for the LSAT. WRONG!

Taking practice test after practice test isn't how you learn (though it is so important to do!) When you take a practice test and look at the answers (and if the reasoning for the answers is there -that too), you don't necessarily get smarter. You need to look at what you've been doing and focus on your weaknesses.

For example, my first 6 practice tests were all weak in one area- Logical Reasoning. But it's more than realizing that. You need to go back to each question and see: am I missing all of the "Necessary Assumption Questions?" And explore those. An assumption is something that is pretty much required for the conclusion to exist. That's not all I learned-- Did you know that if "Jack or John goes to a party" this could entail *Jack go John no go" "Jack no go John no go" AND "Jack go John go" --?? There are some words on this exam that you have seen before but they have different meanings. LOOK AT THAT. Know the LSAT vocabulary.

Other than those fun tips all I can really say (if I haven't said it before) is get used to using regular pencils again. I know it's weird and awful and mechanical pencils are so much more fun. I went out tonight and bought pencils and a pencil sharpener. My life is thrilling. I am just ready to relax though I probably will not do until I get my test results.

I am on day 15 with no Facebook (if I can do it you can do it) and I haven't been to a bar in~50 days. Take away distractions in your life. I feel focused and it feels good. I don't even mind studying for this test. Its not bad material and its nice to have a routine.

PS I checked out my testing center the other day- just the general location. I need to check out parking soon. My LSAT Registration ticket is printed and I am trying to prep for my week of "taking it easy" LSAT wise. Time to wind down and have faith in my studying to get me through this!!

Thinking positive thoughts :)

Photo by bdorfman

LSAT PDFs of GROUPED by Type Books Available

I've linked to my reviews of each of the GROUPED books of LSAT questions below:

GROUPED By Game Type (PrepTests 1-20)

GROUPED By Question Type (PrepTests 1-20)

GROUPED By Passage Type (PrepTests 1-20)

More GROUPED By Game Type (PrepTests 21-40)

More GROUPED By Question Type (PrepTests 21-40)

More GROUPED By Passage Type (PrepTests 21-40)

Logic and Games

"Logic and Games" is something new here on LSAT Blog.

It'll be a weekly post with random, mostly law-related, things of interest to you as the classy future law students you are.

* The worst-ever lesson on freedom of speech. [FAIL Blog]

* Traveler sues airline, claiming her on-flight meal contained lizard. Hilarity ensues. [Gawker]

* NYC kids get a comic book on what to do when arrested. Remember when comic books used to be fun? [Above The Law]

* Amazon kicks WikiLeaks off of its servers. WikiLeaks remains unharmed. [Washington Post]

* Kim Jong-the-Illest pops in unexpectedly. [Kim Jong-Il Looking At Things]

* Kaplan's non-ABA-accredited online law school may get an actual campus. [Washington Examiner]

* Facebook close to trademarking the word "face." Scared yet? [NYTimes]

LSAT Logic (Of Course) & Bargaining For Deals

Hope everyone celebrating Thanksgiving had a happy one!

With the holiday season coming up, many of you will be shopping for friends and family. In a down economy, it's more important than ever to get the best possible deal.

While sites like Amazon already have huge Black Friday sales, sometimes you'll actually have to get out of your pajamas and bargain with a real, live human (maybe at a boutique or something). They'll resist your efforts, but recognizing the flaws in their reasoning will help you make the best possible argument.


False Analogy












"With the deal you're asking for, you'd be stealing money right out of my pocket."

"With a customer like you, I might as well just flush my money down the toilet."

The salesman treats different situations as if they are similar. Even if the salesman were to lose money on the deal, that's not quite the same as "stealing." Nor is it the same as flushing money down the toilet. Giving a good deal is much less likely to clog one's toilet, and it has the added benefit of creating goodwill (although that doesn't necessarily make it a good business decision).

In LSAT language:

"treats as similar two cases that are different in a critical respect."

Examples of the same flaw in actual LSAT questions:
PrepTest 29 (October 1999 LSAT), S4, Q25 (p43)
PrepTest 31 (June 2000 LSAT), S3, Q5 (p97)
PrepTest 33 (December 2000 LSAT), S3, Q15 (p172)



Ad Hominem Attack (Personal Attack)










"You drove here in a Maserati. Why should I give you the deep discount you want?"

"That's a nice iPad for you to use while claiming that my prices will put you in the poorhouse."


The customer's ownership of the Maserati has nothing to do with the value of the item the customer is purchasing from the salesman.

Perhaps the customer can't afford to pay a lot for the item precisely because he or she bought the iPad.


In LSAT language:
"rejects a claim by attacking the proponents of the claim rather than addressing the claim itself"
"attack employers' motives instead of addressing their arguments"
"criticizing the source of a claim rather than examining the claim itself"

Examples of the same flaw in actual LSAT questions:
PrepTest 19 (June 1996 LSAT), S2, Q14 (p24)
PrepTest 26 (June 1998 LSAT), S4, Q4 (p241) (esp. relevant to Park51)
PrepTest 32 (October 2000 LSAT), S2, Q6 (p139)
PrepTest 34 (June 2001 LSAT), S2, Q1 (p194)


Appeal to Popular Opinion

"This is one of our most popular items. Everyone loves it, so you will too!"

Or check out this portion of a random banner ad:




Or this McDonald's sign:








Just because more people go with Visa (whatever that means) and just because McDonald's has served over 99 billion meals, does that mean going with them is the way to go? Maybe they've just managed to fool all those people, but going with them wasn't necessarily the smartest move.

An example of LSAT language describing this flaw:

"taking evidence that a claim is believed to be true to constitute evidence that the claim is in fact true"

Examples of the same flaw in actual LSAT questions:
PrepTest 28 (June 1999 LSAT), S1, Q9 (p324)
PrepTest 32 (October 2000 LSAT), S4, Q13 (p141)


Part-to-Whole Flaw












This is a flaw that stores actually try to get you to commit. They prominently feature the best deals to draw you into the store, so you'll likely buy more expensive items when the advertised cheap ones have already sold out.

"This store has the best deals - I saw they're selling Call of Duty for only $29.99. Oh, they were sold out at 6AM because only 50 were in stock? Hmm...I'll buy this (overpriced) Microsoft Kinect for $299 instead."

(I don't know about you, but if I'm awake at 5AM, I don't want it to be because I'm waiting outside in the cold at some department store fighting to get the last discounted flatscreen TV at Best Buy.)

In LSAT language:
"improperly draws an inference about the scientific community from a premise about individual scientists"

Examples of the same flaw in actual LSAT questions:
PrepTest 19 (June 1996 LSAT), S4, Q3 (p36)
PrepTest 35 (October 2001 LSAT), S4, S18 (p245)

Harvard Law School Acceptance: Legally Blonde Video

In Legally Blonde, Elle Woods (played by Reese Witherspoon) gets a 179 on the LSAT and is accepted to Harvard Law School.

The 1st person out there in LSAT Nation to leave a comment with the PrepTest # / date of the Logic Game described at 0:31 in this video gets a virtual fist-bump.

Cancel LSAT If You Missed The Test Date Change Deadline?

UPDATE:

The below post is now outdated due to an LSAC policy change - please see New Option to Withdraw Your LSAT Registration From LSAC.

***

Law school admission consultant (and former UChicago Law admission dean) Anna Ivey recently contacted me regarding last year's cancel vs. absence post (written for those who miss that deadline).

What followed was a lengthy email discussion about the consequences of missing the deadline and how admissions officers will likely view the resulting cancellations and absences.

The following are some excerpts of that email exchange between myself and Anna Ivey, as well as a section from the University of Michigan Law's FAQ on the issue.

Some of you who don't postpone before the deadline will undoubtedly change your minds and wish you had. Or you might not read this post until then.

Either way, this post is for you.

***

Anna: LSAC changed the registration cancellation deadline in the run-up to the June 2009 without much notice or publicity, and that caught a lot of test takers off guard through no fault of their own. Fast-forward to 2011, though, and applicants have had plenty of time to see the current deadline for canceling or postponing registrations, and I would think that admissions officers are going to expect that they plan accordingly. I still don't think one absence is the end of the world, but it does signal that someone couldn't follow directions, and that's a pretty big deficit for someone who wants to be a lawyer. (Lawyers live and die by deadlines.) In contrast, with the June 2009 test, an absence didn't really signal anything about their ability to follow directions, because the directions got changed on them in the middle of the night. Does that distinction make sense?

Steve: My impression from students and blog readers is that, for the most part, test-takers are aware of the deadline, so it's not an issue of irresponsibility. I see it as simply being that 3 weeks beforehand is too early a deadline for them to know whether they'll be ready in time. It forces them to gamble and assume they'll be ready, or it forces them to postpone to a later date when they may not have needed to do so. They may have been ready by the date for which they'd initially registered. Many people just can't predict where their scores will be by Test Day.

Most serious preppers spend that final month taking full-length practice tests and refining techniques. By Test Day, some will experience score increases during the final 3 weeks that signal their readiness to take the exam for which they've registered, others won't. It's hard for test-takers to know which group they'll fall within.

And there are all the people who, in the final 3 weeks, get sick/injured, have life crises, or experience a sudden increase in busyness due to work/school/family issues. In short, something may come up before the exam that prevents test-takers from studying adequately during the final weeks. This often leads them to desire a postponement, but by then it's too late. I hope admissions officers won't punish them for what may be outside their control.


Anna: I guess I'm biased in the other direction, because I hear from a number of applicants who just didn't pay attention to the deadline, and that puts a bee in my bonnet. :) Also -- and I'm really curious what you think on this front -- I see a lot of applicants acting a bit delusional about how much they can improve in that 3-week window.

In any event, I agree with something that was said in the original post, which is that admissions officers now have no way of knowing who is "absent" because life got in the way on test day (woke up with the flu, etc.), and who is "absent" because they couldn't be bothered to follow directions. When LSAC conflates the two and uses the same label for both situations, they remove an important piece of information. If someone had until the test day (or even beyond, as used to be the case) to reschedule, but didn't, then failing to do so actually used to signal something.

Steve: Yes - too many people think miracles regularly happen in the final 3 weeks and on Test Day itself. The extent to which applicants see diminishing marginal returns depends upon the individual (as so much does when it comes to the LSAT) and how much studying they've done up to that point. Those who put in at least 3-4 months total generally see the majority of their increase prior to the 3-week deadline. However, those who put in a total of approx. 2 months have only done a little more than half of their total prep by that time. As such, a lot can happen as they finally bring it all together in the final 3 weeks.

Many do see big increases toward the end as things finally start to click. Others simply devote an increasing amount of time to studying as the impending test date finally kicks them into high gear.

Anna: That all makes sense. I guess the former admissions officer in me still thinks that if someone waited so long to prepare for the LSAT that the last three weeks represent some sizable chunk of their preparation, they really haven't gone about it with the seriousness it deserves. I'm inclined to think absences are OK for those day-of catastrophes (waking up with the flu), but as long as admissions officers don't have insight into why someone was absent, it's all a big question mark, and an absence can't really be held against the applicant.

Regarding cancellations: I do think admissions officers take those into consideration to a small degree when analyzing the subsequent score. No matter why someone cancels (dry run vs. screwed something up on the test in a big way), people who have taken the real thing before are going to have some advantage on the margin over someone who hasn't, and so people who have canceled will be assumed to have the benefit of that dry run (again, whether they did it for that reason or not).

***

University of Michigan Law's FAQ

It's been a while since I quoted Dean Sarah Zearfoss (of UMichigan Law) and Dean Ed Tom (of UC Berkeley at Boalt Hall Law) in my original post on this topic. I contacted them this week to ask whether their positions had changed since some time has passed, but stand by their original quotes.

However, Dean Zearfoss pointed me to the FAQ section of the UMichigan Law Admissions website, which now addresses the issue. I've reprinted this portion below, with her permission:

I registered for an LSAT sitting but then a conflict arose. I tried to change my test date, but missed the deadline for doing so. What should I do?

Beginning with the June 2009 exam, the LSAC instituted a policy requiring people to make test date changes at least three weeks in advance of the test. The reasons for this are sensible; in the past, their very flexible policy (allowing for changes even after the test had occurred!) meant a misallocation of resources–people would not show up for the exam and there would be wasted space at a test center, while meanwhile, other people would have to travel to a second-choice location, sometimes at considerable expense and inconvenience. The new policy allows LSAC to plan much more precisely.

But it also means that people who have very good reasons for postponing can’t do so if they don’t learn of the conflict in the necessary timeframe. What to do?

First, if the conflict is with the date itself–e.g., you’re scheduled for surgery–your only option is not to attend. There will be a notation on a subsequent score report showing that you were absent for the test. A single absence is simply not a big deal at all, and you shouldn’t worry about it. A pattern of absences may be a red flag, however, and so you would be wise to be careful to keep your calendar free for your next test registration date, or to be sure to postpone within the timeframe prescribed by LSAC. If you’re really worried about the notation of an absence, you’re more than welcome to submit a couple of lines in explanation along with your other application materials, but it truly is not necessary.

Second, if your conflict is not with the test date itself but with the necessary preparation (e.g., you’re a paralegal and were unexpectedly asked to participate in a trial for the two weeks prior to the test), you have two choices: (A) take the test and roll the dice with the score, or (B) take the test and cancel the score. (For information about canceled scores, see the prior FAQ.) Only you can know which option makes the most sense for your situation.

Also see why LSAC decided to make the test-date-change deadline earlier back in June 2009.)


Photo by jonathan_bliss