Logic and Games

* A list of law schools attempting to be transparent about their employment stats. [Above The Law]

* One lawyer's custody battle with Jeffrey Toobin, author of The Nine, led her to open her own boutique practice. [NYTimes]

* Justice Scalia gives some advice on how attorneys can achieve the ideal work/life balance. [The Careerist]

* The NYPD engaged in extensive surveillance of students in Muslim Student Associations, even those outside NYC. [Huffington Post]

* A juror is jailed after friending the defendant on Facebook in order to get out of jury duty. [Mashable]


June 2012 LSAT Questions / Answers

June 2012 LSAT Questions AnswersThe June 2012 LSAT might seem far off, but it'll be here before you know it. What would you like to see on the blog between now and then?

Please leave your questions for me (and for each other) in the comments, I'll do my best to answer as many of your questions as possible.

Also, if you're looking for general advice on improving in Logic Games, Logical Reasoning, or Reading Comprehension, please note that I've already written plenty of blog posts on these topics and have integrated them into my LSAT study schedules.

Quick request: please leave a name rather than posting as "Anonymous." It makes it easier for everyone to respond to specific comments. Thanks!

Photo by lwr

LSAT Diary: Making Practice LSAT-Style Questions

This LSAT Diary is from blog reader Jason, who writes in with some half-finished, LSAT-style questions he's made up.

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.)

Leave Jason some encouragement and your thoughts on his questions below in the comments!

Jason's LSAT Diary:

RC is still a bit of a hit or miss, for me. I can consistently score -0 on RC and then I'll have a rough passages that I find the most boring and subsequently confusing and I'll miss 2 or 3 questions in a row. So, I would lose a few points based on a very rough literary set of questions. My best case RC is -0, my worst is -4. -4 is WAY to much to lose on the real test. So, I need to confine that to no more than 2 missed questions. If I get a games section written for me, I am pull it off in -1 to -3. A great LR section I can ace. 1 tough LR section I usually go -2. So, I'm looking anywhere from -4 to -11 -- a big variation! Basically anywhere from 176 to 169. I think the median score is in the 173 range right now. I'll know more more in a few weeks after the additional drills.

When I took the LSAT before, I doubt I missed a single question on the experimental RC section. I am sure my answers fit lock-and-key. Then, I missed 3 questions on the actual RC. I lost focus in the games. I performed nowhere near my 170 practice range. So I signed up to retake -- once again preparing for game day. I'm going over all questions that I've previously missed on the first attempt. I'm going to redo all the games in Grouped By Type (4g per day, each day until the test) and I'm doing each of the newest exams - 1 test every other day.

Games are the most dangerous -- not the technique necessarily, but the speed. I felt this recent test really less emphasized the setup and up-front inference and focused more on on the need to use brute-force inferences on the fly. The games seem less "definable" and much more hybrid than in PT 1-40. PT 54 - present really demonstrate a next-gen type of game, in my opinion.

Anyway, here's my running, stream of consciousness of fun LSAT-style questions that I've made up --- They aren't yet finished, but I think you can see where I am going with it:

"An agonist is a substance that initiates a physiological response when combined with a receptor. Agonists increase the level of receptor activation, antagonists reduce it. An antagonist is a substance that interferes with or inhibits the physiological action of another. An acetylcholinesterase inhibitor (often abbreviated AChEI) or anti-choliterase is a chemical that inhibits the cholinesterase enzyme from breaking down acetylcholine, increasing both the level and duration of action of the neurotransmitter acetylcholine. Acetylcholine receptor agonists and antagonists can either have an effect directly on the receptors or exert their effects indirectly, e.g., by affecting the enzyme acetylcholinesterase, which degrades the receptor ligand.

If all of the above are true, which of the following can be properly inferred? (Still need to write some awesome, tough answer choices questions here.)

***


----This is one of my favorites -- the LSAT-makers like aviation but this is an entirely new level of difficulty:

Pilot's Association Rep:
Many people believe that, as flight technology becomes increasingly automated, that human pilots will soon be entirely replaced by automated control systems. But, the cost of labor required to produce human pilots -- typically free -- is much less than even the cheapest factory workers that build autopilot devices.

Cost-Saving Opponent:
But, of course, the cost of the direct labor required to produce said device is not the only cost valuable in comparing the costs to become "flight ready." For example, a human requires 20+ years of health, maintenance and education support costs before they are "flight ready." The cost of the flight instruction alone can approach a cost in the millions of dollars.
But, humans have the ability to make ethical decions -- whereas computers do not. Therefore, autopilot devices are not ethical.

Pilot:
Well, autopilots are superior because they make decisions based on objective criteria -- therefore, autopilots are not hampered by ethical considerations. Additionally, to adequately consider the costs of producing a human pilot, you would have to compare the costs required to allow the parents to achieve a fertile age and condition as well as all parents precedent to the pilot.

Opponent:
Nonsense, if you suggest that the cost of a particular human pilot is the sum of their direct ancestors, then you would similarly have to consider the cost of an autopilot device as the cost of all computers precedent to it's construction. UNIVAC alone, adjusted for inflation in today's dollars, is in the billions of dollars.

Pilot:
Well, just because computers built today are built upon technology inherent within UNIVAC, does not mean that they are direct descendants of UNIVAC.

Oppoment:
I wholeheartedly disagree with your dismissal of UNIVAC. Besides, the US Army built UNIVAC and the US Army has a positive history of building technology. Therefore, flight technology built by the US Army will be superior.

Pilot:
True, that logically follows if any technology built by the US Army will be superior, but the US Army also trains humans. Besides, you are missing the point.


What is the major point at issue between the Pilot and Opponent?

How do these arguments proceed? Do either and/or both utilize logical flaws through the course of the discussion?

I need to work on these questions -- but it's a lot of fun to build your own questions -- understanding them at that level -- and then taking a test form.

Photo by bobaubuchon

Logic and Games

* Two guys try to cash in on the Jeremy Lin fever by trademarking the term "LINsanity." [Above The Law]

* In other trademark news, Apple is forced to stop selling the iPad in China because an insolvent company there claims to have trademarked the term already. [NYTimes]

* State lawmakers want to limit the activities of a law clinic at the University of Maryland School of Law.

* A woman suspended from practicing law lies to get *onto* a jury. [WSJ Law Blog]

* An analysis of just how useless law review articles can be. [ABA Journal]



LSAT Diaries: Starting to Understand the LSAT

LSAT Blog Diary Starting Understand LSATThis LSAT Diary is from Jason, who writes in with his thoughts on starting to understand the LSAT.

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.)

Leave Jason some encouragement below in the comments!

Jason's LSAT Diary:

Nudging past a 173 is a very difficult accomplishment. I am not sure that is realistic for me in another 6 weeks. In each LR section, there are almost always 2 questions that are either time killers or really tricky. (Parallel reasoning questions with Except, Unless in 2 of 3 conditional statements in the stem and then the answers are contrapositives in a different order. Nightmare in 1:30.) The LSAT is not like the SAT/ACT -- where a top scorer has a relaxed time to spare. I find myself working right up to the second on these sections!

At present, everything has to line up just right for me to make a 172-173 on a practice test. I need to answer the first 10 LR questions in about 8:30, then work 11-15 in about 1:30 each, then 20-end in 1:40, then spend a careful bit on 16,17,18,19. I am carelessly missing Qs 13,16,17 very consistently.

RC, I miss typically 1-2. Most often, just 1. Hard to refine that much further. Also, I've burned through all the comparative passages published. Other than deconstructing those, I have an absence of material.

I have a lot of range right now: I could see potentially missing anywhere from 4 to 11. I need to refine that.

I'm getting nervous -- making daily gains on LG then giving a few mistakes on LR. My first, and essentially, only choice school is SMU here in Dallas -- only because I can't relocate due to family commitments. And, I am not concerned about getting an acceptance offer, not at all, but the strength of my performance on this exam -- of course -- can make a substantial difference in the form of a scholarship package. (It's right at the edge of a T50 school, and very expensive, so they don't get a lot of 172+ scores applications.) I need to, undoubtedly superperform!

I've been actually putting together a number of my own stims, questions stems, flaws and args. That's been an incredible way to really burrow into the test-maker's mentality. Just this past week, I felt that unity -- that point where all the mechanistics internalized. I finished a new PT with a score of 175. That is my highest yet. But, best of all -- I had time. I was relaxed. I felt comfortable moving back and forth between time-drain questions and those that are easily doable.

I am starting, now, to really understanding the zen of the arguments. I understand what it means to not quite remember the rules but internalize them -- I'm starting to feel this way now. I am adding up the Sufficient Assumption questions quickly and read the negations as I roll through a N.A. question. Principle questions I now see the subtlety of different -- as minute as for the force, certainty, scope, order, logical reconstruction, etc. After a while, It's starting to make good sense.

Photo by Paul Watson

Logic and Games

* Supreme Court Justice Breyer robbed by man with a machete. [Boston Globe]

* Rick Santorum claims judicial tyranny is a serious problem when it comes to gay marriage. [WSJ Law Blog]

* A legal scholar argues that Jim Crow still exists in America due to inequities in the judicial system. [NPR]

* The U.S. Constitution is losing influence as a model for those of other countries. [NYTimes]

* The worst Valentine's Day gifts ever. [Yahoo Shine]

February 2012 LSAT Score Release Dates

LSAT Blog February LSAT Score Release Dates
UPDATE: LSAC began releasing February 2012 LSAT scores on Tuesday, March 6th. Scores are released in batches, and it may take several hours for everyone to receive their scores.

Good luck!


***


The February 2012 LSAT scores / results are scheduled to be released via email by March 7, 2012. However, LSAC generally releases LSAT scores a bit earlier than that.
Let's look at the trend over the past several years (click to enlarge):





LSAT Blog February 2012 LSAT Score Release Dates










The December 2011 LSAT score release was a bit unpredictable, but the June 2011 LSAT score release and October 2011 LSAT score release are helpful in allowing me to make an educated guess about when February LSAT scores will come out.


Over the years, February, June, and October scores were traditionally scheduled to be released no later than 23 days after the exam date (a Monday). However, LSAC started giving themselves a little more time in the June 2011 - February 2012 test cycle, scheduling the score release date to be 25 days after the test date for the June 2011, October 2011 and February 2012 LSATs (a Wednesday).


For both the June and October 2011 LSATs, LSAC scheduled the results to be released no later than 25 days after the test date, but then released them 23 days later (2 days earlier than scheduled. For this reason...


My best guess is that February 2012 LSAT scores will be released on Monday, March 5, 2012.


"But at what time specifically? I need to know when to constantly refresh my email / LSAC account!"

In batches over the course of several hours. Likely starting late in the day (Eastern Time).

No one knows how the batches are organized, if at all.

The batches do not seem to be organized in any of these ways:

alphabetical/regional/high-to-low scores/low-to-high scores/test center #, etc.

Wish everyone all the best!

***

See other LSAT score release dates posts.

***

While you're waiting for your score, get busy with my Law School Admissions Book Recommendations list and other admissions-related blog posts.

Feel free to leave comments and vent at the injustice of having to wait so long for what is rightfully yours.

Finally, here's Success Baby, in case you prefer him to the other baby for your Facebook profile photo or something:
LSAT Blog February LSAT Score Release Dates


LSAT Diary: Prep and Test Day Experience

LSAT Blog Prep Test Day ExperienceThis installment of LSAT Diaries comes from Tamara, a 45-year-old computer programmer who scored a 166 on her LSAT.

She's got some great LSAT advice for you about how she did it, and a great description of what taking the test was like.

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.)

Tamara's LSAT Diary:

Patents and intellectual property rights interest me, and friends who are lawyers suggested my prospects for practicing intellectual property law are good. I've worked in computer software for 15 years while I attended college for degrees in communication and computer science. I had high school ambitions for law school, but high school graduation was 25 years ago. Almost on a whim, I registered for the LSAT. I had ten weeks to prepare.

I didn't pin any specific outcome on the results. Everyone who completes a law school application takes the LSAT. So instead of pondering "Should apply to law school" and "How will I ever afford it" I decided to take the test and see what happens.

My first stop was the public library. I opened the phonebook-sized guide and took the practice test at the front. Reading comprehension, no sweat. Short-answer logical questions, hm, some of those I'm getting backwards or not right ... ohmigoodness, these puzzles? Most fun I've ever had with a #2 pencil, but each one takes a full half-hour? Many hours later, without timing anything and with ample breaks, I had a practice score of 159. (But test prep book warmups are not equivalent to the actual tests.)

So my journey began. Next step, Internet, where I quickly found LSAT Blog. Based on the advice of using official LSAT practice tests, I ordered five. One for each of the last five weeks of preparation. I didn't share this goal with anyone other than my housemates: people who could see from the huge tome labeled LSAT preparation on the coffee table.

The first five weeks, I focused on accuracy on the two weak spots: short answer (logical reasoning) and logic games (analytical reasoning). I spent weekday evenings casually answering 10 or 20 logical reasoning questions, then working on the types I got wrong. I learned about the question types, and how to identify the argument and conclusions. I followed a strategy of discarding the obviously wrong answers right off and then selecting the one best answer from the remaining answers.

Logic games? Definitely hard. Fortunately, it's the same type of reasoning required to solve the trickiest real-life computer programming problems. I photocopied logic games on individual pieces of paper and carried them with me, so that a wait at the mechanic or the vet became logic game time. I worked on them in the break room at work, where I sat and tried to figure out the contrapositives and grouping and scheduling and charts and placing square people at round tables.

Spending the weekend drinking Lone Star while trying to figure out which seagull shat on which Amish hat was a highlight of my study time. After that game, my speed picked up. I started doing two games every time I sat down, finishing one and immediately starting another, and finally got to where I could solve two in a half hour. Three. I needed three. And eventually four? Would I ever compress two hours of work into 35 minutes?

The last five weeks I focused on completing the test in the allotted time. Oh, and without a cigarette break. And getting my 45-year-old eyes trained in on bubbling selections accurately on those tiny cramped answer sheets. Each Saturday I woke up at the time I'd have to wake up for the real LSAT, drove to the library, and took a practice test. I still needed more speed on logic games. Sometimes getting three completed during a practice test. Sometimes. Almost, but not quite. I had accuracy; if I got to a game, I got all or all-but-one of the questions right. If I worked too fast, jumped to a false conclusion, didn't re-read and carefully map out the initial information? I got the whole thing wrong. Accuracy took time, precious time, but I'd rather get two completely right than four completely wrong.

But at the same time, I remained casual about the results -- if I got a good score, I'd continue down this path and apply to schools, if not, that was OK too.

Game day rolled around. Got there early and joined hundreds of others sitting around waiting to be assigned to a room. Then we had interminable delays while the proctors figured out that even if you'd grown a beard since your license picture you still were allowed to take the test (a rather common thing, you'd think, considering that LSAT studying didn't seem to allow time for shaving ... or was it an influx of Amish inspired by the seagull question?)

The wait to get our LSAT test booklets was long and frustrating. The proctor mis-read and mis-pronounced instructions. Settled into a zen-like calmness for the rigamarole and tiny uncomfortable chairs; I never thought to practice sitting in a horrible chair with a tiny tiny platform and no place to rest my pencil? Logical reasoning, reading comprehension, logical reasoning, a break to walk around, more logical reasoning, will this never end? It's well after noon, and the quiet and tedium are taking a toll. Finally the analytical reasoning, the logic games. Read them through, ranked them order of attack, worked the first, third, fourth ... time was called, and bubbled in C on the blanks. Oh, and I never did work down my list of things to do and practice that writing sample. Arguing on the best choice for a summer camp? Whatever.

They collected our packages, and the whole thing was over. And I'd gotten to three of the four logic games. And I was jubilant, driving home, calling friends who practice law, my sister, anyone who might care: I'd finished the LSAT. Finished. It is done, and now I'm sharing. Keeping my plans quiet helped keep it low-key. Then we could wait for the scores to be published together.

The results of ten weeks of casual preparation? A 166 that I can send off with my other data to the nearby top-14 law school. Due to LSAC data-sharing settings, my email inbox is filling up with other schools inviting me to open houses, waiving admission fees and talking scholarships. All without ever breaking a sweat. Take it easy -- know the question types, know your strengths and play to them. You can improve your LSAT score with three to five hours a week of consistent but moderate effort over a ten-week period and maintain your job. Friends and family will barely miss you. Next up? Applying to schools. Again, I'll do my best to achieve good results without being too attached to any particular outcome.

Photo by offshore

Logic and Games

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

* Then read all these LSAT Test Day tips available on the blog. [LSAT Blog]

* Goldilocks avoids criminal sanction when Sotomayor judges dispute on Sesame Street. [ABA Journal]

* Judge sentences man to take his wife to dinner at Red Lobster. [WSJ Law Blog]

* The University of Minnesota punishes mortuary sciences student Amanda Tatro for making jokes on Facebook, Tatro takes them to the state Supreme Court. [Above The Law]



LSAT Test Day Clothing: What NOT To Wear

LSAT Blog Test Day Clothing What NOT To WearIt's often been said that the similarities between LSAT Blog and The Sartorialist are uncanny. After all, I write about the LSAT, and he takes photos of stylish people.

So, I wasn't at all surprised when a blog reader recently asked me what to wear on Test Day.

My thoughts below:










-Formalwear

Pros: You can boost your self-esteem by dressing in formal clothing. Feeling good about yourself is important when performing difficult tasks.

Cons: Formalwear can be constricting, which might slow you down and make you uncomfortable. Also, no one likes that guy/gal, so they'll beat you up as soon as the test is over.

Protip: Don't wear a suit or evening gown to take a standardized test. Just don't.



-Homeless Chic

Pro: You'll distract other test-takers with how disgusting you look (and smell, if you really go all-out). Which is kind of funny, if you're an asshole.

Con: They'll beat you up as soon as the test is over.

Protip: As a general rule of thumb, if you dress in rags, you won't have many friends --- unless you're filthy rich. It's nasty, so don't do it.



-CasualwearLSAT Blog Test Day Clothing Casual Wear

Pros: Just about everything.

Cons: You won't be asked to model.

Protip: Wear casual, comfortable clothing. Your favorite t-shirt, sweatshirt, jeans, and sneakers work well. If you're a girl (or like to dress like one), you can also go the Juicy sweatpants route. You don't know whether the test center will be hot or cold, so layers are a good idea.


More LSAT Test Day Dos and Donts here ----->

LSAT Diary: Logic Games Tips

LSAT Blog Diaries Logic Games TipsThis LSAT Diary is from Liz, a 23-year-old English teacher who's taken 20 timed tests and 40 untimed tests as she's been preparing for the February 2012 LSAT. She's got tons of great advice from her LSAT studying experience, and she's improved 15 points on her practice tests - from a 154 to a 169. In this LSAT Diary, she provides some of her tips on Logic Games.

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.)

Leave Liz some encouragement below in the comments!



Liz's LSAT Diary:

Logic games were my greatest weakness when I started out. Fortunately for lots of us, though, they probably comprise the most easily learned section of the LSAT. The following are some general observations regarding an overall approach:

1. Take your time on the individual games when you start out. Using Steve’s 5-month LSAT study schedule, I dedicated an entire month to dissecting and deconstructing the games by category and then focused on my weaknesses (for me, In-and-Out games). I did not time myself until I felt relatively at ease with each game type, and even then it usually took 7-11 minutes for me to solve them accurately. But as I shifted my primary focus to LR in month 2, I continued to work at least one section of games per day, timed. My speed eventually picked up and I can now accurately solve most sets within 5-8 minutes. Even now, just a few days before the LSAT, I still work out a few challenging games each night to ensure a speedy performance on Saturday.

2. Work as many LG sections as you can get your hands on. Especially if these are very difficult for you, as they were for me, practice will be an essential component of your ability to master the games. I started out on the Next 10, which seemed somewhat easier, and “graduated” to 10 More as my speed and accuracy increased during Month 1. I tabbed the most difficult games by color and worked those sets several times.

3. If you run out of LG sections, just recycle the ones you’ve already completed. I’ve probably done each of those sets at least twice, and those that I tabbed, many more times. For this reason it’s important to practice either with photocopies or with a notebook so you don’t have to erase your work again and again.

4. Confine your problem-solving space. Because I don’t like photocopies, I used a notebook to solve my game sets. But I didn’t want to become dependent on the extra writing space, so I took Steve’s suggestion and divided each page into fourths to confine my working space for each problem set. See his post for more information on this strategy.

5. Pay very close attention to the wording in each stimulus. I know this seems obvious, but it’s amazing how one teensy little mistake in a game setup can waste precious minutes. I’ve committed several during my timed practice tests, so now I re-check all of my diagrams before moving on to the first question.

6. Double-check your responses if time allows. And I don’t mean just at the end of a section, either. Once I reduced my average time per game, I began to notice that I could finish a section with 2+ minutes to spare and still miss 2-3 questions! So I started a new approach – I began to check my responses as I completed each question. For example, if I think B is the correct answer choice, I will still work through C, D, and E to make absolutely sure I am choosing the correct option. Nine times out of ten, I have chosen B correctly, but on those few occasions where D is the best choice, this strategy pays off. The issue with this approach is, of course, the timing. Personally, I don’t need to check my watch anymore to know how I’m doing on a problem set – if I feel I’m taking too long, I won’t work out C, D, and E, but will mark that problem set just in case I finish all the games early. This is a very subjective approach, but it has worked well for me so far. If you’ve developed another strategy for checking your work, please share!

7. Solidify your understanding of conditionals. This was a major issue for me in the In-and-Out games, and one I did not master until studying the relevant LR questions in Month 2 of my study plan. If you find conditionals particularly challenging, focus on them and your performance should improve.

8. If you get discouraged, take a break. Especially during your original orientation to the games, it’s important to maintain a positive attitude in your approach. Becoming frustrated will only condition you to view the LG section negatively, which is important to avoid if you want to successfully tackle the games. After all, it’s much easier to study subject matter that you associate with positive or neutral feelings than with negative ones.

More to come soon!

Photo by paperbackwriter

Logic and Games

* Disabled LSAT-taker gets extra time on the exam as an accommodation. He decides to sue LSAC anyway, demanding double-time. [Boston Business Journal]

* In related news, the ABA approves a resolution urging LSAC to provide "appropriate accommodations" to test-takers in need. [ABA Journal]

* Attending law school part-time is becoming a less popular option.

* A law student in Austria takes on Facebook for alleged privacy violations. [NYTimes]

* On the legality of unpaid internships (and: ATL seeks a paid intern.) [Above The Law]