6 of 6 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars
Not the right product if you are looking for a high score...., June 2, 2009
This review is from: Cracking the LSAT, 2009 Edition (Graduate School Test Preparation) (Paperback)
I have used prep books from Kaplan, Powerscore, McGraw Hill, and now this book. I would say that only the McGraw Hill book was worse than this one. Its approach seems to be aimed at someone looking for more of an average score than someone looking for a really top score.. The book seems to suggest skipping whole questions in every section in order to have more time for the easier questions. This might be a good tactic if you are looking for a score in the 150-160 range, but in order to get a really strong score you are going to have to attempt every question. The book includes some valuable test taking tactics, but a lot less than what is provided in Powerscore or Kaplan. Also, one of the main pieces of advice for the Logical Reasoning (or 'Arguments' in Princeton's terminology) section is to read the question stem first. This is something that Powerscore directly contradicts, and offers much stronger reasoning for why NOT to do this.. While many people seem to dislike Kaplan, I have found their product to be fairly good, but there is no argument that if you are looking for LSAT prep, Powerscore is the way to go.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
4 of 5 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
Not actual former LSATs. Misprints on questions!, April 17, 2009
This review is from: Cracking the LSAT, 2009 Edition (Graduate School Test Preparation) (Paperback)
I have taken three practice tests so far. Two were out of The Official LSAT SuperPrep, which uses actual former LSATs. The third test I took was the first test appearing in this book.
This book does not use real LSATs. This was very obvious when I discovered a significant typo (one that literally made a question impossible to answer and made me waste valuable time) in the first section of the test. How do I know it was a typo? Because the answer key reprinted the full question correctly. Taking a practice test is a serious time commitment. I don't have time to waste taking tests with results that may have been skewed because of poor editing.
Maybe I was having a bad day. Or, maybe other factors, like time-wasting typos and the fact that the questions may not be as rigorously tested as actual LSAT questions, influenced my score. Whatever the reason, I actually scored a full 10-15 points lower on this test than I had on my previous 2 LSAT tests. I seriously question whether or not Princeton Review practice tests are accurate predictors of actual LSAT scores. If not, who needs to have their confidence shaken before they take the test?
The only positive thing I can say about this book is that the practice tests do include the new comparative reading comprehension questions. However, this is to be expected since the book is dated 2009 and they came out with these questions in 2006. But unfortunately many other books don't have them because their tests are older. I just purchased all the individual tests available since June of 2006 at $8 each to be able to practice these. I haven't found a book containing the actual tests that is recent enough to include them (although honestly, I have so many general review books now that I didn't look that hard).
My advice is don't waste your money on this book. Use practice tests with actual former LSATs. And for studying help, I have read PowerScore is the way to go. Just bought their Logical Reasoning and Logic Games Bibles.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
1 of 1 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Needs more practice material, May 24, 2009
This review is from: Cracking the LSAT, 2009 Edition (Graduate School Test Preparation) (Paperback)
It's good, but they could be more efficient with their explanations and fit more practice questions into it. A lot of it is fluff, though the actual substantive stuff in it is very good.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No