In order to earn a Bachelor’s degree, many colleges have a foreign language requirement. You’d never take an exam to waive out of that requirement without studying for it - what a giant waste of time!

Now, stop and think about logic. A lot of the words common in logic are words we’re familiar with in everyday life – assumption, inference and principle to name a few – but they’re words with different or specific meanings on the LSAT. Logic is a language all its own, and logic games are like doing a puzzle in that language. That’s one reason that logic games can be so tough; they’re written in another language. But, it is close enough to English to fool you into thinking it doesn’t need translation. That’s why it’s so important to look at each rule individually and figure out exactly what it means.

As tough as logic games can be generally, there are some games that are even tougher. Hybrid Games immediately come to mind. Hybrid games, of course, are games where you have to do more than one thing. Sometimes you’ll have to sequence and match, or distribute and sequence, or select and match. Really, it can be any combination of the four main actions – sequencing, distribution, matching, and selection. The key to Hybrids is to take control of the game by drawing a good sketch based on the most important action. (One thing I like to tell my students is, ask yourself which action has to come first. It’s surprising how often that simple question tells you how to draw your sketch.)

Using the wrong strategy can take an easy game and make it tough. It’s like trying to use high school geometry to solve a calculus problem. Sure you can find the area under a curve by using a bunch of area formulas, but it’s a lot easier to just take the integral. The same thing shows up in logic games. For example, sometimes a game’s rules will separate it into two sub-games depending on one entity’s position. (We call these limited options.) While limited options are never the only way to work through a game – and while they don’t show up in every game – they are very powerful when they can be used. Not knowing this strategy is can result in spending 20 minutes on one game when you’re only allowed 35 minutes in the section.

Even the order in which you attack the games can make the section tougher than it needs to be. If you take a minute or two at the beginning of the section to do some triage and figure out roughly what the order of difficulty is, you can work from easiest to hardest and gradually build up to the most difficult questions – ranking up the greatest possible number of points along the way. It’s easy to psych yourself out if you start with the hardest game, so always take the time to triage.

Remember that even though logic games are tough, inadequate preparation will make them tougher. Kaplan’s brand new Logic Games on Demand course will give you comprehensive, in-depth instruction on everything Logic Games – every game type, every sketch type, every question type, every deduction type… everything.

Learn new strategies. Learn to triage. And don’t panic!

Initially, test takers consider logic games often the most intimidating section of the LSAT, primarily because of their unfamiliarity. For the majority of students, the time element of 4 games in 35 minutes is the biggest problem. That is why it is important to become very skilled and confident in diagramming (sketching) the games. Once a test taker has learned a systematic approach to setting up logic games, LG’s can be a great opportunity to pick up points on the LSAT and to raise your score.

In order to understand how to set up a logic game, first we need to understand exactly what LG’s are and what they are not. While thinking how to define exactly what a LG is, I find myself thinking of a book I recently read called What the Dog Saw by Malcolm Gladwell. By the way, if you are reading this and are not familiar with his books, they are very interesting and have my endorsement. In this book, Gladwell references national security expert Gregory Treverton. Treverton made a very interesting distinction in Smithsonian magazine June 2007 between puzzles and mysteries. According to Treverton, puzzles have enough evidence or information given to make deductions and reach the answers. "They can be solved." Mysteries however offer no such comfort. Treverton’s interpretation on mysteries is that they have no answers. There is simply just not enough information necessary to reach a definite conclusion.

Ok, so at this juncture, you may be asking yourself how this relates at all to any of the three points in the title. Here it is. As an LSAT instructor, I see many students initially perceive LG’s as mysteries, and at some point in diagramming them, they simply give up and try to limit the answer choices to two or three possibilities and chose the best one hoping for luck. Then, as students learn to diagram and interpret the rules and develop reasoning and deduction skills, they begin to see the LG’s as puzzles. Each game having absolute answers can be conclusively proven. At this point is when a student begins to see their LG scores go up consistently and progressively. And that’s the point; LG’s are puzzles, not mysteries. Check out our newest course, Logic Games on Demand, to learn how to demystify them.

So why are the LG’s tested and how do they relate to law school. These games tell you absolutes, but not always blatantly. Often times, they want to see if you have the deduction and reasoning skills that are necessary to see what is not directly in front of you. For example if 1, then 2; and if 2, then 3; so if 1, then 3; and if not 3, then not 1. The skills tested in that basic example are elementary versions of the skills that are necessary to think through legal issues and complex situations.

"Hi, my name is Lindsey, and I am addicted to Stuff."

Hey, I’m not that bad! I’m nowhere near the stage of those hoarders whose interventions are laid out for public consumption via reality TV- and at least those guys get a whole team of experts to makeover their pits… I mean, nests! I’m left standing alone, surrounded by outdated receipts, matchless socks, middle school memorabilia, and a ‘helpful’ team of loved ones encouraging me to streamline, to "simplify" my life.

But for every one of their tough-love lectures, I’ve got an excu… I mean, justification. After all,who wouldn’t want to remember every torturous middle school moment? And using those stray socks as cleaning rags will help me ‘go green.’ Hey, it’s all fun and games until somebody needs to return last-last year’s birthday present and can’t find the gift receipt- they’ll be thanking me then!

No matter what some self-help gurus say (or chant), in my view, change isn’t always good. ‘Same’ can be just great- there’s something really comforting about that which is… well, comfortable. That familiar baggy sweater, the well-worn copy of my favorite childhood book- I can count on them. Knowing exactly what I’m going to get time after time is worth keeping that old… I mean, vintage stuff around.

Believe it or not, the LSAT is a lot like my old sweater, albeit minus the coziness (you’d be in for certain disappointment if you were to try nuzzling the LSAT). Challenging? Intimidating? Yes and yes. But the LSAT is also utterly predictable. In fact, it is the only major graduate admissions exam that has not changed materially in nearly twenty years! Why? Because it’s a good test; it tests precisely the skills law students use on a daily basis in law school – and law schools know that. That’s why they put so much weight on the exam in the admissions process.

And that’s good news for you. This means that LSAT testtakers have the best opportunity to hone precisely the skills law schools expect because the testtakers themselves know exactly what to expect on the LSAT.

True, there have been some slight adjustments made: for example, testtakers have seen more Principle Logical Reasoning questions and Hybrid Logic Games show up over the past few years. Plus, the unscored Writing Sample was extended from thirty minutes to thirty-five several seasons ago, but even this change helped testtakers feel more comfortable because it replicated the timing of the scored sections. The most significant change to the LSAT was the addition of a Comparative Reading format on one passage per Reading Comprehension section. This format draws heavily upon testtakers’ Inference skills to determine relationships between the two passages’ authors’ attitudes and purposes for writing (kind of like comparing two cases in your contracts casebook), but, again, Inference is a question type with which Kaplan students become well-familiar in their prep for Logical Reasoning.

In fact, that’s exactly Kaplan’s mission: helping our students build complete familiarity with the LSAT so that, on Test Day, they are competent, confident, and comfortable. From offering our students every released LSAT (plus answers and explanations) for personal practice and review to timing our class sessions to reflect the time students will spend testing on LSAT Day, Kaplan provides comprehensive insight and understanding of the inner workings of the this formidable but predictable test. Wow – I guess you could say that Kaplan is a lot like my soft old sweater! OK, OK, I’ll "hang up" that analogy and get back to clearing out the clutter. Just don’t make me give up my poufy, sequined prom dress- I’ll fit into it again some day!