[emotionalwreck_]

I've just completed the LNAT practice test and I achieved 20/42. Is that any good? Or is the real test significantly harder, thus I should be worried?
Thanks

[thelawstudent]

i scored 23 on the practice test at home, got 15 in the real thing (missed out the last 2-3 questions) and completely missed out the essay at the end - it was nerves on the day that got me.. just make sure you're relaxed in the real thing (easier said than done i'm afraid).

[Sean9001]

Contrastingly to the above poster, I go 20 on my practice but 24 in the actual test. Chill out as much as you possibly can, and just take each question as it comes. Don't over complicate it!

[emotionalwreck_]

(Original post by thelawstudent)
i scored 23 on the practice test at home, got 15 in the real thing (missed out the last 2-3 questions) and completely missed out the essay at the end - it was nerves on the day that got me.. just make sure you're relaxed in the real thing (easier said than done i'm afraid).

May I ask where you applied and whether it affected your application. Also, does the essay matter as much?

[emotionalwreck_]

(Original post by Sean9001)
Contrastingly to the above poster, I go 20 on my practice but 24 in the actual test. Chill out as much as you possibly can, and just take each question as it comes. Don't over complicate it!

That eases me aha, did you do any preparation beforehand?

[Sean9001]

(Original post by emotionalwreck_)
That eases me aha, did you do any preparation beforehand?

I prepared by making sure that I fully understood the meanings of inference, deduction and assumption. Then I read the Guardian and tried to identify those three things in the articles that I read.

Best of luck!

Sean.

[emotionalwreck_]

(Original post by Sean9001)
I prepared by making sure that I fully understood the meanings of inference, deduction and assumption. Then I read the Guardian and tried to identify those three things in the articles that I read.

Best of luck!

Sean.

I'm sorry to ask, but what does deduction mean in the context of this? As in the conclusion of the article?

Also when you read the articles and think of the assumptions, is that thinking what they had assumed whilst writing it. E.g. An article concerning milk prices and they believe that the ones at the end of the chain have the power to dictate the price. Thus they're assuming if the supermarkets took action, then it would be successful in raising prices.

Or something like that.

Thank you!

[Sean9001]

(Original post by emotionalwreck_)
I'm sorry to ask, but what does deduction mean in the context of this? As in the conclusion of the article?

Also when you read the articles and think of the assumptions, is that thinking what they had assumed whilst writing it. E.g. An article concerning milk prices and they believe that the ones at the end of the chain have the power to dictate the price. Thus they're assuming if the supermarkets took action, then it would be successful in raising prices.

Or something like that.

Thank you!

By assumption, I literally mean identifying the things that the article presume to be true. ' they're assuming if the supermarkets took action, then it would be successful in raising prices.' - yup. Another simple example would be: 'Scotland should not legalise gay marriage because it destroys a historic institution'. The assumption (or premise) is that legalising gay marriage is destruction.

I'm sure someone would argue with it, but I viewed deduction as deciding on the most logical conclusion with regards to the assumed facts.

Please feel free to continue asking away

[Sean9001]

Also, have a look at this. I wish I had known about it before my LNAT.

http://graduates.hoganlovells.com/ap...thinking_test/

[emotionalwreck_]

(Original post by Sean9001)
By assumption, I literally mean identifying the things that the article presume to be true. ' they're assuming if the supermarkets took action, then it would be successful in raising prices.' - yup. Another simple example would be: 'Scotland should not legalise gay marriage because it destroys a historic institution'. The assumption (or premise) is that legalising gay marriage is destruction.

I'm sure someone would argue with it, but I viewed deduction as deciding on the most logical conclusion with regards to the assumed facts.

Please feel free to continue asking away

I really appreciate this by the way, I haven't really been able to speak to anyone regarding it.

Oh yeah thanks. May I ask how early did you start preparing for it? Also, did you take Critical Thinking AS last year? I believe my apprehension stems from not having ever taken it, plus being dubious that I'll think of the "right" answer.

Could you give an example of deduction? Sorry if that's inconvenient.

[Sean9001]

(Original post by emotionalwreck_)
I really appreciate this by the way, I haven't really been able to speak to anyone regarding it.

Oh yeah thanks. May I ask how early did you start preparing for it? Also, did you take Critical Thinking AS last year? I believe my apprehension stems from not having ever taken it, plus being dubious that I'll think of the "right" answer.

Could you give an example of deduction? Sorry if that's inconvenient.

I read the Guardian through the summer, but did my other preparation just the month leading up to it.

Nope, I didn't take critical thinking AS.

Deduction: The lights of the house were on. Music could be heard coming from the house. The logical conclusion would be that someone was in the house. Eventhough we may be completely wrong, and the owner may have left the lights and music on to deter thiefs, it's the most likely conclusion.

[michael321]

(Original post by emotionalwreck_)
I've just completed the LNAT practice test and I achieved 20/42. Is that any good? Or is the real test significantly harder, thus I should be worried?
Thanks

I wouldn't read too much into your marks on the first practice you do. Some will be lost because you simply aren't used to the style and format of the test.

[emotionalwreck_]

(Original post by Sean9001)
I read the Guardian through the summer, but did my other preparation just the month leading up to it.

Nope, I didn't take critical thinking AS.

Deduction: The lights of the house were on. Music could be heard coming from the house. The logical conclusion would be that someone was in the house. Eventhough we may be completely wrong, and the owner may have left the lights and music on to deter thiefs, it's the most likely conclusion.

Did you use any critical thinking books?

Oh okay. How about this:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2...-debited-twice
This article is basically about how human error has caused customers to be charged twice, thus they have overdrawn and are unhappy etc.
Would the deduction be how some people may have lost faith in this bank. Some may not, but most customers are likely to be unhappy to be part of this bank and consider changing. Or how about the bank have some unreliable staff who need to be re-evaluated. They may not be unreliable but...

Is that what I'm meant to be thinking?

[Sean9001]

(Original post by emotionalwreck_)
Did you use any critical thinking books?

Oh okay. How about this:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2...-debited-twice
This article is basically about how human error has caused customers to be charged twice, thus they have overdrawn and are unhappy etc.
Would the deduction be how some people may have lost faith in this bank. Some may not, but most customers are likely to be unhappy to be part of this bank and consider changing. Or how about the bank have some unreliable staff who need to be re-evaluated. They may not be unreliable but...

Is that what I'm meant to be thinking?

Nope, no books.

Precisely! It's unlikely that you'll get a question that says 'X. Y. Z. Assuming X, Y and Z are true, what is the most logical conclusion' - but this is the kind of thinking that will help you grasp firmly the line of argument.

I also made a point of reading the question first. Then you are effectively reading the answers.

[emotionalwreck_]

(Original post by Sean9001)
Nope, no books.

Precisely! It's unlikely that you'll get a question that says 'X. Y. Z. Assuming X, Y and Z are true, what is the most logical conclusion' - but this is the kind of thinking that will help you grasp firmly the line of argument.

I also made a point of reading the question first. Then you are effectively reading the answers.

Thanks, you've really reassured me. Finally, what articles did you read? As in, informative news articles or leading articles, opinions etc?

Thanks again, I currently cannot think of any more questions. :P However if I have one, would you mind if I posted again?

[Sean9001]

(Original post by emotionalwreck_)
Thanks, you've really reassured me. Finally, what articles did you read? As in, informative news articles or leading articles, opinions etc?

Thanks again, I currently cannot think of any more questions. :P However if I have one, would you mind if I posted again?

I read thoroughly, opposed to browsing through on a Sunday morning, through anything which struck me as topical. But don't forget, getting into that kind of reading habit is really beneficial, so read what you find personally interesting.

When I was younger, my reading habit didn't come naturally. But equally, I knew that it was important to get into a routine. So I became particularly beady eyed for articles on society, gay rights and religion which grasped me more so than others.

The topical questions in the exam though, will cover a sufficiently broad number of issues for the LNAT to be considered an 'assessment'. So if your interests aren't especially diverse, you may just have to brace yourself and dive head first into the tedium!

Please do feel free to message me in the future! As of October I'll be at Warwick, and might be able to give you some more informed advice

[emotionalwreck_]

(Original post by Sean9001)
I read thoroughly, opposed to browsing through on a Sunday morning, through anything which struck me as topical. But don't forget, getting into that kind of reading habit is really beneficial, so read what you find personally interesting.

When I was younger, my reading habit didn't come naturally. But equally, I knew that it was important to get into a routine. So I became particularly beady eyed for articles on society, gay rights and religion which grasped me more so than others.

The topical questions in the exam though, will cover a sufficiently broad number of issues for the LNAT to be considered an 'assessment'. So if your interests aren't especially diverse, you may just have to brace yourself and dive head first into the tedium!

Please do feel free to message me in the future! As of October I'll be at Warwick, and might be able to give you some more informed advice

Yes I must confess I only read a few articles which I believe may benefit me. However yes I will read more articles concerned with all matters regarding society.

Also how did you construct your essay? Was it a set structure or spontanteous prose?

Oh yes I'm considering applying to Warwick, so it'll be wonderful to hear your first-hand experience of it.

[Sean9001]

(Original post by emotionalwreck_)
Yes I must confess I only read a few articles which I believe may benefit me. However yes I will read more articles concerned with all matters regarding society.

Also how did you construct your essay? Was it a set structure or spontanteous prose?

Oh yes I'm considering applying to Warwick, so it'll be wonderful to hear your first-hand experience of it.

Yes, I used a specific structure.

You're given a whiteboard when you walk into the exam. On it I brainstormed points that were relevant to the question, and, crucially, that I could think of a counter-argument to.

I chose my three best, and sandwiched them between an introduction and conclusion. My introduction reworded the question, and briefly signposted my argument by saying words to the effect of '... the statement may be true, because of X,Y and Z (point: 1; 2; 3). Although, these views are neither without flaw, nor unchallenged.'

The conclusion was bog standard. Do not sit on the fence. First, decide on which side of the fence you fall. Then reiterate what you believe is the most persuasive argument in that view's favour.

5 paragraphs.
1 - Intro
3 - Points for, with counterargument
1 - Conclusion

[emotionalwreck_]

(Original post by Sean9001)
Yes, I used a specific structure.

You're given a whiteboard when you walk into the exam. On it I brainstormed points that were relevant to the question, and, crucially, that I could think of a counter-argument to.

I chose my three best, and sandwiched them between an introduction and conclusion. My introduction reworded the question, and briefly signposted my argument by saying words to the effect of '... the statement may be true, because of X,Y and Z (point: 1; 2; 3). Although, these views are neither without flaw, nor unchallenged.'

The conclusion was bog standard. Do not sit on the fence. First, decide on which side of the fence you fall. Then reiterate what you believe is the most persuasive argument in that view's favour.

5 paragraphs.
1 - Intro
3 - Points for, with counterargument
1 - Conclusion

Oh so the introduction requires you to assert the points you will argue in favour beforehand?

In essays I tend to make assertions/statements, then proceed to back them up. However in examples, I've seen a lot of rhetorical arguments and logical analysis. Is that how you presented your points? (Then always add the counter argument afterwards?)

Also, how important is the essay in terms of your LNAT score? Is it the way it is articulated which is most imperative, or the points you raise?

[Sean9001]

(Original post by emotionalwreck_)
Oh so the introduction requires you to assert the points you will argue in favour beforehand?

In essays I tend to make assertions/statements, then proceed to back them up. However in examples, I've seen a lot of rhetorical arguments and logical analysis. Is that how you presented your points? (Then always add the counter argument afterwards?)

Also, how important is the essay in terms of your LNAT score? Is it the way it is articulated which is most imperative, or the points you raise?

In my introductions, I say what points I will start my analysis paragraphs with, as briefly as possible. It's good practice, because whoever reads it can see that you've thought through what you are going to say beforehand. And, if you complete the essay in time, it gives it a certain polish that you tend only to get in coursework.

I think the worth of the essay is judged differently by each University. UCL supposedly places a lot of emphasis on the essay. Whereas KCL explicitly told me that 18 is the minimum multiple choice score they will accept. I think it's important to show analysis and a balanced argument, over and above interesting points.