- PowerScore Staff
- Posts: 4027
- Joined: Mar 25, 2011
aaraya wrote:I, like many before me, fell prey to being confused by "direct proportionality." Looking at the dates from this thread, I'm wondering why this question remains in the LRB Must be true practice set. I've run into a handful of questions difficult for me in the practice sets of the PowerScore curriculum where I search for questions in these forums and the response from PowerScore will usually be something to the effect of "the reason you got this question wrong is because it involved some notorious LSAT vocabulary that you haven't encountered yet. But hold on, you'll get there!" Wouldn't it be easier to include that vocab earlier on in the curriculum, or refrain from using questions with advanced vocabulary in earlier chapters? Or maybe even include an index at the end of the books so I can find the term "direct proportionality?"
Thanks for the question—I appreciate it! Although some indeed have fallen prey to "direct proportionality," there are other reasons for including this problem (including how it uses related concepts to get to the answer). And, to be honest, there's never just a single reason that causes a problem to be included in the book, and that particular phrase in this case wasn't the reason this question was included. Do I like that the term comes up? Yes, but it's more of a minor point in its favor as far as this problem goes.
With your broader question about terms, in some instances it's intentional that I don't mention it earlier. The reason is that there is nothing like seeing it in action for the meaning to have the most impact. And, it's not my goal to maximize performance on problem sets; I'm far more interested in using those sets to teach lessons about the way the test makers think, and to teach certain lessons about things that the test makers do.
If we only did basic questions early on, they would have to be very simple, and thus very easy, and thus not really rewarding to do. I have a feeling that the complaints about taking that path would be much greater! Plus, you really can't define every term on the test in a meaningful way before diving into the problems. It would really bog people down, and I already hear some kickback about the word lists that are there early on. I do take your point about an index with that term though, and I'll look to include one in future editions. Thanks for that suggestion!
There's more to this discussion than I have time to post at the moment, so I may come back and try to flesh out my response to more clearly and comprehensively explain what you are seeing and why. Hopefully, this starts to convey the idea that these problems aren't here because of these terms, but that encountering the unknown in this fashion is actually a plus in my opinion because it helps you get better when it matters, which is during the actual test
PowerScore Test Preparation
Follow me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/DaveKilloran
My LSAT Articles: http://blog.powerscore.com/lsat/author/dave-killoran
PowerScore PodCast: http://www.powerscore.com/lsat/podcast/