1
00:00:19,859 --> 00:00:25,099
If you-you take two students who both
missed, say, PrepTest 90,

2
00:00:25,339 --> 00:00:27,219
Section 1, Question 14...

3
00:00:28,079 --> 00:00:31,059
on paper, their-their spreadsheets look
identical.

4
00:00:31,579 --> 00:00:34,699
They both got a-a big red 'X' next to
Question 14.

5
00:00:35,600 --> 00:00:38,199
But if you actually dig into why...

6
00:00:38,260 --> 00:00:41,420
uh, one of them has a critical reading
comprehension problem,

7
00:00:42,000 --> 00:00:45,340
while the other has an answer-choice
elimination problem.

8
00:00:45,379 --> 00:00:49,639
And a generic study log just-just
completely fails to spot that difference.

9
00:00:50,937 --> 00:00:55,217
Right, because the spreadsheet just says
'Question 14, wrong,

10
00:00:55,757 --> 00:00:56,157
move on.'

11
00:00:56,898 --> 00:01:00,297
But-but what you're saying is we need to
know where the actual...

12
00:01:00,338 --> 00:01:01,977
the actual point of failure was.

13
00:01:02,477 --> 00:01:06,898
Did they-did they trip over the stimulus
itself, or did they get tripped up by the

14
00:01:07,037 --> 00:01:08,937
LSAT writers in the answer choices?

15
00:01:09,591 --> 00:01:10,292
Exactly.

16
00:01:11,051 --> 00:01:16,131
It's the-the distinction between what we
call upstream errors and downstream errors.

17
00:01:16,911 --> 00:01:21,651
An upstream error happens during the-the
information-ingestion phase.

18
00:01:22,191 --> 00:01:24,491
You are reading the stimulus, and you...

19
00:01:24,591 --> 00:01:26,411
you misinterpret the raw data.

20
00:01:27,011 --> 00:01:32,831
Maybe you misidentify the main conclusion,
or you miss a-a quantifier shift--going

21
00:01:32,911 --> 00:01:36,971
from, say, 'some' in the premises to
'most' in the conclusion.

22
00:01:37,590 --> 00:01:40,250
Or-or my personal nemesis when I was
studying...

23
00:01:40,929 --> 00:01:45,590
misreading conditional trigger words like
'unless' or 'until.'

24
00:01:46,429 --> 00:01:51,349
You map the-the formal logic completely
backwards before you've even looked at the

25
00:01:51,409 --> 00:01:52,109
question stem.

26
00:01:52,676 --> 00:01:53,376
Exactly.

27
00:01:53,936 --> 00:01:55,836
You've-you've poisoned the well.

28
00:01:56,636 --> 00:01:59,216
Now, compare that to a downstream error.

29
00:01:59,956 --> 00:02:02,456
This is where you understand the argument
perfectly.

30
00:02:02,936 --> 00:02:06,516
You see the gap, you-you know exactly what
the flaw is...

31
00:02:07,176 --> 00:02:10,716
but then you get down to the five answer
choices and you-you get,

32
00:02:11,337 --> 00:02:12,416
well, you get lost.

33
00:02:13,017 --> 00:02:17,776
You fall for a 'shell game' choice that
uses all the right keywords but swaps the

34
00:02:17,837 --> 00:02:23,116
concepts, or you get scared off by a
really strong verb in the correct necessary

35
00:02:23,177 --> 00:02:23,956
assumption answer.

36
00:02:24,647 --> 00:02:31,007
So upstream means you never even had a
chance because your-your foundation was

37
00:02:31,087 --> 00:02:31,487
cracked.

38
00:02:32,468 --> 00:02:34,807
Downstream means you...

39
00:02:34,887 --> 00:02:40,308
you had the right map, but you let the
answer choices talk you out of the correct

40
00:02:40,367 --> 00:02:40,708
path.

41
00:02:41,421 --> 00:02:41,941
Yes.

42
00:02:42,542 --> 00:02:46,002
In-in my litigation days, I used to see
this all the time.

43
00:02:46,701 --> 00:02:51,641
An upstream error is like a trial lawyer
who-who sits there during a deposition and

44
00:02:51,721 --> 00:02:56,121
completely misinterprets what the witness
actually said on the stand.

45
00:02:56,681 --> 00:02:58,821
They just-they misheard the testimony.

46
00:02:59,681 --> 00:03:04,201
A downstream error is when the lawyer
understands the testimony perfectly,

47
00:03:04,761 --> 00:03:08,941
but when they stand up to do the
cross-examination, they-they write a weak,

48
00:03:09,302 --> 00:03:12,701
convoluted question that-that completely
misses the mark.

49
00:03:13,361 --> 00:03:16,222
The-the execution failed, not the
comprehension.

50
00:03:16,942 --> 00:03:18,102
Oof, yeah.

51
00:03:18,542 --> 00:03:22,023
That-that deposition analogy really
highlights it.

52
00:03:22,642 --> 00:03:24,402
If you mishear the witness...

53
00:03:24,843 --> 00:03:29,103
I mean, it doesn't matter how brilliant
your-your cross-exam question is,

54
00:03:29,722 --> 00:03:31,642
you're-you're fighting a ghost.

55
00:03:31,722 --> 00:03:34,402
But if you write a bad question, you're
just...

56
00:03:34,462 --> 00:03:35,862
you're fumbling the delivery.

57
00:03:36,709 --> 00:03:38,470
So how do we actually...

58
00:03:38,589 --> 00:03:43,389
how does a student sitting at their desk
find out where their pipeline is leaking?

59
00:03:43,809 --> 00:03:48,349
Because when you're-you're looking at a
completed section, it all just feels like a

60
00:03:48,389 --> 00:03:50,670
big mess of-of confusion.

61
00:03:51,399 --> 00:03:55,839
You have to run what I call the-the
Cover-and-Compare Audit.

62
00:03:56,519 --> 00:04:01,479
The next time you sit down with a question
you missed, do not look at the correct

63
00:04:01,659 --> 00:04:02,639
answer key yet.

64
00:04:03,500 --> 00:04:06,239
Cover the five answer choices completely.

65
00:04:07,079 --> 00:04:12,260
Force yourself to-to reconstruct the
argument's skeleton in plain English.

66
00:04:13,059 --> 00:04:18,239
Write down the-the premise, write down the
conclusion, and explicitly write down

67
00:04:18,340 --> 00:04:20,840
what you think the logical gap is.

68
00:04:21,699 --> 00:04:24,159
Only then do you uncover the choices.

69
00:04:25,500 --> 00:04:25,860
It's like...

70
00:04:26,159 --> 00:04:28,359
it's like a water filtration plant, right?

71
00:04:28,860 --> 00:04:33,079
If you-if you have dirty water at the end
of the line, you don't just keep boiling

72
00:04:33,139 --> 00:04:35,460
the municipal tap water and hope for the
best.

73
00:04:36,099 --> 00:04:38,179
That's-that's treating a downstream
symptom.

74
00:04:38,639 --> 00:04:43,239
You have to-to trace the pipe all the way
back up the mountain to see if there's a-a

75
00:04:43,340 --> 00:04:44,979
toxic spill at the reservoir.

76
00:04:45,600 --> 00:04:50,099
If you cover the choices and realize you
can't even summarize the argument...

77
00:04:50,719 --> 00:04:53,079
well, your reservoir is contaminated.

78
00:04:53,459 --> 00:04:55,000
You have an upstream issue.

79
00:04:56,731 --> 00:04:59,891
That's a-a very vivid way to put it, yes.

80
00:05:00,672 --> 00:05:04,831
And if you *can* write down the flaw
perfectly without looking,

81
00:05:05,571 --> 00:05:09,011
but you still picked option B during the
timed test...

82
00:05:09,871 --> 00:05:14,171
then we know the reservoir is clean, and
the leak is downstream,

83
00:05:14,591 --> 00:05:16,191
in your elimination strategy.

84
00:05:16,939 --> 00:05:21,239
So, okay, when we're actually writing this
down in our wrong answer journal...

85
00:05:21,719 --> 00:05:22,859
what does the entry look like?

86
00:05:23,339 --> 00:05:24,960
We can't just write 'I got tricked.'

87
00:05:25,691 --> 00:05:29,871
No, we need a-a strict, six-point logging
checklist.

88
00:05:30,651 --> 00:05:34,052
First, you tag it: Upstream or Downstream.

89
00:05:34,971 --> 00:05:40,591
Second, if it's upstream, you write down
the exact word or phrase in the stimulus

90
00:05:40,651 --> 00:05:45,751
that triggered the misread--did you miss
the word 'only' or mistake 'some' for

91
00:05:45,851 --> 00:05:46,132
'many'?

92
00:05:47,171 --> 00:05:53,151
Third, if it's downstream, you identify
the exact trap type you fell for--like 'too

93
00:05:53,191 --> 00:05:55,632
strong' or 'unwarranted comparison.'

94
00:05:56,482 --> 00:06:01,162
Wait, let me add the other three because
this is-this is where the journal actually

95
00:06:01,202 --> 00:06:02,142
becomes useful.

96
00:06:02,982 --> 00:06:06,842
Fourth, you write down why the correct
answer was attractive...

97
00:06:07,262 --> 00:06:09,182
like, what was the psychological hook?

98
00:06:09,942 --> 00:06:15,263
Fifth, why the correct answer--the one you
probably crossed out early--was actually

99
00:06:15,343 --> 00:06:17,562
correct, despite looking weird.

100
00:06:18,103 --> 00:06:22,562
And sixth, what is the concrete rule
you're taking away for next time.

101
00:06:23,083 --> 00:06:29,542
Not 'be more careful,' but 'if I see
"unless," I will instantly translate it to "if

102
00:06:29,783 --> 00:06:30,042
not."'

103
00:06:30,917 --> 00:06:31,597
Perfect.

104
00:06:32,397 --> 00:06:37,177
That is how you turn a frustrating mistake
into a repeatable blueprint.

105
00:06:38,017 --> 00:06:40,997
When you-you stop asking 'what is the
right answer?'

106
00:06:41,517 --> 00:06:47,437
and start asking 'where exactly did my
pipeline leak?', the-the anxiety of practice

107
00:06:47,537 --> 00:06:48,417
tests just...

108
00:06:48,537 --> 00:06:49,537
it melts away.

109
00:06:50,277 --> 00:06:54,697
You're not bad at logic; you just have a
leaky valve in your process that you

110
00:06:54,757 --> 00:06:57,257
can-can easily patch before the next test.

111
00:06:57,902 --> 00:06:58,302
Yeah.

112
00:06:58,562 --> 00:07:04,242
It turns it from a-a moral failure of 'I'm
not smart enough' into a simple...

113
00:07:04,262 --> 00:07:04,922
plumbing problem.

114
00:07:05,563 --> 00:07:07,383
Alright, let's-let's go fix some pipes.