So, I was looking at the updated LawHub interface that LSAC is putting out,
and, uh, they have made this massive change to how we interact with the screen.
With the new interface, you will be able to highlight content throughout the exam.
And I, I mean, literally anywhere on the screen.
The stimulus, the question stem, and, yes, even the individual answer choices
themselves.
Oh, no.
That, that sounds like an absolute nightmare in disguise.
Honestly, when I was studying, the last thing I wanted was more things to click on.
It is a total psychological trap.
They sell it as this, you know, this user friendly feature,
like, oh, look, now you can highlight the word except in option C,
or underline a conditional trigger in option D.
But what you are actually doing is, is, you are creating massive visual pollution.
Right, because if you highlight a word like always or except in a wrong answer,
you are literally, um, you are gluing your eyes to the trap.
You are anchoring your brain to the very nonsense that LSAC designed to mislead you
in the first place!
When I was aiming for my score, I, I had this rule.
Keep the screen clean.
By the time you get to section three, if your screen looks like a,
a coloring book, your eyes are just exhausted.
Exactly.
Think about it like a deposition.
If I am questioning a witness, I do not take a, a yellow marker and start color
coding their lies on the transcript while they are speaking.
No, you, you keep your eyes on the core claim, the baseline.
You compare everything they say against that single anchor.
For the LSAT, that anchor is the main conclusion of the stimulus.
So, wait, what is the new protocol then?
If we have all these, uh, fancy new tools, how do we actually use them without
hurting our score?
My advice is simple.
Treat the answer choices as strictly, um, read only.
Do not touch them with the highlighter.
Restrict your highlighting exclusively to the main conclusion in the stimulus.
Find the logical skeleton, mark that, and leave the rest of the screen completely
pristine.
Now, there is another feature they added that is, uh, well,
it is equally dangerous.
They have introduced a new Reset Response feature.
It is a single button that lets you clear your selected answer choice with one
click.
Wait, a button just to unselect?
Why is that bad?
If I change my mind, I want to clear it, right?
It is about friction, or rather, the lack of it.
When you make it effortless to clear your answer without instantly committing to a
new one, you, you create this frictionless doubt loop.
You click Reset Response, and suddenly you are sitting in this anxious state of
limbo, staring at five blank bubbles, second guessing your entire life.
It encourages indecision.
Oh, I see.
It is like, instead of active logical progress, you are just,
uh, you are escaping.
My rule was always commit or skip.
If you want to change your answer from B to D, you do not clear B first and drift.
You actively select D because you have a concrete, constructive reason to believe D
is better.
The only time that Reset Response button is actually useful is if you made a blind
guess, say at the end of a section, and you want to clear it so you do not
accidentally miskey during your review process later.
Yes, that is a perfect use case.
Otherwise, it is just a, a security blanket that actually makes you more insecure.
Speaking of the new layout, they also changed the visual question bar.
It now segments the questions by Reading Comprehension passage.
Which, honestly, is a game changer for pacing.
Instead of seeing a giant, overwhelming row of thirty questions,
you see them grouped by passage.
Right, so you can visually track your eight and a half minute limit per passage much
more naturally.
It gives you a macro view of where you are in the section.
Precisely.
So, use that visual grouping to keep your pacing on track, but ignore the cosmetic
highlighting tools on the answer choices.
Keep your process clean, build that stamina, and do not let the new interface play
mind games with you.
Well said.
Alright, let us put the markers down and get back to the logic.