To anyone reading this comment feeling defeated and completely lost (like I did), I HIGHLY suggest going through the entire conditional and set logic curriculum again once you've sat on it for a couple of days. Everything is super easy and clear now that I'm revisiting it!!
If there are no video explanations for complex exercises, then paying customers will not improve. If paying customers do not improve, they will seek out other test prep services.
To echo the last messages on this thread, this is one of the harder lessons that I have encountered thus far. I think video explanations would be helpful in these lessons and in the conditional logic section as a whole. I feel like I am not grasping the concept only by reading and seeing visuals, and I am not sure how effective that is.
In previous lessons where we are relearning basic grammar skills, such as finding the subject and the predicate, we receive videos. Unfortunately, the more complex material, like this one, has no videos. It makes it hard to follow along when we are only reading lessons at this point and it is not ideal to try and move on to other lessons without comprehending these last ones first. #feedback
This was a pretty poor display from 7Sage and unacceptable. There's absolutely no explanation or preparation for these exercises and have only caused more doubt where this could've been an immediate value prop for the curriculum. #feedback
I'm genuinely sorry to hear that you've had this experience. Your feedback is incredibly important to us, and I understand the importance of having a clearer explanation. We're committed to improving and providing great resources, so I have shared this with our product team.
If there's anything specific you'd like us to address or if you have further concerns, please feel free to share. We're here to help in any way we can.
As you can see from the comments above, Jack isn't the only one to have experienced this. This comment was from two months ago. Is there an update on whether 7Sage will attach explanatory videos to its lessons?
Just want to chime in here to say it's sad 7Sage hasn't gone in during the 4 months since your comment to actually break down the answers on this skill builder. If we aren't receiving help for the money we paid then why would we ever recommend this service to anyone else?
It's lowkey sad that were paying money, and majority of us are confused in chat. Why aren't there any explanations or videos if chaining is complicated??
Got a real gripe with question #5!!!! It's not fair to assume that WE should make a contextualized inference that politicians and society's elite are the same when there IS NO CONTEXT in the question. If on the LSAT there was a sentence prior that read something along the lines of "citizens of a nation presuppose that politicians and society's elite are the same.," then I'm happy to make that inference.
@cwferrari I agree. I feel that so far, we have been taught to take wording extremely literal and to not make unreasonable assumptions. This question is troubling for me. Of course my brain resorted to assuming which in this case worked to my benefit, however, I thought this is what we were trying to prevent our brains from defaulting to, based on the nature of the test.
@cwferrari I was confused as well, but the video made it click for me! Basically, the point of this question is to illustrate the principle that sometimes we have to make an inference and put 2 and 2 together. The LSAT writers are going to ask you to make an inference sometimes, but I don't think it'll be as big of a stretch as this question. I think it will probably show up like the moving vehicle taxi example though, which just seems more reasonable to me.
I scrolled down and saw that the lack of videos and in-depth explanations has been an issue for months. Are you guys just going to ignore the concerns of everyone who has paid for this program? I am personally so lost in this lesson and I'm starting to feel like I wasted my money.
Could we please have the same in depth explanation for each step as we had in the previous lessons applied to this one as well? Ie grammar, lawgic, necessity/sufficiency etc for each sentence?
806 comments
Well that was a spike in difficulty lol
To anyone reading this comment feeling defeated and completely lost (like I did), I HIGHLY suggest going through the entire conditional and set logic curriculum again once you've sat on it for a couple of days. Everything is super easy and clear now that I'm revisiting it!!
If there are no video explanations for complex exercises, then paying customers will not improve. If paying customers do not improve, they will seek out other test prep services.
/VE → /Improve → Seek other test prep services
Let me know if this is chained correctly
Video explanations have arrived
To echo the last messages on this thread, this is one of the harder lessons that I have encountered thus far. I think video explanations would be helpful in these lessons and in the conditional logic section as a whole. I feel like I am not grasping the concept only by reading and seeing visuals, and I am not sure how effective that is.
In previous lessons where we are relearning basic grammar skills, such as finding the subject and the predicate, we receive videos. Unfortunately, the more complex material, like this one, has no videos. It makes it hard to follow along when we are only reading lessons at this point and it is not ideal to try and move on to other lessons without comprehending these last ones first. #feedback
Video explanations have arrived
I've never felt more dumb
i dont get this.. we need videos of this. NO explaination is WILD #help
Video explanations have arrived
Please please please make videos, this is super hard to understand just by reading
Yeah, can someone comment back to me when there are videos on this? Super confusing.
For real, they must have a reason for not doing videos on these lessons. Nonetheless, they are very tough just reading it.
I feel so brain dead
Please burn question number 2 thanks
This was a pretty poor display from 7Sage and unacceptable. There's absolutely no explanation or preparation for these exercises and have only caused more doubt where this could've been an immediate value prop for the curriculum. #feedback
I'm genuinely sorry to hear that you've had this experience. Your feedback is incredibly important to us, and I understand the importance of having a clearer explanation. We're committed to improving and providing great resources, so I have shared this with our product team.
If there's anything specific you'd like us to address or if you have further concerns, please feel free to share. We're here to help in any way we can.
As you can see from the comments above, Jack isn't the only one to have experienced this. This comment was from two months ago. Is there an update on whether 7Sage will attach explanatory videos to its lessons?
Just want to chime in here to say it's sad 7Sage hasn't gone in during the 4 months since your comment to actually break down the answers on this skill builder. If we aren't receiving help for the money we paid then why would we ever recommend this service to anyone else?
what da fuq
real. im so confused
Amen, of all the sections to not make videos or provide an explanation for it had to be this one...
mood
real i get the singular signals but the chained are crazzzzy
i’m the opposite 😭 this is the first section i’ve been confused on since starting the core curriculum
the example used in the video is nothing compared to these questions...can we improve the video by adding more complicated examples?
im cooked
It's lowkey sad that were paying money, and majority of us are confused in chat. Why aren't there any explanations or videos if chaining is complicated??
Got a real gripe with question #5!!!! It's not fair to assume that WE should make a contextualized inference that politicians and society's elite are the same when there IS NO CONTEXT in the question. If on the LSAT there was a sentence prior that read something along the lines of "citizens of a nation presuppose that politicians and society's elite are the same.," then I'm happy to make that inference.
@cwferrari I agree. I feel that so far, we have been taught to take wording extremely literal and to not make unreasonable assumptions. This question is troubling for me. Of course my brain resorted to assuming which in this case worked to my benefit, however, I thought this is what we were trying to prevent our brains from defaulting to, based on the nature of the test.
@cwferrari I was confused as well, but the video made it click for me! Basically, the point of this question is to illustrate the principle that sometimes we have to make an inference and put 2 and 2 together. The LSAT writers are going to ask you to make an inference sometimes, but I don't think it'll be as big of a stretch as this question. I think it will probably show up like the moving vehicle taxi example though, which just seems more reasonable to me.
I really need more explanations on this. I feel like we really jumped.
agreed like wtf </3
Wow, I went from fully comprehending all the info to my brain turning to jelly the moment I saw #2
Lost me at question 1.
this exercise absolutely wrecked my brain
I NEED VIDEOS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1
I feel like im doing algebra
I'm cooked
already completely lost on number 1
I scrolled down and saw that the lack of videos and in-depth explanations has been an issue for months. Are you guys just going to ignore the concerns of everyone who has paid for this program? I am personally so lost in this lesson and I'm starting to feel like I wasted my money.
agreed. this is ridiculous to have videos for the first few lessons making it seem like this is a good program. Waste of money.
Could we please have the same in depth explanation for each step as we had in the previous lessons applied to this one as well? Ie grammar, lawgic, necessity/sufficiency etc for each sentence?
I'd appreciate if we have more explanation on these #feedback
Following