Does anybody know the formula US schools use to convert Canadian GPAs?

I have a 3.7 (A-) in Canada but not sure what it will be when I apply to a US law school.

Does anyone else now prefer the digital test? I took PT 37 last weekend, and it was the first PT I'd done in a while. Not just that but my first with the digital. It just felt so much less stressful not having to think about bubbling things in, not worriedly double-checking bubbles, etc. Maybe it's also from being an internet addict. I matched my highest PT score. Having the countdown timer is also kind of nice. The only section where I can see needing a watch is LR maybe since it's good to shoot for 10 in 10, 15 in 15, etc. But even that is something you ideally get down instinctually. I'm taking July and praying for the digital version. I feel like my goal score is going to be more attainable with the digital test - hopefully this won't result in adjustments once the data is in on the new version.

I should add the biggest adjustment was getting used to doing LG digitally. I don't see any way to filter out "signal" from noise without using the highlighter function. I will be doing that myself moving forward, as I previously would circle important details.

I started studying for the LSAT barely able to answer a single question on games. With no training in logic, I essentially had to start from the ground up. I credit 7Sage with allowing me giving me the tools become competent in games. I have been tutoring for about 8 months now and have been working on a system that I try to impart onto my students. Any parallels between the following steps and the advice that others have dispensed is purely coincidental. None of this is reinventing the wheel here, but rather some thoughts I have on LG consistency.

I have titled this thread "The Four Pillars of LG Consistency" for a reason. Notice that I didn't title this thread: "The Four Pillars of LG success." This is because 1.the definition of "success" will vary slightly from person to person, 2. Success has more elements to it than consistency. Consistency is a part of success. This post is better able to answer the question: "how can I keep my sections from being riddled with errors?" rather than "how can I get a -0?" The "pillars" are what emerged for me after doing over 2,000 games and teaching LG for several months. The general thread that runs through each aspect of the pillars is 1.to try to eliminate any "sloppy" errors and 2. knowing the exam well enough to be confident in our approach. Zooming out, what we are trying to do is build competency and eliminate any "mystery" the exam might present. Lets get started:

1.Develop your system whatever your "system" is, develop it and keep it rigorously consistent. Do you write your game pieces in the upper left hand corner each time? Then keep doing that. Do you write your gameboard to the right and your rules to the left? Great, keep doing that. But go deeper, make sure you are making "tick marks" next to your rules each time you write one down. Write your game pieces twice separated by a line: one set you never touch and the other you can scribble out to see what piece is left or what piece is the "floater." Have constant checks that you have properly translated rules. After you have translated all of the rules start from the last rule and read up to the first rule, each time checking that you have translated the rule correct. Read and extract precisely what each rule is telling you. The slogan here with check is: pay now or pay double later. If we made a mistake in translating a rule, we want to be in a position to catch it with our 20 second check rather than midway through the game (we all know that feeling :( ) when you have burnt 2 minutes. Have built in fail-safes. What also goes along with this first pillar is: be neat in your writing, what you are doing is worth money in scholarships.

I will tell a quick story here. When I first started studying for game I spent 6 months and did 1,400 games. I thought I knew what I was doing, I thought I would have that coveted -0. When I did my first timed section, I missed 7. Partially because I drew a "V" that looked like a "U," thereby messing up a rule and ruining my score. All of this stuff has to be solved item by item. For games we are looking to extract three basic things: the rules, our pieces and our gameboard. This information will often be partially contained within the "stimulus" (the block of text to begin a game before our rules.) I cannot understate how important this step it. I have calculated that for us to be consistent on an LG section between 16 and 19 things have to go well. We have to make sure we are translating the rules correctly, we have to make sure we have a neat and coherent system etc. But for things to go bad, just one or two of those things have to fail.

There are several ways to find the inference of a game. The most obvious is to focus on rules in which a piece is mentioned more than once. So if rules 1 and 3 both mention piece "A" we should be asking questions about what these rules mean in combination with each other along with the inherent constirctions of the gameboard (things like we are choosing 5 out of the 8 available in an in-and-out game etc.) Asking questions is a very helpful way to help us find the inference. So if a rule for a grouping game says something like: "piece A must be with exactly one other piece," we should be asking the question: who could that piece be? If in a five space sequencing game we have three pieces that are "followers" we should be asking the question: who can be first?" I believe that essential to finding an inference is asking the right questions.

What can aid us in asking the right questions? That is where the concept of the other side of the coin comes in. A coin has two different sides that express the same thing, we could be looking at the "heads" or the "tails" of a penny and those of us familiar with the penny will know that it is a penny and it has this particular value. Rules on LG are often presented to us in "the positive" or "the negative." By trying to find the other side of the coin we can help ourselves possibly find the inference. So for instance if we have a three group grouping game and piece A cannot go in the tennis group, by telling us that piece A cannot go into the tennis group the other side of the coin for that rule is: A must go in the volleyball or soccer group. It is the same thing stated in a different way, except now we have "the positive" of the rule or "the negative." You probably already do this, but often times the other side of the coin with rules is valuable information. It becomes valuable because questions will often be predicated on us knowing the other side of the coin. Take the aforementioned example. Piece A cannot be in the tennis group, which means piece A must be in the volleyball or soccer group. Another rule might tell us that a piece that piece A must stay away from piece B and a question might tell us that piece B is in the soccer group, which means, since we know the other side of the coin, that piece A must be in the volleyball group.

The other aspect of this step is building on an analogy I use quite a bit with my students. That is where do we start our analysis of the question? The analogy I like to use here is that if the car won't start before we replace the transmission, let's make sure that the car is not just out of gas. This is a variation on Occam's Razor. We start with the least complicated solution-a $5-$10 quick solution- rather than a $700-$900 complicated and long solution. In LG we can often eliminate an answer choice or two from a question by a mere application of our rules. Some choices are never going to work no matter what "If" condition they give us in the question stem is. By starting our analysis here we can possibly eliminate all the wrong answer choices quickly or efficiently or we can eliminate enough o make our "testing" of the available options quicker and more efficient. Take for instance PT 11 game 1 question 2. If we start our analysis of this question by first eliminating what could never be true with a mere straightforward application of our rules, we know that answer choices (A) and (B) violate rule 5 and answer choices (C) and (D) violate rule 4. We essentially do not have to do much work here because we have worked simple to more complex and we eliminated all of the incorrect answer choices on the basis of "checking the gas" i.e. a mere application of our rules. Always try to run answer choices against the rules or your inference or mini inference unless you know the answer from a sub-game board or split etc. We maximize our chances of getting the question correct in many instances.

Knowing the questions also comes down to knowing what to look for when they ask you a straightforward MBT: this is more than likely (but not 100% of the time according that my knowledge) a point that they are rewarding you for finding the inference.

Knowing the questions also comes down to counting the "steps" away something like an "If____, then what MBT?" question form takes. +90% of the time the answer to these questions will be between 1 and 4 steps away from the condition they gave us. So for instance if the if condition they gave us tells us to place something somewhere, we ask ourselves what does that trigger (by consulting our rules that are neatly placed next to our gameboard) that should trigger something, that is 1 "step" away. That thing should trigger something else according to our rules and pieces: that thing is 2 "steps" away. one can effectively predict the answer to these questions by knowing the amount of "steps away" something is from what they have asked us. The LSAT will rarely ask us for 1 step away and will rarely ask us for 4 steps away. Instead, they will be looking for 2-3 steps away most of the time.

LG has stayed remarkably consistent for the better part of 30 years.

4.Knowing what you know and executing that knowledge The last pillar here is the actual application of your knowledge to new games and timed exams. It is one thing to know how to dig deep into the games, it is another to be so comfortable with being able to do that that you can apply that knowledge to new games in a concise and coherent fashion. This is where a focused process of drilling comes into play. When you drill, look at all of the above pillars, consciously apply your system to the game, do each game several times, you will start to see the patterns upon which the games are built.

Feel free to reach out with any questions.

David

Around how long should the personal statement be?

Has anyone heard about the possible changes of the retake policy? I read a reddit post today (https://www.reddit.com/r/lawschooladmissions/comments/bzl6ku/lsac_imposing_limits_on_number_of_lsat_retakes/) and called the LSAC. They said that these changes can be implemented after the July Test.

Hi everyone,

On Wednesday, June 26, at 9:00 PM ET, I'll host a webinar with Rob Schwartz, the Assistant Dean of Admissions at UCLA Law. Dean Schwartz will give us a short presentation on UCLA Law, and then I'll ask him some of the questions you're dying to know:

You’ll get a chance to ask your questions at the end.

:warning: You’ll have to register for this webinar in advance.

:cookie: After the webinar, we’ll award one attendee a free Edit Once (see https://classic.7sage.com/admissions/enroll).

:warning: The webinar will be recorded, and we may post it on our site or on YouTube. We may also share the audio on our podcast.

→ Please register for the webinar here: https://zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_HYa5yz-7QFWR0LUVf23Q6Q

After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the webinar.

If you want to ask a question, you should connect via a computer instead of calling in. We also recommend that you join the webinar a few minutes early and test your microphone.

I heard that people who take the lsat abroad take a different test than people who take it in the U.S. I don't have that many fresh lsat tests remaining and I don't want to retake tests that I have already done so I was wondering if there is a way for me to obtain the lsat tests that they use in Asia or Europe?

Am I missing something here?

Dear 7Sage community,

As my account for the past 1.5 years is about to expire in an hour, I just want to say thank you for all the tips, encouragement, and wisdom. I applied last year, and got into a school in the mid 60's with no scholarship. This year I am going to a top 25 school with very, very close to a full ride. Wow what a difference applying earlier, with a much better score, and more fully flushed out apps does (basically a different applicant).

I could write all day about this. I kind of want to because I have learned so much in this journey that I would love to hand over this highly niched knowledge. But I will say this:

Just because you are a good person doesn't mean you are entitled to a good score. It must be earned. And in many people's cases, it took years. Some of my heroes on this website battled for 2 plus years to get their score, but it paid off BIG. I studied for almost a year and it paid off BIG for me. I was rejected from the school I will attend last year and this year they are rolling out the red carpet.

Your stories matter. Your humanity matters. But numbers matter most. If schools were to let in every great person or story, numbers at most schools would be down. So take the numbers component seriously. And if you have great essays or stories, that will definitely help. But get those numbers! I promise you, they are not playing around.

Do everything JY says. Obviously test what he says out. But he doesn't say things randomly with no thought (or at least not when it comes to the LSAT).

Take practice tests with 5 (or I recommend 6 sections). It drives me crazy when people are willing to do everything under the sun to prepare, but when it comes to PT, they take 4 sections. Then people say "the energy of test day will give you that extra boost." Ok, maybe it does. But aren't we trying to simulate test conditions as best as possibly. 5 sections are different than 4. And practice with 5 then get the additional "energy boost." I promise you, it helped me out.

The main difference between a 167 and a 172 is most likely test taking strategy. Of course better fundamentals helps, but at this point it's strategy.

Practice reading comprehension. Most people believe this is the hardest section to improve. That is because most people don't like to practice this section. LR is fun and you can do you a few questions at a time. I found LG fun. I hated RC, practiced it the least, and improved upon it the least. Practice it!

Don't be afraid to postpone a year. It was one of the most painful decisions of my life. It doesn't matter where you are in your life. But it was one of the best decisions I have ever made.

Sorry, but if you are just starting you LSAT prep, it's probably best to postpone a year. By the time you take your first real test, you will most likely realize you can do waaaaay better and it's too late (plus you have to start writing essays). Don't be afraid to wait a year (please refer to #7).

It's important to be able to break this test down. So taking your first PT in month 3 then retaking at month 5 looks very different than taking your first test in month 5. As you get close to test day, getting results are more important. So settling for cheap tricks versus really digging deep happens. So you can end up taking 3 tests in 6 months and very really studied in depth. Then you can become burned out after test 3 and then the real pressure happens. Wow, I have studied for 6 months and keep not improving. Is this for me? If i take it again I REALLY must do well! Don't do this to yourself. If after the second take you don't see big gains, take a year off and really go deep.

Get a tutor. Take all the pain and suffering that they had to go through and learn from it.

You don't only need big chunks of time to study. 20 mins here and there (in addition to the necessary big chunks of time) can really help and add up.

This test is a snapshot of where you on a highly specific set of skills right now only. It doesn't define you. But as you study for this test one can reduce their value to how well they did on their most recent PT. Don't get to high or too low on this. Study. Learn. And move on.

There are a million more things to say but I can't think of them. But for those in the deep dark jungle of LSAT study, I would come across the occasional 7Sage "Thank you" message and wondered if I were every going to be able to write one. I am. Thank you 7Sage! And best of luck to all of you who are studying! It is worth it. It pays off. It might take a little more time than you thought, but have faith!

I just started my 7Sage journey and I’ve been going though the CC, but when it comes to taking the June 2007 diagnostic, I get so much anxiety and I keep putting it off and moving onto the other lessons. I’ve taken diagnostics in the past when I used to self-study and was in other prep courses, but they’ve always been so low that I always get discouraged (which is why I’ve been too nervous to take it this time around).

Am I potentially hurting my chances of getting a high LSAT score by not taking a diagnostic before I start learning and doing problem sets? If so, how can I overcome this anxiety?

Hi everyone.

I have just started on my PT's/blind review after completing the CC for the past 5 months, and have a significant gap between my actual scores (around 150) to my BR (high 160's). I miss about a game a test which I know will come with JY's fool proof method, and my RC has greatly improved with the full tests I take (but still needs work). My main question is: will the gap in my LR close overtime with more BR and tests taken? In my LR sections I miss around 7-12 on the actual test and blind review from -2 to -4.

Any help would be great, especially from those who started off with low actual scores and high BR scores.

I was wondering which would be the better route after finishing my CC on 7sage. I've been loving the CC so far and I am thinking ahead to what I am going to use in conjuncture with 7sage. I heard that the trainer's LG sections is not so great, so I was wondering if I should use manhattan prep's LR and RC books to go along with the CC, or go with the Lsat Trainer anyway?

I took my very first diagnostic test back in Feb 2019 and scored 140. Took an in person class, but didn't really study much because I'm working full time as well. That ended in March, and after that, just been studying-ish by doing drills, but didn't really fully internalize and understand my mistakes.

I just started the 7sage CC last Sunday, and took the June 2007 diagnostic and scored 146 and BR is 154, not that much a difference which really sucks :(. I guess the 6 points improvement from my first diagnostic is good, but I was hoping to break 150 this time, though realistically I haven't been studying the right way or putting dedicated hours, so maaaybe 150 was a little to much to ask lol. I just started aggressively studying last Monday. I'm registered for the July test (first time ever), and July is just my test run to get myself familiar with the test environment and everything. I'm betting on the October 2019 to be my actual one.

I'm just thinking of following the CC, but I'm also thinking of taking 1 PT every week to track my progress. is that a good idea to do while I'm still doing the CC?

My goal is 165-170 by the time I write my October, and I have requested 3 months off (hopefully it'll get approved!!) to study before the October write. For those of you who started from a lower score and reached your goal, any advice?? feeling a litttle discourage tbh. I tend to set high standards for myself, and want to see improve ASAP. Ahhhh, honestly any advice would help!!!

Hey guys,

This might be a dumb question and I don't know if anyone would know for sure I guess... but this

would be the exact model the LSAC will be using for the exam, correct?

And did anyone else buy the tablet to simulate the test? Was it worth it? And did you get the keyboard as well or you only need the tablet and pen.. And did you get the one with the larger storage or smaller if you're only using it for test prep?

Thanks a bunch guys!

I will try to make this long story short. My ex-girlfriend who was supposed to graduate this summer from GW Business School had to take one more math requirement to graduate- an entry level business math course. She felt she wouldn’t have time to do it so she offered to pay me $200 to take the class. I felt very uncomfortable about this particularly given it seemed like she was just trying to blow off her work and take advantage of me. I offered to “help” in the class but she went off on me saying it’s either take the class for her or don’t help. Now, this girl is a URM and has had a lot of life problems. I met her my first semester at GW and never really was attracted to her. A lot of students thought she was my GF just because we come from a similar ethnic background and walk around together a lot. Anyways, I am really passionate about helping people so I decided to play into it a little bit (people thinking she’s my GF) and help this girl out a lot during my time at GW. But this last proposition is really where I’ve drawn the line. For example, she wants to go to UChicago for an MBA but has less than 2.5 at GW Business, can’t handle or even bothers to take the GMAT/GRE seriously let alone an intro business math course, and has no relevant internship experience or even an understanding of MBA admissions. It’s just like if you’re pressuring someone else to cheat and take a class for you that’s 1). An intro level business math class 2). A class you should easily know how to do yourself if you want to go to UChicago Booth 3). A class that you need to take to graduate then you’ve totally got another thing coming to you. And another thing is that during my business policy final she sat next to me and just started copying off my final which could have gotten me in a lot of trouble. That someone would just start cheating off you like that really concerns me. Am I being too harsh or was I right to cut this person out of my life? I said no and refused to help her any more and now she blames me for not being able to graduate. I’ve started seeing a new girl who I’m helping get started with LSAT prep and I feel a lot happier with her. It’s worth mentioning that I’m actually attracted to this new girl and don’t feel like I’m being used or taking advantage of. Anyways, I just want to get this episode out of my head. It’s just like I really wanted to help you but you can’t just take advantage of people like that. I want move on and find someone who I can eventually settle down with.

Okay, I'm a bit confused on how to BR.

Do I go through a timed PT/Section, transfer my answers to different sheet/7sage, and then go back and go over my pt once again un-timed?

will start the RC section soon. I really appreciate it if you guys can give me advice on how to carry on from here. Once I finish the LG section I will start fullproofing the bundle while going over the RC CC. I will watch the webinar on what to do after I finish but I could use some strategies. (When to take timed sections?) ( when and how many times to take full PTs) So basically for my situation which im sure many of you have been through whats the best way to go?

I’ve been taking caffeine pill instead of drinking coffee, which helped me tremendously with my bladder,

But now I fall asleep right after taking the pill. Is this normal? Has anyone experienced this?

I feel very alert after the 30 min nap, but now I’m confused if it’s the pill that’s working or just nap...

Does anyone know on average how many points above a school's median would it take to get a full tuition scholarship, maybe even more than that? Obviously, they take other part of the application into account but assuming those are good

I've been taking some PTs lately in which I fail to answer all the questions in time so I just usually guess all D's or E's. I've seen quite a lot of discussion on if this is a good thing or not to do on PTs because it might mask your real potential or make you look like you did better or worse than how you actually performed.

In my eyes, I attempt to mirror my PTs as much as I can to the real thing, and I do think if I took the LSAT tomorrow and still had time allocation issues that I would surely guess. However, I also understand the importance of Blind Review in order to really increase my potential and see where I am making mistakes and wasting time and using bad logic. That said, if i'm guessing on say 5 or 6 questions in a section on a PT, is it worth truly blind reviewing those if all I am do is solving the questions with infinite time? Would it be a better practice to ignore blind reviewing questions I purely guessed and only concentrated my BR efforts on understanding the logic better for the questions I did answer?

Hey guys,

How should I practice doing 5 sections on the digital practice tests, especially if I'm running out of pt's (since I only have the Starter Pack)?

Should I just do the extra section from a different PT on paper and go back to digital?

Also, if I purchase a PT as an add-on (the ones that cost 29.97 dollars each), I get to do it on digital too, right?

Thanks for your #help !

I will start the RC section soon. I really appreciate it if you guys can give me advice on how to carry on from here. Once I finish the LG section I will start fullproofing the bundle while going over the RC CC. I will watch the webinar on what to do after I finish but I could use some strategies. (When to take timed sections?) ( when and how many times to take full PTs) So basically for my situation which im sure many of you have been through whats the best way to go?

Last year, I was kicked out of an LSAT administration because I did not drop my pencil in time. Getting kicked out was perfectly understandable. I violated a rule, and got what I deserved.

What I didn't understand at the time was that, in their report, the administrators left out a very important piece of information, namely how I ended up dropping my pencil. An administrator forcefully made contact with me, and essentially smacked the pencil out of my hand. To clarify, it was not that I took a long time to drop the pencil; instead, she stood next to me during most of the test, because I sat in the corner, so she just happened to be there was the time was called (there were people still writing afterwards). Although a tutor from 7sage said I should bring this up to LSAC, at the time, I thought it would be pointless or meaningless. Or maybe it was because my Asian parents have taught me that being hit for doing something bad in an academic environment is normal. But then, I watched the following youtube video, and learned that assault is assault, and that they should be held responsible for what they did, as I was.

Does anyone have any suggestions for what, if anything, I should do?

I am stably getting bet 165-167.

I started prep exactly a month ago, kicking off from 159.

However, never got 170+ in timed set yet.

Are there any tips on getting to 170+ from mid 160??

Think I can literally do anything for that. So desperate.

Also, for those who get 170+, how long did it take for you to get that score from the first prep and from mid160 respectively??

Thank you in advance:)

I emailed documents to LSAC requesting accommodations on May 28th but when I review my LSAC it says still reviewing and a decision has not been made. For anyone that has applied for accommodations what was your experience? I am anxious because I am writing the July exam. Input is greatly appreciated.