35 posts in the last 30 days
Hey Guys,
Just wondering what you guys think about the October 2019 LSAT being on October 28 this year. Would it be a bit too late for applications? I have a very very suboptimal GPA so I want to get my apps in sooner rather than later.
I'm preparing to take July 2019 LSAT. And i guess the consensus is I can't use the freebie for September. Sooooo October LSAT too late for an "early application"? It is basically situated at the end of October so...
I am currently going thru my finals and at the same time having Lsat a week away from now.
This situation prob have triggered something in me. Can’t really concentrate on both.
The prep score was improving right on track but once this whole final began, I seem to be lost a bit.
I got 167, 167, 169 on the last three preps before the final began but once it got started, yesterday I scored 162 with 15 RC wrong and today 165 with 6 RC wrong.
On the last 3preps i got 3 wrong on each RC. Messing up like this a week before the real test is making me feel not really relaxed... Actually it’s making me really worried now.
Good thing is that the final’d be over in 3days.
Would this be a temporary thing which can back to the right track once the final ends?
Wonder if anyone has a similar experience.
Advice or tips from anyone would be greatly appreciated.
Any chance that there is a package that offers tests only to buy and practice online at 7sage. If I can't afford the whole curriculum, I should still be able to practice on the new beta testing for online exams if that kind of package is provided.
Thanks!
Hello everyone,
I finally finished the CC after 7 weeks of studying and I have around a month to do PrepTests and Blind Review but I am kind of lost where to start from here. Should I take a day or two just to review the CC content or should I just take a PT tomorrow morning? Also how should I manage fool proofing the logic games until July? Is 2 hours/day for fool proofing enough until next month?
Thank you for your advices in advance!
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.
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.
If you're considering a job in public interest, or just wondering what "public interest" really means, check out our new lesson. It goes over some of the pros and cons of public interest jobs and touches on the question of median starting salaries.
:cookie: as if that weren't enough, it's got a SUPER CHEESY STOCK PICTURE in the header.
Come. Gather. Learn. Smirk.
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.
Anyone else just get this email from LSAC? Thoughts?
(I just copied the most relevant part)
“In effect starting with the September 2019 test administration, test takers would be permitted to take the LSAT:
Three times in a single testing year (the testing year goes from June 1 to May 31).
Five times within the current and five past testing years (the period in which LSAC reports scores to law schools).
A total of seven times over a lifetime.
This policy is forward-looking, not retroactive. Tests taken prior to September 2019 will not count against these numerical limits. “
Around how long should the personal statement be?
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...
Is anyone currently studying for the LSAT(registered for June but pay push to Sept) while attempting looking for a job? I'm currently in this predicament and I'm finding that my consistency is suffering. Any thoughts or advice?
Okay I plan to take the test on September 21 and want to get at least 167. I'm using Khan Acadmey guide to the LSAT. I took the diagnostic test and got 159. I've taken three practice test since then but my score has gotten lower with each test going to 155, to 151 and 149. This is really frustrating me and stressing me out as now I'm doubting my skills to do good on the test. Whenever I practice with their practice questions I'm doing worse on them as today I took about 4 different sections focusing on Logical reasoning with regards to strengthening/weakening the argument each with 6 questions and only got at most 2/6 right and 1/6 at worst which further ruins my confidence in my ability to get the score that I want. I try to practice an hour each day by doing these practice sections and I've been doing it since around April but so far there's been no improvement. I'm really getting annoyed, stressed out, and angry at this and fear I won't get the score I need on the actual test. I'm especially having trouble with all aspects of logic games in analytical reasoning, assumptions, flaws and strengthen/weaken with regards to logical reasoning as well as humanities sciences passages with regards to reading comprehension. What can I do to improve my score, and my confidence in taking the test?
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?
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 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.
Hi everyone,
On Tuesday, June 11, at 9 p.m. ET, I'll host a webinar with Mathiew Le, the assistant dean of admissions and financial aid at The University of Texas at Austin School of Law. Mathiew will give us a five-minute presentation on UT Austin 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/4cc9fc08ce59502a34538d7d4481ef37
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 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
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?
Can someone please explain the "Model" that's presented on answer keys for each section? i.e., "This is a model of scaled LSAT scores vs probability of getting the question right."
Is it just showing that, for example, if the grey bar had 141 - 150 - 160 and the percentage for the correct AC was 85% then that means 85% of people who scored a 160 got that question correct or what?
Thanks
Am I missing something here?
Hey, I'm just a few hours away from finishing my LR part of the CC but at this point I'm quite unsure about what my weaknesses are and I'm wondering if I should come back to LR after I wrap up the CC in 2 weeks or start reviewing it alongside LG?
Also, I've exhausted the Problem sets so what resources should I be using to practice more? (Haven't taken any PT yet)
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?
Can we lay the tablet flat on the desk/table? It makes a big difference for me in reading comprehension.
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.
