So in fall, back when I was hoping for this cycle, I met with my recommenders, then had to let them know I'm delaying until the next cycle. Now I just want to send them a quick update so we stay in the loop with our communications and so they can make plans for scheduling the writing and letter submission in the next several months. Has anyone written one of these interim emails before?

I am new to 7sage and I have not completed the cc yet and am wondering if I should finish the cc before I start drilling the topics that I recently finished with. Any help would be great, thanks guys.

Apparently, schools are aware of when you begin filling out an application for them. I began an application to a certain school but did not finish it, and just got an e-mail from them telling me that they know that I began an application to them and should get a move on finishing it by the end of the month!

Do all Law Schools use the index formula that computes your UGPA? adding withdrawals and f's into your gpa? I am mainly interested in which schools in New York follow that. Thank you

Hello everyone!

I was hoping that someone could give me some advice on how to tackle the LSAT if you are a slow reader.

A little background: I wrote the LSAT this past september, scored 145, rewrote in December and scored 155. I am re-wrtiging again in two weeks, and I have been improving consistently. However, one thing I don't seem to improve on is my reading speed. I consistently don't get to answer the last 5 questions in arguments, and I always barely make it through 3 out of 4 passages. If I try to read faster, I start misunderstanding what I read and get lost. Overall this has been very frustrating. I would really appreciate if anyone could give me some points on how to fix this! I don't think I can handle writing this test more than 3 times :|

Before Feb 10?

Hi 7Sage Community, I took my first practice test, with no knowledge of the LSAT back in late June 2017 and got a 148. I've been studying since then, but not as much as I could, and last weekend my score was 158, and 160 BR. I'm wondering if anyone on here has started with a score under 150, and excelled past 170? Is it possible if I put the time in before the June 2018 exam?

I've always done horribly on standardized tests, and the LSAT is no exception, even though I understand the tricks of the test makers a lot more than I ever understood the SAT (which I put minor time into studying for because I lacked self-discipline and time management skills in high school, even though I got all A-s and As in my Honors and AP classes through hard work and cram studying). I also have ADHD so that really doesn't help with the challenging time constraints of the LSAT.

Thank you!!

...but I just received an email from Yale inviting me to apply. Under “know” illusions (as in, “I know that Yale is a wash”—not getting it twisted on that) as to its significance for an app but I’m curious as to how I should treat the information that they send me for my app.

I was already done with my materials for Yale, but I’m just wondering if I should carefully read through the packet that they sent in order to adjust my materials. Or do the materials just constitute some suggestions (that are really only suggestions) as to the sorts of things you might include in your application materials.—if they are more than that, then I’ll have to sit down with them more carefully than I would otherwise, given the stage I’m at. I’m sure it’s no biggie, but any advice would be appreciated. Many cheers—A.c.S

Hey there, I am new in 7Sage l was wondering if there is a video explanation for the small problem sets we get after some lessons. Thank you!!!

Hi everyone I thought it would be cool to see if anyone on here is planning on attending MH this fall!

So I'm about to finish with the Core Curriculum (the reading comprehension section - not all PTs). I'll be finished by early next week. Immediately after, I plan on taking the preptest to assess where I am at, but after that I'm not so sure. As you can see I'm not Ultimate +, so LG bundle is not an option - BUT I plan on getting the bundle by the end of next month (funds don't currently allow). In the meantime should I purchase the LSAT Trainer and go through it to reinforce material? Should I go through all of the CC drills again? Both? I'm not entirely sure what route to take post CC, with a month before purchasing Ultimate +. Thanks!

***I love to write, and I also happen to have a little knowledge about the LSAT and law school admissions generally. With JY’s blessing, I have decided that I will scratch my writing itch on a semi-regular basis by posting long-form blog-style pieces on the forums. If you have a topic that you’d like to see me write about, feel free to PM me. And please, discuss the piece freely in the comments below, especially if you disagree – I love to hear other viewpoints and am happy to engage in respectful and reasoned discourse.

My personal philosophy has always been that fundamentals are paramount because they set the groundwork for true understanding, and true understanding is a foolproof way to do well on anything. Some methods out there eschew a deep discussion of formal logic in favor of more ‘holistic’ approaches, relying on the student to supply their experience with the English language instead. I don’t buy it, and here’s why.

First - if the LSAT gave us everything in “if…then” terms, then I would absolutely agree that formal logic would be mostly unnecessary because everyone understands the “if…then” construction on a very basic level. There would still be some purely logical issues that would need to be addressed (for example, thinking that “if A then B” is equivalent to “if not A then not B”), but those could at least theoretically be addressed without resorting to formal logic mapping. Unfortunately, the LSAC is not so accommodating. Semantics plays a huge role on the LSAT, so we can’t just ignore it as if we lived in some idealized world where “if…then” is the only game in town.

Next - if people were naturally proficient at identifying equivalence between statements, I would also agree that learning formal logic would be mostly unnecessary. But unfortunately, that’s not the case either. The number of students who complain that certain arrangements of conditional statement are ‘convoluted’ or ‘complicated’ speaks to the sheer difficulty of that level of translational proficiency for even the most clued-in students, to say nothing of the average person. Sometimes, even a simple reordering of words can be enough to throw the most astute of students. If you’ve ever missed a conditional indicator because it was in the middle of a sentence, then you know exactly what I’m talking about.

Finally – if there were an easier way to give the required background than what currently exists, then I’d embrace that wholeheartedly. Unfortunately, when we’ve got a conditional (if-then) statement, we need an “if” side (sufficient), a “then” side (necessary), and a way to express the relationship between the two (the arrow). I’m really not seeing how this can be made any simpler.

I take a lot of pride in my ability to teach formal logic, but believe me – I would not teach formal logic at all if I could help it. It is one of the least fun parts of the curriculum for the student, and is very difficult to teach well. It took me years to get even reasonably proficient at conveying the concepts. In addition, once learned, most students go through a phase where they try to translate literally every statement into conditional logic, which I then need to scale back, causing more suffering for everyone. I teach it not because I want to, but because I have to.

Formal logic is not an end unto itself. It is not something where as soon as you learn it, you can go crush the LSAT by mapping everything out. Rather, it is the means – the fundamental first step toward actual comprehension of what’s going on. That comprehension facilitates the application of logic to the facts at hand, because now we’re clear about what the facts actually are. This critically important piece is often overlooked – it doesn’t matter how good your logical skills are if you don’t understand the facts correctly, and screwing up the relationship between two elements is one of the surest ways to screw up the facts.

This is why it always amuses me when people ask whether they have to use formal logic in a question if they can ‘just see it’ (or whatever variation of that metaphor they prefer). That’s actually the entire point. Being able to ‘just see it’ means that you’ve already unconsciously used and understood the formal logic – you just don’t perceive it because the translation is already automatic for you. It’s akin to ‘seeing’ the answer to 2+2: it may be automatic for you now, but there was a time where you had to count it out. That you don’t have to count it out now doesn’t mean that you don’t need to know how it works – in fact, it is precisely because you’ve learned how it works that allows you to avoid counting it out. And if you've ever misinterpreted something even though you thought you could "just see it", that's not just some minor mistake - that's a gaping hole in your logical reasoning instincts because that suggests you've internalized faulty fundamentals. It's the equivalent of going through life thinking 2+2 is 5; what you "just see" winds up being confusing at best, and flat-out wrong at worst. How do you fix that? By going back and learning how it actually works.

When you learn formal logic, it’s important to understand why it works the way it does. A lot of methods just teach formal logic as a series of trigger words and rules to memorize, and in that light it’s entirely understandable why there’s so much animosity toward it. In addition to it being remarkably difficult to apply rules we don’t understand, it also just feels arbitrary – like it’s something the LSAC is forcing you to learn just because. Who wouldn’t get frustrated in that situation?

Conversely, when you understand WHY it works the way it does, several things happen. First, you can ‘prove’ to yourself that the theory itself is sound, which (although it sounds dumb) is an important part of internalizing it. Second, you start to synthesize your existing intuition with the explicit underlying mechanics, allowing you to have principled bases for adjusting your intuition. And finally, because you understand the theory and aren’t just memorizing rules, it becomes much easier to apply the rules appropriately in a wide variety of situations. If you don’t understand why things work the way they do, then you’re forever bound to memorizing lists of words and hoping that no variations show up (though even if you do understand the theory, you’ll still have to memorize some words – sadly, there’s no avoiding that).

So, don’t think about formal logic as just sufficients and necessaries, arrows and slashes, contrapositives and other seemingly-arbitrary rules to follow. That approach misses the mark entirely. The only way you’ll ever be able to consistently parse out complicated sentences is if you have a firm grasp on the underlying mechanics, and you can only have a firm grasp on a set of mechanics if you understand the theory behind it. Formal logic is one of the most important elements of the LSAT, so prioritize accordingly.

Bonus points for those of you who unconsciously translated that last bit into formal logic.

My study abroad grades would hurt my current cumulative GPA if taken into account by LSAC... and I'm already a splitter to begin with so I can't afford any hits to my GPA.

My school notes my abroad courses and grades on the transcript (with an "S" for satisfactory and my actual grades in parentheses), but does not calculate it for the cumulative undergrad GPA.

When I send my transcript to LSAC, will my abroad grades be taken into account for cumulative? If so, is that a hard rule or are there exceptions?

Hello all!

I purchased 7sage last summer with the intention of taking the September LSAT. I had a 158 diagnostic, BR of 174. Ending up kind of half-assing my way through the CC, never truly focusing on any particular strategy for any of the three sections or forcing myself to make sure I truly understood the logic. When September rolled around, I knew I wasn't ready but decided to take anyway (I made this big post about whether or not I should, I had to take it abroad in Paris) with the plan on taking again in September. I scored a 163, which was pretty much what I expected.

I continued studying through September/October and made incremental improvements - took three more PTs and got a 164, 166, and 167, with BRs from 175-177. I then came to the realization that December was not enough time to reach my potential. So I decided to postpone the whole cycle and now I'm shooting for June and I'm pretty pumped about this choice! Woo!

I've been re-doing the CC more meticulously this time. I am currently in the midst of fool proofing the LG bundle...I've made it to game 12 and for the last 5 games I've gotten 2-3 wrong the first time through timed. So I feel like I am on track for that section and am comfortable enough to do it alongside the CC, since some of the material is review.

For LR, the CC + the few PT's I've done have helped me identify weak areas, as there are definitely patterns in the questions I am missing. Particularly SA, NA, and Parallel Flaw questions. I seem to be on average missing 5 or so per section. My hope is that through question type drilling and returning to the CC I will be able to get this down to a consistent 2 or less over the next 4.5 months.

Reading comprehension is where I am a bit lost because I don't feel like I really know where to begin in terms of practicing. I miss around 4/5 per section ... but that has been as high as 7 and as low as 1. I think I'm a little bewildered as to how to approach this section due as I've always been very strong in RC in other standardized tests, but obviously LSAT RC is a whole different beast... I know some people do a lot of marking, underlining, etc. on the passage while others do none at all. Just curious about how y'all have approached the RC section from the get-go/how you figured out what strategy worked for you.

Just for some more details, if I got score of 174 I would be pretty thrilled. I realize I still have plenty of work ahead and just want to make an effective use of my time, as I'm sure we all do. I can devote 20-25 hours per week to the LSAT, I'm just working part-time. My undergrad GPA is a 3.76 with a degree in global policy and a couple random minors in biology and French for a small LA school. By the time I attend law school, I'll have been out of school for 4 years, 2 of which I spent teaching English in France and 2 spent in Iceland getting a MA in International Affairs (free tuition wooo!). I would love love love to go to Columbia or NYU, as I'm quite interested in International law but will definitely apply to a slew of schools.

Any input on RC would be much appreciated, as well as general feedback regarding how realistic my goal is. Thank you thank you !

I've been studying full time for a few months and on days like today (where I'm loopy and can't focus), I like to take a break and do something non-LSAT related for a bit. I'd love to use my breaks to spend time with friends but socializing has been tough lately because all of my friends either work full time or are still in school. I am usually studying by the time my friends finally get off work/end class, so my 'break' moments have consisted of me going to the gym and then putzing around until I feel like I can study again lol... I'm running out of ideas for things to do during the day that will keep me sane!

For those who study full-time, what do you like to do during the day when you take a break from the LSAT?

I was wondering if anyone knew if PreProBono was holding any more LSAT workshops? I was going through the website and the last workshop was in 2016 : (. I signed up for their newsletter but wanted to express my interest in case anyone here is working with JY on it. Thanks.

We are all working hard as the feb exam is approaching. This is a thread for giving advice of any type to anyone writing the test. My number one advice, if it’s your first write, TAKE THE DAY BEFORE OFF. don’t do anything that will compromise the next day like get drunk the night before, but totally unwind. Do a baking soda detox bath and go to sleep on time!

I went to Top undergrad known for having a tough curve. I double majored (math and Econ), am a urm. I have an exact 3.0 gpa. I took the lsat in dec and got a 160. I was pt-ing high at a 168/169 and just bombed that day. I’m retaking in feb. I spoke to the and they say taking the feb test significantly hurts my chances of admission. What min score would I need to overcome that? And are scholarships now not in play? Their avg is 165 and 75% is a 166.

Is there a portion of the application process where you apply for scholarships? Or do schools look at your score and make that decision

Over the summer I took a diagnostic and got a 141. I read the LSAT Trainer and did all of the recommended exercises. I just started the 7Sage CC a couple days ago. My goal is a 170 on the September LSAT. Obviously anything is possible, I was just curious to hear about anyone's experience who was able to do this. I'm in school full-time but I'm still able to devote a lot of time to studying for the LSAT.

Hey everyone!

I started 7sage in late December 2017 and have just recently started the Core Curriculum Reading Comp section (I used the 7sage's "create schedule feature" for the June 2018 LSAT). My diagnostic was a 149 and a167 blind review. The reason for the drastic jump is undoubtedly that I went very slow and left tons of unanswered questions in each section.

I am shooting for a 175 LSAT. 149 to a 175 is a huge jump, but given that my BR was167 on the diagnostic I'm hoping it's achievable with hard work. Now for the question - should I sign up for the June LSAT and just cancel it for a partial refund if my PT's are looking grim? How far out can you cancel with a refund? I'm working a part-time job and have already graduated college also. The alternative is to not even think about June and just chug along until the September LSAT. Thoughts?

Just a note to say... I've heard folks say that the LSAT is kinda like riding a bike. Once you learn the logic and how to take the test, the skills more or less stick around. I'm happy to report that after being away from it for about 6 weeks, it's pretty true!

After the December test, I've basically only been focusing on applications. I'm still registered to re-take in February though. I was hoping to have apps done by now and be able to go back to drilling, but life has gotten in the way and I'm crazy behind on applications. Ugh.

Just to gauge where I'm at though, I took a PT yesterday and scored the exact same as I did on the December test! I was afraid that I would have gotten rusty. In LR, I actually felt like I improved a lot. I finished both sections with about 5 minutes to spare (which is a first for me) and went -1 and -2, which is basically my high scores for those. I did feel rusty on LG though, they all took me longer than I think they should have and my score reflected that. I did better than average on RC too, which is my weakest section. That all balanced out to a consistent score with where I was at in early December though, and I'm very pleased. I actually even think an extended break was helpful - I think I did better on LR because I wasn't overthinking things so much.

So this is a note also just to encourage anyone that may have had to take a break for any number of reasons, or is afraid of taking a break to recover from burn out: trust yourself! If you learned the underlying logic, you're going to be ok and retain those skills.

This may be silly, however I can't remember if the real test paper is thinner than the single tests available on amazon. Does anyone know if the paper is that thin delicate stuff? Also, was LSAC releasing Dec scores early a one time thing or have they hinted at releasing Feb scores early?

I started studying for the LSAT September with a 155 on an non timed LSAT by January 22 I got a 170 on a non timed test. I am now switching to timing myself to learn how to analyze and take the test as time efficiently as possible. At the same time spending more time on RC which is my weaker area. Any thought on how to own the timed LSAT scene? In the meantime keep grindin' everyone!! You got this!!!!

PT83