I'm just now starting to do logic games, and it is completely foreign to me. My question: Do we not write on our master game board with inferences and rules annotated on it? Sorry, if it seems like a silly question; I am just super confused.

I'm prepping for the exam with a friend who has a pretty serious chronic illness. He has applied to get 25% extra time on the LSAT. Although I think that, given his illness, he deserves the added time, I'm confused whether that extra time can be of significant help. If he's approved, he'll get 8 extra minutes per section.

I haven't taken the exam yet but I understand that time constraint is one of the biggest challenge that the exam entails. However, I also believe that if you're not familiar with the exam by test day, those 8 extra minutes will never be enough. Him and I had a mini argument on this topic.

What're your thoughts on this? Especially the folks who have taken this dreadful exam previously.

Hey 7Sagers, had a few users a bit confused about the difference between trivial & non-trivial inferences on this lesson:

http://classic.7sage.com/lesson/quiz-on-drawing-valid-conclusions-2/#comment-30714

Think you guys can shed some light?

@captainoats @linette.m

I'm about to start the PTing portion of my study.

I've also just purchased the Cambridge LR bundle that covers all question types for the section. What's the best way to use it? PT, discover my weaknesses and then incorporate the drilling into my refresher study from the core curriculum and Trainer?

Any advice welcomed!

Hi everyone, I just took the June LSAT. Currently, I trying to write my personal statement while waiting for the LSAT results. English is my second language (born in South America), so creating strong sentences to express my thoughts becomes challenging sometimes. I would like to know, what you guys are doing concerning advising and editing (your essays). Do you guys know any services that can assist you in this writing process?

Hey,

So I have recently started out the 7sage curriculum. My biggest weakness in the past was Logic Games so I have really been focusing on the LG curriculum and making good strides. I feel as if my PTs will be essentially wasted if I take them without fully going through all of the LG curriculum. My RC and LR are not bad, I just want to improve on my LG score for the time being. Therefore, I was planning on knocking out the rest of the LG curriculum before I start taking PTs for the October LSAT. I hope to be done by the end of June with the LG curriculum and then begin taking PTs along with drilling RC and LR through the 7sage curriculum through July, August, and September.

Do you guys have thoughts on this approach/have others used a similar approach and been successful?

Any input would be much appreciated.

Thanks!

This question might strike some as odd. If it does, I apologize in advance. I'm having a problem carving a block out of any day for a full length timed test. What are the draw backs, aside from not subjecting myself to the mental anguish of sitting there for 4 hours, of taking the sections individually under the same strict timed conditions? I understand the importance of taking timed tests, but I also have to juggle everything else as well. Is it more important to keep the tests for the days that I can complete it undisturbed or to actually complete timed sections each day and take full length practice tests every now and then? My fear is not doing enough timed sections by limiting myself to only taking full length tests. I'm interested in hearing opinions from others that might be in the same boat and from those that are "LSAT deities." Some teachers, such as Nathan Fox, believe there is nothing wrong with completing PT's in this manner as long as full length PT happen every once in a while for acclimation to the full test. To provide a background on myself, I have been through the curriculum twice, The Trainer once and have completed 8 post PT 36 tests in a mixture of the methods questioned above.

@amanda_kw

@nicole.hopkins

@ddakjiking

@Pacifico

@"Nilesh S"

@emli1000

Ok so am I the only pretty little law geek that finds these questions tough? Lol I'm not bad at LR overall but these questions trip me up quite often. Any advice? I know eventually if I keep doing them I will get better but I am interested to know if anyone uses a different strategy or notices a characteristic about these that distinguishes them from other flaw questions and makes them a little easier to solve. I simply identify the argument, find a flaw and attempt to find the answer that strengthens or weakens that bond between the support and conclusion (not always easy to discern even when I understand the argument).

I just finished going through the entirety of the core curriculum (ah if only that was all it takes). I have the basic course, and I'm looking for input on the whether upgrading is worth it given that all the tools, so to speak, are provided with the basic version. The price isn't an issue, nor is my cognizance of the potential ROI; just curious what you all think.

Ran into this commercial and found it LSAT related/amusing. Hope you guys like it.

While I am making progress in the LG section, I am seeing that there is a pattern I do not like. It is an extremely sporadic pattern. Either I understand the game and get all the questions right (sometimes miss only one) or completely misunderstand the game and get most questions wrong. There isn't a very strong correlation between game type for me. For example, I don't seem to bomb matching games more than sequencing etc. It's literally if I understand the task well, I answer correctly and if I don't I am guessing I misrepresent the diagram or the rules in such a way that it nearly throws me off the entire game. Is this a basic diagramming/notating problem that I just need to address? Maybe re-read the basics of LG, or use another resource to bridge that gap?

I am also thinking maybe it doesn't make sense to time myself. When I blind review LG, of course I do a lot better. But if I can't get them accurate under in times conditions then it doesn't make much sense to time myself yet right? Naturally, I tend to do worse even on games i do understand under the time pressure. =( usually its because of a missed inference or incorrect representation of a rule that I get correct when I am not being timed.

I've regressed back into my plateau range of high 150's low 160's. It's disappointing as I thought I had made progress and now I have around 15 of my 21 total preptests in this range. In other words I have been in a consistent plateau my whole testing period with a few beneficial and not so beneficial outliers. Nonetheless, I have thought of a possible solution. Would it work if I took and retook preptests 62-72 until I was able able to score 175+ consistently on all of them. That way I would be able to master some inferences in LR, fine tune my RC, and increase inference making ability and speed in LG. I would keep 73 and 74 fresh to check to see if I made any real progress afterwards. I know it is highly likely I would be remembering a lot of answers, but hopefully I would also be remembering why the respective answers are correct and why the incorrect answers are wrong. I may increase the range (from 62-72 to 57-72) to encompass a few more possibilities for questions but you get the major gist. I really want to break out of this plateau and hit a higher range so that I may have wiggle room on the next test day. My new goal for myself is 165-180. Is this idea stupid or just dumb enough to actual work???

I started the 7sage core curriculum in March, and finished it last week.

My diagnostic was 153. Today, I took my first PT (after my diagnostic test) - PT39.

I scored a disappointing 151, with 161 for BR. ( I left 13 questions blank due to the ticking clock...)

My strongest section was RC, then LG, with my weakest being .... LR...

I am planning on taking the Oct LSAT with a goal of 168+.

WHAT SHOULD I DO???!!!! Help me out sagers...

Hey guys - I've been studying for almost a year and have been consistently scoring in the low 170s-high 160s on PTs35-70 and once I took 71,72,73 my scores fell to low 160s and even hitting a 159 for one. Is it just me or do these most recent PT feel different to anyone else? Even when I BR I find the LR arguments to be much more tricky and the RC is more difficult for me to finish in 35 minutes. What the heck is going on and how do I get over this?

Declassified "actual" footage of various proceedings:

[begins at 1:56]

Hey everyone! I have not yet bought a package from 7sage, but probably will go with the premium option. I'm a Canadian looking toward getting a score of around 160-163 to be competitive at Canadian law schools.

I'm entering 4th year university and was on the edge of whether I should apply for the 2016 cycle or wait till I graduate to study for the LSAT and apply for the 2017 cycle.

If I start prepping now I have around 3 months ( I know you can't reach your full potential in this short time). I would just like to hear some of your progress stories and whether 3 months of serious studying is enough to break the 160 barrier.

Thank you, and I look forward to communicating with you guys in the future.

Most people who take many exams of the lsat plateau at some point. How did you escape your plateau?

Since this is a diverse group of people with different expectations and ideals, I have a simple question. What do you consider a good score and why?

So I was just poking around on the site and to my surprise 7sage has a law school course! I had no idea. Has anyone taken this course and if so, has it really made a difference in your law school grades and/or experience?

Anyone else not able to access the locked problem sets despite having an Ultimate account? I'm not able to access them, and I have no idea why.

Thanks!

I had some proctor timing problems on the 6/18 exam. The proctor wasn't clear on start times for 2 sections and didn't call 5 minutes on a section.

Is this worth contacting with LSAC about? What's the best they can do to help me after the proctor mistimed?

Hi everyone! Does anyone have a good study guide or cheat sheet tip(s) I could use when making my own? Or possibly an example of their own that I could use when making mine?

Is it normal when your about a month into studying for the LSAT, and you feel like for a minute your getting good at some skills, then suddenly you realize you still suck, or you think you are good at something and you really are not? Do you begin to feel some sort of demoralization? I do want to make it clear, however that by no means does this stop me from studying, it just kind of puts me in this sort of funk.

How does everyone here feel about this concept, of studying for logic games for a week for example, and then moving onto RC, and then back to LG or LR.

I'm just following the 7Sage curriculum and they switch back and forth a lot which I actually enjoy.

When I'm so sick and tired of doing logic games I see RC and it seems kind of fun and new. Then when I'm tired of RC I look at LR and it looks appealing.

I'm curious if I'm the only (group one indicator looooool) one that thinks like this lol.

A quick read (and a great site for those interested in solo/boutique practice):

Everyone Is Losing Interest In Law School on Lawyerist.

It seems our timing couldn't've been better, folks; for those who are applying in next year's cycle, it may be even better.