Hello,

If I upgrade, but then change my mind for whatever reason, am I able to get a full refund for the upgrade, if I decide I no longer want it?

Summary: This is far and away the ideal test center. If you're anywhere near DFW or North/East Texas, take the test here! I told an LSAC employee about my experience and she said it was one of the best she had ever heard of. I would even consider making the trek from OKC or Austin.

Setting Pros: We were in small rooms; I had 9 other people in my room. Each person had an entire large table. My room was in the basement near a bathroom.

Parking free and easy. Right off the freeway.

Setting Cons: It might get a little cold. Not a lot of great hotels nearby but you could branch out a bit (if traveling to the test center).

Proctor Pros: We had 2 lovely proctors who kept time very well. They were extremely quiet and respectful.

Proctor Cons: None.

Like the title says, I'd registered for the Dec at JFKU law and had enquired about seating conditions at it with the test center staff. I received an update that suggests that seating will be bad (multiple people on the same desk), which can be very distracting for me.

Should I change the test center? The Deadline is Today so I don't have much time.

I am open to driving far as long as the center has excellent seating and will be staying at a hotel the night before.

I am considering other centers in Bay Area.

I am consideting UoP McGeorge Law at Sacramento but don't know anything about this test center.

Any opinions on if I should change and to what center in Bay Area?

Hello,

Would the LSAT ever use the same flaw type that has subcategories in the same question? For example, would it ever have multiple answer choices that would say A) over generalization B) Bisased sampling , etc. there are many subcategories of this flaw type but would they have answer choices that falls under the subcategories

I've been studying on my own for some time. When I do PTs I notice that I am getting an average of 5 wrong per LR section. All of them are either assumption or paralel/parallel flaw questions. Everything else is right. I've been looking online and most of the suggestions involve diagramming. I don't know how to do that. Diagramming confuses me. Right now my results are -0 for games, -5 for reading ( which I am improving by getting used to reading more. ) but for my LR sections, I am stuck. Any suggestions or advice? Is learning how to diagram mandatory?

PT73 S2 LR - I *really* need some help with explanations on a couple LR questions on this test

Question 9 (weaken) - Answer is C, i picked A

Question 18 (flaw) - Answer is E, i picked A

Question 19 (weaken) - Answer is B, i picked E

Question 21 (mbt) - Answer is E, i picked B

Question 22 (strengthen) - Answer is A, i picked B

*REALLLLYY* need help as I am taking the December exam. Huge thanks to anyone who will help!

I can't seem to be able to find the answer key to the questions on the Question Bank! Is there a way? Thanks in advance.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/on-friday-the-first-thing-we-do-lets-love-all-the-lawyers-1446774232

It's today!

All Librarians enjoy spending time organizing books. Since Susan enjoys spending time organizing books, I imagine she's a librarian.

It is well known know that Yahoo Corporation has slashed the amount it pays in salaries by 6 percent this year. Since Jeff works at Yahoo, his salary was reduced by 6 percent.

Are these different flaws or the same?

In a recent poll conducted among readers of popular surfing magazines, surfing was ranked as the most popular sport and beach volleyball was ranked third. Therefore, it cannot be true that tennis is more popular than both surfing and beach volleyball. Part of me feel like this is a biased sampling simply because the readers are clearly supporters of surfing; so of course they would rank it more high. On the other hand, I feel it is also an overgeneation because it bases its conclusion off of those reader's opinion, and never specified if those polled were representative of the population.

Will there ever be a flaw question containing an overgenerzation and biased poll answer choice? because if both appeared as an answer, I wouldn't know which one to choose and why

hi,

for those of you (like me) who might have started in the late 140s and have been stuck in the 50s for a while...

how do you convince yourself that it CAN BE DONE? I had 161 as my best score and 160 and then dropped back down. I can feel that part of me doesn't even believe that it even is possible, to get into the higher 160s much less in the 170s. i know at this point i need to convince myself of the actual possibility of this happening, or my scores won't budge. do you meditate on a specific number? Use a vision board? zone in on where improvement has actually happened? I was just curious if anyone had any advice. I read the "don't give up post" (thanks!) but can still feel this weight...

UPDATE: Hey folks—just in case anyone has trouble joining or the Webinar fills up, there WILL be a recording and a PowerPoint—and I'll give out my email address during the session.

Due to popular demand, we will be holding this webinar using GoToWebinar. Please continue to use the sign-up link below. You will receive an email prior to the webinar with instructions.

NEW! 7sage Webinar (RC) | Saturday, October 24th 6pm–8pm ET

Hey y'all. A few of us Mentors are going to be hosting webinars on a variety of topics. These are free and open to the public (and to folks at all levels of LSAT mastery).

RC with Nicole: It's Hammer Time

In this webinar, I'll share my notation strategy and talk about how to effectively turn the passage into a toolbox with which you'll eliminate 4 wrong answer choices for each question. This strategy is for beginners, strugglers, and experts looking to refine their own method.

We'll also talk about what makes a good RC answer choice, and how to sniff out the bad ones.

If you'd like to join (we will be using GoToWebinar), fill out this super simple form.

http://goo.gl/forms/poB0E5eSez

If you're unable to attend, don't worry—we'll cycle through the list of topics periodically, and a recording will be available.

Note: no special materials or preparation necessary!

Hi I know that there are books that group the logical reasoning into question types but does anyone know of a book or other study material that has lsat questions grouped specifically by the type of flaw

EX.) the flaw: Absence of evidence-describes the flaw and then lists flawed lsat questions that are this flaw

do this for each type of flaw

(I feel this would really help me see how each type of flaw is used in a lsat question) -Thanks

m

Hi y'all, I'm studying for the upcoming Dec LSAT and am currently scoring in the low 160's. I'm interested in working with someone(s) to do PT'S/BR/Drill etc. Shoot my inbox and let's set something up to crush the LSAT. It's almost time!

Just curious if being significantly older than most students applying to law school (lets say hypothetically speaking 20+ years) would qualify you as being URM? Not that I would actually know anyone who was of course :)

.

What lessons are the best to review for mapping out logic? Perhaps maybe a couple rule of thumbs to always go back to would be great! I use to do very well on SA questions and now I see myself getting more than half of them wrong, I know these type of questions usually play leave on mapping out the logic.

I'm trying to figure out the best way to make use of the 7Sage Core curriculum, the LSAT Trainer, and a bunch of grouped LR questions based on question-type (going up to PT 30) which I'm using before I go into the whole PT/ BR phase in preparation for the June 2016 test. If you've used both 7Sage and the Trainer how did you approach your studies? Is it generally advisable to go through the course and then read the Trainer or vice-versa? Would you make use of the grouped question-types at the end of each lecture on that specific type or use them later for review? I'm considering starting the whole PT/BR regimen at the end of January at the latest which would give me at least a solid 4 months before the test. I really need to structure my studies so any advice/ comments going forward would be great.

The Trainer wants me to use PT62-71 for drills and full exams. Can I use PT40-50 instead? I don't want to use newer tests until I'm somewhat ready.

.

Just curious if anyone keeps a spreadsheet or anything of the questions they get wrong on the PTs? Or do you all just track it in LSAT Analytics? If you do log the questions you are are getting wrong in a spreadsheet, do you actually write out the questions, answer choices etc. and make notes of why you got it wrong? Or do you just write the test number section, & question & type of question. Just trying to figure out if it would be helpful for me to do this or if it would just be wasting valuable time I could be spending more productively. I'm already doing a BR. Although I think I'm going to change the way I have been doing that. I am going to start doing an untimed BR of the complete exam instead of just reviewing the ones I circled in addition to the ones I actually got wrong. Any tips or suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

This question is difficult because once you spot the flaw, it is hard to put it into words, which is why I missed it. I couldn't figure out how any of the answer choices paraphrased the flaw, so I had to pick an answer and move on. I don't really see how C is the flaw and how A is worse than C.

Bike riders don't follow the rules of the road, and this is a causal factor in 25% of traffic accidents involving bikes. The lack of bike saftey equipment is also a causal factor in 25% of those accidents. Thus, bikes are partly responsible for more than half of the traffic accidents involving bikes.

What I am looking for: I think the flaw is a math error. The conclusion says that 50+%, but we are given information about a causal factor being 25% and of those accidents a causal factor is 25%. Instead of additive, the relationship should be multiplicative. The conclusion should only talk about the percentage of bike accidents that included inadequate bike saftey equipment.

Answer A: This was the answer I chose, and I don't see how this doesn't adequately point out the flaw. Sure, you need to make an assumption that motorists are a factor in traffic accidents, but how is that not a reasonable assumption that the author overlooked? Additionally, since we conclude that 50+%, this is implying that less than 50% ("less than half") have some other cause. But, since we can't conclude anything about 50+%, this presumption is not justified. I don't see what is wrong with this one.

Answer B: No. We are to take the causal premises as truth.

Answer C: How is this the correct answer choice? Doesn't the conclusion say "at least partially responsible?" Thus, the argument DOES consider the possibility that more than one factor may contribute to a given accident? Additionally, the argument isn't talking about "all/given accidents;" it is limited to accidents involving bikes. How can the flaw be about "given" accidents?

Answer D: We don't need a source.

Answer E: Who cares about the severity of injury?

I'm trying to significantly improve on logic games. If I study every day for an entire month for so many hours, what are the chances of me seeing major improvement?

May I ask: what is the trainer?