Discussions

General

New post

31 posts in the last 30 days

Hi everyone,

First time poster here. I just started my study journey for the February 2023 LSAT. I actually took the LSAT about five years ago and did terribly as I mistakenly thought I could cram 3 weeks before the exam.

As far as the new format as the test goes, can anyone share any tips? I took a digital diagnostic on Khan a few days ago and I felt it was much harder to stay focused reading digitally as opposed to on paper. I know we can have scratch paper for the games, but how did you guys manage to not physically mark up reading comp for instance?

Thanks!

0

Im confused as to what the difference between the pt's before 2020 and the modern option is. How should we be taking the ones before 2020, with the stimulate modern option or all 4 sections? and. How are the before 2020 ones scored? are all 4 sections scored?

0

I haven't heard anybody talking abt this, but I recently finished pt78 and found several questions in this pt to be kind of atypical of lsat questions. They seem to rely more heavily on you making some assumptions abt unstated things, sometimes to an extent I would usually consider very risky to do in LSAT tests. Does anybody feel that? Have you ever encountered a particular PT that runs counter to your experiences with LSAT?

1

Hello everyone! Ok so I enjoy drinking coffee however I noticed I crash hard when I'm coming down later in the day. I've tired drinking matcha tea however it's not as strong as coffee and I'm not able to focus as much. The problems I'm having with coffee is I believe it affects my sleep. I drink literally one cup at 9am and for some reason my mind is constantly racing. at night. In other words I'm not getting REM sleep. Does anyone else have problems with caffeine? I'm considering just quitting coffee cold turkey and only drinking matcha from now on. WHAT DO I DO?!?!?!?!?

1

Hey 7Sagers!

Update: After carefully considering feedback from several 7Sagers, we've decided to keep the pre-made problem sets available for the time being. You can find more information regarding this here: https://classic.7sage.com/discussion/#/discussion/34509/core-curriculum-update-pre-made-problem-sets

A few months ago we announced that we'll be replacing the pre-made problem sets in the Core Curriculum with an advanced drilling option! We're excited to announce that the old problem sets will be completely replaced by the drilling feature starting March 1st. This means that after February 28th, you will no longer be able to access the pre-made problem sets in the Core Curriculum.

I know this is a big change to the Core Curriculum we all know and love. However, we are doing this as part of our larger goal to make LSAT prep as simple and streamlined as possible. This feature is just one of the many ways we're working towards that. Instead of making a new post to announce this, I decided to simply edit this one because there are a ton of great questions and answers in the comments. I've picked out one of JY's comments from the initial post to include here. Hopefully his response answers some of the initial questions you might have about this change!

In the meantime, feel free to comment any questions you may have and review the initial announcement (included below). If your heart is set on doing the problem sets exactly as they are (I get it, change is tough), feel free to download them before February 28th so you can continue to use them.

We perceived two issues with the existing Problem Sets and replacing them with Drills is our attempt to remedy both.

The PSets are static sets of 5 questions in increasing order of difficulty and newness. For example, Flaw PSet #1 contains 5 of the easiest and oldest Flaw questions from PTs 1-35. Flaw PSet #23 contains the hardest and newest. As they are laid out in the CC, the expectation is that a student should just proceed through them one by one.

The issue with that is the typical student probably doesn't need to start with PSet #1 (too easy) and probably doesn't need to finish all the way to PSet #23 (time could be better spent elsewhere). This is inefficient. The Drill addresses this by giving the student the ability to set the difficulty themselves. A student can, based on how well they followed the lessons, set the difficulty to, say, medium, and see how they do. Based on the results of the Drill, they can quickly adjust the difficulty for the next Drill. (We're also working on auto adjusting as a new feature to be released.) Admittedly, this is also something that could be done with PSets: a student could jump into the middle of the PSets and work forward (if too easy) or backwards (if too hard). But that's very cumbersome and not everyone will know to do this. Drills will allow students to more efficiently hone in on what they need to practice.

The second issue is that PSets contain a disproportionate amount of older questions. Their questions are pulled from only PTs 1-35. The assumption was that the newer PTs should be saved for timed PTs. Two changes undermined that assumption. First, it's been 5 years since the PSets were created and many more new PTs have been released. Second, the modern LSAT only contains one scored LR section. The two changes together meant that we have many more newer LR questions that should not be in PTs. For example, PT 45 was originally released with two LR sections but the second LR section should not be in a modern PT. So what do we do with it? We pushed it into the Drilling pool of questions. We did this for all the LR sections we deemed to be "extra." This way, you still have a huge pool of modern PTs (with a rotation of LR, LG, and RC experimentals on the next feature release). You will also have a larger and newer (compared to PSets) pool of LR questions to Drill with. PT 76's second LR section is the newest section that we placed into the Drilling pool.

For those who are concerned about spoiling PTs, if you choose "Simulate Modern" and take PTs 45 and higher, there will be absolutely no overlap between PT LR and Drilling pool LR. In other words, you're guaranteed to have a fresh PT with a reliable PT score.

For those who are asking for the ability to self-select which sections should be in PTs v. Drilling pool, I think that's a good idea(?) but I can also see arguments against this. More choice is not always better. We're still debating this. At this moment there are no plans to create this feature but we may work it into a future release.

In short, we believe that Drills are a superior version of PSets.

If you’re familiar with our Core Curriculum, you’ll know that each core LR question type includes a number of pre-made problem sets related to that topic. As we continuously work towards improving our course, we’ve rolled out a new feature to replace these problem sets!

You’ll notice that above each problem set, there is now a ‘Drill’ option. https://imgur.com/8VszND7

Unlike the pre-made problem sets, the Drills will enable you to, well, drill each question type as much, or as little, as you’d like. You can also configure the difficulty to exactly what level you’re looking to practice at. It's basically a better version of the problem sets.

If you’d like to test out this drill feature, you don’t have to wait! The drilling option is already available for each LR question type in the Core Curriculum.

MC

MSS

MBT

Weak

Streng

SA and PSA

Princ

NA

AP

Flaw

MoR

Para

PF

PAI

RRE

13

Hello everyone. So for context, I’m not looking to go to a T14 so a 160 is pretty much what I need to get into my picks for law schools. Even a 161/162 would be amazing for me. Unfortunately, I can’t seem to crack this magic number. I usually score in the high 150s with few outliers but have never made it past 159 despite always scoring in the 160s upon BR and in the very high 160s nearing 170 as of more recently.

I’ll admit I don’t have LG down to -0. I’ll usually score around -5 or -8 due to timing but then get -0 on BR. LR and RC is where the gamble comes in. I’ll always either do like -6 or -7 on RC but then -10 on LR or I’ll go -6 on LR but -11 on RC. LG is about the same every single PT. The most frustrating part for me is my inconsistency on LR. Like I could do a drill on just weakening questions and do well but then on my most recent PT, 3 out of the 9 questions I got wrong were all weakening questions. It’s seriously frustrating knowing that had I gotten those 3 weakening questions correct my score would have gone from a 159 to a 162. 🥲

No matter what I do I can’t seem to crack that magical 160 (maybe not so magical for others lol). With only days left until my October LSAT, should I just fully focus on LG at this point to hopefully get it below -5?

13

Hi everyone, I was approved for +50% time today and just wanted to ask about some strategies to best leverage this extra time.

I was already not horrible in terms of pacing, but I was missing questions bc I was misreading/ rushing questions etc.

My intital impression of the best way to leverage this extra time would be to literally blind review during the actual exam; finish the section in ~35 minutes and then go back and review the answers I’m not 100% confident with. This is also a godsend for diagraming during LG, though I haven’t started studying LG. Same with RC my impression is that I should use the time to read the passages more critically, etc.

If anyone has any additional general of section-specific advice, I’d greatly appreciate it!

0

Hi all, so I noticed that some PTs are labeled with letters (PTB, PTC, PTC2). Is there anything special about these practice tests, such as experimental sections, or questions that were tossed out on them? Just curious why these PTs were labeled with letters instead of being regularly numbered like the other PTs. Are they good tests to use to gauge my scores?

0

Hi everyone! After hitting 170-176 on a few PTs, I saw my scores drop back down to high-mid 160s. Last Saturday, I got 5 and 6 wrong on LR when I usually only get 1-3 wrong! A lot of the questions I missed were 1-2 star questions I usually never miss. I have a feeling I'm getting too much in my own head, and I was wondering if anyone has advice on how to deal with this. I am taking the October LSAT and I'm trying really hard not to freak out!

1

I'm in need of some advice. I initially took the LSAT in February 2020. I had no knowledge of the test and received some poor advice that I should take it blindly and see what I get. I scored a 142. I knew that I needed to retake it. I studied for some time, and in October 2021 I retook it. I cancelled the score because I didn't feel good about it. Then I took November 2021 and scored a 152. I was happy with the increase, but it was still not near my goal of 165+ so I decided to take another year to study. This time, I took the September 2022 test and only scored a 156. After what feels like forever studying for this test, I did not get as close to the score range I was PTing. I feel like I have screwed myself because of my previous takes. I know law schools frown upon taking the test over 3-4 times. I'm not sure what to do next.

To sum it up: (142 > Cancel > 152 > 156)

I have a good GPA, nothing that will compensate for a poor LSAT but it's still decent. I'm not interested in any T14 schools, most I have looked into are in the 25-50 range, which I know my score is still on the low end for. I cannot take another gap year to study. I plan on applying this month and November, so my options would be to apply to schools now to get my applications in, and take either January or February 2023, or totally roll the dice applying earlyish with a 156. I have ADHD, and I've struggled with this test both mentally and emotionally and I'm not sure if it would be worth it to take a 5th time. If you can offer me any sort of guidance I will be grateful! Thanks for taking the time to read this!

2

I noticed that some people use the wrong answer journal.

Do you find it useful?

I'd love to try it but do not know where to start.

It would be a huge help if you can share the document if there is any!

0

Confirm action

Are you sure?