So, I'm sure a lot of you are in the same boat as me and are panicking for the September LSAT. I am reaching out to ask people who have already written the test or are also writing it next week, what they are doing to prepare themselves for test day. I know I should get a good sleep, exercise, and eat to keep my energy intact but besides that, what's the best practice for these last 7 days? Should I be doing full practice tests every day, drilling, doing sections, or just relaxing? I know that I will probably not get my desired score, however, I want to put my all into this and not let my last 4 months of studying go to waste. I am also seeking any tips for how to keep up your momentum, considering the test is fairly condensed in 2 hours and 45 minutes.

My other area of concern is my argumentative writing sample. In the next week, I don't have any free time to complete it and was wondering when is the latest that I can complete it and still get my score on September 25th like everyone else? Also, I was planning to go into it blind, but have been told otherwise. How many practice samples should I complete? I don't want to waste my time, but at the same time, I want to be able to write a well-crafted essay.

Finally, for those who have done remote testing, when do you recommend setting up the test software and is 30 minutes before the exam a sufficient amount of time to log in and get settled in with the proctor?

For anyone who has reached this far and takes the time out of their day to ease my anxiety by replying to my thread, thank you in advance and good luck to you all!

For RC - question stem, it has "WSE" as an option, but when I hover over it, "WSE" is the only thing that's offered. "PorG" says "principle or generalization" when I hover over it. TIA!

The past couple PTs I've been beating the target time on both the passages and the questions, and yet I'm still getting crunched by the end of the section. I normally get between -3 to -0 on RC, but since encountering this issue I've swelled to -7 and -9. Is anyone else having a similar problem? What can I do?

Hello all -

I'm registered to take the September and November LSAT, and with the September test in just two weeks, I'm questioning my decision to take it as I do not feel prepared - I've been studying since March, starting out with the LSAT Trainer and then focusing solely on the 7Sage curriculum starting in June. While working a full-time job, it took me much longer than I would've liked to just get through the core curriculum, and now that I'm finally at the stage of drilling and prep testing, I'm receiving PT scores below my goal (I'm anywhere from a 147-154 in the timed PT, and 155-160 in BR. If I got a 155, I wouldn't be too upset, but ideally would want something in the low 160's).

I know to jump from a 150ish average to a score in the 160's in two weeks is unrealistic, however should I still take the September LSAT if I'm not feeling prepared? I know that the rule of thumb is to wait until you feel ready/your PT scores are hitting around your goal score, and I know that's not the case for me, but I want to apply this cycle and still be competitive when it comes to scholarships/admission and don't want to rely solely on my November LSAT score now that the October registration deadline has passed.

Essentially, what do I do - take the September LSAT anyway, or withdraw and take in November and potentially December? Any and all feedback would be appreciated - I know law schools primarily look at your top score, but I've seen/heard a lot of discourse about how many times you take the test, that you shouldn't take it more than twice, etc. so if I know that I don't feel ready, I'm not sure what the best course of action is regarding taking the September test.

Thank you in advance!

Hi everyone,

I've done a handful of prep tests here on 7sage now and have been getting a 160 every time (minus a one time fluke of a 166). According to the analytics page, my worst LR topics are Causal and Conditional Reasoning and Link Assumptions.

Does anyone have any advice on ways to improve in these areas (strategies, syllabus lessons, etc.)? Also, does anyone have any advice on how to break past the 160 barrier?

Thanks in advance for any insights you might have!

I'm taking the Oct LSAT and the Jan LSAT and right now I'm in my first week of studying and scoring 150 on timed tests. (I've taken 3) This week I am now going to focus on the curriculum and learning the questions and focusing on areas I got wrong to strengthen those areas. But, is it it too ambitious to try to gain a 15-20 point jump by Oct? I've heard a couple stories of people doing it and I know the work I would need to put in. However, I'm just worried I'm putting too much pressure on the Oct LSAT. (I really want to get in through early admissions though.) Any thoughts? Advice? I'll take it all!

Also if you have any stories or need a study buddy I'm available to listen and help :)

Hi guys!

I am a bit confused on how to use "without" when writing out conditionals. I understand that you negate the sufficient when you see the word without, but what if the statement says:

John always sleeps without socks.

Isn't "always" a necessary indicator?

Would it be diagrammed as:

sleep -> /socks (this one makes more sense to me)

or

/socks -> sleep

Another example, I know that if the statement says: You can't come home without making money, the conditional would be written out as:

come home -> made money.

Just a bit confused with the "always... without..." statement I mentioned initially.

Thanks!

If anyone could share their strategy sheet for Logical Reasoning question types, it would be greatly appreciated.

7Sage has a really helpful one in their Reading Comprehension curriculum, but I haven't found one for LR.

Thanks!

hello. can someone please answer a question regarding the writing part of the LSAT. if you are taking it in September, how long do you have to complete the writing section? I am trying to find clarity on this. Thank you

I am confused on the timing of the writing portion of the exam. What is the deadline associated with the writing portion? Is it something to worry about before or after the actual exam?

Hello! I have gone through the syllabus on Parallel Flaw questions and I am still not getting it. On my drills I seem to keep missing those and wasting time trying to solve them. Any tips? Help is much appreciated!

The biggest piece of advice that I've gotten from countless videos regarding RC, is that you have to pretend like you're interested in the RC passages to do well. I didn't understand why I wasn't doing well because I was highlighting and taking notes, so how could I not understand the passage? But when I got down to answering the questions, I was getting a majority of them wrong. It was extremely discouraging, to say the least.

As soon as I started gaslighting myself into giving a damn about the topics discussed in RC, I started seeing improvement. No highlighting things I think are important, no taking notes that I won't even go back to--just pretending like a topic, that I genuinely do not care about, is something super interesting.

The amount of times I think to myself: "wow, that's cool." "oh, I never knew that, how interesting." is the biggest reason why I'm having to refer to the passages less when answering questions.

Engage with the passage, I promise it'll pay off.

Looking to increase by score by at least 15 points in the November test. I just really need words of encouragement and ways you guys are able to stay commitment and focused. What are some techniques you guys use? If anyone is interested in creating a study group please let me know!

Update: I created a discord and I'm still in the middle of setting everything up. Both for those of you who want to join!

https://discord.gg/JCKBH4BkEp

LINK IS UPDATED AND SET TO NEVER EXPIRE

If you are having issues joining please DM me!

It seems like I am incapable at doing the strengthening and weakening questions. I read the answer choices and just think that none of them make sense. I could use some advice.

I noticed today the RC Curriculum, as I am going through it, changed from 244 lessons to 169!! I am happy but is 7Sage adding more lessons in or will it remain at 169 lessons? Thanks, I am trying to get my study schedule correct.

hey guys. I'm currently scoring in the mid to high 60s and each section is around a -5 or lower. I really want to get a 170+ so I am aiming to do a little better on my sections. I have heard from multiple people that this is the hardest improvement to make. Can anyone give me some strategies that worked for them to make the 70s jump. Specifically, my RC sections are consistently lower than LR. I really think that's my point of weakness. What would be a good plan of action for the September test? Should I do 1 minute/Q sections? Full sections?

Any help is appreciated.

How do you guys drill?

I'm looking to improve on LR overall, and I'm not sure if I should lump together different question types in one drill. If I do this, how many questions should I have in one mixed drill and how do I divide them based on their difficulty range?

Flaw and weaken are two question types I tend to get incorrect, should I drill them separately? If so, how many questions should I add in my drill and how many of each based on their difficulty range?

Hi, im starting my LSAT study journey with little previous knowledge about past tests and current changes. What are the sections to focus on if I plan on testing in January 2025? I heard logic games isn’t on there anymore? Thanks for reading and best wishes to all who come across this!

I’ve been studying for the LSAT for a little over two years now and I’ve made no progress on the logical reasoning, I always get half right and half wrong. I always get it down to two, consistently, then of course I always choose the wrong one, consistently. This is an occurring problem and then there are the little ones that I get wrong here and there, and I can’t even begin to describe those questions. Before anyone says I ought to memorize the questions types and the approaches and the this and that, the methods for particular questions and so on, my opinion on that is, it’s absurd. How can the LSAT be a predictor of critical thinking skills when one chooses to memorize each distinct grain of sand on a beach and the elements that make up those grains of sand, and that one has to approach each of these grains of sand with a different kind of mindset and identify these grains of sand by key-wording and sentence styles (the way it’s directed). It’s defeats the purpose of the LSAT and it has been stated as such by several lawyer types who seem well established, to approach the LSAT with a critical thinking based effort rather than a memory based effort. Nonetheless I’ve tried the memory based method and even then it’s absurd because each year the questions made by the LSAC association are different, right? Granted there are some questions that are thrown into the mix that have been used before in some LSAT at some time in the past, this I’m sure of, but it’s only some, and there’s no knowing those particular sum of questions, thus I’m back to square one which is to totally scrap the memory based effort because it’s not based on skill rather it’s based on prediction and patterns. So I’m committed to the critical thinking method, but I can only go so far, so what do I do?

Hi all, I got to the RC portion of the curriculum and I see that a lot of it says "to be removed soon." Should I avoid this while studying since I am taking my lsat in November?

The last month or so of studying for me has been incredibly frustrating as I keep getting wildly inconsistent results. I have been studying since May and have completed the syllabus and mainly work on drilling, doing sections of PTs or PTs in their entirety. When doing one or two sections at a time I can routinely get -2 to -4 on both RC and LR. However, when I take PTs, all of my progress seems to go out of the window. Even in the first sections of my test I can score from anywhere from -7 to -10. Just today I took a PT that was frustratingly inconsistent in the test itself, scoring -9 RC, -10 LR, -6 exp RC, -3LR. I've also noticed that I tend to score worse on more recent tests, whereas older tests I seem to do far better on. Here is a breakdown of the last few tests I took and how I scored form oldest to most recent:

PT 155 - 159

PT 149 - 163

PT 143 - 160

PT 110 - 167

PT 138 - 159

PT 144 - 163

PT 145 - 159

Has anyone else had similar experiences being able to crush individual sections but not being able to translate that into PTs? And has anyone noticed a trend of newer tests feeling more difficult than older ones? I really don't get test anxiety and I don't usually feel super fatigued after a PT, so I don't think my fall off is attributable to just the long format alone. Id appreciate any advice or insight, I am taking the September exam and really want to hit a 165 or slightly higher which I think is possible if I continue to work hard.

Hey! I am having trouble understanding why A is incorrect. I do see how and why D works but I can't understand why A doesn't.

Here, we are given a correlation between the ad, price increase and drop in smoking. From the correlation, we get a causation that the ad is what caused the drop in smoking.

The flaw here is that the author overlooks all other alternate causes of the drop in smoking. In a strengthen question, an AC that denies an alternate causal explanation wins. For example, an AC that says or implies that X, an alternate cause for the drop in smoking, did not actually happen or that it can't be the cause will be the correct AC. And any AC that knocks out an alternate explanation for a given phenomenon automatically strengthens the proposed explanation.

Coming to AC A which says that the residents did not increase use of other forms of tobacco. Here, X i.e. the alternate cause, is given as people's increased use of other forms of tobacco. AC A denies this alternate cause.

The explanation that the 3% decrease in smoking happened because people switched over to other forms of tobacco seems like a valid alternate cause for the drop in number of smokers. (Cause: people switched to other forms of tobacco; effect: drop in smoking) It is such a small percentage and it is entirely reasonable that people switched how they wanted their tobacco kick. So, "3% people stopped smoking because they had switched over to other forms of tobacco instead" is a wonderful alternate causal explanation. Denying this alternate explanation increases the likelihood of ad causing the drop being true.

I get that D is better because it deals with the alternate explanation mentioned right there in the stimulus but how is A irrelevant?

TIA!

Hey guys, I've been studying for two months now and have learned all the foundations of Logical Reasoning. Currently, I'm scoring between -13 and -8 in the best-case scenario. Should I just keep drilling and focusing on accuracy, or is there another key to mastery at this point? Even with a solid understanding of the foundations, question types, and stimulus identification, I still find the test very challenging.

I PAY FOR THIS I WANT ACCESS......... RUDE

Help. I have an ERROR 404 message on everything I do