Does anyone have (or know) a good structure for creating Low-res summaries for each paragraph in a passage. I find myself getting lost in the words and extrapolating information i do not need or missing the information I do need.

Hello! I am reviewing PT 148, and I am a bit confused about why we can make certain assumptions and not others. On question 12 of section 1, I chose A but the correct answer is supposed to be C. After watching the explanation video, I understand that I had to make a couple assumptions in order to land on A. However, if C is correct, wouldn't you have to assume that the wolves prefer to prey on sick moose over healthy moose? The way I read the answer choice was just that the wolves often eat the sick wolves, not that they tend to eat the sick wolves over the healthy wolves. What if the wolves are still preying on more wolves than the diseases would? Thank you in advance for any help you can offer!

When going through LR questions, sometimes I see what i am sure is the answer but I still go through every other ACs and eliminate them. Sometimes this pays off because I change my answer to a better one but most of time time it feels like a waste of time. Should I be reading every answer even though I am 90% sure I already know the correct one?

Hi all,

I recently took a PT and saw that I mostly only missed Level 4 and Level 5 questions, but I'm a little confused on how to study because there is a Level 4 or 5 question from different question types that I missed. For example, I missed a Level 5 from method of reasoning, evaluate, agree, flaw, parallel flaw, and weaken. It's not a couple specific question type that I can drill and understand.

Any tips on how to go about working on/drilling these questions? Are there any strategies you guys were able to use to not get the L4 and 5 wrong later?

Anything helps!!

I just started regularly taking PTs, and I feel that I'm under-utilizing my scrap paper. I find myself reluctant to use it, as it feels like a time sink.

I'm curious to know how people strategize using scrap paper to help them effectively, so I can brainstorm some ideas for myself. I'd love to hear tips and tricks as well!

Thanks in advance :))

I just finished the LR section of the core curriculum, but I want to keep practicing while I work on the RC section. Does anyone have any tips on how to approach this? I'm thinking of doing 5-10 questions of a drill per day.

I am taking the test in september and am consistently PT'ing around high 160-low 170 but I find I consistently lose one or two points to these two question types. So I'd ideally like to clean them up before I get there.

Does anyone have any strategies for making these types of questions both more quick and more consistent? I find even when I get them right I'm unsure if I'm actually getting them right for the right reasons, or if it was just luck.

Hi! I'd love to have some friends to study with, maybe a pomordo type set up where we work and can chat over a break maybe, 30/5 or 50/10?

I'm thinking evenings or Saturdays but am open to weekday options too!

I absolutely love the live class feature on 7sage! Nicole's classes have been extremely helpful in advancing almost 20 points in my test score since I first started studying for the LSAT. While I haven't been able to attend most of her classes live, I have been able to access her wealth of knowledge, and other tutor's as well, through the live class library. When I filter on the live class search bar the classes only go back a few months vs. the classic.7sage which goes back 10 + months. Will the live class library on classic.7sage be incorporated on the new and improved 7sage? #hopeful #help #feedback

Was wondering if anyone had advice for how I can help this problem. I've been studying consistently since June, and have been plateauing on scores of around 155. However, my blind reviews have been going up, to where I'm now getting 170+ but not seeing those actual score changes on the timed version? Does anyone have advice on how to fix it? Is it just more practice with doing timing? I noticed one thing that I have trouble with is more of the logic ones like SA's, NA's, Mbt, etc where I get them wrong on the timed tests but get them right on blind review when I have time to work through them.

163 lsat 3.8 gpa. Applied pretty late got waitlisted into Chapman, LMU, UC Irvine. Got admission with 200k from southwestern. Obviously southwestern is lower ranked. Should I just go to southwestern or try again next cycle earlier?

Like many, this is one of my weaker points. It's been a focus throughout my studies and I feel like I'm finally understanding and getting more accurate! I know how to recognize SA vs NA questions, but it's not making sense to me how these questions differ in the answer. For example: "Which one of the following is an assumption necessary for the critic's conclusion to be properly drawn?" I am able to bridge the gap and connect the points, which is getting me the correct answers, but I don't see the answer as a necessary. An example is PT 126 Section 1. The answer is connecting B to C. Then the conclusion is C to D. So how is B to C a necessary vs sufficient assumption? Maybe I'm getting too in my head about it and the focus on finding and filling the gap is all I need to really think about. But open to any thoughts! And not able to pay a tutor $1000 to explain this question to me 🤪

I’ve done a few prep tests, and my actual score usually ranges from 150 to 160. My blind review score, though, is around 170. When I do timed drills, especially for four-star and five-star questions, I usually get only a few right or most of them wrong. But during blind review, I get almost all of them right, or sometimes just one wrong.

At this point, I know my issue isn’t comprehension. It’s timing.

If I focus on finishing within the time limit, I make dumb mistakes. But if I focus on accuracy, I often spend too much time on certain questions. Sometimes it’s because I’m unsure about an answer that’s actually correct, and other times I just can’t finish all the questions.

Do you have any strategies? I understand that comprehension is the key to improving speed, and I’ve been working on that for months. I see improvement only in blind review or with the easier one- and two-star ones and no major improvement in how quickly I can get through the harder questions during timed sections.

Hi everyone! I have made some progress on my LSAT score. I have been scoring low 160 and then high 160 or over 170 in the blind review. Any tips on closing this gap? The fundamentals are there it seems but the timing gets me I guess.

I am a visual learner and I am really struggling on how to study for the LSAT. I'm usually a flashcard person but I've been told that's not a good way to study for this test. I have looked on youtube, tiktok, chatgbt, I can't find any advice on how to approach studying for the LSAT as a visual learner. Anyone have any tips or tricks?

Hey guys!! I'm looking for a study buddy/ accountability partner. I'm taking the LSAT in October and trying to apply to TTU law. I hope all of you guys get a 175 or higher!!!

Hi,

I'm located in MD. I just started studying for the LSAT and would love to start a virtual study group if anyone is interested.

Thanks

Hi! My question is about the Question #5 on Skill Builder - Negation 3 in the Foundations module----

The original sentence is: "Chess is the most appropriate analogy to reporting on political campaigns."

I understand that a proper negation would be something like: "Either something else is a more appropriate analogy for reporting on political campaigns than chess is, or something else ties with chess as being the most appropriate." or "It is not the case that chess is the most appropriate analogy to reporting on political campaigns."

However, I was wondering why wouldn't a simpler negation like "Chess is not the most appropriate analogy to reporting on political campaigns" be sufficient? Is there a meaningful difference between the two, or do they functionally mean the same thing in formal logic?

Thank you so much for your time and help!

Are the analytics that prioritize by tags made only from data from PTs, not including drills or sections? I think it would be nice to see the analytics that include how I did at least in timed sections if not timed drills in addition to the PTs cause I don't really want to be taking a PT all the time to see which areas I should try to focus more of my attention on.

If these are really only made with solely PT data, I feel like the lack of PTs I've taken so far is skewing my analytics. However, I don't want to be blazing through all of the PTs and burn out mentally to get a better sample of how I'm doing.

The analytics feature is super cool and useful for sure, but I think it would be a nice feature to at least add a filter where I could toggle to add more data into these analytics with questions from drills/sections if I wanted to!

I often click on the "high priority" question types for logical reasoning, and I'll do a drill of maybe 10 "Must be true" questions, but the system doesn't include any of my drilled questions into the data for how I am performing on those questions. This leaves me a little confused about what the "personalized drilling" is doing if it is not connected to analytics. I'm using new 7sage if that helps.

I just got done taking the LSAT at an in person test center and it was so loud. I had the headphones on but the proctors sat on the other side of a glass window talking about their lives almost the entire test so loudly that I could barely think. I took the test at a center because of the horror stories I've heard of online tests. If I knew it was going to be so loud I would have just taken it at home and asked my family to get out of the house for two hours. If I file a complaint do I have a chance at getting this score canceled and getting a retake? Or am I being ridiculous here?

hey there im new one here if there's an actve group on whatsapp or instagram could you please share the invite link THANK YOU

Hi! I found that I am very weak in the more difficult questions involving conditional and casual reasoning. Where can I look for study material/ how can I improve my understanding to get more effective at answering these question types?

Hi all! I’ve noticed a pattern while studying LR — it’s not specific question types that trip me up, but rather the hardest questions at the end of the section (usually the last 6–8). I tend to get those wrong, even when I do really well on the earlier ones. Any tips on how to get better at those tough, high-difficulty questions? Would love to hear what worked for you.

As the title implies, I don't really train RC that much, I've been focusing on LR in order to get my average down to ~ -5, and hopefully -4, before August test, but I rally haven't drilled RC much, maybe 1 passage for every 40 LR questions. RC is much harder to improve on for some, and I was so tunnel visioned on trying to improve my LR, that I think my RC average of ~6.5 has only consistently gotten worse, with my worst preformance being over these past 2 days, when drilling a couple of spotlight 1 star passages I've gotten 4 or 5 wrong on each. Maybe Im just really bad at spotlight, as it is my worst passage, but I keep being shocked by the results of the passage, seeing ive gotten almost all wrong on a 1 star. Any tips?