Folks,

I'm at the point where I understand the RC...I'm not doing too bad at -4 or -5 if I have 40-44 minutes. But unfortunately we only get 35 minutes, so my question is: How do I close this gap?

When I do the timed version, I either relax and miss a whole passage or rush and miss 10-13...that's a pretty big delta.

Anyone got any advice?

Hi folks

Does anyone have any tips for reading in a more focused manner on a computer screen for RC passages? Does anyone track the lines with their finger on the screen? Any idea if that should be a problem for during the actual exam?

Any tips would be much appreciated!

RC success is a function of knowing what to read for and a healthy balance of focus and confidence. Without confidence, it is hard to really focus. Knowing what to read for helps to build confidence, which increases your willingness and ability to focus.

I will briefly discuss how you can practice knowing what to read for below. This is difficult at first, but gets easier with repetition- the more you do it, the faster and more accurate you become.

First, why RC? Why does LSAC care to test us on RC and what do they really want us to do?

In law school, we will be reading tons of cases written by judges. It will be our job to discern the main point of the case, determine what the judge really thinks, and how they build their argument. Once we have this understanding, we can (with the help and insights of professors) analyze the strength of the argument and think about its implications.

The LSAT tests our ability to identify the main point or thrust of an argument, discern the authors’s view, and be able to see the author’s logical progression to the main point or conclusion, in other words to map the blueprint of the argument.

The questions are almost all based around these elements. By reading with the intent of figuring these things out before the questions, the questions fly by. This is analogous to making up front inferences during Logic Games.

RC is hard because we are not used to reading and thinking in this manner. Most of the things we read, we just skim.

So here is a template to fill out when you read RC. Filling this out yourself will get you in the habit of consciously thinking about the things LSAC requires of you. The more you do this, the better your ability will become. After writing these things out many times, you will eventually be able to hold these elements in your mind. This is how comfort, speed, and accuracy is built. So focus on filling this template out untimed at first. Then hit the questions. During the questions, you will find that you have thought about many of the concepts asked if you already.

So here is the template:

Paragraph #1 Low Resolution Summary:

Author’s separate paragraphs to signal a shift in ideas. Each paragraph is the reporting of a different idea. We want to identify what that idea is.

We are looking to summarize the takeaway from the paragraph. This will show us 3 or 4 different ideas. Then we take these ideas and examine how they relate. The relationships of the paragraphs come together to allow us to see the takeaway of the whole thing.

P2:

P3:

P4:

Main Point? - What does the author want you to take away from this? What are they trying to argue, show, or tell you about?

Author’s tone? - Where do they show their opinion and what is it? Pay close attention to when the author is speaking versus when they are telling you about the opinions of others. Do not conflate the 2!

Argument Structure?-

How does each paragraph relate to one another? Use your low res summaries to tell a story. For example: Paragraph 1 tells us about a strange phenomenon, Paragraph 2 then gives us Jones explanation for the phenomenon, Paragraph 3 introduces Kate and she offers a different explanation for the phenomenon, Paragraph 4 ends with the author telling us why they think Kate’s explanation is better than Jones’.

Analyzing an RC passage and doing this is time consuming and even draining- for harder passages it will take me sometimes 1.5 hours to fully feel like I have a full understanding of the passage. This is normal, take your time and shoot for quality of training over quantity. Knowing deep down that you have a true understanding of the passage is how you develop confidence! Like I said earlier, this process will start out slow and painful, but it will pay off if you stick with it.

Once you have completed the template, and feel comfortable with it, you are ready to hit the questions.

More so than LR, you need to take your time to fully understand the question stems, or what is being asked if you. For example, in LR a stem may ask you which AC most strengthens the argument. You can read this and know your task in about 2 seconds because you have seen hundreds of these. However, an RC stem is more likely to be unique, specific, and its meaning may turn on a single word. So it is important to take your time with stems.

Use Pre Phrasing! After reading the stem, answer the question in your own words. Think about what a credited answer choice might be. For example, if the question asks you what an author would most likely agree with, think about what you know about the author’s opinion. This type of conscious thought before looking at answer choices will make you less prone to traps and more efficient. It also forces you to full understand the question stem. I found that many of my mistakes were a product of not understanding the task at hand.

Steps:

1.Fill out template untimed (this will take forever at first)

2. Analyze the questions. Read the stem and pre phrase before looking at answer choices. Write out justifications for every answer choice, right or wrong.

3. Take a break, reset your brain, repeat

4. Check answers/grade

5. Over time this will become easier and you can try doing 2 passages in one sitting

6. Once you can do 2 passages in one sitting and go -1 or -0 per passage, you are ready to add in timing

7. Complete a 35 minute strictly timed RC section. Pick the 2 passages you found most difficult and complete the template and question justifications, untimed.

8. Keep an excel sheet tracking your results, timing, and takeaways. Before you take a timed section, revisit this sheet and set intentions/ goals going into the section.

Hey everyone,

My PT scores have been varying wildly from low 160s to low 170s, with pretty much all of the variation coming from RC. I consistently get between -2 to -4 on LG and LR, but my RC scores vary from -2 to -10. It seems to have less to do with the question types and more to do with if I happen to be able to retain focus while reading the passages (which appears almost arbitrary). If anybody has any advice about how they stay focused on the passages while reading, I'd be grateful. I try to convince my brain I'm interested in the topics and actively work on a low res summary, but it seems to be hit or mess on whether it's successful.

So, I've always gone about LR in a kind of unstructured way, I've never formally studied for it and reliably go about -2 to -4 since my diagnostic. I don't actively think about LR in a technical way, like trying to identifying premises and conclusions, highlighting stuff, mapping out lawgic, thinking about trigger words and question types etc. I've continued to depend on a formless sort of instinct for what is right and wrong. I'm sure some of these considerations operate at the back of my mind, but it's nothing deliberate. Although this has served me well until now, as the test approaches I feel doubts about the sustainability of this approach. I feel like even if a resource doesn't improve my scoring range, devoting some time to seriously studying LR would salve my fears and firm up my confidence for the test.

I have Powerscore, the Trainer and naturally 7Sage. What I'm curious about is the Loophole. Do you guy's think it's worth buying that getting through before the November LSAT in my situation? Or any other resource with the Nov test in mind? LG is still my weakest section and I've been grinding it for the past month.

Hi ... I need more practice with labeling. Where can I get more problem since I have gone thru the 4 problem sets.

I'm having trouble with these type of logical translation and mapping questions - could someone map out the conditional logic of the stimulus and how the AC fits as the NA?

#help

For the SA and PSA questions, I'm getting absolutely destroyed on the tougher ones. I think it is because I am not identifying the stimulus fast enough and missing the small details that get overlooked. Should I just map it out and understand how to piece together the stimulus first and take my time to decipher it and then answer the question, or should I be just mapping it out in my head and getting better with doing it that way? Anyone got any good strategies they can share? Thank you so much.

Hi everyone!

Thank you for reaching out after my last post, it was incredibly helpful! I was wondering if anyone had advice for how to become more fluent in logic? I feel like I'm spending a lot of time thinking it over instead of it being natural. Did flashcards help anyone? Or was it more just heavy repetition of logical reasoning and then intense blind review? Thank you!

I've browsed through some discussion forums on this passage, but wanted to see if my overall conditional logic thinking was correct. #help

Stim: Fear of retaliation --> deterrence

A) deterrence --> fear of retaliation (switches the logic)

B ) /fear --> deterrence (which also just makes no common sense)

C) deterrence --> fear of retaliation

D) I couldn't figure out a rough logic translation but the overall thought process tracked with that in the stimulus

E) deterrence --> need the best retaliation (which is just irrelevant)

I know this is a very basic necessary/sufficient question but could someone validate the way I diagramed the logic?

Stim:

Professor: both O parents --> only O child

Student: not [both O parents --> only O child], but the student switched the professor's statement around to mean [only O child --> both O parents]. So given his logic, /both O parents --> /only O child (since he's Type B).

ACs:

A) only O child --> both O parents

B) both O parents --> /type B child

C) both B parents --> only O children

D) irrelevant

E) both B parents --> type B children

#help

Hi,

When I did this question, I got stuck between B and D, even after I used the negation technique for assumption questions. Why exactly is D here wrong?

For context, I thought D could be an answer too because when voters are paying enough attention to make informed decisions, then they don't need the press to cover substantial policy issues for them, and thus then they don't need the campaign advisors to stay out of the limelight.

Can someone please explain how we arrive at answer choice D from the stimulus?

If I understand correctly, not routinely unpunished (/RU) equates to sometimes unpunished.

We get /RU by negating the chain presented in the stimulus which is /CH->MG->/RU

From there the author shifts from "routinely" (/RU) to "never" (/U).

So why does the correct answer say confuses "routinely" with "sometimes"? Since the conclusion says never unpunished, I figured it would be confuses "never" with "routine" or "sometimes."

JY's video explanation offers no insight here, but I'll post the link anyways.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-41-section-1-question-22/

Hey everyone!

In conditional-heavy games, when a question stem introduces a new temporary conditional, I have trouble linking this to the master chain, especially if it's already completed.

Anyone know any good video lessons or resources that could help me out with this?

Thanks!

Sorry if this is a stupid question...

In PT I recently switched to using both a blue pilot gel pen and a mechanical pencil for diagrams. I find this works so much better than just pen or just pencil because it allows me to clearly mark the universal rules and main game board and then use the pencil to 'write over' the main board as i go, erasing with each question as needed.

This silly little change has got me down to -2/-4 territory on LG far more consistently, mainly because of the time savings and easy visual recognitions. However, it just now occurred to me i may not be allowed both a pen and a pencil in the test :( Any insights?

Any advice/tips are welcomed. I am trying to find a schedule that will stick, so I'm not making up things as I go and I'm getting the most out of my study time. What works best for you guys? Thanks a lot!

How important is it to get very good at the miscellaneous games, the games that are traditionally the final game and a lot tougher? Is it worth time foolproofing them?

Hello, I'm struggling with understanding Hybrid games. I have a solid foundation on ordering and grouping but for some reason hybrid is tough. Are there any tutors that specialize in Hybrid games?

#help

Hi everyone! I have 2 questions.

1st. In logical reasoning, when the question stem asks for the main point, is that slightly different then it asking for the conclusion? I watched an explanation video for a main point, the question stem said “Which one of the following states the main point of the argument?” And JY said that the main point questions are looking for a summary of the conclusion. Rather, I notice when the question stem ask for us to state the conclusion it will be a more “word-for-word” explicit answer, leaning away from a summary type answer. Is this correct? Or does it depend on other factors?

2nd. Okay. Another question. Is not always the same as sometimes in logic?

Thank you so much.

I look forward to the #help!

I see that the conclusion is based on a resolve the paradox.

But I find that unfair for a MC question because resolving something does not make it the conclusion of a paragraph.

Example:

If I make a paragraph on what really went down on Roswell, the point is asking all the crazy thing. The main summary would be “something weird happened that caused people to look into”.

If I give explanations (aliens, CIA, time travelers, big foot) that doesn’t justify it to say that’s the conclusion. I would say “ummm no, this just means reasons for what is it”. Reasons for what? The mystery (HENCE THE CONCLUSION)

Are resolving paradox's conclusions now for modern LSAT?

The explanatory video glosses over this very quickly. Why is it just assumed that H and M must not be connected? Does it have something to do with the HT not-block?

Any help appreciated; thanks!

Admin note: edited title; please use the format of "PT#.S#.Q# - [brief description]"

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-40-section-2-game-3/

Hi you legends,

Backstory: Cold diagnostic 161 in April. Then my dad almost died of a heart attack. Fortunately he made it through, but I spent May-Aug caring for him/my mom, working full-time, and studying on the side.

Did CC. Got down to -1/3 on LR, -1/2 on RC. Good enough there. Taken 6 PTs so far, have been scoring 168/9.

Sat the Aug LSAT bc in the haze of everything w my dad I forgot to cancel; scored a 165-- low for me.

LG is the problem. I started at like -11, did some of the early problem sets and then sets from PTs 40-63. Got it down to a pretty regular -4. But now things are trending in the wrong direction. For the past 5-10 sets, have been missing more questions... like back up to -7, not finishing sets on time, etc.

A few questions:

What timing strategies do you all use for Logic Games? Unlike RC and LR, I never finish sets early, and rarely even finish with enough time not to have to guess on the last (or, more recently, last 3-4) questions.

Are the LG in the 60s harder, and that's why I'm battling?

Is my regression burnout? (Caring for a sick parent + working more than full time + finishing a book with an academic press + studying for the LSAT has obviously made for quite the year.)

Did anyone have any experience with excellent LG tutoring? I am in my 30s/unmarried so obviously paying for this ~jOuRnEy~ myself, but at this point, I'd be willing to shell out maybe $200 for some excellent private tutoring that really brings my LG score consistently into the -3 range.

Thanks for all your feedback. 7sagers are the sole positive thing about this whole LSAT trash!

Any tips for MSS/Inference questions for RC please.

Especially, when there is a Passage A and Passage B.

Thank you.

I know this question may sound confusing but Im having trouble with knowing the difference with cbt vs mbt questions. When ever I do a could be true question I have a hard time finding my answer because I would mix it up MBT answers and the same for MBT answers I mix them with CBT answers. How can I improve on this to increase my score?

As the October test is fast approaching, I have been focusing on what has now become my weakest section, reading comprehension. I miss at best -9 questions, and usually do not finish within the time restraints or end up overlooking details because I am rushing. I would like to reduce this number to at least -7, preferably -5. Does anyone have any tried and true techniques they use tackle the passages? I tried focusing on three passages, but I have seen very inconsistent results with that method (I did score 21/27 one time, probably lucky!)