With the digital format, what are your strategies for taking notes or highlighting for the RC section. I have been trying to write down the parts that I think are the main points or a word or two for support but it feels like I am wasting time and its taking too long. I'd like to hear other's strategies to try out.

I thought I had a good handle on quantifiers until now lol I can't understand how C and D in structure are different, so I was stuck between the two. Help would be appreciated on this question.

Thanks!

Hey guys,

I was wondering if there was a way I could take a 4-section LSAT, see what my grade would be for that, and also see what my grade would be if it were a flex. I would like to take the 4-section test to increase my exposure and test endurance and also because the August LSAT is a 4-section test.

On a side note, for someone who tends to do relatively well on logical reasoning, isn't having one less LR section a disadvantage? Pre-covid, LR was 50% of the grade and now it is only 1/3. Did they make up for that in some manner or does LR now just simply determine a smaller chunk of the grade?

Thank you!

Would you classify the stimulus as a set of premises or an argument?

I am looking for ways to better BR RC. Typically when I BR RC I try to write a low-res summary for each paragraph, then construct a MP and tone/attitude of the author for each passage. Sometimes I go through the passage and highlight authors ideas versus ideas of others. RC is by far my worst section on the LSAT. I have ranged from -8 to a disastrous -14 on my last PT. When I BR, I usually go -2 or 3. My main issue when BRing RC is that I lose interest in the passage, and its super frustrating spending 45 minutes to an hour on one passage when BRing.

I am wondering if anyone has any tips for more efficiently BRing RC? As I mentioned, RC is my weakest section, and any tips on how to improve on BR or timed passages would be greatly appreciated.

I was putting together a list of rules of thumb to remember when answering LG questions and I thought I'd share. I'd love to hear what others use! I typically try to remember the following:

----> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1BP1NnndhE5i6cbuF2GLPetUgzwtr3rUaDfEZuaIJXhE/edit#gid=0

The google sheet I made has every Core curriculum game in it(I believe) and broken down by color for each question type, plus a few games along the way I kept to keep my skills fresh(to the right). Once I started to keep track of the questions and what I did wrong, for example if I missed an inference I would write down the game and what I did wrong and also the inference that I missed, the number of questions I miss dramatically decreased.

I would mark down every game that I had the slightest struggle with or that I did not feel 100% comfortable with. I would also color code the games that I got a question wrong with or went over by 0:45 (red) plus I'd note if it was one question, setup or just slow overall.

I would code the ones I got correct and undertime but did not feel comfortable yellow.

I would code the one I got correct, undertime, and feel comfortable green.

On the sheets if you scroll down you will find the CC games by question type. If you scroll to the right you will see the games from actual exams and games from 1-35. I left some games here to show you how I coded them and put them in descending order, I deleted a bunch because I had lots of inner dialog that was not PG rated to help remember certain things, but the categories are there and so is the color coordination of the ones I got wrong.

I would appreciate that everyone who wants to use it just copy it to there drive to start working on personalizing it so it does not mess up the original.

I also made a list of the LR questions that I would use to keep notes about certain styles(someone deleted my notes working on getting them back) and what to look for on those particular style questions along with a color code system of priority and difficulty.

I also would put words I came across studying that I did not know at the bottom with their definitions.

Lastly there might be a few swear words I did not get rid of...

I hope people find this as useful as I did and kick the LSAT's ASS!

edit:

Where are you at -4? (-15where I started?)

I would keep track of every single game that gave you any sorts of trouble and also note what it was that gave you the trouble: setup, inference, rule, question, ect...

I would start with the games you are somewhat good at I would assume sequencing since that is the common one people grasp first, and I would get these games down then move to the next 'pure' form of a game grouping pure, in/out basic. And work on the fundamentals of those then once you feel comfortable with those branch out on what ever is your worst/give you the most trouble.

Have to know when rules trigger versus when they don't and the 4 groups.

Sufficient

Necessary

Negate Sufficient

Negate Necessary

(I don't think one can go -2/-0 if they do not have a strong grasp of this).

--I would try and get comfortable with as many game types as possible before PT'n because fresh PT's are a non renewable resource. However that said, if you plan on taking the exam in a few months and know you wont take any exam after, then I would start in the 60's. and then jump to the 70's once I start to get comfortable with the LSAT jump to the 80s.

--Drilling: I would do about 4 games per day everyday. I would not recommend too many more than that because then its likely we just burn up games. At first I would do 2 new games from PT 1-35 and as I got closer to -0 around --4/6ish (depending on score goal & time frame)I would start PTing

--Do not be afraid of redoing games you've done before, as long as you do not specifically remember the inferences and answer choices its okay to keep redoing the games. if you do happen to remember the AC's put that in a new category on the google sheet or color code it so you know to come back. I have learned that the LSAT implies the same tricks 95% of the time and once you have the bones of the structure you can build any style structure.

----timing help make many if not all of the critical inferences up front(try to) or at least be aware of them if they need to map them out for a question. Learning when to split I think is more of an art form I normally stick with the general rule less, game boards than questions excluding the acceptable situation question. Tune your approach to you, you know yourself the best. I normally do a partial spilt on pure grouping because I personally hate them more than any other game type.

-- super important to combine rules into chains and see what comes from that, always push the new rules up to the old rules and see if any inferences drop out.

---Keep track of the words that indicate different style games such as:

--sequencing will normally use words like--before, after, ahead, behind, IN front of, between; these normally indicate sequencing. Selecting, placing, combining, are going to be grouping games.

--Paring groups Xs & Ys together is likely going to be a double layer sequencing. matching witnesses to police interviewers or another dreadful one books to bookshelves.

--only having two categories is going to be in/out EX. I have 2 floors and I have to select which employees are going to be on which. Or the once dreadful (some will get it) assigning photographers to two different schools, or doctors to 2 different hospitals. In out is a grouping game, however it is a grouping game with only 2 groups. A common inference in this style game is once one category is full then all the other pieces have to go into the other category and the common correct ACs in the piece that makes one category too full, or a game piece always has to be in the same category.

---grouping---placing pieces into categories EX bones to time periods

---once you are able to identify the games quickly it allows you to setup the game board fast and in turn makes you faster in LG.

---keep going back to old games that gave you trouble.

--start watching/tracking question types that you should look at all the answer choices before starting to eliminate ACs because many times its a super obvious AC. or look for ACs that should be tried first you do not need to eliminate A first and so on eliminate (or try to) pick ones that look suspicious. EX on sequencing a common trick they like to employ wrong ACs is by having followers in the leader spots and the leaders in follower spots many sequencing questions/games employ this and it is easy to spot once you're made aware and this increase the chance of a correct answer and the speed at which you can get through questions.

grouping they like to ask which piece must be in or must be out, is easy when you know the

A----->/B (both cannot be in)but they can both be out --fail sufficient rule falls away

A/---->B( both can be in) but both cannot be out.

A(---)B forever together

A(---)/B forever apart

((((if this does not make sense keep going through the CC or go back to the CC)))))

---if you get to a game and the setup is giving you trouble Skip the game. this is one of the best lessons I have learned. SKIP SKIP SKIP move on get the low hanging fruit then come back and you'll be more relaxed and see the game from 'fresh' eyes. especially when first starting out because you'll be slower generally.

--- do not (force yourself) to not let the past question affect the next question and do not let the last game effect the next game. chances are if you struggle with the game many other people will too, and the other games will make up for that or the curve will.

--Be honest with yourself, do not give yourself little cheats here or there because those will be crutches and you won't get those on the exam this is true when drilling in a less extent but this is mandatory when practice testing.

--Blind review is the biggest advantage on the LSAT you can give yourself. take it just as serious you are taking the actual exam, this is where you will notice (if done properly) mistakes that you make undertime make sure to keep track of them so you can work on them and not repeat them. this is true for every section of the exam.

--I have more of a math oriented brain so LG came way easier than RC. that being said find things to do in the off time to increase you analytical skills: sudoku, rush hour,(try and get the odd color block out through a particular spot by moving all the other blocks around it)apps/games order/number sequences, of shape matching/finding the similarities between things in pictures or words. Doing these style games will workout the part of the brain LG calls on. I found these games to be super fun when I was a kid, maybe that is why I like LG.

---Positive Attitude is key. If you go into games with 'ughh this sucks' or 'ill never get this' 1) it'll make studying that much worse. 2) you will start making stupid mistakes and the cycle will repeat.

---Burnout is real, take breaks when needed. I learned a panful lesson on this, 2 hours of quality studying beat 6 hours of mediocre studying---many hours wasted, and it just compounds on itself.

You got this I believe it, you have already taken the initiative and spent the money, You can do it!

-Kole

Am I the only one who scores significantly better when I take the PT on paper vs the online version?! I can take the PT on paper and score 25-27/27 on RC sections but seriously struggle to hit 20/27 on the online versions on Lawhub, sometimes its even lower. It's not that I'm doing more recent or older tests on paper vs online either... I literally just STRUGGLE with scrolling to see/read the reading passages online and HATE that I cannot notate like I normally do. Trying to to highlight or underline online is hit or miss because half the time it underlines the words below or above where I want it to and I AM FRUSTRATED. Does anyone have any tips?? I know I could try taking notes on scrap paper but I feel like that wastes precious seconds and is just distracting. I feel like the online version is discriminating against us old-school folks who prefer to read and write on REAL books/notes vs virtual/online texts.

I've taken the LSAT once so far and scored (what I estimate to be) a -3. On PTs, I generally get anywhere from -1 to -5, with an average of -4 in a normal section. There is a lot of fluctuation is my LG performance, depending on the section.

I've been doing games for a long time now. I started with the PowerScore LG bible and went through that twice. Since then, I've FoolProofed a bunch of games and also drilled most of the early games (PT1-20) by game type.

I don't feel particularly weak with any of the most common games (sequencing, grouping). If I just sit through a section in BR, I can almost always get to -0 on my own. Here are my weaknesses right now:

Execution: I find that during the timed section, I sometimes let my nerves get the best of me. When I'm just reviewing, I feel like I can calmly work through a section, but during the timed run, my form just goes out the window sometimes.

Making inferences: This has to do with nerves as well. I find that I tend to rush into the questions because of a lack of confidence with making inferences up front (i.e., before starting the question).

Timing: On my actual administration, I didn't have enough time for 2 of the questions, so I had to guess them. That's how I know I lost at least two points in LG. I sometimes lose time on the easier games in a section. On some sections that are quite hard to me, I sometimes manage my time so poorly that I cannot comfortably finish all 4 games.

Weird games: I struggle with what PowerScore calls pattern games, mapping games, and, to a lesser extent (because they are so rare) circular games. I froze when I came across the Employee's Workpiece game in PT72, and I tend to have a lot of difficulty with games that have bizarre setups. And this is despite having worked through the weird games in the early PTs.

I've watched a handful of the videos in the LG section of the Core Curriculum, and I've worked through a few question sets. I've done every game in there already, and I've probably seen the explanation videos for many of the games. Is there anything special about the LG Core Curriculum that I won't get just by drilling games and watching the explanation videos for each game? Does J.Y. add anything extra in the LG Core Curriculum?

How can I best spend my time if I want to get from where I am to -0 consistently? I am scheduled for the April test, so I still have more than two months, and I feel like I definitely have plenty of time to get to -0 consistently before then, since I'm so close!

Should I just drill games, watch the explanation videos, and then FoolProof?

Were any of you stuck at the -3/-4 range before getting to -0 consistently?

I've heard many people who have gotten to -0 consistently on the games sections swear by the LG Core Curriculum, but I wonder if it would be a good investment of time for me, given my situation.

I would also appreciate any advice from you all about how I can get from where I am now to -0 consistently. I know that if I can get to -0 consistently, I will be able to score in the 170s consistently. I'd also love any advice about addressing my weaknesses mentioned above.

Hi, would really appreciate any thoughts on this question. My understanding of the stimulus is as follows:

Support NT --> /chance of elect.

Und E -->/support NT

Conclusion: Und E --> Chance of elect.

I'm not entirely sure how the AC follows from this. Thank you in advance!

Hey! I am trying out this test prep because I heard it's is really useful for building critical thinking and comprehension skills. I'm struggling with the CARS (critical reading) section on my MCAT and if anyone has advice on how to transfer these skills over to critical reading in general I would love some tips.

Just making sure I am right for the right reasons

Not being able to hear -----> Not every permutation is understandable----> Not Spoken Language completely effecient.

AC E

Sorry, this is really long, but this question has me confused. When I read the stim, I gravitate toward answer A. Then I read B and I'm confused by what it's trying to tell me.

When we remove one gland, we see calcium levels drops. So they hypothesise that this gland is responsible for raising calcium levels. But when we remove the first gland along with a second, we see that the calcium levels decrease less steeply.

I want to say that if the gland that raises calcium is not present, then the other gland that is present could cause calcium to drop because we see this happening and there is nothing there to raise it back up. And if we remove both glands and calcium levels don't drop that much, then there isn't anything else that would cause it to drop even more, so this second gland is what causes it to drop.

Are we supposed to think that because we can remove a gland that raises calcium and nothing effectively replaces that function that we can also remove a gland that decreases calcium and nothing will replace that function either?

As for the answer choices, I'm not really sure what B is tying to say to me.

C appears contradictory to the premises. If the absence of the parathyroid causes the adrenal gland to make more calcium, we wouldn't see such sharp drops without it. D is a hypothetical so that doesn't really resolve anything. E seems irrelevant.

MBT V.S. MSS

Flaw V.S. Weaken

How do you differentiate between these question types by using the question stem? Sometimes, I mistake one for the other...

Thanks in advance :)

I for some reason can see somewhat of links between things when reading a parallel question that asks to find a similar reasoning in the answer choices. But I can't diagram it for some reason. I am hoping that the premium version of 7sage will cover this obstacle, but just wanted to know a head of time if this is an issue for anyone else or more importantly is covered well in the 7sage videos/lessons?

Thank you!

I felt this exam went horribly for me. I guessed on far more questions than I am used to guessing on when taking PTs. I started with LG and was overwhelmed. This bled into my LR section where I ended up guessing on about 8 questions. Plus, I felt unsure on about 5 more questions. My last section was RC. Fourth passage was difficult and ended up guessing on about 7 questions. Even if I did get some of those questions correct, I feel that amount of uncertainty will lead to a lower score than what I earned on the Nov. LSAT.

Is this a sign that I should cancel?

Does anyone do reading comprehension passages in a specific order? If so, how do you order them? I've had success ordering the games I do in LG. I didn't know if you could do the same thing in the RC section.

I'm on my first run through the LG part of the CC. I'm having some trouble in the later stuff (In/Out with sub-categories, etc) and LG timing in general. Should I stop and make sure all of those practice sets are 100% within time, or should I finish the CC, do a PT, and see what I still need to work on?

Need to break through my mid-160s plateau in order to get at least a 170 on the April LSAT! I've been scoring -3 on LG and LR on almost every test (sometimes less on LG) but for some reason getting a range from -1 to -8 on RC. Any advice? I really don't want to have to retake in July :( My BR's are around 169-171. I know they should be higher, but if I could just get them to match my overall test score I'd be fine and never think about the LSAT again!

Basically, I am wondering whether I can still sign up for the April LSAT and have the ability not to take it.

I picked the correct answer but, just for the purpose of learning, I wanna discuss further the logical structure of (D).

Regarding the first sentence----"Depending on volume of business, either one or two or three store detectives are needed for adequate protection against shoplifting."----I have two questions:

Any help will be greatly appreciated!

Leon

Hey guys, this may have been previously covered but I am curious to hear about test day experiences in terms of signing in to ProctorU and the LSAC Hub. Did you just sign in to ProctorU and receive instructions from the test proctor before starting the exam. Does your exam start exactly at the assigned start time? I suppose just logistically how do you go about signing in to bother ProctorU and the LSAC Hub come test day and any advice for clearing out room prior to the test. Good luck everyone and thanks for any feedback!

Hey I'm trying to foolproof games 1-35 pacifico style. I stumbled upon pt. 16 game 4. This is the hardest game I've ever seen. I thought PT.12 (game 4?) the flask game was hard but this game I can't even attempt the questions.. I spent 2 hours trying to understand it. I thought my confusion was that I didn't realize odd/even alternate. Afterward I realized this.

Now I guess the fifth rule is confusing me?

low defeats higher then switch but wouldn't this revert back to the original?

Idk a lot of rambling here but feel free to tell me ur reactions to pt 16 game 4, whatever they may be...

(This is the tennis game where u switch odd & even) 5 slots)

Also, do u guys skip 5 star games when ur foolproofing and save em for later? or..?

For those who initially struggled with LR (-5-7 a section), did you get better with more exposure to the test? If not, how do you overcome a weak LR section?

How does one distinguish between some-referring to a single person option like, (some people say the LSAT is hard) vs when a author of passage use "some" to indicate another person(s)'s views in a given passage? This question is in context to ** LSAT 29 - Section 4 - Question 06**