Hi all, I'm preparing for January and trying to tighten up my worst section, LG. My method has been to take 2 fresh LG sections a day, but I've almost exhausted all the core curriculum LG sections. I've been stagnating at around -4 for a few weeks, though in the last week my scores have been pretty erratic (-1 and -9). I'm worried that I'm wasting fresh sections, especially since it's possible I might be retaking in February or April. I'm also wondering what alternative strategies might be more effective at raising my score. I especially struggle with grouping/in out games. Thanks!

Hello everyone, I am struggling to get faster on the logical reasoning section. I usually get to question 16 and guess on the rest of them under timed conditions.

I usually miss like -2 on the 16 that I do answer, and maybe get like 1-2 from guessing C on the ones I don't get too.

I would really like to get to at least question 20. Any tips on how to improve speed for LR?

I have been having issues with missing out on these questions lately, and I am not sure why---I used to be able to get them immediately. Do such questions generally include "causality" in the conclusion and as a result, one is able to know that in all likelihood, it is a correlation-causation flaw? Sorry for the stupid question (I went back to look at the causation lessons, but am still somewhat confused).

Thank you so much!

For Parallel Flaw/ Parallel MOR questions, do you move on after reading (what you believe) to be the CAC? Doing this has saved me massive time in some instances, but in others I miss a slight missing parallel that would have been obvious had I read another AC (the one I chose was missing a “can”, etc). I often make a local decision that changes for every parallel question, but I want to be more systematic about this.

Curious to hear how your timing is on Parallel questions!

I'm a bit confused about the language in the stimulus. If the college was using Hall Dining Services "until this past year," wouldn't that mean their current food vender was Hall Dining Services?

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-80-section-4-question-11/

Hi all,

I need some help with this question. i watched and read the explanations, and while i now understand how to eliminate the other choices, i still don't quite get why answer C is the necessary assumption. Here's how i broke down the passage --

Context: Some nuclear reactors are in geologically quiet region, which only has minor faults and lives far away from plates.

Premise: no minor fault in this region produces earthquake more than once in any 100000 year period. That means there is at least a 100000 year waiting period between earthquakes.

Conclusion: in this region, potential nuclear sites near a fault that produced an earthquake in living memory are least likely to be struck.

So i imagine that X is a nuclear site in a quiet region near a minor fault that produced an earthquake in living memory, say 100 years. From the premise, X will not be struck by another earthquake for at least 99900 years. That's pretty unlikely. But i need to compare it to other sites, so this is where the necessary assumptions come.

C: in this region, every potential nuclear site is near 1 or more minor fault.

The negation test means there is a nuclear site Y in this region that's not near any minor fault. But the passage says nothing about the frequency of earthquakes in areas without minor faults. For instance, if Y's area has earthquakes every year, even though there are no faults, X would be less likely to be struck than Y. But that means the conclusion still holds, failing the negation test.

Am i wrongly using the negation test for this question? Hopefully someone can explain my error here. Thanks a lot.

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-17-section-2-question-21/

After reading the stimulus, I thought one reason why the foundation decided not to rebuild the original organ was perhaps it would cause damage to the other parts of the church. I am just very confused as to why D is incorrect; if the design of the organ had been modified several times before it was destroyed, couldn't that be a potential reason why the foundation decided not to rebuild it? because it could not match the original?

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-80-section-4-question-13/

Hello! I am taking the Jan 2021 Flex, and have been studying for awhile now. I am aiming to get into the low 170s, but consistently score within the 165-167 range. The biggest reason for this is because of my logical reasoning. I have gone through the 7sage curriculum several times, and am still having trouble on LR. I don't have an issue completing it on time, but rather identifying the right answer within two or three answers left after elimination. Does anyone have any tips on what else I can do to improve it? Thanks in advance!

As always mentioned in this discussion forum, the first 10 questions of the LR section are usually the easiest. I get to the last 5-10 and start really struggling. I am not sure if it is fatigue or difficulty of the questions. Any tips on this? I have seen that people say to follow your gut on the first 10 so you have more time with the last questions.

Why is D incorrect? Can't it indicate the footprints were incomplete?

I dont know how to get faster. I've been doing RC practice for so long and I cant get faster. I easily do LG and LR on time but not RC, any tips on how to get faster that you did that worked for you? Skipping words made me do worse.

I'm okay with RC, and I know that my LG will improve with practice, but I've really been struggling with improving my Logical Reasoning section.

Do any of you who have had success with that section have any advice?

Does anyone have tips on how to tackle must be true questions when there is percentages/numbers involve because I'm having a hard time understanding why D is right

I am not understanding what answer choice D is saying. Can someone please explain it to me?

Hey all!

I got this question right almost immediately during timed, and during BR I changed it to C because I doubted myself.

I used to have a tendency to get rid of answer choices like A that use 'other' examples because I would immediately see them and think they were irrelevant. However, I am now beginning to notice myself improving at picking up on this subtle nuances in LR and just wanted to clarify if my reasons are correct for keeping it.

The reason I selected AC A is because it showed that at other companies when the cause isn't there (companies that don't offer free shipping), the effect isn't there (mail orders decreasing); therefore strengthening the causal link between these two factors which in turn strengthens our conclusion.

From a more broad perspective; I understand that everything in LR sort of depends on the situation, but generally when AC's refer to corroborating data (ie: using other - seemingly random - scenarios or situations to strengthen or weaken something) are they only relevant when they do something deliberate like that to strengthen the causal or correlative relationship? (Ie: by affirming that it's possible for something to happen because it happens somewhere else)

One last question: for AC C, I realize it is wrong because it reiterates something that we are trying to confirm. However, I was wondering if it would still be wrong even if it said something that didn't reiterate but just affirmed another correlation. (ie: 'the NUMBER of sales have increased since the policy change')

I guess what I'm asking is if an answer just affirms that another correlation happens, does this strengthen an argument (even a little?) my opinion would be know because we are trying to prove causation and what would a bunch of random correlations tell us, but please correct me if I'm wrong!

Sorry if anything was worded weirdly lol I was sort of figuring everything out in my head as I was typing.

Thanks for any help with this!

Admin Note:* https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-66-section-4-question-12/

From the bottom of my heart, I want to thank 7sage and everyone on these forums for being so helpful, inclusive, and encouraging. Especially my awesome tutor @Sami, and my intelligent and hard working study buddies @DINOSAUR and @jmarmaduke96.

This test was a huge struggle for me, and studying for it made me confront weaknesses in myself that I honestly didn't want to. I wish I could tell you that this test was easy, but it wasn't. There was no gradual improvement, it was more like a zig zag of ups and downs. But if your diagnostic was in the 130s like mine, I want to tell you that it's possible to increase your score.

Could someone explain exactly what L is doing in response to S's argument? I thought both were interpreting access in different ways, for S it was about access to high tech care and for L it was about access to basic healthcare. I just feel that there is some sort of disjoint between the two arguments; does L even address S's argument at all?

Hi All,

Has anyone recently taken PT 79? I found the RC to be incredibly difficult, I basically ran out of time on the last passage. Has anyone has a similar experience? I am normally -3/-4 on RC but this was extremely discouraging.

Why is the administrator's argument weak? Is it because she is trying to base her conclusion (pilots make mistakes in 1 in 2 million flight landings) on the flight reports and it's not as precise as actual footage of the flights? (air traffic control tapes?)

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-80-section-1-question-16/

LSAC hasn't sent out options for scheduling your time slot for Jan LSAT-flex, right? I remember the September LSAT I took, I'd received scheduling options by the 15th-- Just wanna make sure I'm not missing something.

I've found that the games I struggle with most consistently involve conditional logic. I don't have any trouble understanding the logical relations themselves, but the complexity of the rules gets me very confused. For example, when a rule says something like, if A is before B, then C is before D. An example of a game that gives me trouble is PT78.S2.G3: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-78-section-2-game-3/

Does anyone have any advice on how to approach these games?

#help why is the answer A and not E?

Why is the answer B and not C?

Sorry, I don't know where to find the videos for this. Or is there a specific space on this site with videos of students completing RC passages? I'm looking for some examples of low resolution summarizing or notetaking.

I am having trouble with consistency in LR sections. Some days I will take a PT and go -3 to -5 on the LR sections, and other times (like today PT 84 section 2) I will get -12... I am wondering if anyone has figured out a method that helped them do constantly well in LR.

#help