Hey guys,

One of the sections I struggle the most on is reading comprehension, and from what I read online, the best way to improve is to simply read more.

I am looking for sources of reading material that would strengthen my reading comprehension skills and expose me to the type of reading that I would be seeing in the LSAT. Some of the sources mentioned online were the economist, wall street journal, and published articles/papers from the top 3 law schools.

Any idea if reading material from these sources actually helps or if there are other useful sources out there?

Thank you!

Hi 7Sage,

I am proud to announce my free LR tutoring series!

You're probably asking, who the heck are you and what's with the this tutoring series ?. Let me preface this by saying I AM NOT AN EXPERT. However I recently scored a 168 on the January LSAT, and have been tutoring for a few months, and studying for over 18 months. I started at a 140 diagnostic, I went through Powerscore, The Loophole, The LSAT Trainer. Scrounged the internet for any advice I could find, spent hours on YouTube watching explanation videos only to end up watching "Funny Pet Videos". What I'm getting at is I had to fight my way to a 168. And throughout my journey, I developed a process that allowed me, and those I tutor to to tackle this blasted exam.

This is the main purpose for this series, the LSAT doesn't have to be as hard as it's made out to be, everyone learns differently so my goal is to bring a new perspective and clarity to anyone struggling to achieve their goal. Oh and did I mention it's free! Don't be shy, all skill ranges are welcome there is something for everyone in this series.

We will be following the schedule below, (This is a working list, topics may be added depending on various factors) if you have any questions don't hesitate to PM me.

All Sessions will be held at 7pm EST

2/25 - LSAT Language/ & Vocabulary

2/28 - Flaws Pt 1

3/2 - Flaws Pt 2

3/4 - Conditionals

3/7 - Powerful vs Provable

3/9 - Must be True

3/14 - Strengthen

3/16 - Sufficient Assumption

3/17 - General Questions (Ask me anything)

3/18 - Weaken

3/21 - Necessary Assumption

3/23 - Most Strongly Supported

3/25 - Qualifiers

3/28 - Wrong Answers

We will be using PT's 19 - 25 for live examples.

Topic: LR Series Zoom Meeting

Join Zoom Meeting

https://us02web.zoom.us/j/4630306071?pwd=ZVRUV1FNSTFiNkZJRnBzYmN5YXUrUT09

Meeting ID: 463 030 6071

Passcode: x4w3Zj

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!

Reading comprehension has shown to be my weakest section, and I just cant finish all of the passages and questions within the 35 minutes. I am registered for the April test so I would really like to become more consistent and feel more confident going into RC, any suggestions?

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've been PTing tests in the 20's and 30's because I've done PT's in the 50's and 60's already. However after getting back to practicing in the 50's my score tanked. In the 20's and 30'Ss I am able to score -5/-6 in RC but I've gotten so many more wrong in the harder RC. Anyone deal with this and found a way to overcome? LMK. Thanks!

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 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:

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!

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.

Based on my understanding of the stimulus, the flaw is that the author is assuming that what was true in the past (CPUE is constant= X number of sharks) is still true in the present (because CPUE has remained constant, we must still have X number of sharks).

From an abstract point, in order to weaken this we must say that something that could potentially change the conclusion has occurred in the present.

With that in mind, I narrowed down my answers to D and E. They both talk about a change. However, I really struggled to see which of those two changes could potentially change the conclusion in the present.

I would greatly appreciate any feedback on my train of thought as was as explaining why E is a better choice over D.

Thanks in advance!

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.

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.

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!

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.

Hey 7Sagers,

Here's the official February 2021 LSAT-Flex Discussion Thread.

**Please keep all discussions of the February 2021 LSAT-Flex here!**(/red)

Rules:

❌ You can't discuss specific questions. 🙅‍♂️

You CANNOT say things such as the following:

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

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 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

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?

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..?

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**