When I am taking a timed section of LR, I am missing around 8-11 questions. This is usually due to lack of time and anxiety. I usually BR every single question, and I end up missing 3-5. I usually spend 35-70 minutes to BR an entire section. I am taking the January test, so I need to figure a way to bring my timed score down to my BR score. I am sure there have been more people in my boat, so what methods did you use to bring that score down. I am thinking to do timed sections back to back to really get a feel of the time constraint (i.e 4 LR sections/day). Let me know what has and has not worked for you. Thank you so much.

Alright, this was a confusing question but I'm still a little unsure about one part of it.

It's in the CC MSS section, so you guys can go look at it. Essentially the stimulus states that light is registered in the retina when [rhodopsin] molecules change shape. These molecules can change shape without the light simply by normal molecular motion, which introduces error into the visual system.

The final part is what trips me up. It says that the amount of molecular motion is directly proportional to the temperature of the retina.

OK, so this whole thing hinges on the definition of "directly proportional". What exactly does that mean? Well it means that as X increases, then so does Y and vice versa. OK got it. From this, I can assume that as temperature increases, so does the amount of movement. And as temperature decreases, then so does movement. I mean, that's what directly proportional means, increase X increase Y, etc...

My problem here is that the stimulus does not say whether more or less movement creates error. It simply says that "movement" in general creates error. But, like I said, this begs the question as to what type of movement creates the error? Does more movement create more error? Does less movement create less error? How am I supposed to infer this? I guess one could take the step in assuming that since less movement brings us closer to the state of no movement, then it must be that less movement causes less error. And since more movement is moving away from the state of no movement, more movement is thus causing more error. Since a state of no movement would essentially mean no error.

But this just seems to imply a lot of advanced deductions that one is expected to make while under the stress of trying to comprehend this information in the first place. I guess I pretty much answered my question in thinking this all through out loud, so let me know what you guys think as well.

Admin note: edited title

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-34-section-3-question-19/

I have about a 10th grade level knowledge of science so science passages about things like fractal curves or the ocean floor spreading theory are completly abstract for me. Does anyone have advice on understanding complex science passages?

I took the LSAT on November 17th and didn't get the score I was hoping to receive. After reviewing my test online it was very obvious that the Reading Comprehension section was very bad and that is what caused me to not get the score I wanted. I am signed up to take the LSAT again on the 23rd this month, and was wondering if anyone had tips/tricks/advice for the reading comprehension section.

So it’s about that time I get serious with my life and really buckle down. I finished the June 2007 LSAT and scored a 58 RAW (150 cold diagnostic) with the breakdown of 13 LG, 14 on both LR and 17 on RC. My question for y’all is... what now?

I found that almost all the questions I answered were correct but I was getting lost in individual questions and ran out of time.

I’m scheduled to take the LSAT in January but I set it up as a preliminary evaluation to get myself more comfortable for March. I don’t expect to be scoring anywhere near the 160s for January but how do I set myself up for success in March?

Any tips or advice would be greatly appreciated.

Please see link below

June 2007 LSAT link:

https://www.lsac.org/sites/default/files/legacy/docs/default-source/jd-docs/sampleptjune.pdf

Hi everyone,

I am having trouble seeing the repeating structure patterns in RC in Art and Law passages. However, I DO see the structures in Science and Social Science passages. I have great difficulty when reading them the first time and most of the time I can't see the patterns even when I am reviewing them. I seem to be able to make low res summaries that apply but they don't seem to fit into cookie cutter molds. I am hoping that by seeing these molds I can see the structure quicker.

My question is: are their cookie cutter structures for Art and Law passages in RC? If so, do you have some examples from the CC?

Thanks everyone!!

So this question is easy enough when I take a moment to write out the logic. Even so, I'd like some advice on how to attempt this without enough time to parse out and write down the logic of each answer choice until I get to the right one. Unless the rule of thumb is, just write it out. In which case, I'll continue to do so.

Thanks!

Admin note: added link https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-68-section-3-question-24/

Is there a way to identify whether the question requires a bridging or blocking assumption from the question stem or stimulus?

i.e. is there a way to definitely prephrase an answer choice for NA questions in a foolproof way?

Hello,

Please help me out with this LR question.

I can infer that Clarifssa definitely disagrees with D, but how can we know what Myungsook thinks doing natural science successfully requires? From the stimulus, I cannot infer that Myungsook has any opinion on whether natural science requires observations not stated in precisely quantitative terms.

Myungsook states that converting observations into numbers requires observations. She doesn't mention the requirements of doing natural science successfully.

Thank you!

Admin note: edited title

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-c2-section-2-question-24/

Ironically enough my biggest problem is timing. I did the diagnostic and received a 155 (I struggled with answering a lot of the logical reasoning questions and had to guess on a lot so I didn't run out of time) However once I went back and had time to fully answer the questions my BR score was 175. I am able to understand the material, I just am having a hard time performing under pressure. Can anyone give me tips on how to improve this before I write in January?

I am having timing issues with RC. I don't think my issue is with understanding the passages because for the most part when I go back and review I understand what I'm reading. However, when I factor in the clock I feel so rushed and have trouble processing what I'm reading as time progresses, causing me to make stupid errors. I don't have this issue with LR. Has anyone else ever experienced this? Can anyone offer any tips for overcoming this problem?

Wow,

I feel like I'm posting one of these everyday. So this question has to do with a Necessary Assumption question--an old one. I've realized in the past hour or so of review that I've been doing, that I fall pretty consistently for one type of attractive wrong answer choice for NA questions. The answer that fixes the argument/is important (as it's described in the LSAT Trainer). That realization has forced me to be a bit more timid and cautious about my approach to NA questions (which I thought I was pretty set on). So here's the scenario I found myself in:

I know what the conclusion is. I know what the premises are. I understand the argument. From this, I see two problems/assumptions the argument is making:

Feeling confident...ish (remember my new found timidity) I attack the answer choices and am left with C and D. So I negate.

C- The recommendation would be satisfied by the creation of a nation formed of disconnected regions (sounds amazing)

D- The new Caronian nation will include as citizens anyone who does not speak Caronian.

uh-oh.

The negation of D is speaking to that second assumption I found. If they include these people, then Caronian speakers don't need to be in the majority (they still can be, but it is not necessary).

Where did I go wrong here?

Thanks in advance!

Admin note: added link https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-26-section-2-question-07//

I understand for some people it can take up to a year to go from 140s to 160s. But is it normal to not show any improvement in Logical Reasoning sections after the first 10 timed Prep Tests?

During Blind Review I can get 20 correct out of 25. While taking timed Prep Tests I am only getting 11 correct. I do relatively well on the first 10 to 12 questions but after that I am a mess.

Timing is certainly an issue for me. But for the moment I am more concerned about getting as many questions correct as I can answer.

Right now I have the foundation to get 160 -165 during Blind Review. I’m just not performing well on Logical Reasoning sections when I set the timer.

Are there any techniques or exercises I can do to improve timed LR sections?

What sorts of drills should I be doing? And should I do them timed?

Any advice would be appreciated.

Happy New Years to everyone.

I am confused why this isn't the case :

Observation : Many teachers are afraid of computers.

Explanation: Because you can teach far many courses with far few teachers.

Admin note: edited title

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-57-section-2-question-13/

Hi all! I was wondering if there might be a list of reading comp passages that were covered in CC? I am in the middle of RC drilling, but feel like that I keep coming across articles that I have read before when doing CC. I would like to avoid such repetition, so a list of articles that were covered by CC would be of utmost use! Thanks in advance to you all!

How did you guys determine which sentence was the main conclusion? The sentence beginning with "However" seems to support the last sentence.

Admin note: edited title

For any mistakes I make in RC, I can correct them because there is content in the passage that supports the answer choice and I can make a mental note of how to read more carefully and fix it. Sometimes there isn't much I can do in terms of learning to not repeat an RC error.

Same for LG, right now I am at -0 to -2 (highest) and I do not think I have an issue with LG and I can easily understand/not replicate errors.

But for LR, I am stumped. How do I make sure I do not repeat my errors? I do not have a particular question type where it happens. The errors seem random. All I know is that I have issues answering some 5* rated questions but I guess that's their point? That they are hard?

So in general, how to improve LR?

Hi fam!

So, This is your straightforward Sufficient Assumption Question. If you have a moment you can work out the logic and make your way to a correct answer. Sometimes however, you can see the elements you need to bridge the gap without writing the logic down. In this instance, I read the stimulus and knew I needed an answer tying Success to companies purchasing the software.

Which bring me to my question: Is there a quick way of figuring out which of the elements needs to be sufficient and which necessary? Without writing out the logic chain that is. I think I read somewhere--though the person's explanation was somewhat hard to make out, that because Success is the sufficient condition in the conclusion, it is the sufficient condition in the answer we need. Does that sound right? And if so, can that understanding be used in other similar scenarios?

Thank you!

Admin note: edited title

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-26-section-3-question-21/

Hey guys I recently graduated with a masters in legal studies this December so now I have nothing but free time. Though I have not taken a diagnostic or done any pretresting for the lsat I believe I’m good at logic games and reading comprehension.

Anyway do guys believe studying full-time for three months (6hrs/day) and using the 7Sage starter pack will be adequate for a high 160s to170 score. I have also purchased the newer lsac PTs (60-81)and will be drilling those newer PTs twice a week. Does anyone have tips or a daily schedule? Anything helps...

BTW I am applying for Fall 2019 admissions so taking it now is a must!

Hi all! I ran into a logic based MBT game in my lsat PT that quite honestly stumped me. So I want to present a version of it here in pure logic to see how my fellow 7 sagers work through it. This will make more sense in a bit:

All A's are X

All B's are X

If X is /Y then /Z

All Y Xs are C

Most Z Xs have F

In my opinion things start to get a little dicey at the If X is /Y then /Z but. So for starters, how would you translate this line into logic? Ignoring the statements that follow for now.

Thank you so much!

I've realized for some tough strengthen NA Q's, the right AC also kinda functions like a NA, and by applying the negation test, it actually weakens the argument.

Often, these tough NA questions have right AC that are "defenders," which defend against an alternative explanation/fact. So if you negate a "defender," it'll make the argument weaker/more vulnerable. (Example is PT 74.1.17)

I was wondering if some people also considered applying the negation test to strengthen AC's?

Again, I'm not advocating to do this for ALL strengthen Q's, but just those tough ones in which the AC's are very subtle, and pulling out the negation test from the toolbox may prove helpful.

Any thoughts or suggestions appreciated. Thank you!

"If males are assigned to Veblen South, then Wisteria North is assigned males."

Can I take the contrapositive of this as such: "If Wisteria North is not assigned males, then Veblen South is not assigned males." And then translate that, since the only two options are (1) male and (2) female, to: "If Wisteria North is female, then Veblen South is female." ?

I watched the solution video and this wasn't explicitly explained in these terms, so I wanted to make sure this is correct. I guess the way JY set up the video kind of implied this, but in any case. Thanks in advance!

Good Morning 7 Sage Community,

Hope everyone had a wonderful holiday. As I am making my way through the core curriculum I am considering signing up for the March 2019 LSAT as a type of practice run/PT/get comfortable with the testing environment. I then plan on taking the June 2019 test as well. I am looking to apply in the Fall 2019 for enrollment in Fall 2020 and I want to give myself the best chance at scoring well. Obviously is things dont go as planned I do have the later 2019 tests which I am open to taking as well but the goal is to be in a position to apply early with a great score.

From listening to the 7sage podcasts I have ben hearing the common theme of if you are taking the lsat, plan on taking it more than once to be the most successful. And some of the most successful have taken it 3+ times in some cases.

Does anyone have any thoughts on this or experience in a similar way? Thanks again.

Good Morning 7 Sage Community,

Hope everyone had a wonderful holiday. As I am making my way through the core curriculum I am considering signing up for the March 2019 LSAT as a type of practice run/PT/get comfortable with the testing environment. I then plan on taking the June 2019 test as well. I am looking to apply in the Fall 2019 for enrollment in Fall 2020 and I want to give myself the best chance at scoring well. Obviously is things dont go as planned I do have the later 2019 tests which I am open to taking as well but the goal is to be in a position to apply early with a great score.

From listening to the 7sage podcasts I have ben hearing the common theme of if you are taking the lsat, plan on taking it more than once to be the most successful. And some of the most successful have taken it 3+ times in some cases.

Does anyone have any thoughts on this or experience in a similar way? Thanks again.

Admin Note:

Thread closed for duplication