Scoring in the low 160s but my RC score is not good. Looking for a study buddy that is in the 140s or low 150s and help them while working on improving my skills. Looking to meet 1-2 times a week from 7-8 pm est. Only looking for one study buddy so message me if you are interested!

Apologies if this has been asked or addressed already - I have not seen it yet. Is there a bug with the new format which makes it so that RC passages randomly move up when you eliminate answers or even just highlight stuff in the passage? I was wondering if anyone else is experiencing this issue and if it will be included on the actual exam. Thank you!

Okay guys, I want to preface by saying that I believe that I generally am a strong writer, but NOT UNDER TIMED CONDITIONS, LOL!!! I want someone to look at this practice I just did and tell me if it is generally okay- as in, I didn't completely tank it, and I'll be fine for the real thing. (I have inserted it below)

The role that any national government has in foreign affairs has been one of controversy for many years. While some people believe one’s government should help as many people out as possible, whenever they can, others believe that one’s government should be somewhat egotistical, in the way that they seek to act solely in their best interest. Some take the view of the middleman, where a government should involve themselves in foreign affairs, but only to a certain extent. This is especially a debate for nations with a strong economy, such as the United States of America. How much should a nation with such rich resources contribute to foreign affairs? A nation’s government should attempt to address problems outside its territorial boundaries only when lives are in danger, and we have enough resources to do so without the expense of its own citizens. Along with this, a nation should never intervene if its intervention would only exacerbate harm to other nations. 

Using the United States as the prime example in this essay, a nation with such a rich economy is usually expected to lend a helping hand to others, but to what extent? I believe that when serious lives are in danger and/or at risk, foreign intervention is acceptable and even necessary. For example, nations like Sudan and even Puerto Rico are currently experiencing drought and famine, with many lives at stake. A case as such would be where a nation’s intervention would be absolutely acceptable. The world may be filled with separate nations, but they are all still sibling in a way, and siblings should help each other out when danger occurs. The USA, for example, has much more resources than the third-world countries struggling, and so if anything, they have an obligation to help out. Along with this, as perspective two points out, natural disasters are another situation in which a nation with such a large economy should be of aid. Perspective two brings up the example of having such great power that it comes with a  “responsibility,” and that is exactly why those nations that are better off must help those nations who are less well-off during a crisis. 

Now, although nations should generally help other nations, what should always come first is one’s own citizens. As seen in perspective one, it would be a “fundamental betrayal” to use a nation’s resources to help others out when a nation’s own people are struggling for survival. The United States of America may have a much larger economy and access to profound resources that others don't have, but we still have many in this nation who are starving, homeless, and struggling to make ends meet. Before we use our already scarce resources to help other nations out, we should make sure our own people are taken care of, first and foremost. For example, since 2025 alone, the USA has sent billions of dollars to Israel for weapons and military intervention. Simultaneously, there are hundreds of thousands of Americans who are currently experiencing homelessness. Why should we be sending out BILLIONS of dollars to another nation to aid them in fighting a war, when our own people can barely afford a single meal? It is irresponsible, and as perspective one advances, a betrayal to involve a nation in foreign affairs at the expense of its own citizens. A nation should ensure that its own people have the basic necessities of survival before aiding in any military intervention or national affairs. 

Now, some might say that this military intervention is necessary because it will protect us in the future from possible security threats. Although this may have some validity to it, there will be no future to secure if a nation's own people aren’t taken care of first. A nation should not be worried about possibilities in the future if its own people in the present are barely surviving. To think so far ahead in the future without taking care of issues within is a betrayal. Additionally, money that is sent to other nations to harm innocent lives in a war is never, by definition, “necessary.”

The role that any nation’s government plays in foreign affairs should be taken into consideration, with its own citizens being the number one priority. When lives are at stake and disasters have occurred, it is acceptable and necessary to intervene. If lives are not at stake, the only time nations should intervene, is if their own citizens are well-off first. Already scarce resources should not be used to fight wars across borders, while people are living on the street just a few feet away. Nor should a nation intervene if that intervention would exacerbate harm to other nations. A nation’s government should attempt to address problems outside its territorial boundaries only when lives are in danger, and we have enough resources to do so without the expense of its own citizens.

Already try to follow advice like "focus on the author's opinion," "read for structure, not details," but still getting too many wrong, or running out of time on the last passage? Here are 3 mistakes you might be making.

@EricB7Sage

Just jumped in to the 7 sage community last week and took my first diagnostic. I scored a 145 with a goal score for my LSAT of 175. Any advice on how to navigate 30 points improvement ?

Hey y’all!

For necessary assumption questions with answer choices that strengthen, when I apply the negation test, would weaken the argument.

How can I tell the difference between an AC that strengthens vs a necessary AC on a necessary assumption question then if the negation test both yields answer choices that weaken?

As I typed this, I realized the answer to my question, can someone confirm please if I’m thinking about this correctly: would an incorrect AC weaken only slightly vs the correct AC completely wreak the argument?

These questions are coming to my mind as I review PT 145 Sect 4 Q 26.

AC A strengthens the argument

AC E also arguably strengthens the argument

AC A negated would be at least one creature that wrecks havoc will be put in the tank, and from the stim, we know creatures that are in the tanks invariably will be deposited when cargo is unloaded at the coasts. Therefore, some environmental havoc is likely at the coast.

If I personalize the argument though, the author could say, “my solution is still better than the current method because there will still be a reduction in environmental havoc wrecked”

E negated though would mean the proposed solution isn’t even viable at all.

Please someone lmk if this way of thinking is how I eliminate strengtheners on necessary assumption questions.

I've been studying for over a year now. I stopped in January 2026 until May because I gave up from showing a lack of improvement, so I decided to just focus on improving my GPA and take a gap year. I've been consistently having issues with closing the gap of my blind review and my actual score. In all my timed sections, I'm usually missing -8 to -6, but I will invariably miss -3 to -2 in Blind Reviews. This has been happening for months, yet I feel like I'm in the same boat, no matter what I do. I think it's a timing issue because I feel like I'm improving in drills by getting better with accuracy, it's whenever I get to the actual test that it gets bad, and it feels like everything I learned goes out the window.

I'm accepting any tips or brutal honesty below, because my GPA is low and I need to get a high 160 to counter it, preferably by November. I've decided that I'm not prepared for the October test, as this will be my fourth time taking the LSAT, the second time I took it, I was severely underprepared, so I want to make sure I'm 100% ready...

Hi all, listening to the most recent Dean Z Mini App read, she starts off the episode talking about grammar and spelling issues in the applicant's essays, specifically the LSAT argumentative writing. I had put this out of my head completely but listening made me remember that, back in April when I took my first LSAT and thus did my argumentative writing, I made the same spelling mistake a few times, using "tenant" instead of "tenet." Now, I have no reason to believe I made any other egregious mistakes, nor am I a bad writer, or will errors like this show up in the other areas of my application, but I am taking the LSAT again in September, so is it worth it to redo the argumentative writing? I do enjoy writing in my free time and plan for that to focus in some way on my applications, so I do not want to appear inconsistent or disingenuous.

Side note, I guess this is what I deserve for trying to use a more obscure word, and not just going for "fundamental principle" or something of the like.

If I watch a recorded session, will it automatically mark those questions as seen?

Will I be able to use the built-in Huge (175%) font-size setting shown in LawHub during my actual October LSAT without requesting a separate accommodation?

I seem to have fallen off the wagon and have not studied in about 4 weeks. I finished the 7Sage course and was just drilling lightly before I stopped.

Any suggestions on how to get back into the rhythm? If I’ve finished the course do you suggest just picking up drilling and practice tests or just start over again? I scheduled my exam for September but will be pushing it back.

Thanks for the time and guidance.

I previously took the LSAT and did the argumentative/writing section, 2-3 years back. I ended up purchasing the score preview for that and did not keep my score. Now I'm studying again to write the exam in September, should I do the writing section again? Am I even allowed to?

Not sure if that's even an option for me. Do law schools (Canadians) look at it a lot, or at all?

Hi friends! :) I just had a quick question that I was hoping could be answered preferably within 24 hours; for the argumentative writing, am I able to use one of the perspectives as an objection or should I come up with my own?

Hi 7Sage Fam,

Just want to ask how yall have been splitting your prep time between LR and RC. I haven’t done much RC but I think I’m starting from a pretty good base (-6 avg per section). Between work and masters classes, I can manage about two hours of quality study time on the weekdays and 3-4 on Saturday and Sunday. I’m targeting a November exam, but I’m struggling to find out what balance I should be striking. TIL now I’ve been spending 90% of my time on LR. I’m not even sure how to really drill or prep for RC best.

Any and all advice is welcome. Love yall!

I am studying abroad in Sydney, Australia, but hoping to take the April 2027 LSAT. Has anyone taken the test abroad? Or is it even possible to do so in Sydney? I can't find anything on LSAC about it.

I've seen it mentioned that the target times for individual Q's are "calculated from top scorers," but what is the cut-off here? I realize that I heavily weight my speed performance off of these target times but they vary wildly especially when compared to that state showing how likely percintiles for given Q get them right, for example "75% [175]."

Is the target time based of of the average time like 175+ scorers get the question right in? Sometimes I get a question done much faster on hard ones, but then the percintiles data will be "75%[164]" which seems to imply that this "hard" Q is actually an easier "hard" Q. So if that's the case, is the target time on this Q using the average of the 164 scoreres for its time calculations? If not, and its still using the generic "high-scorers" (which I presume to be around 175+?), then why is would the target time be so high on a given question with such a low 75% percintule score?

Sorry if this is a bit negative, but I am genuinely concerned about my applications chances and scholarship prospects at this rate.

Almost everyone agree that the new interface makes the exam more difficult. The highlighting system is totally different and hurts my hands, hiding answers is slow, text is harder to read, and they don't even highlight question prompt's referenced quotes in the RC sections anymore. All of these are time drains. Historically Law Schools have never cared about these things and only looked at the raw scores, but historically the LSAT has never been so stupid.

So my question for those who might have insider info is: Are we struggling August test takers just doomed? They won't consider our circumstances or anything? Surely they know that the exam went through massive changes right? @J.Y.Ping

The absence of a full screen in LawHub is really messing w/ me for RC. Did August test-takers have a full screen by default, or were they forced to take the test without one? I'm extremely annoyed with this change from LSAC.

I tried pressing Ctrl+Cmd+F to enlarge the screen for my Mac, but it didn't work.

In taking timed sections and PT's across the past 2 (potentially 3 or more) weeks, I have noticed several instances of my countdown timer glitching. The clock will count down three or four seconds, then jump back up to the earlier time.

Ex) 11:53, 11:52, 11:51, 11:50, 11:49---11:53, 2, 1, 0, 9---

and so on.

The only reliable way to make the clock begin working normally has been to exit out of the section and re-enter, at which point I typically wait for 15-20 seconds to try to be realistic with how much time I've actually used.

I do not know if this issue is sometimes occurring and then stopping on its own, and with my clunky adjustments, the entire situation has made me far less confident in the recent speed "gains" I've been seeing.

What is important is that this has happened multiple times across a few UI updates. Could those be related?

Any updates are much appreciated!

--

Hi everyone! I am taking the LSAT in April 2027. I took a diagnostic in the spring which landed me at 161, which initially I was very happy about. However, I have been studying since then and have been consistently stuck in the 160s- sometimes high, sometimes low. My biggest area of improvement is RC, but no matter how hard I blind review, I feel stuck! Does it just take time? I am so afraid of wasting my time studying ineffectively.

Update: the changes below are live!

******************************************

We're shipping an update to the Digital Tester this week. The goal is to make practice look and feel more like test day. Here's what's changing.

• Narrower width, full height

  • The tester will be slightly narrower and run at close to full screen height. This will match the reported proportions of the real thing more closely. You'll still see your browser window and menu bar at the top, but otherwise the dimensions are close to what you'll see on test day.

• The full screen button in the toolbar will be gone

  • LawHub removed its full screen button, so we will remove ours. Since the tester will now size close to full screen by default, you shouldn't need it. If you want true full screen, use the three dot menu on the top right.

• Updated toolbar icons

  • Toolbar symbols will match LawHub's. The most noticeable change is answer elimination (also called response masking), which will use an "a" with a slash through it.

• Blind Review and Review testers restyled

  • Blind Review was stuck on the old tester style. It will match the current tester, as will the review interface. You'll see consistent styling across the tester, the Blind Review tester, and the Review tester.

• One deliberate deviation: font size persists, unlike LawHub

  • On LawHub, your font size selection does not carry over from section to section. You have to reset it at the start of every single section of a PT. We're not copying that. On 7Sage, your font size choice will stick.

  • We don't think LawHub's behavior here is intentional. Color and line height settings both persist. Font size is the odd one out, which looks like a bug. We've flagged it to LSAC and asked them to fix it. We'll let you know if they do. Or if this is actually intentional on their part.