I'm sure I'm not alone in this, but RC is by far my worst section. I'd say I've greatly improved on LG and LR and have a pretty good understanding of the concepts on both sections, but for some reason RC is just not clicking with me. My best score on RC was -10 and worst was -17. My BR scores for RC range from -5 to -10. My goal score is 170 because I don't have the best GPA to get me accepted into my dream school and I plan on taking the June test (I've been studying since August and began PT's in November) and I'm really aiming for -0 to -3 but I have no idea where to begin. Is it possible to achieve -0 by June? Any advice would be greatly appreciated! :)

Please offer your help with this question! Apologies for a long post.

We know that snowy land reflects MORE sunlight.

That means snowy land absorbs LESS sunlight. We dont know what effect this ABSORPTION has on earths overall temperature (although I think it is logically implied that absorbing light means absorbing heat so C doesnt add anything new!)

C) explains what the effect of absorbing sunlight has on overall temperature of the earth. Absorbing heat actually warms up the atmosphere.

So when the earth gets more snowy lands+iced ocean surface, which means there will be more sunlight reflected and less sunlight absorbed, the earth temperature will likely decline.

Again, I don't see how C strengthens because I thought more reflection logically implies less absorption. And less absorption means less heat absorbed. So C isnt saying anything new… Of course absorbed heat would warm up the atmosphere?!

Could someone also explain D? It is very tough to eliminate it.

I chose D) because it seemed to work as a defender Strengthener. There may be other factors such as volcanic eruptions that override the temperature change brought by having more snowy surfaces. If that is the case, and the sunlight absorbed plays a minority role in determining the overall temperature of the earth's atmosphere, the conclusion would be weakened. D effectively blocks this possibility by saying that the atmosphere derives most of its heat from sunlight.

Thank you!!

Hey everyone-

I am going through the core curriculum for the second time (a year apart) and had an idea I'm playing with and think is helpful.

I started fool proofing both solving the game completely (as JY often does in his video) and never splitting the board. I realized that when under time pressure, I may not see all of the inferences that lead to a full and complete solve, but I still need to find the correct answers in a timely manner.

For an idea of how this looks from a process standpoint:

*Repeat until I can answer all of the questions correctly and well under time without the fully solved game board.

After doing this, I felt there was another skill set being developed and felt less flat footed going into games if I couldn't fully solve a game board.

I am going to provide these caveats...

What do you guys think? Anyone else experiment with doing this?

I think the games below are beneficial for those finding themselves making "silly" mistakes when reading split game boards. Those mistakes are probably less "silly" and more indicative of a mechanical/procedural weakness you have - actually that was just the case for me. I don't want to paint with a broad stroke. Either way, I thought these were good games to do in a fool-proof kind of way to get splitting quickly and accurately down pat.

These questions consistently take me three minutes to do when they're in the 4 or 5 stars difficulty. Takes me a minute to read and diagram the stimulus and then another two to read or diagram the answer choices, and I still get them wrong sometimes because of rushing. Do you guys have any advice on how you tackle these questions quickly? Thanks =)

Hey friends! Until now I've been using charts for grouping games anytime the game pieces can be used more than once, but I just came across a game with those conditions where JY used a standard grouping setup. I was able to complete the game without errors with a chart when I wrote the PT, but after watching JY's explanation I think it would have been faster to use the standard grouping setup instead.

So my question is, should I be using a different criteria for deciding when to use a chart? Thanks in advance!

Hi everyone. I have always thought NA questions are like inference questions in that their right answer will be true if the conclusion is true. And I thought the SA question types are the ones that the correct answer will bridge the broken conditional chains.

But over and over, from JY and others, I hear the comment that goes 'answer choice X is correct because it fills the gap between the premise and the conclusion" in the NA question expls..

Okay. So I guess that NA are sort of like SA, but NA right answers are minimum requirement while SA right answers are 100% air tight reason?

I have always thought NA are similar to inference. But now I'm just confused.... Is there a simple way to clearly distinguish NA from SA? HELP!

Do the number of problem sets we're given for different types of LR questions reflect the frequency in which we will see them on actual LSAT tests? For example, we are given 24 Flaw/Descriptive Weakening sets, but only 3 AP sets. Does that mean that on actual LSAT tests that there are likely to be more Flaw questions?

Hello Everyone!

Im facing a dilemma. So I have applied to schools and hoped that the November LSAT would have been my final exam. It didn’t work out that way and I am unable to take the January test. The March is LSAT is my only option, I’m not necessarily taking it for admission, I am retaking it for scholarship reconsideration. Do you guys think this is too late in the cycle? I’ve noticed many schools are requiring that the deposit be made prior to the current April 19th score relseae date. Any advice is appreciated!

(I am unable to take it and apply next cycle - next cycle is not an option for multiple reasons)

Thanks!

Hi!

I recently started doing the "Fool Proof Guide to Perfection on Logic Games"

For a game where the ideal time according to 7Sage is 6 minutes. I am scoring under that when fool proofing the game.

1st attempt: 8:50 (same day)

2nd attempt: 6:51 (same day)

3rd attempt: 5:47 (same day)

4th attempt: 4:42 (next day)

I guess I should come back to this game in a couple days or next week and see if my time is still roughly 4 minutes?

Is it redundant for me to keep drilling this game since I'm already under the allocated time?

Hi guys which strategy do you think is better? Going for accuracy or covering the entire questions?

I try to go for the "low-hanging coconut" during the timed tests but i find that it's hard b/c unlike LR, LG section takes 2 to 3 minutes just to figure out the rules and the diagram. And sometimes I find it a bit distracting (and makes my answers even less accurate) to move back and forth between questions in LG just to cover all the questions.

How do you guys deal with this problem? I wanna hear ur thoughts

Hey there fam,

So I was just doing some NA drills when a question struck me. In LR generally, we're looking for the assumption or flaw, and then want to set about our assigned tasks based on what we find. More specifically the flaw in the argument (between the premises and the conclusion). Does this mean then that when we notice an assumption in between the premises (which we are supposed to take for granted) that we just ignore said assumption or integrate said assumption into the group of things we take for granted?

Stated differently, can we think of any scenario wherein that assumption between the premises is something we need to account for, strengthen, weaken ect?

Thanks!

I keep hearing that RC is the hardest to improve on, and since I have about 18 months until my first attempt I'd like to solidify RC. On my June 07 timed diagnostic I scored a 152 with a -7 in RC. Does this constitute a good score? And what exactly can I do to get down to -1/0? I've always been a fast reader and finished all the passages and questions with 2 minutes left. The 7 I missed were all seemingly dumb mistakes.

How do you guys like the memory method? I haven't looked at it yet as I'm focused on LR right now.

Hello,

I just registered for the June LSAT and below is the notice that was at the top:

"Notice starting with June 2019 LSAT: The writing section will be separate from the LSAT starting with the June 3, 2019 test. This change will result in greater convenience and flexibility for test takers as the testing date will be shorter, the essay will be typed rather than handwritten, and it can be completed at a time and place of the test takers' choosing. By registering for the June LSAT, candidates will be automatically eligible to complete the writing section as of the date of the LSAT and up to one year thereafter. Candidates are only required to have one essay on file to complete their Law School Reports. Essays completed during previous LSAT administrations will still be valid for use in Law School Reports. There will be an additional fee of $15 for each administration of LSAT Writing."

This may have already been discussed, but I haven't seen anything about it. We don't focus much on the writing sample, but I've heard it's actually important to top law schools who are choosing between two high-scoring candidates. In regards to the notice, does this mean we have to register for another day? I'm only like 20% through the LSAT Course so I know very little about the writing sample but I'm curious how exactly this new form of the writing sample is different than before?

Thanks!

Hey guys,

I need some assistance with my logical reasoning improvement?

So yeah- basically what occurs is: I do the exam, Blind review, then I still miss -4--6 per LR section post BR.

Once I view the videos, I immediately recognize why I miss the things I miss. (Rarely is it due to me completely believing that my answer choice is so accurate, but rather that I don't translate complex conditions properly i.e. if A then B unless C or If and only If (anyone want to point out a good CC lesson to re-watch?), or it's due to the fact that I didn't focus on the right premise + conclusion tie-ins, or just didn't read an answer choice at all...)

Do you guys have any advice for someone like me?

Anyways, Thank you so much!

Taking all suggestions before the January LSAT!

Hi everyone,

Just wanted to hear some tips on folks who are very comfortable with Reading Comp. I absolutely loved JYs breakdown and framework for science passage - phenomenon and hypothesis. I studied literature in college, so those science passages are daunting, but with that framework, pretty much every science passage can be broken down into that structure. It's like a swiss army knife to understand them. Love it.

Wanted to hear if you all had similar frameworks for Law / Human/ Arts passages? Particularly law. Those also seem daunting to me and I get overwhelmed by the specificity that many of the law passages tend to have under time pressure. Any type of larger frameworks in law that I can use as a swiss army knife (human / societal practice ---> law, problem existing --> law with answer ???)

Arts and Humanities are fine - my lit degree really comes in handy haha - but would also appreciate your tips in case I get a passage about Ayn Rand or something that I'm not inherently interested in (I hate Ayn Rand).

I usually do pretty well on RC, average 3/4 qs wrong. But sometimes I blow it and get 6-7 if it's a hard science or law passage. Want to be ready for the worst case scenario.

Thanks!

I could not figure out why this is a circular reasoning...or my understanding of CR is too mechanical?

the conclusion is "....ought to do C..."

the only premise is "it is better if C happens"

the flaw I thought was the switch from the descriptive language to the prescriptive one

Admin note: edited title

I've been going through 7Sage's explanation for logic games and I noticed JY uses slots instead of columns. I previously took another LSAT course and they used columns for sequencing games.

I'm kinda habitually stuck always going back to columns. I was wondering what benefit there is to use the slots opposed to columns?

For those of you that use the slots, what benefit do you see? Is it faster/neater? Do you prefer that method to columns?

Does anyone happen to have a list of all the comparative passages? (Ex, PT 57, Passage 3). I want to drill them and was hoping someone had a list. Sincerely, someone feeling lazy.

Someone please tell me this was a hard test !!!! I ran out of time and scored horrible !!!

I want to challenge in the following example ( https://classic.7sage.com/lesson/basic-translation-group-1-flashcards )

Each and every member of Q is omnipotent. Lecture tells us M is SC and O is NC.

However, if we use venn diagram (from set theory) and sorry for the long explanation but I cannot post pictures or draw here.

it raises questions.

Q1: Out of M or O, which "IS" the bigger set ? A1: we do not know

Q2: Out of M or O, which "cannot" be bigger than the other ? A2: M cannot be bigger than O because .... "Each and every member of Q is omnipotent" but are all omnipotent set members members of Q ? Obviously, not necessarily .

Well if Q2, A2 is right than why is O not the SC and M the NC ( not by logic but because whatever is left should fit in the remaining slot )

Dear friends,

I just missed your group study on Jan 8th. Here is one question I don't know why C is the best answer to Q13.

As the two sentences are responses from Bordwell in proving musicals still fit into his theory, he mentioned that first musicals are derived from live theater, second, a structure from other genre makes viewers prepare for and thus accept them realistic. The author then attack him that "pigeonholing genres" is not necessary for viewers in watching films. So that is choice C is another way saying that "pigeonholing genres" is unnecessary? Thank you for helping me out.

Admin note: edited title

can someone explain the new LR explanation layout (the quintile range, 2 sets of difficulty ratings)

on LR explanations, next to the AC's there's like a box plot chart. Also, there are 2 sets of difficulty ratings. Sometimes they're different - like one is 5 star and another is 3 star.

Can someone explain what this all means? Thanks.

Do you guys skip questions in RC?

If so, do you come back to them at the end of passage or do you do the section as a whole and address skipped questions later?

If not, why don't you skip (unless of course you are extremely good at RC.)