Hi guys,

After finishing the CC and taking a few practice tests, I decided that I'll need to slow down and first drill individual LR question types before diving into more full PTs. I've been using the question bank and doing individual questions timed then leaving one full 35 minute section of JUST that one problem type to do. Afterwards I review the questions. But I still find that I'm struggling and average -8 per section, section of just one problem type that is (which i feel like shouldn't be happening cause I literally did just so many of the SAME question type). I'm wondering how you guys went about this? How did you drill Q types for LR? What helped?

Thanks so much!

Hi there,

I'm stuck in what to do before the clock strikes midnight tonight. I have taken 10 PTs within the last 2 months and am scoring between 157-163. I have done the whole 7Sage course and have completed the LG and LR Bibles (have seen a significant improvement on LG). I want a 170+ and I think I can get that with more time and a big life decision.

I think I am being held back by some psychological pressures. Right now I am working on a political campaign. Up until 3 weeks ago, I was working 60 hours per week, but then dropped down to 30 hours a week to study for the LSAT. My score has not improved and I think I have hit a road block. I know that many other people work full-time, but campaigning for a nationally recognized House race is quite demanding and requires constant attention beyond scheduled hours.

Bottom line, I really need a 170+ and I think I can get that if I eliminate a major stress factor in my life. Should I quit my job, eliminating the possibility of a LOR from a congressman, and focus on the LSAT for November OR just take it tomorrow and see what happens even though I am certain I will not get my target score?

It seems the preferred method is to read passage A, go through questions, then read passage B, then finish questions.

Did I miss a core curriculum lesson? From what I can tell this is not really taught until answer explanations for the later PTs.

I am taking September LSAT and by the time I found this method I did not want to switch to this with so little time left to practice it. I think it would be very beneficial to make a lesson explaining this method early on in the RC core curriculum. (Unless their already is?)

Just wanted to know if most people diagram the logic in must be true in searching for valid argument forms?

Hi!

Best of luck to everyone taking the test tomorrow! We got this!

Hope you all have a nice and relaxing Friday :)

Hey guys, Im considering in taking this september test but something tells me that maybe i should push it back for the november one because this is already my fourth time taking it. But at the same time, I feel as if since I already took it 3 times already, I might as well take the november one too if I dont feel satisfied with my september score. I dont think law schools would really feel a difference with someone taking it 4 times as opposed to 5. How do you guys feel about this?

Hello 7sagers,

I've been trying to make sense of this question for the longest time but I just can't seem to understand what the difference between answer choice (c) and (e) is.

Here's my train of thought.

We all know from the core curriculum that A unless B is

~A~ ---> B

OR

~B~ --> A

Given this, (c) states "Unless K is assigned to T, both F and M must be assigned to T."

(e) states, "Unless either H or M is assigned to T, K must be assigned to T."

So to put (c) into lawgic and if I put it in ~A~ --> B form, it reads, ~Ft and Mt~ --> Kt. If I were to do the contrapositive, it reads, ~Kt~ --> Ft or Mt.

Is this contrapositive right? The answer says that it's supposed to be contraposed back into ~Kt~ --> Ft and Mt but I seriously cannot understand why that would become an "and" statement...

But if I were to put it in the ~B~ --> A form, it reads, ~Kt~ --> Ft and Mt (which is the correct answer). I'm really confused as to why these two are coming out differently when it shouldn't be...

Please help! I feel like I'm not understanding the most basic concept of lawgic and it's truly giving me so much anxiety.

Admin note: edited title

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-74-section-2-game-4

Anyone else making stupid mistakes?

I just did a logic games section and got them all right except an acceptable situation question (sigh) because for some reason I read "glass" in the rules but looked for "wood."

One instructor said, "Don't just say it's a stupid mistake and you won't make it on test day. You absolutely will make it on test day if you don't have a system."

But what system can I develop for not being an idiot? Glass is not wood, I've been telling myself helpfully.

Title says it mostly.

I’ve [unfortunately] done all of the PTS in the 50-80s. Used the 30s & 40s for drills. Haven’t really touched PT 1-29. From what I’ve read, 1-29 are pretty useless as anything besides drilling, so it seems that all I have to work with is PT 83 - Dec. 2017 PT - which I got in the mail today!!! Unless someone can reassure me that taking PR 1-29 as full timed test will be beneficial? Please please please please please....]

So here’s my story & my questions.

My PR average for PR 70 - 82 was a 178. I sat in December & choked. A good score, but below not my PT average. I blanked out on RC. kinda froze on LR. skipped. guessed. anxiety got the best of me & I predicted I’d get between a 165 & 170. I got a 168.

Luckily I took the sabbath test, so the released PT 83 is brand new for me. However, I don’t know what to do to prep for my retake in February...

• since I had a good handle on it PTing up to December what do I do to stay fresh and afloat before 1) taking PT 83 & more importantly 2) sitting again in Feb? How do I even study before the PT or test. [Unfortunatley sabbath tests being unreleased I have no clue how exactly I did on individual sections.

• as I previously questioned - can I benfit from taking, & at this point should I even take, any exams between 1-29 as full length PTs?

• Should I just not take PT 83 since my average is solid? What if I do poorly and shake my confidence?

The most recent PT I've taken in preparation for Saturday's test is PT 77. Initially I thought this was a good idea because I will likely take the November exam as well. Of course with two days to go I am starting to worry that I haven't taken a recent enough PT (I did sit for September 2017 though). I watched the Power Score predictions for June/September a few weeks ago and have an idea of what to expect...

Would anyone advise taking sections from a newer PT today (scattering them throughout the day, not all at once)? Or should I just drill some more LG?

I have kept my studying fairly light this week (just some LG and RC for the most part) along with reviewing questions I answered incorrectly on past PTs.

Thanks in advanced for any input! and best of luck to everyone taking the exam this weekend!!!

Hi everyone,

I'm scheduled to take Saturday's LSAT. My score is 150 despite my best attempts. Half of me wants to just take it just not to give up and use it as "practice." What do you think? I'm trying to see the benefit in taking other than the experience. I hate to cancel because it feels like I'm giving up, but I know I'm not ready.

Doth tell me 7Sagers, do I Mad Max this mofo?

I scored a 141 on PT 2007 (FIRST TRY). I am ok with LR, but I suck at LG and RC. I study part time because I work full time at a firm and hoping to apply for next cycle. Is there hope?

So I'm drilling hard RC passages and I seem to have the most success when I spend I little extra time on the questions. So instead of finishing in the 7-8 minute range I'd finish these passages in about 8-10 Minutes. When doing full length Prep Tests, is it ever advisable to spend that much time on an RC passage? I can't imagine being able to make up for extra time by finishing a passage in like 5 minutes.

Perhaps a good sign for this saturday? Worst PT score in a while... but perhaps the best? Good luck, everyone! Cheers~

So I was set on the Sept test but unfortunately my PT average is right around a 164-165 at the moment and thats well short of the 170 I need to be confident going into the test. I've already seen an 18 point improvement from my diagnostic score but I know I still have a lot of room for improvement.

I'm currently averaging around -8 on RC and thats what's really killing my score. Is it smart to dedicate a whole week to drilling dozens of RC passages? I know this helped me a lot with logic games but I'm wondering if the same approach can work with RC. I haven't really figured out the proper approach for RC because my scores don't really follow a clear trend. I suck at inference questions and typically go -1 or -2 on BR.

hey all,

so i did 59.3.19

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-59-section-3-question-19/

in it there's a conditional statement that's actually a hypothetical. we don't actually know if it's true.

the question hinges on whether you realize that condition statement is a hypothetical.

in general, when we see conditional statements, how do we distinguish if it's a hypothetical or if we just accept it as true/fact/reality?

thanks!

Danino has expressed dissatisfaction that many genetic studies have attributed the ‘spread of agriculture’ into the subcontinent to migrations. Just to be sure that no one thinks that the practice of agriculture is in the genes, I would like to point out that the spread of the technology of agriculture was associated with the movement of people; agriculturists who took the technology to new regions and taught it to the locals in the new region. Movement of people implies movement of genes. Some migrants ‘export’ their genes to a new region by taking spouses from the new region and producing children with them who stay in the new region. We can never be sure that the attribution of agriculture having been introduced to the Indian subcontinent by migrants is fully true. However, genetic data do support this model, especially of the spread of modern, organized agriculture.

Having said this, I must also emphasize, once again, that collection of more extensive data is always more helpful in understanding our past and of the spread of our inventions and innovations. A Y-chromosomal signature, haplogroup J, was shown to be associated with the spread of modern agriculture. This signature has its highest frequency in the Fertile Crescent region – the region comprising the present-day countries of Syria, Lebanon, Turkey – where the technology of modern agriculture was invented about 7,000–10,000 years ago. Collection of deeper data showed that this signature is quite heterogeneous and is composed of at least four sub-signatures, one of which – haplogroup J2b2 – is confined to the India–Pakistan region.

This sub-signature arose over 13,000 years ago and hence its introduction into India could not have been by migrants who introduced modern agriculture into India. We showed that the haplogroup J2b2 possibly arose in India, because the highest frequency of this haplogroup is found in India. We discovered multiple epicentres of this haplogroup in India and interestingly these epicentres neatly coincided with the seats of introduction of early forms of agriculture in India (as evidenced by the study of fossilized pollen grains by Fuller and his team). It is unlikely that haplogroup J arose independently multiple times in geographically separated places. It probably arose in an ancient population who had spread themselves in geographically separated regions and they invented rudimentary forms of agriculture independently in multiple geographical regions. However, it is notable that these early forms of agriculture remained largely confined to India and Pakistan region.

Question:

Danino believed that genetic studies, which “attributed the ‘spread of agriculture’ into the Indian subcontinent to migrations,” are:

1)incorrect because migrants did not introduce agriculture into the subcontinent.

true because it was indeed migrants who introduced agriculture into the subcontinent.

only partially correct as early forms of agriculture were indigenously developed in the subcontinent.

originally results of expert intuition but later validated by an improved ability to decipher evidence.

Source : https://www.imsindia.com

Need help in finding POV!

Correct Answer is 3 .

But I find AC 1 more suitable because 1st line of passage "Danino expressed dissatisfaction....."

Is anyone else lost with logic games? I''ve been studying for the LSAT for several months and the logic games ( not even the easy ones) just don't make sense to me...at all....I'm signed up for the LSAT this saturday. would it be better to just not take it and pick a different career if I just can't learn logic games? Everyone else on here seems to think they are attainable or the easiest section and I just don't see it.

As other 7sage students reminded me:

Remember to dress in layers, because those A/Cs are way more powerful than they should be some times.

Remember to bring a sugary snack for the break to joint your brain and body.

Remember to eat a nice balanced breakfast that includes complex carbohydrates so that you'll have energy throughout the test.

If you have any other tips, please share!

hey all,

So I've been noticing that I've been missing a lot of NA, PSA, and SA questions. I think I want to really drill these questions so they become like second nature.

My question is - how should I drill these question types?

I've already done all PT's from 20-57.

I'm planning to save PT's 58-84 as full length PT practice tests.

Should I drill these question types by redoing NA/SA/SA questions from PT's I've already done -- PT's 20-57?

Also, should I also drill questions I've previously gotten right, or focus more on questions I got wrong?

Any input or advice would be appreciated. Thanks!

Just want to clear up something about principle questions. If the principle says something like, " One ought not make promises, if one knows they cannot fulfill the promise. In the answer choices are we only looking for the answer choice that say ,"One ought not do," thus eliminating all answer choices that says, "One ought to do."

Please let me know if you understand what I mean, and can answer this question.

does anyone feel that the more center PT's (starting form the late 50s) are harder?

I think that's when the rule substitution questions started happening.

idk .. i've been struggling more with LG than i have had previously now that I'm doing PT's in the late 50s.

Thanks!

I dont know how but

7Sage is truly a life saver in helping me improve my Logic Games score. Thank you so very much. Now that I have the tools needed to be more successful at logic games, I notice that it can be difficult to keep track of everything when the space is limited and you cant "wipe clean" your game board like you can in the videos. Obviously it depends question to question, but what are your recommendations to accommodate both for time and organization? Duplicate game boards? Crossing things out and dealing with the messiness?

Hi guys,

I'm having a very big problem with missing easy 1star LR questions. I don't know what exactly I'm doing wrong but I tend to miss 3-4 at the start of each LR section. But when it comes to the more difficult (3-4stars) questions (15-23) I get them right no problem.

I'm not doing anything different. Same thought process. No matter how easy or hard they look, I read all the ACs.

What should I do? I'm honestly so confused and just really disappointed in myself that I'm letting these easy ones be missed.