Can you solve this or is this invalid

A - (some) - B

B - (all) - c

Format Edited by Admin #HELP My goal for the LSAT is to score in the 160 range. Honestly just anything above 160. Currently I have not seen much improvement on my practice exams. I am worried that my self-studying has not been effective thus far as I was only using the powerscore bibles up until this point. With less than a month left until the September test date (that I am currently registered for) I am wondering if I should postpone my exam until November. What would everyone suggest? I AM FREAKING OUT!

Admin note: Please refrain from using "#" at the beginning. The character "#" indicates a subheading: Markdown

RC seems easy on many passages, but when Science comes up and all these crazy words are thrown around, I get lost and frustrated. Any keys or tips to overcome this? I can never seem to wrap my head around whatever I am reading.

Most of the time when I review JY's videos for the LR questions I get wrong I completely understand the right answer. Its like I get smacked in the head - I mean, duh, the right answer is so obvious. Rarely do I review a wrong answer that I don't understand and it makes me wonder why I can't see it when I'm first doing the question. My guess is that I'm at fault with these:

Is there anything else that I'm missing?

Alright guys so I used to be good at flaw questions and now I have realized after taking my last PT I lost my edge. Does anyone have suggestions? I am planning on review the different flaw types but does anyone have something that matches the different flaw types with the answers that have actually show up on the LSAT? This really killed my score on the last PT...

In explaining why the AC was correct for a particular Necessary Assumption question, JY said: "This answer choice is great because it states the assumption in a weak way. For Necessary Assumption questions, the LSAT writer's are weary of using language that is too strong... because if they write something that is too strong, it's not necessary."

I can just accept the italicized statement as true and move on but does anyone care to expand on this and explain why it is so?

For reference, the correct answer choice said "can be" (as opposed to, perhaps, "must be").

I understand why conditional language is an indicator of a Sufficient Assumption correct AC (because it bridges premise A to conclusion B ) but I am not fully grasping why, as JY mentioned, we should steer clear from conditional language or language that is "too strong" within Necessary Assumption answer choices.

Lately I've been noticing that when practicing LR, I'll almost always find the correct answer while doing BR but I still get 2-4 wrong a section while under timed conditions. Most of the time it won't even take too long to notice my mistake. Am I supposed to assume that this is a timing issue rather than a misunderstanding of the material? Should I be focusing on my timing and test strategy? If anyone has an insight into this please let me know. Thank you.

Here is a concept which LSAT sometimes tests:

false positive/false negative

I learned this concept a couple months ago and went:

https://media.giphy.com/media/wWuNgWHR7ZzMI/giphy.gif

Unlike other concepts, I don’t see it often on the LSAT, so I tend to forget about it.

But I see it again and again:

PT11.S2.Q15; PT15.S3.Q21; PT41.S3.Q17; PT45.S1.Q24; PT54.S4.Q20; PT61.S2.Q20; PT80.S1.Q10

So I'm making this post so that I can explain and understand fully!

False positive:

a result that shows something exists when it actually does not exist.

　Examples:

　・A medical test shows that someone has a disease when the person actually doesn’t.

　・A DNA test falsely shows that A’s DNA matches the DNA at a crime scene when it doesn’t actually match.

False negative:

a result that shows something does not exist when it actually exists.

　Examples:

　・A medical test shows that someone doesn't have a disease when the person actually does.

　・A DNA test falsely shows that A’s DNA does not match the DNA at a crime scene when it actually matches.

https://media.giphy.com/media/GSpDlV6BbFTyw/giphy.gif

In order for a test to be good, both the false positive rate and the false negative rate have to be low.

To sum up:

• True positive: correctly identified

• False positive: falsely identified

• True negative: correctly not identified

• False negative: falsely not identified

Actual LSAT questions:

:star: PT11.S2.Q15 Flaw

The computer security system has never incorrectly accepted someone, which means it has never committed a false positive error (falsely identified). The argument concludes that it will give access to the right people.

But what about false negative? In other words, it might not accept people who should be accepted. So this is the flaw.

:star: PT15.S3.Q21 MSS/Misc.

The EEG reading is a reasonably reliable indicator of temporal lobe epilepsy, so false positive rate is low.

But EEG test might not be able to detect abnormal electrical impulses even though the impulses are present (“false negative”). So not being identified doesn’t mean you don’t have temporal lobe epilepsy.

Let me know if there are other examples (other than the ones mentioned above)! :)

Hello. Whew, first post. It’s been awesome ghosting everyone because I’ve learned so much.

In April I took a 4-part diagnostic and got a 150. I’ve since enrolled in the 7Sage prep course and have scheduled for September. Realistically, how much improvement can I expect before the test?

I'm looking for an excel document that outlines LG Fool Proofing with the following pattern type: full LG section from PT 1 today, revisit tomorrow, revisit next week; full LG section from PT 2 today, revisit tomorrow, revisit next week; repeat. The excel document I am using now doesn't help me clearly organize the PT's that I'm doing for the day. Any old excel docs folks used for fool proofing games would be greatly appreciated too!

Hi Everyone! I hope you all are enjoying this beautiful summer!!

I want to maximize my chance of getting in Columbia law, but I'm having trouble deciding on the two options I have here. I hope you guys can kindly offer me some advice! And many thanks in advance!!!!

I am considering either apply early, say in October, or bet on a boost on my LSAT score. (I'm probably not going to consider ED because the stats in 2015 shows that Columbia doesn't favor ED applicants, according to http://admissionsbythenumbers.blogspot.com/2015/05/to-ed-or-not-to-ed-2015-edition.html)

I was quiet surprised when I received a score of 170 from my July LSAT. It was my first time taking the LSAT, and my average prep-test score was around 168 before my actual exam. Because of that I still have around 20 clean/fresh prep test saved for my second test, which I was planning to take in November. I guess there is a chance for me to get a couple points of increase, but this will also mean that I will have to apply late, presumably in early December. So I'm not quiet sure what to do here.

My GPA is 3.84, which is above Columbia's 75th percentile, but my 170 LSAT is below Columbia's median, which is 171. Also, as an international student, my chance of getting in columbia is a bit lower than the domestic students.

What do you guys think I should do?

Hello!

I am about 90% done with my CC. I took the July LSAT and had only studied for 10 weeks prior. I scored a 144. My diagnostic was a 139.I feel gutted. I have hit 153-154 at least 3 times each. (Target school has a median of 155) I guess the main problem I had was 1. I did not take FULL practice tests like back to back sections. I would take a two timed sections, then have a 5-10 min break and do the other so the exam just felt LONG and I was TIRED by the third section 2. I rushed through my CC and really need to understand conditional logic more. 3. I did NOT have my games down.

I guess i'm just worried I won't do much better when I retake November. I know a lot of members here have had higher diagnostics than my LSAT score so I am feeling really discouraged although I know where I messed up completely. Lack of studying and blind review. Has anyone else experienced a terrible first exam score but able to pull a 18 point improvement?

I am retaking in November.

For PT 7 S1 Q 16 I don’t see how if more mass equals more light that if the comet is 60 times smaller how the previous estimates would be too small? that’s less mass, so how would answer choice B make any sense if it’s saying the exact opposite? I’m convinced the LSAT writers messed this question up. I’ve looked at this over and over and can’t possibly see how B could ever possibly be right.

hey all,

so i'm having a real tough time bridging this gap btw my BR score and timed score. i'm BRing 175ish (granted, I BR/review every question but pay the most attention/effort to the questions I circle) but my timed score is in the low 160s.

One trouble I have in particular is executing timed LR sections.

For LR, it often happens that questions don't "click" under timed conditions. For example, in one timed LR section I did today, I skipped a SA question because I couldn't find the gap/didn't know how to map out the logic of the question due to the convoluted grammar.

I skipped it, and even when I went back to it, I still couldn't get it.

Then after I finished the test, I went back to the question for BR, and after thinking about that question for like 4 minutes, I finally saw the gap and successfully map out the logic.

agh so frustrating that i wasn't able to do this under timed conditions.

any advice or suggestions? many thanks.

hey all

so i've heard of some ppl who do this but just wanted to get everyone's broader feedback. i know many ppl disagree with looking at the questions first before reading the RC passage.

but how is this strategy?

first briefly scan the questions, see which questions have specific line references, and then go back to the passage and just note (draw a star/squiggly or something) next to those line references.

then read the passage, but when you come across a part of the passage that you previously noted (and that will be tested on a question), read that part a little bit more carefully/intentionally.

that way you'll be a little more prepared when you see that question after you finish reading the passage.

what do ppl think of this strategy? and advice or thoughts? thanks.

I'm writing in September and was struggling to get PT scores that I was happy with. I was consistently getting in the mid 160's on my PT's but my BR would always be above 170. I was missing most of my points from LR and RC. I skipped PT 50-59 so I could use the LR drills and they made the world of difference. On top of drilling at least one LG section every day of the week, I've been doing 4-6 LR drills a week on days that I don't take PT's (I do 3 PT's a week). Now I'm getting in the 170's. To other people in the same boat, I would say focus on keeping your LG above -2 and try to scoop as many of the LR points up as you can. I usually go -3 to -8 in RC, so I'm still trying to stabilize that and get it down by a few points, but by far the easiest points to rake up are the LG and LR.

Another big thing for me is the mental game. I've picked up guided meditation every morning using the app Headspace and regularly practice breathing and body awareness exercises throughout the day. They help me block distracting thoughts and focus on the task at hand. Taking 30 second breathing breaks during a section is really helpful for me if I start to feel overwhelmed/rushed. Before I write a PT, I sit at my desk and do nothing from 8:30-9 (check in for me is 8:30 and reports of my test center say the test doesn't usually start until at least half an hour after that). During that time I try to make myself feel as anxious/nervous as possible, and then spend the last 10 minutes mediating it away. Picking up a habit before writing the tests can be a really good thing. Something that you can do before writing each PT to get you in the right mood. I do the meditation thing. A good friend of mine who got into the 170's last year would go for a walk around the block every time before writing. Just a quick thing you can do to remind your brain that an LSAT is coming up and it's time to get serious. Almost like Pavlovian training for your head.

Anyway, hope that helps! Keep grinding and putting in the time. Anyone can succeed.

I studied philosophy in undergrad so I never expected to struggle with RC. Hundreds of pages every night were common but RC has nonetheless kicked my ass. I've been studying for over 8 months and nothing really ever "clicked"... until today.

I decided to switch it up a bit today and completed an RC section while sitting comfortably on my sofa (much like I would while reading a novel). A few things happened. Because I was incredibly relaxed I accidentally spent more time reading and understanding the passage (probably about 4 minutes). I also found eliminating answer choices to be a lot easier because I remembered what I read more clearly. In the end, I was pressed for time on the last passage but I imagine that is because I was moving at such a different pace. I only missed one question. This is significant for me because my average falls around -7 and my best RC score was previously -4. So this is obviously a huge outlier and I'm still not sure how it will work out for me in the long run. For now I'm just excited to try something new that might work!

Has anyone else experienced a significant jump after calming down and reading the passage a bit more naturally? I know spending more time up front on the passage leaves little room for error but maybe that's a better method for some people. I still had plenty of time to revisit each passage for the questions that called for it.

Does anyone else have a hard time remembering what they were thinking when they got a logic game question wrong? I can always remember my (wrong) thinking on LR and RC, so it's easier to learn from my mistakes. But when I do a logic game a second time through and get it right, I draw a blank. I don't know what I was thinking. I got it right this time. Geez. Anyway, it makes it harder to correct errors of thought. Anyone else in this situation?

Yay for small victories! Studying works guys (who'd've thought lol). The only thing I've been doing differently is doing the last passage first. It's helped my timing and confidence. Woo hoo!

I'm currently on this section of the CC right now. When I was watching JY diagram the game with the chart, I thought it was very useful/fast. However, I am still confused on when it is appropriate to use the chart. How do you know which grouping games to use it for?

I'm taking the September exam and really want to nail down LG since it's killing my scores. It can get as bad as -11, BR -0/-1. I foolproofed games 1-35 and I can get -0/-1 on almost all games that I do untimed but I can't seem to nail down consistency and timing. Since some games take longer than others I think I get panicked when I don't have set time benchmarks to refer to (I tried finishing the 1st in 5 min, the second in 7, the third in 8 and the last in 10ish but that gets way too confusing to keep track of) so I end of wasting a lot of time skipping around and setting up gameboards for each game but freaking out on the naked questions. Does anyone have any tips or a process they work through during a timed LG section? I am thinking of foolproofing again but I also want to be able to consistently scoring well on new material, I think I've memorized too much of the bundle to create good inference habits, but I might try it if I decide it can help.

No matter how many videos and notes I take I am still having trouble understanding when the necessary is being satisfied or failed and the same for sufficient. I understand what the rules are saying but I still am not understanding how to recognize the two when it comes to in/out games.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-9-section-3-game-2/

In reference to this game, in game board three we have In: K, N ,L and Q. I understood why L went in but for Q this is when I get lost. If K went in then I thought that the sufficient was being satisfied but if the sufficient is being satisfied then the necessary must be satisfied but that wasn't the case because Q became a floater which means that the necessary was satisfied. Can someone please clear up this confusion? I am not sure what I am missing or what isn't clicking.

I can't seem to find the rhythm for the Logical Reasoning sections, I keep getting at least 10 wrong per section. I am taking the LSAT in less than a month, any recommendations?

So I just wanted to start a survey regarding my thoughts on logic games. As we all know, although logic games can be really fun in the beginning they can certainly become very daunting and cumbersome under pressure and the stakes of an official exam. Who here would prefer to take LSAT with an extra LR or RC section instead? Who think he or she would score higher if LSAC were to take out the logic games section?

The question is fairly self-explanatory, but here's one of a number of examples: PT 4, Sec. 3 rates the overall difficulty as a 3/5 in the Question Bank but a 1/5 overall under the Free LG Explanations list. Can anyone clarify? Thanks in advance!