Pardon my panicking, but I'm a month away from the LSAT and decided to change my approach to RC, with major emphasis placed on structure as opposed to details. In doing so, I managed to get -12 (woah!) on the RC section in PrepTest 63. Has anybody experimented with RC and fallen into such a rut in the past? In particular, has anybody experimented with an emphasis on structure? If so, do you have any advice as how to adopt this approach (in other words, what should I be doing to inculcate such an approach into my strategy)? (If it is relevant, my inspiration came from Mike Kim's free RC video online.)

Hey guys!

Here's the official June 2018 LSAT Discussion Thread. Please keep all discussions of the June 2018 LSAT here!

We know that everyone will be excited to discuss what was on the June 2018 LSAT, but here are some ground rules:

:warning: Don't mention specifics about the test! (e.g., "I got B for question 6" or "the 3rd LG was sequencing")

It can get both us and you in a lot of trouble!

:warning: Saying that the test was hard/easy is okay, but anything more specific is not okay!

:warning: The only exception: you can say which sections were real or experimental. For example, asking questions like “Was the LG with "flowers" experimental?” is okay. You can say “The LG section with "flowers" was real!” But you cannot say “the 3rd game of the real section was In/Out game.”

TL;DR: PLEASE don't talk specifics about June 2018 LSAT!

Have fun discussing!

If cars drive faster, there will typically be a higher accident/fatality rate.

PT 57 Spoiler below

I'm writing out an explanation for https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-57-section-2-question-20/ and I got to AC C where it's wrong for different reason, but I do see another assumption that I stated above. I wanted to know if this is alright for the LSAT.

Now that we're a little over a month away from the September LSAT, I'm just curious what everyone is focusing on/how you're hammering out your routines. I'm taking one PT per week and reviewing/drilling/fool proofing in between PTs. I'm a little bit nervous that that won't be enough PTs before the test, but I tend to do better when I do fewer PTs and put more focus on the other aspects of studying.

Hello everyone!

I've taken about 15 PT's now, and am still consistently missing flaw/strengthen/weaken problems—basically the questions that force me to think outside of the box. When I go over questions I got wrong, the correct answer always makes sense, yet when test-taking I struggle with coming up with those types of answers myself. Has anyone else had this problem? Do you have any recommendations for working on this type of thinking and practicing it? I've gone over the CC a couple of times now for these types of questions, but it never seems to stick...

Sometimes I have a hard time understanding what the answer choice is saying. For example, on Method Reasoning questions, I understand what X is doing, but have a hard time formulating the words into LSAT words/answer choices. Does anyone know a good way to solve this issue?

Hey everybody!

I had this idea for RC that I wanted to run by the community and get some input. After all is said and done, the gist of the RC is to actively read so that after every sentence, you are constantly building a puzzle and applying it back on the previously read sentences. At the end of the day, it isn't so simple to keep all that new info neatly filed away in your brain. A powerful tool that is missing here is review. The thing about reviewing is that you need downtime in between the material studied and the actual review for your brain to settle. Just skimming over the selection real quick after the initial read won't do it. So I was thinking, what if you read all four paragraphs in succession and then return to the first selection, skimming it in about two minutes and then doing the questions on it and continuing for the rest of the selections? I have tried it twice. Both times I finished by the skin of my teeth (not much improvement from doing the questions right after an initial read). However, I answered most questions more confidently and quickly than before although my overall score didn't improve much. Has anybody been doing it this way? I figured I could improve in this strategy but I'm still not convinced it is the best way.

Hello 7sagers,

Iv been studying for 8 months. Went through the CC, did Powerscore, did Manhattan Prep, and I'm still getting -8, -7, -6, with my BR usually being around -4, -6. I feel like I've made a lot of traction when it comes with RC and LG. With RC, I realized that If I just read it slower with a narrator's voice in my head as I'm reading it, that I was able to retain a lot of the information and structure, with very minimal notations. With LR though, I feel like my strategy is obviously off, something about how I'm reading it, my focus isn't where it needs to be, I'm not sure. I try to read them with an eye for the conclusion and premise, but when I'm cognizant of this, I feel like I'm not understanding it completely if that makes sense. I'm BR'ing correctly, I write all the answers I get wrong in an excel spreadsheet and go through each answer and reason it out, and I'm going to continue to do this but I think something is off with my reading strategy and my focus. Because I'm missing questions that I know, that are so obvious when I go to BR.

Just casting a large net here and seeing if others have felt this way, and what they did to master their focus and reading ability on LR, or any general tips on combating this would be much appreciated.

Hello everyone!

I am having trouble with point at issue questions and I know that you can either make a chart or just use your intuition.

I use the intuitive method and most of the time I overthink and choose answers that aren’t even mentioned by the two speakers. What if I try solving these questions like how JY solves the questions on comparative passages? Like read the first person’s argument and eliminate some answers and then read the next person’s argument to choose the right answer?

Does anyone use this kind of method?

Thank you!!

Biologist's argument: DF (deforestation continues at its present pace) -> KAE (the koala will approach extinction)

Politician's argument: /DF (stop deforestation) -> /KAE (save the koala)

So the politician's argument is a mistaken negation of the biologist's argument.

(A) is wrong because we do not know whether deforestation continues at its "present pace" so we do not know whether this is consistent with the biologist's claim.

(B) is right because even though deforestation is stopped, the koala could go extinct because deforestation could have stopped as a result of complete destruction of forests.

(C) is wrong because no one talks about reforestation.

(D) is wrong because it is consistent with the politician's argument rather than the biologist's

(E) is wrong because the biologist's argument says that the koala does not approach extinction only if deforestation does not continue at its present pace

Is my explanation correct for this question? Could anyone add explanation for this question? Thanks

Admin note: edited title; please use the format of PTx.Sx.Qx. Existing threads on PT2.S2.Q11: (1); (2)

To those who consistently score well in RC, do you usually have significant time remaining at the end like in LG or LR?

Hey guys. I recently was going through some comments in RC and came across a chat referencing the LOCI method that fellow 7Sager @Alex? Would anyone be able to point me toward more information on this or be able to describe to me what that method entails? Thanks a lot guys!

Good day to all! I need some help. I am always getting these type of questions wrong and have decided to make a brief overview of the typical question in the hopes that someone can PLEASE help. :)

Most strongly supports/stregthens/weakens/expresses/describes.

Is there a general strategy to these type of questions that any of you Jedi Masters have helped you to get these questions right?

Much appreciated and good luck to all!

I'm having a hard time brainstorming assumptions for SA, PSA, weaken and strengthen questions. Sometimes when I draw out the premises and conclusion and look for the missing assumption, I end up with something that's either not in the AC. It's been interfering with how well I can do on these questions. I've practiced quite a lot, but does anyone have any tips on how to be smart about working on this? Thanks!

Does anyone have a "cheat sheet" for how to approach different question types? ex. main point is to find conclusion then look for answer. same idea but for all the different question types

I just finished going over a warm up piece from LG PT46 and had a bit of a realization during BR. I commented at the link below and I would absolutely love to know what other 7Sagers think about this added step going onto each LG game.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-46-section-4-game-2/

It's sorry it's so long. Thank you!!

I had taken the Princeton review course last fall in preparation for the December 2017 exam , which I found to be the least helpful and disappointingly scored a 147. I took it again in February and got the same score. Has anyone been in a similar situation and have any tips/ suggestions on how they improved?

i take the lsat in September, I am scoring around 157 in practice testing, what are the chances of scoring in the mid 160's in 1 more month. I study about 10 hours a week and am planing on pushing that to15-20 for this last month. My GPA is currently a 3.83 and really want to get into UC Berkeley. Given this, would any of you recommend changing my test date to November?

PS. does anyone know if being Latino helps in law school admissions, Thank you

I am wondering whether I should be drilling games by using the Powerscore logic games bible because I did buy it before, or whether I should just continue taking PTs? If I get games wrong, then I can see what I got wrong and try to watch the videos on it? What's the best idea because I am taking the test in September?

Hi guys, just a quick question. When I'm drilling for logic games (doing timed sections in the bundle), is it a big deal not to be able to get it on the first try? I find untimed, I can do them really well (accuracy wise) but I only struggle with timing. Once I watch some of the videos or even attempt the set again I am able to do much better. The reason I'm asking is because obviously you only get one chance on test day so I just wanted to see the general opinion on this topic is

Thanks guys

Hello everyone, on reading comprehension I usually miss the questions where you have to go back to the given line number in the question stem. I usually read 2-3 lines above and below the given line number. Any suggestions on how to improve on this type of question? Like should I quickly scan the questions before I read the passage and note the line number that is going to be asked in the question? Or would that just be a waste of time?

Thank you very much in advance.

Does anyone have a specific way of dealing with these problems. I swear I almost consistently get them wrong time after time despite understanding that the answer is in the passage. I don't know what I'm specifically doing wrong but I suppose I must be falling for a trap answer or something like that. This occurs with any question that asks to explain the purpose of a specific word or phrase. Any help would be very appreciated. Thank you.

Hi everyone,

Just thought I'd share some things I've learned in the course of studying for LR and that I'm really excited about!

I would like to say that I did go -1 on both LRs on my diagnostic and since then have only fluctuated in the -4 to 0 range. But I REALLY, REALLY want to emphasize that it didn't mean that I necessarily understood what I was doing or that I was any kind of master. I have no doubt that some of these good scores, especially on my diagnostic, had a lot more to do with luck.

I know this because I realize that my mindframe taking an LR section now is so, so different than before. 42 sections of LR later, and I can FEEL the way my brain has changed. 905 of the time now, I can already guess what the correct answer is going to be before I even start reading the multiple choice options. Whereas before, I used to run out of time, I finish with minutes to go... sometimes even 10 minutes left. Now, the only questions I get wrong are the really hard ones -- like 5-circle-difficulty scale hard. I want to emphasize that it's not because I'm any kind of genius, but because of tips, a lot of which I've learned from all of you.

Things that have helped:

Anyway, I'm making this post because I want to emphasize that I really feel like my brain has changed. I feel so much more confident in my LR skills, not like I'm blundering my way through and hoping. For those of us who aren't happy with your scores, it's completely possible to improve! And for those of us who did well at first, there's still probably room for improvement. Thanks everyone!

Or how do you decide whether to proceed without writing out your game boards (and write out game boards for separate questions)? Any advice appreciated - thanks guys!

Hello,

It's Aug 1 and I am transitioning from material to prep tests only for the final month before taking the Sept LSAT. I know...should have been doing them more often throughout, but have been doing a lot of drills and sections. For the prep tests that I have done, I've started with the older ones. About to print a stack of tests and wondering if it makes more sense to start from the more recent tests or earlier? Basically, if I wanted to print 15 prep tests, which ones would you suggest?

Thank you!