Simple question really, when can you register for the September 17 test? Since I'm fairly certain I want to take it in September I want to register early to get the testing center closest to me. Just wondering if anyone knows roughly around when registration opens.

Hi everyone,

I'd like to share a RC strategy that's been working for me.

PLEASE DO NOT SHARE THIS INFORMATION WITH OTHER SITES/ COMMUNITIES.

I'm just trying to give back to this community that has given me much.

Quick note about me:

When I first began the LSAT prep, I didn't think that I needed to focus on RC much, due to my arrogance.I majored in Political Science (Political Theory) and got a master's degree in humanities. I'm very used to critically reading and analyzing dense, complex materials. I also happened to get a perfect score on GRE verbal. I didn't have much trouble with the GRE RC passages, so I thought that my experience would be the same for the LSAT passages.

I was wrong.

When I first timed myself, I realized that I go over 10 min easily per passage, with 1+ wrong. I'd be missing on average 5 questions wrong per section, way over the allotted time. Since then, I have been studying and researching various RC strategies to help me, such as Nicole's webinar, Corey's active reading webinar and @"Cant Get Right" 's, (they were also super duper helpful. I really highly recommend watching them), some discussion postings from here (the posting from @theforms is also very helpful) , some from TSL, Mike Kim's trainer, etc.

After synthesizing my own strategy and using it, I am now consistently 2~3 min under with 0-2 wrong per section.

Here's my synthesized strategy from the various resources above.

Success to RC = a seamless integration of 1. active reading + 2.reading for structure.

My strategy is on how to INTEGRATE the two. I'm not going to go into details on explaining what is each, because there are many resources out there already.

Before I go over my strategy, I will still briefly mention what active reading and reading for structure are.

What is an active reading? It is engaging with the reading as if one is having a dialogue. Think of it as active listening; it is about being totally present, but mindfully detached. We all know some of the crucial techniques to actively read well. Below are the especially effective techniques for me.

Here's an example sentence. "LSAT passages are like paper tigers: they appear to be formidable at first, but get easier over time."

When you encounter the sentence, think about what question would prompt the above sentence as an answer. My question would be, "how difficult are the LSAT passages?" Here, it helps you to articulate the essence of the sentence: It is about the difficulty of the LSAT passages.

Reading for structure

Like I said, I won't get into the details of reading for structure.

Now here's the crucial integration piece I'd like to share with you- how active reading and reading for structure integrate and feed off from one another.

The key is to

Step 1. find the central theme (the key subject matter that forms a basis for an argument, hypothesis, claim, finding, problem) in the opening paragraph and treat each sentence as revealing the aspects of that central theme. Compile the aspects of the central theme as you are reading, and add them on to the central theme. This is pretty abstruse, so I will use an example (PT 32 Passage 4 opening paragraph) to explain.

sentence 1: something about wine. - (hold this in thought as you are reading. Something about wine is the central theme)

sentence 2: wine - distinct. (Here's an aspect of the central theme, wine: it is distinct. try to utilize the active reading techniques mentioned above. What question would the sentence be answering?

sentence 3: wine- distinct b/c of health benefits (there's another aspect. It is distinct. Why? Because it has health benefits)

sentence 4: wine- distinct health benefits- obscured by the scientists.

Do you see what I am doing? I am simply adding on and connecting the previous information to the new information. Going from simply "wine," the central theme as revealed by sentence 1, I now have a more clear picture about this central theme and its aspects by sentence 4.

The paragraph ends here. What do I have now in sentence 4, the last sentence?

The scientists (who? go back to sentence 1) have obscured the healthful benefits of wine that other alcoholic beverages do not have.

Step 2. Find the structure.

What does this compilation of the central theme + its aspects signify? What does it mean? Why did the author write this?

Simply try to articulate using this mantra, "the author is trying to..." with the compilation that you have at the end of the paragraph.

The author is trying to... 1. suggest that wine has a health benefit that other alcoholic beverages do not have (this is the author's position) 2. counter "the scientists."

So think of having 2 mental columns as you are reading.

The left column: find a central theme--> find the essential aspects of this theme in each subsequent sentence and add on to the central theme found. (like what I did above. wine-> wine is distinct -> wine is distinct in x way -> wine is distinct for x way but that distinction has been obscured by Y)

The right column: after each paragraph, think about the final compilation in the left column and simply ask, "why did the author write this?" Why did the author write that "wine is distinct for x way but t hat distinction has been obscured by Y?" The answer to this question = the purpose of each paragraph.

Repeat this for each paragraph.

Using this strategy, I read the passage in about 4:15 min and answered the questions in 4 min. Total: 8:15 and 30 seconds under the allotted time / passage.

Please help. I don't understand why (C) is wrong.

Stimulus: No combining publicity appearance and competition. So it is "not both" rule.

PA-->/Competition, or it could be Competition -->/PA

PA-->/Competition

Competition

_________________

/PA

(C)

Tomato thrive --> Hot Summer

/Hot Summer

______________________

/Tomato thrive

I was also having trouble subtle differences of serious emergency and critical emergency.

(B)

less serious emergency -->/critical emergency

fairly minor emergency

____________________

/critical emergency

I would think fairly minor emergency would also be non critical emergency....

I am nearing the end of the games portion in the CC [total progress %77] and I was wondering if I should have been fool proofing every single problem set or not. I have been studying 55 hour weeks for the past month now and I am still "35 hours" (according to the syllabus) behind in the CC. I think fool proofing the enormous amount of games would take a few weeks.

I am fully open and willing to take the time and fool proof the hell out of these games, but I was wondering if taking two weeks to get all of them done is worth it if it sets me back two weeks on my study schedule.

I do realize that the ultimate goal here is it do well on the LSAT and that this method will enable me to do so. But I just feel a bit overwhelmed as I am always behind in the CC, no matter how rigorous I set my my own study schedule.

Any thoughts?

For most of the time I have been doing the CC, I have been struggling keeping focus as I read the LR questions. When I time myself, I can't keep focus sometimes which causes me to miss key words/details resulting in missing the question. Its extremely frustrating when I have to keep re-reading sentences/the paragraph because I don't understand what I have just read.

I have tried to read random question passages and quickly write down what I have just read to improve memory and focus but I don't know if that is a waste of time or not. I'm about done with the CC and I really need to fix this problem or I'm screwed 6 ways to Sunday for this test.

Are there any drills or tips anyone has with LR focus or just focus in general?

So I've been studying for the LSAT for a year and some change now.

Finally decided to sign-up for 7Sage in December.

I was averaging around 165 with BR's in the 168-9. I went through the curriculum and for my last 4 PT's my actual score is still around 165, BR score has been in the low to mid 170's. My major improvements came in LG and LR.

I miss anywhere from 4-7 on LR (mostly PSA and Flaws)

-0/-1 in LG

5-9 in RC.

I'm hopeful that with another two months of studying I can shave off a couple of mistakes from my LR and consistently hit -0 on LG. But my Reading Comprehension is so incredibly inconsistent.

A lot of times I'll do -2/-1 on RC drills but when I sit to take the real thing all hell breaks loose.

I've watched the webinars on Reading Comprehension and make an effort to read actively but this is just driving me nuts.

I remember when I first started studying for the test, RC was by far my best section (-2/-3). After a year of studying I'm missing three times that much.

Any help would be greatly appreciated!

Hello all, I hope everyone's studies are going well. I am wondering if it is worth it to purchase the older preptests that are currently sitting in my cart online. Everyday I browse through the discussion board and I believe ran into somebody advising to fool proof all the logic games from 1-35 to help with making inferences. I have really taken my time going through the curriculum because I work a very demanding and hectic full time job and plan to finish by the end of April and complete at least 20+ preptests before the planned target test date of September. I was originally going to complete the newer preptests (60+) and save the older ones for drilling along with the problem sets I have also saved. Through really taking my time with the curriculum I am getting more accurate and faster at completing LR and RC questions everyday, and I heard the key to really boosting your score is to become great at LG. I really want a LSAT score of 160+ to give myself the best chance at my dream law schools and if buying the older preptests is worth it I will definitely do so. I appreciate any insight anybody could offer,thank you in advance.

Hi I was just watching JY's video on grouping games set up 1.

https://classic.7sage.com/lesson/grouping-game-1-game-board-setup/

I'm wondering why "neither nor" in rule 3 is interpreted as not both, as in S -> /Y , and W->/Y.

Why can't it be interpreted as biconditional? S (-) /Y as in S and Y are always apart.

Is it because unlike the in-out games, a biconditional in this a grouping game means that if, for example, Y is not in 1,then S must be 1? (which would be an incorrect inference given that there are more group options now)

If that's the case, if this game was an in/out game, could I still interpret the rule as a biconditional?

Many thanks in advance

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-63-section-3-question-21/

I'm trying to understand this passage fully...

I thought the data on the effects of the weed-killer would be misleading when it was drawn from studies of the weed-killer under a variety of soil condition because the effectiveness fluctuates. That's why I chose (D). I thought the premise was telling us how soil conditions ruin the data.

After watching J.Y.'s video I now (sort of) get (D) actually weakens the argument, but can someone help me understand why my thought process (above) is wrong?

Also why is this not a necessary assumption question? I think the argument has jumped from one idea (the molecules of a certain weed killer) to another (the data on the effects).

Hello everyone! I am new to 7Sage. Could someone please tell me where I can find the actual facts/questions explained in the videos?

Hey 7sagers! I am wondering if anyone can provide me with some advice on where to go from here in LR...

LR might be my worst section and I am having so much difficulty improving. It's not that a particular type of question gets me (in fact I tend to actually be better at the more technical lawgic based types like flawed parallel method of reasoning), it just seems that I am getting the majority of the answers wrong from questions 15-22 across every section. Often times I will misunderstand the stimulus or I will understand what the stimulus is implying and what to pick in the answer choice but will get confused about the wording in the answer choices and end up picking the wrong one. Note: English is my first language, I read extensively and have an MA degree and wrote a thesis paper. Is there any way to improve, or is it simply a matter of doing a ton of LR questions?

I have gone through the CC once and paid close attention to every different type of LR question while taking extensive notes, but it was a couple of months ago. Would a refresher be useful? I also have every LSAT from PT 1-75 and the accompanying Kaplan Explanations, so I began doing sections from early PTs untimed while taking notes on my computer to map out my reasoning, but am not seeing results, although it is still early (I have only done about three sections).

Any recommendations on where to go from here? Everyone provided me with amazing LG advice and I have been doing very well in that section so thank you to anyone who is reading this who helped me in that area, it feels great and I can confirm that the fool proof method is sound.

I will also be joining in the online study group for PT 70 this Saturday!

Thanks!

Specifically, what are some of the underlying traits that trip so many of us up? Grammar? Plurarlity of terms? AC order?

How do you improve upon these underlying traits? Marking up the stimulus? Check the conclusions in each AC first?

I have some thoughts on the matter, but I'd like to see what ya'll think.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-21-section-2-question-15/

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-23-section-3-question-23/

I do not understand why, "'it is never acceptable to offer experimental treatments to patients who experience no extreme symptoms of the the relevant disease" is translated as no extreme symptoms (NES) -----> not acceptable to offer exp. treatment (/AOET).

If we negate the necessary - wouldn't that be 'it is sometimes acceptable to offer ex. trmt'. I do not grasp how just repeating what the sentence says is negating the necessary in this case? I'm having trouble in general with these 'not, never, double-negative type statements, and invariably getting them wrong. please help.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-57-section-3-question-15/

Hello guys,

So I just completed the BR on this passage, and I am still tripped up on question 1.

I understand why answer choice A is correct, expect for the bit concerning "oil companies". Can someone point me to where this is supported in the passage? or are we supposed to presume that the "researchers" are from the oil companies?

Thanks,

Kristen

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-10-section-3-passage-1-passage/

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-10-section-3-passage-1-questions/

Hey guys,

A 7Sager wrote in with a question that I thought you guys could help out with! Here it is:

I recently enrolled in your program and I had a technical question to ask you about one of your lessons. I believe you covered it however just for clarification, in bi-conditionals referring to Logic Games (in/out) in specific Prep-Test 24, Section 4-Game 1. One of the rules states that Fenugreek is not included in the same recipe as Nutmeg. When I wrote out the rule, N /F, however there is another rule that ultimately connects through G N (Ginger in same recipe as Nutmeg). I wanted to ask, when you diagrammed it on your lesson, you wrote the top rule as F/N (aren't they the same?). And ultimately your chain was F/G/N however mine turned into GN/F (/N going from outside to N in the middle). So....am I wrong? Isn't just N/F and F/N contrapositives but switched around, so I guess I'm deciding which side to put my / though (If I should have negated my N or F and if it should always be on the "right side" or can it be on the "left", it's interchangeable right?, but my rule seems ultimately a little "messed" up in comparison. I could use a quick clarification. I had a question and didn't know to whom I should write, thank you very much! I could really appreciate your help!

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-24-section-4-game-1/

Hi!

I was down to answers C and E and wasn't sure why E would be a better choice than C and vice versa.

I did watch JY's video and still have trouble figuring this out.

C- I thought this was supported by line 2-4. Wouldn't "word processors, spreadsheets, legal research systems" be counted as as legal research tools? I interpreted C as the computerized automated legal reasoning systems not being able to fulfill its original expectations and functions.

E- This is supported by line 55-58. However, I thought that the wording "computer specialists" is too narrow to capture the idea in E. That's why I hesitated.

What makes E better supported by C? Because I see both as textually supported.

Please let me know!

Thanks.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-51-section-2-passage-4-passage/

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-51-section-2-passage-4-questions/

All the test sites in and surrounding the NYC area are full for registration for the June LSAT. The options are to either be on the waitlist or go to Philly (Philly is the closest site based on my NYC zip code). Does anyone know if being on the waitlist is a promising option? Should I go ahead sign up for the one in Philly and hope that a spot will open up here in NYC? Any insights will be greatly appreciated!

I'm currently studying for the LSAT in June, but I'm wondering if I should take it in September. I'm working full time, and I think it would just give my more time to do some PTs. I was wondering if I'll have my score back in time to apply early enough in the application cycle to get some scholarship? Just curious. Thank you guys for being so helpful!

I understand it is advocated by JY, specifically in MBT, sufficient/pseudo assumption and parallel reasoning questions. Even if one seems to be getting nearly every question correct without writing the conditional logic down (sometimes I internalize it, sometimes I just think about it intuitively), would you say it is still essential just for good measure?

What does it mean when an answer choice, as is the case in PT17, Sec. 3, #20, Answer D, says, "Fails to consider the status..." of something?

In other words, in this instance, what is the definition of "status"?

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-17-section-3-question-20/

3 months into my LSAT prep and I thought I had logic games down, but I just attempted PT "C" and was surprised how difficult the games were. Went -3 in 41 minutes. Is this section particularly more difficult than the other ones? On the bright side, it was a fun section! Glad to know there's still room for improvement :)

Hey guys! I'm super stoked. I finally hit -3 on RC! I have been stuck at -4 for over a year! Now I know I should be striving for -0 but let me have this moment! LOL I was just as excited when I hit my first -0 on a passage. I've been loosely using Nicole's method for sometime but recently I decided to get stricter with it. Sorry, I don't have anything to add about how I achieved my one point success. It's nothing new. I was just super geeked and decide to post! Somebody feels me, I know! Have a good day, yall!!

I was wondering if anyone has a schedule they follow for fool proofing logic games? I usually just do one the next morning, and schedule that same game about 2-3 days later on a calendar, but I was wondering if anybody has a different routine?

Thanks in advance!

I can't see why (E) is wrong. Could anyone explain why (D) is right?? Appreciate in advance

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-19-section-2-question-04/

The correct answer to this question is information that would help to evaluate the argument in the stimulus. If the information is taken to one extreme, it will strengthen the argument, and if the information is taken to the other extreme, it will weaken the argument. Under this standard, why isn't (D) correct?

The argument breaks down as follows, imo:

Premise: A nearly complete skeleton of an earlier dinosaur that was not a T.Rex had the T.Rex characteristics (big head, small arms, long legs), but was much smaller in size and lighter than the T.Rex.

Conclusion: The T.Rex's features (big head, small arms, long legs) did not develop in order to accommodate the size and weight of the T.Rex.

I understand why (B) is a question that would help evaluate the argument, but why isn't (D) considered information helpful to evaluate the argument?

If the earlier dinosaur is NOT related to the T.Rex, then wouldn't that weaken the argument by leaving it more vulnerable to the objection that some difference between that dino and the T.Rex explains the counterexample away? And imagine if the dinosaur was almost exactly the same as a T.Rex (so extremely closely related) -- wouldn't that strengthen the argument by strengthening the relevance of the counterexample and making it harder to distinguish it?

Let's go a little bit outside the stimulus to explore this issue -- if we had found a mammal skeleton that had the T.Rex head, arm, and leg characteristics, but the mammal was tiny, would that evidence be just as powerful as the skeleton evidence in the stimulus? If not, then doesn't that prove the relatedness of the skeleton specie and the T. Rex IS helpful to evaluating the argument? And if the answer is yes (that a mammal skeleton would be just as powerful as a dino skeleton as evidence for the conclusion), how?

Thank you for any thoughts.