Hi y'all!

I took the Testmasters course for the September LSAT, started studying in July with a cold diagnostic of 153. My highest PT was a 169 two days before the LSAT (I had been steadily PTing around 165-170), and ended up with a 167 on test day.

During the course I had been knocked out by a nasty case of food poisoning for two weeks or so (I ended up in the hospital. Do NOT, I repeat, do NOT go to the Chipotle on N. State in Chicago) and had missed a lot of critical time for test prep. I sucked it up and took the LSAT anyway even though I knew I could've put more time in.

So, after the September scores came out, I registered for December. Upon realizing it was the basically the same price to reactivate my Testmasters account vs. getting 7sage (with like...50 more PTs, I mean c'mon), I have defected! I was wondering if anyone could give me any advice as to how I should go about using 7sage to prep.

My individual section breakdowns usually go something like -6/-7 on RC, -8/-9 on LR, and -0/-1 on LG. On the September test I posted -5 on RC (somehow got Judicial Candor all correct), -10 on LR (a whopping 7 points dropped on the second LR section), and -0 on LG.

LG was my weakest section starting out (I had missed something like 15-20 LG questions on my first diagnostic) so I had put most of my time into Games. Other than drilling individual LR question types and RC sections repeatedly, I didn't give my due diligence to those sections and suffered for it.

I've skimmed through a few course videos already but don't really know how to structure my study schedule around the material. I don't feel it's feasible (or efficient) to do all 800 hours of the course before December. Should I just be doing more PTs? Identify what weaknesses? Figure out what the hell a Blind Review is? Give up completely? Any advice is appreciated. Thanks in advance.

The conclusion in the stimulus, I believe, starts from "However, as a result of its attempt..."

Here, the taxpayer is saying that due to the fiscal irresponsibility of Metro City, they now have to spend a lot more money on reconstruction of its bridges.

However, I thought answer choice (A) is too strong and suggestive of an answer, therefore chose (D) after process of elimination.

Author clearly doesn't state that they 'should' have budgeted more money for maintenance of its bridges. So how is this a MP question? It seems like the stimulus contains premises and answer choice is the actual conclusion--more like a MSS question.

Can someone confirm that the last sentence is the conclusion, and also explain how answer choice A makes sense?

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-25-section-4-question-01/

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-32-section-4-question-24/

Can someone please explain this? I got the right answer but I can't justify my reasoning

As a group, we were BR'ing this question and we could not figure out what the difference was between AC "A" and AC "C". The correct answer seems to hinge on the difference between "Average" (AC C) and Sometimes (AC A). The Stimulus states "Usually a few inches..." to parallel the concept of "usually", why is "Average" closer than "Sometimes"?

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-73-section-4-question-18/

I have a question regarding a logical translation of "derive solely from." This is from the answer choice (D) in PT62.S4.Q15. https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-62-section-4-question-15/

This question is an easy PSA question, and the argument is basically like this:

　　　P: A counterfeit doesn't give any less aesthetic pleasure than a real diamond

　　　——–——–

　　　C: A real diamond and a counterfeit are equally valuable

So we need "Pleasurable --> Valuable." And (D) is the only answer choice that says something close:

The value derive solely from the pleasure. (modified version of answer choice (D) in PT62.S4.15)

Is it ok to translate this as "If it is pleasurable, it is valuable"?

　Pleasurable --> Valuable

In the video, J.Y. says that D is saying "How much is it worth? The only thing you gotta check is aesthetic pleasure it provides" so I think it is ok to translate as above, but I can also interpret it as:

The value depends on the pleasure.

And I think it would mean:

　Valuable --> Pleasurable

Can you help me figure out what derive solely from means?

Hi,

Just starting to create my resume for law school and wanted to know if anyone would be willing to send me theirs so that I can see the proper format/template and how a law school resume should be constructed. Would really appreciate, thanks!

So I desperately need help with improving on logical reasoning. Right now my blind review is close to 19/25. On timed sections, I get around 15. I am writing the December test so I can take all the advice I can get.

I have heard that repeatedly doing untimed questions helps big time as you begin to recognize the patterns in the flaws/answer choices. Right now, I have been doing untimed LR sections in groups of 5 questions so that I don't get use to doing specific question types since I noticed I was getting use to doing one type of question and had troubles switching back and forth when doing an entire section/PT.

What has worked for you guys? I find myself struggling with questions where I have trouble understanding the stimulus or with longer questions, any tips on how to get around this? Should I just keep drilling? Will I eventually see an improvement?

I am wondering if my approach to NA questions is wrong? Despite some concerns about my approach I am still usually getting the correct answer; however, this is not good for test day!

I read the question stem

Read the stimulus, but look for the conclusion

Find the support

Try and find a gap between the conclusion and support (but I struggle with this step sometimes).

I usually get answer choices down to 2-3 (mostly 2)

At this point I’m sort of confused so I just try and negate the remaining answer choices. But sometimes when I negate both answer choices, I feel as if both would destroy the argument?

Thoughts/advice??? What is your approach to NA questions? Thank you! ?

I was wondering if the number of problem sets differ with different packages? Like holy shit I'm about to hit Flaw questions and I see 24 problem sets and it seems like the 'difficult' sets begin somewhere near 17th set. Wtf I'll never finish the CC.

I'm getting almost every flaw question wrong. I'm not sure why, when I do BR and really take time on the questions re-reading stimulus and answer choices, I can usually get the correct answer but still have difficulty. Is there a specific list that I could possibly use to memorize all the cookie-cutter flaws and answer choices corresponding to those particular flaws? Should I make flash cards? Any advice on this will be appreciated!

So this question was an oddball for me. I know it's something we've seen before where we are given a principle/rules/whatever and we have to apply it to given situations. I normally do a fairly decent job of keeping track of all the "rules" in my head but this one really played with me. It's an "except" question as well which threw in an extra degree of uncertainty when working through it.

I found three major problems that hit me during the timed section because of this problem;

1.) It was an "easy" question objectively, but turned into a time sink for me.

2.) I had a hard time keeping track of the different rules. For example;

Credit can be given only if the missed copy is reported to us within 24 hours and only if a replacement copy is unavailable.

Request for temp nondelivery must be made at least three days prior to the first day on which delivery is to stop.

These are very confusing to read and I think they got jumbled in my head, which caused the question to seem more difficult than it was.

3.) For the next 2-3 problems in the section I felt "shaken" by this and didn't feel as confident as I had before.

In hindsight this question should have been marked as an easy "skip and come back" question. I still managed to finish the section 5 min early and was able to address some errors in the section but I think I spent almost 3min on this question alone. I didn't really identify how much it threw me off until it was too late.

So my questions are;

1.) How do I not let a question throw me off if I encounter something like this?

2.) How could I have identified this sooner as a time sink question?

3.) Is there a better way to "map" this out to keep track of the rules? Would drawing the conditionals here have helped?

4.) How do you guys remind yourself that it is an "except" question when you are knee deep into the AC and start to feel the confusion?

I'm in the midst of my first really intensive bout of studying on RC, and I'm a little hung up on strategy. Out of the last 5 or 6 sections I've done, there have been two passages that have really tripped me up. On those two sections I finished around the 31 minute mark, so I had time to go back to have another shot at it. It's what to do with that time that I'm not sure of right now. I'm already trying to force myself to slow down when I notice something isn't sinking in on a passage. Most passages I can read around 2:30 and go -0/-1, and I've spent up to 3:30-3:45 on tougher passages up to this point. These have been in the -3/-4 range (one even got worse on BR...). Does anyone have any tips on whether I should spend even more time up front, or is having the distance of the second pass at the end a better strategy? If I'm going back to a passage at the end that I have 3+ circled questions on, should I dive back into the questions or read through part or all of the passage again? It's kind of a limited sample right now, but it's definitely been an ongoing trend on RC for me. Right now these passages are pretty much my biggest LSAT nightmare.

I am currently starting to go over LR once again to really improve and I want to make changes to how I approach improving each type of question.

This question is applicable to all LR type questions, but I want to know what your routine is for improving a certain type of LR question. Do you do problem sets and then drill an entire LR section. Just problem sets? Timed? Not timed? I think you see where I'm going with this. I've also gone through the CC twice so many of the problem sets are familiar to me and it hurts my objectivity sometimes.

I just want to hear your different ways to about this. Thanks y'all!

Hey Folks,

I need help with something.

It seems that whenever I get an LR question wrong, it's one of my contenders, but I just don't see the right answerr in the moment. What's especially frustrating is that the correct answer is either immediately before or immediately after the answer that I choose.

Any guidance or tips?

Anyone know if it's allowed to use a highlighter on the test?? I'm trying different strategies with RC and think highlighting will help. Any insight much appreciated. Thanks

Hi everyone! So, I have finished all the curriculum and I am doing the December Exam. I am now doing timed sections. So far, my biggest challenge is answering all the questions on time. I missed an average of 2 to 3 questions in each timed section I have done. I am trying to figure out strategies to be faster in going through all the questions. These are the ones I have been trying so far:

I am sure many others have trouble in finishing sections on time. I am wondering if you guys have used other strategies to improve your performance!

Thank you!

any times on quickly properly identifying what kind of game it is?

Hi all, during some of July and most of August, I foolprooed 1-35. And then I started to go back through the games immediately after I was done to make sure I could do a full section under timed conditions (I FPed by doing six new games a day, timing each individually and separately). However, I found that I was going -2 or even -3 per section.

So I stopped. I only looked at games during a PT.

And y'know what? I've gone either -1 or -0 on every single PT I've taken since (six, so far). FPing is time intensive. I was doing 6 new games two times and then doing the 6 games from the previous day a third time AND 6 games from a week earlier. All in one day, starting at 5am and fitting it in between working 7:45am-5pm. This is all to say that FPing takes a shit ton of work. It is exhausting. But your brain is taking it all in, somehow. So if your plateauing---or even backsliding---take a break. Don't look at a game for two weeks. And then get back on the horse and you'll really see how much you've improved. Of course this is all anecdotal but I just realized today how much that break probably improved my morale.

This question tripped me up a bit, not because I didn't understand what I was being asked to do, but because I couldn't really differentiate between some of the answer choices.

Specifically answer choices C, D and E.

(C) Prove that there are factors other than number of police officers that are more important in reducing crime....

(D) Demonstrate that there is no relation between police officers and crime....

(E) Suggest that the number of police officers is not the only influence on the crime rate....

I was able to eliminate answer choice C because it said MORE important, which was not the purpose; however, D and E still trip me up.

I understand that D says number of police and crime rate are not correlated. Which in the stimulus he says;

Which to me suggests they are not correlated.

I also understand why E can be right. I just think the statistics speak more to D than to E. What am I missing here?

I am starting to Fool proof LG. However, sometimes I remember the answer choice from watching the video, so I choose it automatically. Anyone have similar experiences, and any way to solve this?

Ok, I might be exaggerating when I say "punish prephrases," but I noticed that the prephrases, especially for the flaw/ assumption type questions, don't work as well in the recent PTs ( 70s up) compared to the older ones (the ones we used for CC). Also, prephrases make me to be a bit inflexible in considering answer choices (I am too quick to eliminate those that do not fit my prephrase), which hurts me as a result.

Most of the prephrases I used for older PT flaw Qs/ assumption Qs were right on, so I just picked the right answer quickly and moved on. With the newer PTs, I see that my prephrases attract me to trap answers. It seems better to leave the AC that matches my prephrase well as a contender (as opposed to choosing it and moving on) and REALLY carefully consider every other answer choice. I found that I do better in the recent PTs when I don't prephrase at all. Rather, I focus on EXACTLY what the conclusion is and stay open minded. Then, I see if the answer choice weakens/ negates the conclusion (in case if the Q type is flaw/ weaken for example).

Maybe prephrasing isn't to fault at all; maybe the recent PTs just punish those who are inflexible and expect the answer choice to have a certain form. Or maybe I don't have a solid prephrasing skill, but wasn't punished at all in older PTs, but am in newer ones.

Either way, does anyone else perceive a similar trend? What do you think about the utility of prephrasing in general?

I am trying to sink my teeth deep into RC and i am starting to realize i dont have a solid understanding of what every question type requires

Author inference questions (which view would the author most likely agree with)

Is this a MBT? Or more like an MSS?

Is the answer in the passage?

Chose the credited answer, because nothing else came close, but I'm quite bothered with it. Where does the passage say, or even suggest, that the finding about neutrinos might someday be extended to a complete solution of the dark matter problem?

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-40-section-4-passage-3-passage/

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-40-section-4-passage-3-questions/

Took me a lot of time to get this

How can we break it down to get to the correct answer choice faster?

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-25-section-2-question-22/

I got the question right, but any idea how to translate this into lawgic?

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-24-section-2-question-24/