I'd say I'm pretty darn familiar with the 19 common types of flaws. However, I feel like I've never seen a circular reasoning flaw actually on a PT. Sometimes I second guess myself on a tricky flaw question when it's in the AC's. Anyway, would love it if anyone has come across one of these flaws in their recent PT's?

I'm into the high 60's series, so hopefully I haven't been oblivious to them all this time. But I do think they are a rarer flaw.

Anyone else experience a RC drop after the CC? My first diagnostic I took back in November had me at missing 7 questions in the RC. I've consistently scored missing 5-7 on each RC for entirety of my LSAT studying. Honestly, I haven't really bothered to beef up my RC score because I was doing okay without studying for it, and so I focused on the LR and LG. Usually the incorrect questions are from the last passage when I'm feeling a little rushed. SO I decided to go over the 7Sage CC for the RC to help me eliminate those 5-7 wrong RC questions. Now, after doing the 7Sage CC for the RC my score has COMPLETELY dropped. Like, -14 for RC instead of the usual 5-7 wrong. Anyone else experience this, and how did you undo the damage?

I've been really struggling with LR timing. I watched the webinar here (https://classic.7sage.com/webinar/timing-and-levels-of-certainty/), in which they suggested not spending more than 3 minutes or so on a question because there's a better chance you'll just get it wrong. But other people have suggested 'giving the question the time it needs,' not being afraid to invest 3 minutes into a question rather than rushing and getting it wrong.

Then, there's the '10 in 10' or '15 in 15' idea where you push to finish questions in a given amount of time.

I've only been getting through 17-20 questions per LR, getting 2-3 of those wrong, plus the ones I don't get to for a total of 6-9 questions wrong per LR for the past few months with no change. I'd really appreciate any thoughts people have on this and how to manage the ideas of investing time required and skipping when appropriate.

I asked about what types of questions rely on the understanding of sufficient and necessary conditions the other day. I got a lot of really good answers. The issue I am having, and have continued to have throughout my studies, is that they don't stand out to me. I spent a lot of time learning the indicators, making flash cards to remember how to employ them and I have it down by heart. When I'm in the LR section however, I am so hyper sensitive to these words I pick them all out. I have yet to find a situation where I have seen a question, realized it is dependent on my understanding of suff/nec and applied my knowledge to it. Is there a method to identifying when mapping X -> Y on a question? What am I missing?

In LG it is extremely clear and I have no issues.

Hey Everyone,

So far we have done a regular passage and an A-B passage. This time we will be going over a science passage. We will be applying the same strategy that we learned in the previous two sessions. The key is to keep practicing with these strategies so we can get better. This time we will be doing PT 44, Section 1, Passage 3.

I would recommend not doing the passage before coming to the meeting so we can work through this together and you can really practice with the right strategy. All you are required to have for the meeting is the passage and questions in front of you in some form.

If you have never attended one of these sessions please do not worry that you will not know what's going on. I will review the strategies before starting the passage and you will catch on.

To join the meeting all you have to do is click the link below at the specified date and time.

I'll see you all there! : )

Free RC Tutoring - Sami

Sun, May 21, 2017 4:00 PM - 5:30 PM EDT

Please join my meeting from your computer, tablet or smartphone.

https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/283806493

You can also dial in using your phone.

United States: +1 (571) 317-3122

Access Code: 283-806-493

First GoToMeeting? Try a test session: https://care.citrixonline.com/g2m/getready

What strategies work best for you? How many passages do you attempt in practice tests? What have you found helps in increasing your score?

Thank you so much in advance!

Hello All,

I have definitely improved in mapping out my LG games and making inferences and other actions involved in tackling LG games. But when I take practice tests, I seem to be lost at the outset (maybe feeling pressured because of time) and take alot of time to determine what strategy to employ (linear, in/out,grouping etc...) When I come back to the question to blind review it after watching the help videos, the question becomes way more easy than when I try to tackle it under timed conditions.

Is there any fast way or are there any immediate rules to determine which strategy is best to use to tackle a game?

I am stuck on some of the MSS questions, Weaken, and the difference with how to tell MSS and Strengthen apart especially when C/C Strengthen is in play.

For example, PT 16, S2, Q21 was on a webinar with Nicole and presented as a C/C Strengthen question. The stem says what I would take as a MSS question though, stating "Which one of the following, if true, most strongly supports the conclusion drawn by the entomologists?

Nicole suggested looking for the one answer that actually doesn't strengthen the entomologists conclusion at all, rather to choose the AC that doesn't support it, thus making the entomologists conclusion more sound.

Such as A causes B is the conclusion, so the answer needs to be either: B causes A, C causes both A and B, or No relationship.

Can someone please explain how and why I would know that I wasn't supposed to be choosing a supporting answer, but rather a conflicting one? Are there any tricks or key words for questions like these?

I thought that this was an example of a part to whole fallacy. The author concludes that the decrease in revenue is exaggerated because part (parts and service companies) of the industry have succeeded even after admitting that manufacturers' share of the industry's revenue has fallen. Does (B) address this flaw?

https://classic.7sage.com/lesson/preptest-6-print-and-take-test/

Anyone receive accommodations for the June test?

Any word on when the explanations for PT80 will be released?

Could someone help me shed some light on why the correct answer is correct? The passage refers to "such protection", as protection for the sellers (to not have to sell to a buyer who bids extremely low), but the correct answer (E), doesn't seem to be related to that at all. A bit confused.

So I'm working on these question types and have found a pattern. When it is a Causation strengthen question, the answer choice becomes apparent very quickly to me. I am able to identify it, and explain why the rest are wrong with a decent amount of ease. Once the question stem changes to weaken however, I no longer can see the answer and missed all of them. J.Y. said in his explanation that these two types of questions are really the same when it comes down to identifying the answer choice. So what am I doing wrong?

Might be a stupid question but should I, after copying down the inferences, answer the questions or am I only writing down the inferences? TYA!

I'm not sure exactly when it opened up, but I just wanted to let all those wondering about when September's registration would open up that it's allowing registration now! Good luck, everyone!

Hey everyone, I'm just posting here to see what people might think of my decision to postpone taking the LSAT until September. My goal is to test 170. My average is in the mid 160s but the only tests I've been able to score in the 170s have been retakes. Fresh tests are all in the 160s. :( I don't want to postpone because I feel emotionally ready but I think it's the wisest thing to do. The most annoying thing is how expensive it is!! And $100 to postpone vs 180 to just sign up again. I know that's not nothing but... fricken LSAC. Anyway, what do people think? To postpone or not to postpone?

Also, this is a related question to getting out of 160s plateau. I've seen on here that top scorers get through LR with like 10 minutes to spare. That's never happened to me and I'm not sure if my goal should be to just "work faster" (a mentality that, when I adopt, just makes me rush and be careless) or if I should continue to be cautious, to utilize POE unless I'm almost 100% sure of an answer, to give myself two read throughs if I don't understand a stimulus right off the bat as opposed to immediately skipping. Is there merit to a 'slow and steady wins the race' type of approach for top scorers in LR?

Did anyone take it after they'd seen major improvements (my diagnostic was a 153) but not quite reached their max? Any thoughts on LR strategy would also be appreciated.

Good luck to those who know they're ready for June! Jealous!

I am so confused by the video explanation on this one. At 1:27 the video says that an answer choice is "totally compatible to the statement above because they have nothing to do with each other"

===> WHAT??? Compatibility is not having anything to do with a subject? I can use some guidance. Thanks.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-38-section-4-question-25/

I've noticed that some of the LGs in the most recent PTs don't fall into the strict sequencing/grouping/grouping and sequencing categories. In several places on 7sage, users note that they found games from earlier PTs helpful in practicing for these nontraditional games. Can anyone recommend specific games from specific tests to practice?

thanks!

Doing a quick review of concepts that I struggled with early on.

I remember the following rule being simple to diagram:

L is before M but after K.

K-L-M

But I also remember that there is another type of rule that is similar to the above but it involves and "or". I think it goes like this:

K is before M or after L, but not both.

M-K-L, or L-K-M?

Does anyone know what I am referring to? If so, could you link to the lesson or a game that highlights the above?

I can't remember where it came from but the difference between the two above really stumped me at some point....

I got -9 on one section and I was wondering what advice or steps anyone has to reduce that number? I am keeping the main point in mind in each passage and relating the passages to each other but I still got 9 wrong. Thank you so much in advance!

Hey 7Sagers,

I've been studying for at least a year now But for some reason I have so much trouble trying to correctly answer Assumption, Sufficient Assumption and Necessary Assumption questions. I have gone over the curriculum and been utilizing negation tests, conditional logic, etc. But I am simply not improving. Does anyone have a certain method that works for them? Or am I doomed? :/ I have been scoring 16 questions on LR sections but that would be higher if I got more Assumption questions correct. Any thoughts?

Admin edit: Please don't yell! The admins scare easily. (Caps from title removed.)

For some reason whenever I print out a Practice Test, RC and LR print out fine. The print is visible in those 2 sections. Dark and very clear. But the LG section is always very light and thinly printed. I can barely read it. Whether i print them out individually or as a whole section or the whole test. On chrome and on safari This doesn't happen whenever i print out the problem sets from the lesson, but only for the logic games from a PT. Anyone else have this problem? And how can i fix this?

Does anyone have any strategies for answering parallel reasoning/flaw questions more quickly? These questions consistently take, in my opinion, far more time than they should for me.

My method has been:

Does anyone else have any useful strategies?

The main issue for me seems to be how time consuming these questions can be. In the explanation videos, there is the luxury of answering a question in 8 or more minutes, but on the exam this amount of time is obviously not feasible.

Thanks!

I know the task for the strengthening questions is to find a question that represents the flaw in the reasoning but then Ive noticed that some of the correct answers to the questions aren't the flaws for example, one questions states, " During the 1980s, Japanese collectors were very active in the market for european art and then it says the striking pattern surely reflects a specific preference on the part of many Japanese collectors" I paraphrased it because Im not sure if Im allowed to post the whole question here. So I thought the flaw was that there could be another explanation as to why they chose the art, maybe the art was cheaper than most art. and I chose the correct answer (C) which states, " several 19th cent. impressionists painters adopted certain techniques and visual effects found in Japanese prints that are highly esteemed in Japan" but the answer choice (D) says one of the flaws " during the 1960s and 1970s, the prices of 19th cent. impressionist paintings often exceeded the prices of paintings by older european masters", So my question is that for the strengthening questions are there different tasks for each questions? Thank you in advance!

Can someone explain why B is correct for this question? I find this question confusing, mostly because the way the prompt asks for a principle that if established will prove both sides of the argument correct.

To me B justifies the rehab side of the argument quite plainly, but doesn't touch the demolish portion. We know that the demolishing plan precludes the possibility of the rehabilitating the houses, so B tells us to take the rehab path instead. Does it also justify demolishing because it makes reference to "trying the other approach if the first proves unsatisfactory"--basically, it's saying that both can happen if the first plan doesn't work?