160 posts in the last 30 days
Listen and subscribe:
Unlock the secret to acing both Logical Reasoning and Reading Comprehension! Many test-takers treat these as separate challenges, but the truth is, they're deeply connected. On this episode, we explore why the biggest hurdle in LR often isn't the logic itself, but actually understanding what you read. Plus, we'll show you how to see RC passages as extended LR questions. Ready to transform your approach? Listen in!
I've been battling with LR for some time. I starting with 25 question drills, then noticed soon after that less pressure worked better for me so I began doing 10 question drills instead. Yesterday, for the first time ever, I got all 10 questions right and I feel like I'm finally beginning to understand the struggle that is Logical Reasoning!
I recently started gearing up to study for the LSAT and started with a diagnostic test to see where I am. I scored a 138 which is very discouraging, but I know it can be improved. I am needing a score in the high 150s/160, is it possible to achieve this with 3 months of studying? Any recommendations and advice would be appreciated!
How can I properly drill my LR. Should I go up in difficulty as time goes on, or should I mix the difficulty up? Should I focus on one question type at a time, or should I again mix up the question types. When should I do full sections timed? For context, I have been studying for over a year now and have already taken the exam with LG games, Now trying one last time either September or October.
I've really been diving deep in foundations to refine my understanding of conditionals. So, I tried to create one. Please comment where I made errors.
If you are a boxer, you will have good cardiovascular health. To have good cardiovascular health you must be diligent to your training. You cannot be diligent in your training unless you practice good technique.
CHAINED CONDITIONAL:
B->GCH->DIT->PGT
Please correct where incorrect.
Does anyone have any tips for reading comp timing? I have struggled to get the timing right for the reading comprehension sections; I do well on the questions that I have time to answer, but for two practice tests in a row, I have run out of time during the last passage. Does anyone have any methods for practicing RC drills to get faster? Will it come with time as I do more drills and practice tests, or are there any methods some people used that really helped get their timing down? Anything helps!
No NBA team has ever lost a game when leading by 14 points with only 2:51 remaining. Since the Knicks lead the Pacers by 14 points, and there's only 2:51 remaining, the Knicks will win the game.
How do I select a drill with split passages? I don't see the option in the RC drill.
If there's a 5/5 difficulty question that I get correct on my first try, should I make an effort to go over and identify/rule out the trap answers? I guess in a way I must have done that in my original answering. I worry that going over them more might make me more confused when my intuition/reasoning was right the first time. Thoughts? Is it worth doing to carry over?
I'm encountering a weird problem where I'm missing way more 3 stars than 4/5 stars on LR. I guess this is a good problem to have since it's probably a mental thing; has anyone come across the same issue? Any fixes?
Hi. I am new here. I haven't found how to take the curriculum and what it consists of. Where do I get this? I have just been taking live classes. Also, my understanding is to take the curriculum first, then do drills and maybe one or two live classes a day. Is this correct?
And regarding blind reviews, how do I do those on LawHub? I am in a program that requires us to do PTs on LawHub but I imagine I can do some here too if they are different than those we have to do on LawHub.
Also, in this program we have a little over two-months to study for the LSAT and have to take the August exam so we can apply to law school in December. I have told them I do not think I will be ready by then because my initial two PT scores were very low. What do you suggest? I do not want to take the test if I am not scoring well and have that be on my permanent record.
Also, what kind of study plan will pull me up to a good score in this timeframe? To me, a 160 is a good score. But for now, reaching the median is progress. Thank you.
Listen and subscribe:
We're pleased to welcome Eric Revis, a new host and our resident expert on burnout, to the podcast to discuss how it impacts LSAT candidates. In this informative session, Eric, along with live instructors Bailey and Henry, will examine the common pressures that lead to LSAT-related exhaustion. The discussion will center on providing students with concrete, actionable information for developing strategies to combat burnout. Tune in to learn how to sustain your energy and motivation effectively throughout your studies.
Hi everyone, I’m looking for a study buddy or group to join in Brooklyn NY. Studying is so lonely, the company would be nice! Plus like that can hold eachother accountable.
I live in Bedstuy, willing to travel around to diversify the study areas.
Let me know anyone who is interested :)
Trying to the August LSAT
Hi everyone,
Hoping to connect with people who are struggling to get out of the 140s and those who've succeeded. I did a diagnostic at the beginning of May to figure out where I was, and scored 140 (138 raw). After two weeks of consistent studying doing drills and listening to modules, I did my second preptest today and scored 145. Though I am pleased with the increased score, I'm a bit frustrated because I felt the burnout during my second RC section (I had 2LR + 2RC). My eyes began to glaze over the reading and I began skimming for important parts that I may be asked to answer and ultimately got an entire section wrong, which would've had at least a 5+ increase on my overall score. How do I get around wanting to literally pass out from switching my brain from looking for evidence/flaws to reading comprehensively?
I'm going through the RC curriculum and keep reading Kevin's suggestion to try to do the low res summaries mentally due to time. Timing in RC is 100 % an issue for me. Personally, writing down the summaries has increased my RC score but I am still short on time. I just find if I don't write it down I get panicky & get lost. I find it way harder to retain without writing it down. With that being said, if its really worth trying to do it mentally, I'll try but not sure its best for me. I comprehend things best when I write them down I think. What does everyone else do? What are your reasonings behind it?
Hello!
I am currently progressing through the LR section and I am finding that I am understanding each section OK but I am very confused as to how to more overall identify when I am dealing with an argument versus when I am not. The causality arguments in the WSE section are also confusing me, as JY talks about how there are different kinds of them and I am also finding it hard to differentiate between an Alternative Cause Argument and the Basic One-Off Causal Argument among others. Can someone help summarize these in a way thats easy to understand?? Thanks so much!
I'm curious to see if anyone else has found themselves with an implicit bias against selecting answer choices A and E, particularly towards the back half of LR sections when the questions get tougher. I've found myself reading an attractive answer choice in both of those spots, and then thinking to myself "of course they'd place it there as a trap" ... sometimes it's actually worked really well, other times it obviously hasn't ...
Posting this to see if anyone else has become tripped up by the same mindset, and ultimately if anyone has any tips on how to spot those "traps" in I guess a more successful way?
How do you get past that hurdle of my gut reaction in BR being to just stick with the answer choice I chose on the first go around? I feel like I'm falling victim to confirmation bias, like when seeing my chosen answer again the second time, I'm just automatically coming up with and reaffirming the same initial (albeit wrong) reasons I thought it was correct, and then glossing over what I first thought are issues with the true correct answer. So BR, at least so far, has been really ineffective at getting any improvement in choosing the right answers.
Listen and subscribe:
This episode from the 7Sage LSAT podcast aims to help you conquer Flaw questions, discussing common mistakes in arguments and how to identify them. We then explore how these specific analytical skills are useful beyond just Flaw questions, making a real difference in how you tackle other LSAT question types. You'll also get to see this in action as we work through a few example questions as a practical exercise.
Omg I've been wracking my brain trying to think through this question, could really use some help!!
I have trouble understanding why D is correct.
I dismissed it because D claims that the two faulty studies do not support a causal finding, when the premise is based on the two study's correlational finding. The conclusion also specifically clarifies that it only applies under the assumption that "IF night lights cause nearsightedness," so even if the studies are faulty and do not support a causal finding, it doesn't hurt a conclusion that already operates under a world where night lights do cause nearsightedness.
Any help would be appreciated. Thanks!!!!
I chose D but the right answer was B. Looking back at it, now it makes sense.
Hello Everyone. Stick with me here while I explain. Endurance in RC (and the test as a whole) seems to be a big issue with me. When I do one RC passage at a time I seem to do very (4star passages & 160+ Questions correct) well. But when I read them back to back (full section ) I seem to loose focus and it starts becoming word salad. Im starting to see that endurance is a real issue here. How do I increase my endurance. Is there things I can do to make it to where I can sit for this whole 2.5 hour test and not get extremely fatigued!!
Any advice is greatly appreciated
What is the contrapositive of a biconditional like this: A (--) B and C
Would it be: /B or /C (--) /A
Whenever I do diagram for a question, I find that I get very enveloped in it and as a result am less likely to notice the "gap" in the stimulus that needs to be connected for sufficient assumptions. Basically, I find diagramming to obscure this assumption recognition process for me. But I am not sure if this is because I am not diagramming correctly, if diagramming becomes less "involved" over time as you do more of it, or if my brain simply interprets the question better by not diagramming?
My process basically is: find assumption, then find the answer choice that connects the two "unconnected" ideas, then just confirm that the necessary and sufficient positioning isn't making some sort of flaw (e.g. mistaking necessary for sufficient or vice versa).
I'm studying for a 167+, so any advice on how to reduce my margin of error for this process would be appreciated! Last PT was a 161 (which was the official Jan LSAT).
Hi everyone,
I’m consistently scoring around -4 per LR section, and I’ve noticed a frustrating pattern. Two of the questions I miss are usually 4–5 star difficulty so fair enough. But the other two are often 3-star or easier, and when I review them, I immediately see the correct answer and understand exactly why it’s right. I usually just shake my head and wonder how I missed it.
Timing isn’t an issue. I’ve done a lot of timed practice, feel comfortable under time pressure, and usually have time at the end of each section to review any questions I flagged. By the time the section ends, I’m confident in almost every answer I’ve chosen, but I’m still missing these “should’ve got it” questions.
Has anyone else dealt with this? Any strategies or mental habits that helped you tighten up and eliminate these kinds of preventable mistakes?
Appreciate any advice.
