So I'm am struggling to make improvements in reading comprehension section big time. I was hoping to find a strategy for highlighting/pinpointing certain texts in the passage that are generally (in all likelihood) ascertained in the questions that follow, but I'm not having any luck finding it. The videos tend to highlight the passages as an exhaustive study, which is great, but what I'm looking for is an efficient method to practice with on the PTs. Is there a strategy anyone can recommend?

Also, does anyone know of a list of question types/categories for RC stems, e.g, main point, author's intention, passage structure, etc? The categories used for the LR questions are great, but so far I haven't come across anything that breaks down RC questions.

Thanks guys!

Hello,

I do not know of anyone else taking the lsat so i am just posting my concerns here ;)

I took my 1st lsat on Feb of last year got a 141. (hardly studied, and was full time study and work)...i retook the next lsat in June and got a 149 with almost 2 months of studying. English is not my 1st language and its very hard for me to sometime understand the sayings or tone in the lsat. Since my immigration status does not allow me to have private or federal loans in this country I need at least more than 160 to get some money for law school. I live in South Florida with T4/5 law schools that will freely give money. The tier of school is not an issue for me.

Im planning to take the lsat in june of 2016. I have been trying to get back to it since august. I am working on LR since its my hardest section but cannot get out of 15-17 right in timed sections . I need at least 20 or more right. I have gone trough the whole curriculum and seems that I am getting most MBT/SA/NA mid to hard questions right but then the easy or mid main conclusion or weakening questions I sometimes get wrong..with stupid mistakes. When I do the blind review I usually get the right answer but I keep making the same mistakes. I go over everything and the lessons but still same mistakes. I do not know if its my concentration or i need more timed practice. Can you guys advice on what techniques to use for these 8 months leading to the test and to get out of the 15-17 range? Thank you ;)

Hey guys I just started started studying for the LSAT and I've watched some 7Sage videos for LR and I've noticed that J.Y usually reads the question before the stimulus and I was just wondering whether or not if that was recommended for test takers or if that is just a technique he uses for the videos. Thank you.

I have the hardest time with these questions. It's like I can't find the relevant paragraph because the statement/statements is so subtle under time constraints that they are easy to miss. By nature I tend to overthink everything which doesn't help. Does anyone have any advice on these questions?

I was expecting to be in the 165 plateau for a while but now it's been too long - I've been here since August! I know I must be doing something wrong. Recently I've been drilling LG and I BR my tests, but what's the most effective strategy to take in this last month and half I have left? I usually score -4 to -5 on RC, and my LR goes from -1 to -9 ..... I don't know why it fluctuates so much, and there isn't any consistency in what I get wrong

OKAY WHAT IS THIS QUESTION????? I've looked it up on Manhattan's forum, cause they have most of the questions already written out, but I STILL don't understand it. This whole test was a beast to be honest...

I know this is a sufficient assumption question. So far, I have:

~SS

C --> IH

~IH --> ~C

--------------------------------

D --> IH

(SS = send spacecraft) (C = communicate) (IH = intelligent as humans) (D = determine existence)

How do we get to answer D, or I guess a better way to put it would be how do I figure out what the assumption is using the formal logic like JY does?

P.S. Sorry I'm needy tonight

Hi Everyone,

I will officially finish 7sage curriculum tomorrow. It has taken me longer to get through the curriculum than expected according to my study schedule, but I felt that it was important for me to take my time understanding each point of the curriculum in depth. I started at the beginning of August, but have had some previous LSAT training in the past, so I feel confident about where I'm at in my understanding and in my decision to take my time.

However, part of me is frustrated with myself now because I'm having fears about the # of practice tests i will be able to take before December. I want to preface that I absolutely have to take the LSAT in December, this is not something i can put off nor is it something I want to put off (I've studied for the LSAT on and off for year, finally quit my job and moved home so i could dedicate sufficient time to studying for this). I know in a perfect world I would put it off until February and have more time with practice tests, but that is not an option at this point in my life for several reasons, so i need advice for the best possible outcome of my situation. I will obviously retake in February if needed, but my score has to count in December.

So, my question is: how many practice tests a week would you recommend me taking in order to most benefit from testing experience, blind review, and not burning out before December 5? I am a huge fan of Blind Review and see the difference in my ability to retain information after doing it, so by no means do I want to race through 40 tests without feeling I've done adequate review of each test. My only job is to study for the LSAT, so I have unlimited time to study/take PTs.

Thanks for your help,

Liz

How many times am I using the method on one passage? Is it 2? The first time I read the entire passage, go through all the steps, then the second time I read the passage again, go through all the steps the same way with the exception of end of the phase 1 where I spend 30 seconds on writing down what I believe to be the main conclusion for each paragraph?

Correct me if I am wrong in my explanation. Got this question wrong and choose A because I could find any answer I was happy with.

*The kind of question this is:* Weaken

*Paraphrased question:*

First legislator:

Premises: Medical Research is predominantly done on groups of only men. For example, the effects of coffee drinking on health are evaluated on only men, and studies are lacking on hormone treatments for older women.

Conclusion: Government sponsored medical research should be required to include studies of women.

Second Legislator:

Considerations of male/female balance are inappropriate with respect to research; they have no place in science.

*What I am looking for:* An answer that would attack the reasoning? (I got this question wrong and choose A.)

*Answer A:* No. That is information, but doesn’t effect the second legislator’s argument.

*Answer B:* No. Serving as a subject doesn’t address whether male or female groups will be created, nor does it address the second legislator’s conclusion, let along weaken it.

*Answer C:* No. This is information that does not talk about the issue of male over female patient groups.

*Answer D:* No, this is talking about the training of male and female scientists, and not them as group of patients. This is not helpful.

*Answer E:* Yes, if there were to be restrictions on males, this date base would result in inadequate science. Same case for females.

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-28-section-1-question-05/

Correct me if I am wrong in my explanation.

The kind of question this is: Weakening

Paraphrased question:

Premises: In North Atlantic, Codfish population declined as population of Harp seals increased from two mil to three mil, so there is blame on the seal for Codfish decline, but Cod plays a negligible role in Seal’s diet.

Conclusion: Therefore, it is unlikely seals are responsible for the decline of codfish.

What I am looking for: Something I didn’t know about the correlation between Cod decrease and seal increase. (broad lol).

Answer A: No, this doesn’t weaken the argument. It’s not about how people are inconvenienced about fish because of the seals, its about Cods and Seals.

Answer B: No, but sure, there could be a threat. But, there is no information saying that Codfish are dying from this so-called threat. And, what kind of threat is it anyways?

Answer C: No. Sure they capable enough to thrive in water that cod can’t swim in, but that doesn’t mean they can only live in that type of water. They can swim to warmer water to catch cod if they wanted to.

Answer D: Yes, because if Cod feed almost exclusively on capelin, which is a staple diet for seals, then they must run into each other a lot underwater. Or maybe where you find capelin, you will find Cods, and Cods happen to get eaten too.

Answer E: No, that strengthens the argument because it suggests that the seals have nothing to do with the cod decrease.

Correct me if I am wrong in my explanation.

*The kind of question this is:* Weakening

*Paraphrased question:*

Premises: One of the advantages of B.t. Toxins (BTTs) over Chemical insecticides (CI) results from specificity for pest insects. The BTTs have no detrimental effects on mammals or birds + limited range of activity of the BTTs toward insects means that often a particular BTT will kill pest species but not affect insects that prey upon the species.

Conclusion: This advantage makes BTTs preferable to chemical insecticides for use as components of insects pest management programs.

*What I am looking for:* Something that I didn't know about CIs that make them a better choice, or BTTs that make them a bad choice.

*Answer A:* No, This looks like it strengthens the argument by stating how CIs cause harm to a greater number of insect species than does BTTs. We don’t want to cause the ecosystem to collapse. That might kill off the balance of insects that are non-threatening.

*Answer B:* No, We only care about a particular pest insect and not if BTTs are effective on other insects.

*Answer C:* No. we are not concerned with weeds, and are concerned with only pest insects. Plus, this could strengthen the argument because BTT also doesn’t do damage to weeds, which means it another good thing BTT does.

*Answer D:* Yes, Insects (which includes pest insects) build resistance more readily to BTTs than to CIs.

*Answer E:* No, who cares birds and rodents often do greater damage to farm crops than do insects. This passage is only concerned with pest insects, so lets not let the LSAT writers trick us by adding things that are not in the passage.

Can someone please help me with this question, i do not get where some came from in correct answer ?

Sequence Games With A Twist

I Am Pretty Good At Making Inferences When I See Rules That I Am Accustomed To. However, Just About Every Game Introduces A New Concept That I Am Totally Oblivious To. Therefore, I Am Worried That When I Am Ready To Take The LSAT, Many Games Will Have Concepts I Have Never Seen Before.

Is It Safe To Say That Once I Make It Through All Of The Sequence Games With A Twist That I Have Seen Just About All Of The Tricks Of The Trade??? This Way I Can Be Prepared?????

PLEASE RESPOND.

I don't see how E is MSS supported. Can someone evaluate my reasoning?

Here was my diagram:

Opera singers with demanding roles at young age MOST lose voice early because they lack maturity/power.

Young singer with great vocal power MOST LIKELY ruin their voice

Young singer MOST lack technical training needed to avoid straining vocal chords-------->Truncated singing career.

What I was looking for: I didn't think any of the existential quantifier statements linked up (which I thought was weird), except the last one. The first statement talks about opera singers, then we go to young singers with great power (we don't know if they are opera singers), and then we go to young singers in general (we don't know if they are opera singers nor if they have great power). Thus, I was expecting an answer choice that just said that Most/Some young singers have truncated singing careers.

Answer A: We don't know about anyone lacking great vocal power.

Answer B: This is what I chose, but under the timed conditions, I rushed through it. Ruining a voice is only linked to young singers. We don't know if the young singers are opera singers.

Answer C: Only? The only necessary condition is truncated singing career. This answer choice doesn't mention this.

Answer D: Same as C. Maturity isn't a necessary condition anywhere.

Answer E: This is supposed to be the correct answer, but how? Straining vocal chords is a MOST relationship between young singers. The young singers may or may not be opera singers! What if there are 100 young singers and 51 strain their voice. But let's say that 49 other opera singers don't strain their voice! The only thing from the stimulus that we can conclude is that most young opera singers lose their voice early since they lack maturity/power. Where does the idea of "straining" link these ideas? To me, this answer has zero support.

Hey! So I think I'm confusing myself but the game states: Telemarketing will not be given until both Goals and Objections have been given.

then the next rule:

Negotiating will not be given until Persuasion has been given.

I thought I could make both Telemarketing and Negotiating the sufficient, negate them, then make the others the necessary...Why is that not the case?

Thanks in advance for your help!

I took the October LSAT last week. Despite having purchased my account in March, I never really started until August.

However, my scores improved significantly during that month and a half, and based on my most recent PTs before the test, my score will most likely be in the range I would need to be competitive in the schools I will be applying to.

I would still like to take the December LSAT just in case my scores are on the lower side of my average. Unfortunately, the scores come out after the initial deadline for December. I wouldn't mind just going ahead and signing up, since a possibly better second score would also make me a stronger candidate for scholarships, but I don't want to be held up in the rolling admissions process. Does anyone know how schools deal with applications with a second test score pending? Do I need to specifically tell them to go ahead and regard my application as complete or is that the default action?

Thanks alot.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-18-section-2-question-23/

Here is my conditional reasoning:

teachers are effective ------> when they help students become independent learners

teachers have power to make decisions in their own classrooms ------> enable their own students to make their own decisions

become independent learners -------> students' capability to make their own decisions

teachers are to be effective --------> have power to make decisions in their own classrooms

Apparently my conditional reasoning in line two is incorrect??

But I don't understand why it would be.

"Yet not until teachers have the power to make decisions in their own classrooms can they enable their students to make their own decisions."

This looks like: Not until TD can they enable SID

"until" is group 3, negate sufficient

So negate "not TD" which would make it just TD and keep it in the sufficient spot which would turn to TD --> SID.

But this screws up the chain.

Can someone explain?

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-28-section-1-question-05/

Could someone kindly explain the reason "D" is the right answer? Thanks.

Correct me if I am wrong in my explanation.

*The kind of question this is:* Weaken

*Paraphrased question:* CARL: Legally, researchers who preform experiments on animals are required to complete detailed pain protocols indicating whether the animals will be at risk pain. Yet, when humans undergo operations, operators/doctors are not required to complete detailed pain protocols for humans.

DEBBIE: A person undergoing surgery can be told what pain they will be going through, so there is no need for a complete detailed pain protocols for humans.

*What I am looking for:* Not sure yet, but something that has to do with Debbie’s conclusion about there is no need for a complete detailed pain protocol for humans.

*Answer A:* No. That's irrelevant to what Debbie is saying. It might be true, but not what we are looking for.

*Answer B:* No. I’m sure that might be true, but does not weaken Debbie’s conclusion.

*Answer C:* No, I’m sure it’s not hard, but we are contesting whether it is necessary to have pain protocols in the first place.

*Answer D:* Yes, infants have no way of understanding pain, so complete detailed pain protocols for humans would be good.

*Answer E:* No, this has nothing to do with Debbie’s argument. Unalleviated pain after the operation is different than what pain the operation itself would cause. Whether or not to go with the operation, due to the pain it may cause without proper acknowledgement and understanding about the pain, is what is being contested here. Carl says we should have complete detailed pain protocols for animals, and Debbie says we don’t need one because humans can be told by a doctor what pain they will be going through.

Hey 7Sage, I'm having the toughest time understanding why Answer B is the correct answer for this question. In reviewing my original answer choice, D, I can understand why I was incorrect in choosing it, but am caught up between answer choices B and C. Why is B correct as opposed to C? Any feedback is appreciated!

I still don't see how B is the basis for disagreement. Otis would definitely say "yes" to answer choice B, but in my mind, Tyra gives no opinion or "yes" as well. Tyra explicitly says that she accepts Aritisotle's principle of justice, so how would she disagree with answer choice B? Where does Tyra comment on the fact that the situations aren't relevantly similar?

I eliminate B and chose D (which I really didn't like since the passage didn't talk about "asking" nor that dentists should always accept after hours appointments; why can't they accept no after hours appointments?). I just couldn't get myself to choose B.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-55-section-1-question-21/

The principle I thought was

Premise: Not buy-> cancel

Conclusion: feel worth preserving-> buy.

So the gap is feel worth preserving-> NOT cancel

So that's why I chose D. But the answer is B. And I can't still find out why D is wrong and B is an answer.

Am I missing something?

Please someone explain me why D is incorrect and B is an right.

Oh and what's the differences between A and B? (They look almost identical to me.)

Thanks!

I really don't understand why C is incorrect.

I think "there is another explanation~~" can match "since parthenogenesis is~" part in the stimulus.

Why is C incorrect and A an answer?

Please someone explain me.

Thanks!

I really don't understand why D is incorrect and B has to be an answer.

Some explanations said D is too broad, but I don't see how it's too broad.

I think "in the same industry" can match fax industry so that I think D is correct.

Why is D incorrect and B an answer?

Please someone explain me.

Thanks!

Hi all, I took a non disclosed test in Asia and the proctor told me they have to mail it to LSAC. Is there any way in our LSAC accounts to tell that they have received our test back from the test site and that it's pending score release? Out mail system sucks here so as if I didn't have enough stress, now I'm hoping the mailman doesn't lose it. LOL