Does anyone know how likely you are to get a Misc Game on the test? I'm worried if I get one it will mess up my whole section. How can you practice for Misc Games?

Sorry this is long and I haven't proof it yet for errors, but if you would like to read my email to LSAC regarding my terrible experience today with the October Flex, here it is. As prospective law students, we deserve SO much better than this.

To whom it may concern,

I took the October LSAT flex today. After months of studying and putting in my best effort, I was positive coming into it. I got set up my dad’s office since it has the fastest internet in my house, I checked that my connection was good (about 300 megabits per second) and logged into ProctorU. Come 9:10, when my exam was set to start, I clicked ‘begin’ and the process of checking my video and microphone connection happened almost immediately, but I was told my lighting did not pass the test. I turned my light on brighter in the room and pressed ‘retry’ to recheck the lighting. This time, it wouldn’t seem to load. I waited 20 minutes, attempted to speak to multiple technicians, but nobody was responding or could help me. I was afraid of exiting out of the window in case I wouldn’t be let back in. After 30 minutes, I took the risk of closing the window and reopened, logged back into ProctorU and after only a minute, I was set up and ready to receive my proctor. I felt a wave of relief when my proctor said I wasn’t too late for the test.

My proctor was very helpful with getting me ready for the test, checking my surrounding, etc. I started the test with the Logic Games section. About 5 minutes into the section my test was interrupted by a screen saying I was disconnected from the proctor, and my test was also stopped. I opened the chat box with my proctor and told them it had disconnected. They helped me get back into the section but before they could, they had me go into the system preferences of my computer and do a lot of troubleshooting, then eventually I had to reboot my computer. This was not by choice, but what my proctor, who had control of my screen, was requesting of me. With nothing else to do, I obliged. My computer screen went black for about 15 seconds then came back on. I was terrified. The proctor then told me I could begin my test again and that my test was paused at the initial disconnect, meaning I wouldn’t lose any time in the test. But as I started the test again, I am almost positive I lost time in the section. At least a few minutes had passed that I did not get back in that games section. I finished the section, regardless, putting in my absolute best effort and trying not to think about what had just occurred.

I began my Logic Reasoning section next. 20 minutes in, I coincidentally check my time and see that I have 15 minutes left. A few seconds later, the same disconnect that happened in the Logic Games section occurs. This time, I tell my proctor I have disconnected yet again and they lead me back into the exam. This was only a detour of about a minute and I did not lose any time in the section but was sufficiently paused at the time of my disconnect. As I am working through the section, suddenly I see a notification bouncing at the bottom of my screen from my proctor, and I think, “why is my proctor messaging me while I am trying to focus on my test?” Of course, I don’t react or respond to the notification and continue, although I am very distracted by the bouncing icon. A little while later a new tab suddenly opens on my browser and disrupts my test. It is not your average pop up, but a ProctorU support page requesting that I submit a survey regarding my technical assistance. Mind you, this was during my Logical Reasoning section with about 10 minutes left while completing the most difficult questions in the section. Stunned and disappointed, I immediately close the window. Again, I see a notification at the bottom of my screen from my proctor. I ignore it and haphazardly finish the section, however the interruptions undoubtably affected my performance negatively.

As soon as the time is called for the Logical Reasoning section, I have 60 seconds before the Reading Comprehension section begins and I check to see what my proctor had said. There was a second chat box opened (I assume it was because I had to re download the zip file that allowed the screen sharing by the proctor) and in the text box it said something along the lines of, “you have left the testing screen” presumably talking about when the tech support survey screen appeared 10 minutes before. To be honest, I don’t remember exactly what the chat box told me, but I was worried my test had been flagged for something completely out of my control. This carried into my performance on the Reading Comprehension section. I remember the chat saying I had been disconnected from my proctor, but the first chat box with my initial proctor was still open. So I messaged them defending myself and saying, “I did not leave the screen, a new tab opened during the test from ProctorU and I closed it within seconds”. I now had 15 seconds left until my Reading Comprehension section began. Petrified that my months of hard work had been for nothing, I finished the third section without any disconnects, and my test was complete.

This experience has left me feeling rather defeated. I went into this test with a great mindset and countless hours of studying under my belt. I find these technical issues to be extremely unfair and unprofessional. The internet speed in my house is impeccable and has never been an issue before, so I am left searching for a reason why my test would disconnect multiple times. Luckily I do not suffer from a diagnosed anxiety disorder, because this would certainly be something to trigger a panic attack during the test. That being said, it it can be reasonable expected for any normal person to be affected negatively by the stress of this type of circumstance. Thankfully, I was able to stay composed and complete my sections, but I did so with fear in the back of my mind rather than the 100% concentrated focus I expect when taking such an important test.

This was one of the most pertinent days of my life and to go through this nightmare is beyond disheartening. I had read about technical difficulties similar to mine since the first flex test in August on the 7sage forum, and I prayed nightly that I would be luckier. Unfortunately, this format of the LSAT does not only favor those with intellect, but those who are lucky enough to not experience a technical difficulty. Where is the justice for those of us who have lost time on our sections, for those of us who have planned out an entire year based on taking a specific LSAT date and have etched out the perfect amount of time to complete applications but are now impeded by uneasiness and worry as we may have to take the exam in January and apply later than the rest of the pool, or even worse, wait another year to apply to law school? As future law students, we deserve a lot better than this system of consistent failure. I sit here, still, in utter shock and I wonder if I will be able to attend a satisfactory law school next fall.

As a reparation for my suffering today I request a full refund that I may use to take a later test, and a confirmation that my test has not be flagged.

I look forward to speaking further about this situation. Until then, have a great day.

-Lucia Izzolo

Admin Note: Related thread is located here: https://classic.7sage.com/discussion/#/discussion/25548/october-lsat-flex-issues

Does anyone have any particularly open ended games with a lot of rules to recommend for practice? I find myself getting a bit intimidated when there isn't that much that one can map out up front, so more practice with these would be helpful.

Hi,

Can anyone explain why the answer here is B instead of C? I just feel like JY's explanation for why B is right instead of C seems a bit insufficient

Thanks!

I took the August test and scored much lower than anticipated. I am applying to T20 schools. Should I cancel the score? I've been scoring 168-170 on practice tests for the past 4 months but scored in the low 160s. I'm taking the October test.

I finally broke 170 and I never have to take the LSAT again. My diagnostic score was a 161 and I just got a 171. I got those 10 points by studying with 7Sage. Thanks J.Y.

How do you go about annotating and jotting down the summaries without a physical copy.

Hello,

I've been studying JY's method of "knock-out" answers v.s "sneak-in" wrong answer choices.

And I'm wondering if it's possible for an answer choice to be BOTH a knock-out AND sneak-in wrong answer choice.

For instance, in PT 66, S3, G2, Question 11

Answer choice (E) seems to knock out a situation that was possible in the old world (e.g. PVROSTR) but also sneak in a situation that was not possible in the old world (e.g. RVRSTOP).

What does this mean?

Thanks!

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-66-section-3-game-2/

#help

The explanation video for Q11, PTM20 talks about two approaches for solving suspension questions, i.e. knock out and squeeze in. Where in the CC can I find the detailed tutorial for such approaches? Thanks a lot!

Okay, so I'm currently running through SA's and PSA's and ran into this and actually gave it some time to sit with me (after looking it up on the actual explanation video, powerscore forums, manhattan prep forums) and I've come to rationalizing D as such:

"So what the general idea is:

Adopt tax package > Discontinue daily story time > Inconvenience parents.

or

Adopt package > Inconvenience parents.

For some reason this exists, which is what makes [D] right:

Adopt package > [Inconvenience Parents > DONT adopt package]

Technically, could be true. The truth is that WE DON'T KNOW WHAT HAPPENS IF SUFFICIENT IS TRIGGERED (If " Inconvenience parents " is triggered, and we move the diagram forward). This could mean that we can NOT adopt (/Adopt)"

Is this the correct way of thinking about this?

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-23-section-3-question-14/

I've studied the valid/invalid arguments and though it's almost down, I sometimes still have mix-ups. I'm wondering if it's a good steadfast rule that, most and some only allow you to draw valid inferences if they occur first, then all the relationships following are "all" relationships?

ex. A some B ---> C

Is this a rule that works every time? If so, are there any other simplified one liners to help internalize?

Thanks all!

I think the games below are beneficial for those finding themselves making "silly" mistakes when reading split game boards. Those mistakes are probably less "silly" and more indicative of a mechanical/procedural weakness you have - actually that was just the case for me. I don't want to paint with a broad stroke. Either way, I thought these were good games to do in a fool-proof kind of way to get splitting quickly and accurately down pat.

I enjoyed this Q and thought I'd do a write-up.

The hard things on this Q for me were seeing the conclusion and understanding AC D.

The statement about development not negatively affecting the wildlife in the park is the conclusion, because it draws support from the following statements about #s on wildlife increasing and the Park's resources can support the current numbers. At first I thought this would just be a premise but after I read the paragraph I had to go back and see what the conclusion actually was.

The second sentence is a bit confusing, let's unpack it. We're talking about 2 surveys - the most recent surgery compared to one taken just before the development started. We should be asking "how far apart were these surveys taken?" The stim tells us a decade, so ten years. That's enough time to see a sizeable difference.

Next we see that theamount of wildlife has increased in those 10 years. Here is where your flaw detector should be going off!! The amount of wildlife has increased, but do we know that this means the Park's wildlife has not been negatively affected? Heck no. What if the development led to the death of all bears, and now without predators the bunny population is 20million? Or what if development led to every animal getting really sick, so now they don't kill each other, they just sit there in a catatonic state? Definitely a negative impact.

We're given 1 more premise that is not really important for getting the right answer. The parks current resources can support the current population. Ok? Will it support 1 more animal? Idk.

I've identified a flaw and now ready for ACs:

A. (Going bit by bit): ok, the recent survey and 10 years ago survey. This was the bunny flaw we identified. What if 9/10 species died due to the development? We're saying that's NOT the case. Still 10 species alive now, no fewer. Now we see the latest survey shows increased #s in each species. Bears, bunnies, etc all have increased populations. Good! This addresses a big flaw, and I like it. Def keep this answer. Turns out this is the correct AC.

B. If we took a snapshot of wildlife total numbers we need to know those numbers aren't skewed. B is showing it IS skewed - we took a snapshot at the peak time.

If this is how you read B you made the same mistake I did. "Diversity" is not the same as gross numbers. If this AC read "in addition to total number increase, diversity increased as well." This would add support to the argument that wildlife has not been negatively affected by the development.

The issue with B is it does indicate the snapshot is skewed - it was taken during summer when the numbers look best. Also make sure to note diversity isn't the same as gross numbers.

C. If animals are migrating in, then what can we conclude about the numbers of animals within the park? No idea!! The argument is using the total number of animals in the park increasing as a premise. Now that number is skewed by outside interference. What if 100% of animals within the park died, and 200% that number migrated in? Certainly we can't say the development had no negative impact.

D. This is a great subtle AC which makes it a little hard to see why is wrong. What does it mean that we can locate hard to find animals now that we couldn't in the past? It means in the past we could find 8/10 animals and now we're finding all 10/10. This weakens the support that the premise gives to the conclusion. What if population numbers didn't increase and you're just finding the last 2/10 animals?

E. Plant life - what about alien life? Did they find SpongeBob and Patrick? This is a throwaway AC because I don't care about plants - plants don't have a place in the argument we're given.

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-71-section-3-question-25/

Any tips for the last month to help improve LR section? I seem to be making the same mistakes on timed PT and I think it is because of time pressure and not the difficulty of question because I have a solid understanding of all question types. If anyone has any advise to do in the next month to get more comfortable by test day that would be hugeeee help.

Hey all,

What's really tripping me up is that this question stem is written in the passive voice. The stem saying "could have remained unchanged in force and focus IF which one of the following had been advanced as a counterexample in place of the word 'absentee'" makes me believe that the original explanation wouldn't have to be amended if it weren't for the counter example of "absentee" being used. So I was trying to find a counter example that talked about an individual performing the action unilaterally, while not needing the explanation that resolves the impasse which is what I thought the question stem was asking me to do.

If the question stem was "the reasoning could remain unchanged in force and focus if which one of the following words is used in place of the word 'absentee'" rather than the goddamn passive voice, then it really would be much easier.

Can someone clear up my confusion? Am I just crazy???

Paging JY

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-27-section-4-question-22/

hm

Hey I plan on taking the LSAT in September. If anyone is interested in setting up a study group inbox me. I live in Brooklyn, but work in the city. We can meet in person Thursdays or Sundays or we can Skype or video chat any day during the evening.

When? and how often do i start taking prep tests for 7sage.

#help Please

When the ‘OR’ is in the necessary and the arrow does not split, how is that diagramed? without the ‘OR’ if you have to chain them up?

When the ‘AND’ is in the sufficient and the arrow does not split, how is that diagrammed? without the ‘AND’ if you have to chain it up?

When it comes to fool proofing games, should you watch the explanation video after the first time you do it? And also should every time you do it be timed or should there be some type of BR where you just see if you can get every question right

some one please explain this question to me.

Hi guys! I wanted to get some feedback on this RC question.

The prompt asks for the main idea and the right answer is that 'the views of ecologists and economic growth advocates have only recently become polarized.'

To me, that phrase implies that the passage is about recency. It implies that the passage is primarily dedicated towards explaining a long history of no polarization that has but little time ago turned into a polarized dichotomy.

I agree that the passage accomplishes this, but to me, this accomplishment was used as a template for the author rather than his/her explicit, or even primary purpose.

I detected notes of author view, such as in line 11 when he describes the recent polarization as "sad." On top of that, the way the author describes both sides seems to indicate that he favors the previous attitudes towards the issue, consistent with what Marsh and the Enlightenment thinkers believe. I almost got a sense of sarcasm in how he described the implications of Clements' equilibrium model. The author claims that the model became a "mystique," environmental interference was "taboo," wilderness was "adored." These descriptions made me believe that the author saw followers of this mentality to be radical, cult-like, trendy, and perhaps a form of the "tree-hugger" stereotype.

Back to the first paragraph, the final sentence talks about how the "sad effects" make it "difficult for industry to respond to impact analyses that demand action." This came across as having sympathy for contemporary industries, being pinned down in this polarized climate where (as we would later read) before they could act in harmony with environmentalists and have productive conversations based in compromise and understanding.

With all of that in mind, I was very quick to eliminate D, an answer choice with no reflection of the author's argument/bias, and way too much (in fact, pretty much 100%) emphasis on the mere fact that such a change is recent. Who cares if it's recent? You didn't need to give your opinion and write four paragraphs only to tell us that this polarization is recent. You could easily switch the dates mentioned in the passage, and the meaning would barely change. It would just be polarized ----> not polarized instead of not polarized ----> polarized.

I picked E because I thought it captured the author's sentiment and reflected an idea that the entire passage built to establish. A lot of the passage's content contributes to that idea, while only a few small distinctions affirm that the change happened to be recent.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-23-section-4-passage-3-passage/

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-23-section-4-passage-3-questions/

Does anybody know why AC C is incorrect?

With every flex preptest I take. there is a leftover LR section. Is there a way to do these as a separate timed sections?

Please note that the information below will change to reflect the information we get! Contribute if you can via the official February 2017 LSAT discussion (linked at the bottom of this thread) without going into too much detail. If you think something is wrong or should be added, please post in the thread and let me know.

Since it is the Feb. LSAT, please be aware that it is undisclosed and, as a result, I will not be updating this thread until I get multiple confirmations on a question.

Real Sections:

LG:

-Gold/Silver Vases/Plates

-12-Week Class Schedule

-Transcribing & Preparing for Interviews

-Different Libraries

RC:

-The Bumblebee's "Waggle Dance"

-Hindus and Romans / Patriotism

-Civil Courts / Judges and Juries

-Liberal Environmentalism / Ecology

LR:

-Speed Limits for Different Vehicle Types / Vehicle Emissions from 1967-1990 / Smog

-Global Warming/Climate Change

-Charles II

-Napoleon

-Meteorite and Nano-Diamonds

-Supernova and a King's Birth

-Ravens/Crows and Worms / Dropping Pebbles in a Tube

-Children Estimating Half-Full Beakers

-Plate Tectonics / Size of Planet

-Skilled Writer Politician Makes a Speech

-Company Criticism / Debt

-Government Sending Letters Across Country / Connecting People

-Middle-Aged Coffee Drinkers / High Blood Pressure

Experimental Sections:

LG:

-French/Russian Language

RC:

LR:

UNCONFIRMED:

If you can confirm that these are real / experimental, please do so by PMing me or posting in the main thread.

None yet!

This thread is closed for discussion. Official post Feb LSAT discussion here:

https://classic.7sage.com/discussion/#/discussion/10331/official-february-lsat-discussion-thread