hey guys. I'm currently scoring in the mid to high 60s and each section is around a -5 or lower. I really want to get a 170+ so I am aiming to do a little better on my sections. I have heard from multiple people that this is the hardest improvement to make. Can anyone give me some strategies that worked for them to make the 70s jump. Specifically, my RC sections are consistently lower than LR. I really think that's my point of weakness. What would be a good plan of action for the September test? Should I do 1 minute/Q sections? Full sections?

Any help is appreciated.

Hi everyone. I recently got approved for accommodations on the LSAT but I'm struggling to improve even with 53 minutes. Anyone have any tips? I plan on taking the October LSAT.

I picked C for this question, and am having a hard time why A is the correct AC. The two parties clearly disagree on what's described in C.

Hi all, I got to the RC portion of the curriculum and I see that a lot of it says "to be removed soon." Should I avoid this while studying since I am taking my lsat in November?

Hello everyone,

I found this to be an incredibly difficult question. I did get the question right, but I did not feel good at all about my answer choice timed or in blind review. I eliminated the other answer choices because they just seemed outlandish, but I really looked hard at the stimulus and can find precious little textual support for E. Why would it not be possible for the mussels to absorb some of the hazardous waste, but not necessarily become hazardous waste themselves? To me it seemed like that really was making an assumption. I can agree by using my real world knowledge that E would make sense, but in the world of the LSAT where tiny assumptions can separate correct/incorrect answer choices, I really felt that E was just asking me to go much farther than I was comfortable with.

Because of my doubts, I came incredibly close to changing my answer to D in blind review, and even now looking back I can still feel the doubts lingering. Is there something that is just going way over my head here? Does someone else see something in the text that clearly and demonstrably makes E the better answer choice than D?

Thanks so much!

Admin note: edited title

How do you guys drill?

I'm looking to improve on LR overall, and I'm not sure if I should lump together different question types in one drill. If I do this, how many questions should I have in one mixed drill and how do I divide them based on their difficulty range?

Flaw and weaken are two question types I tend to get incorrect, should I drill them separately? If so, how many questions should I add in my drill and how many of each based on their difficulty range?

Hi, im starting my LSAT study journey with little previous knowledge about past tests and current changes. What are the sections to focus on if I plan on testing in January 2025? I heard logic games isn’t on there anymore? Thanks for reading and best wishes to all who come across this!

I’ve been studying for the LSAT for a little over two years now and I’ve made no progress on the logical reasoning, I always get half right and half wrong. I always get it down to two, consistently, then of course I always choose the wrong one, consistently. This is an occurring problem and then there are the little ones that I get wrong here and there, and I can’t even begin to describe those questions. Before anyone says I ought to memorize the questions types and the approaches and the this and that, the methods for particular questions and so on, my opinion on that is, it’s absurd. How can the LSAT be a predictor of critical thinking skills when one chooses to memorize each distinct grain of sand on a beach and the elements that make up those grains of sand, and that one has to approach each of these grains of sand with a different kind of mindset and identify these grains of sand by key-wording and sentence styles (the way it’s directed). It’s defeats the purpose of the LSAT and it has been stated as such by several lawyer types who seem well established, to approach the LSAT with a critical thinking based effort rather than a memory based effort. Nonetheless I’ve tried the memory based method and even then it’s absurd because each year the questions made by the LSAC association are different, right? Granted there are some questions that are thrown into the mix that have been used before in some LSAT at some time in the past, this I’m sure of, but it’s only some, and there’s no knowing those particular sum of questions, thus I’m back to square one which is to totally scrap the memory based effort because it’s not based on skill rather it’s based on prediction and patterns. So I’m committed to the critical thinking method, but I can only go so far, so what do I do?

Hello! If anyone could clarify where I’m misunderstanding, I would be so grateful!

So the diagram for this is: (B - banker, A - athlete, L - lawyer)

B —> A

L—> /B (the contrapositive would be B —> /L)

—

So you can conclude A (—s—) /L (some athletes are not lawyers- which I believe is the right answer.)

Taking the contrapositive of the first statement is where I have some issues:

/A —> /B

L —> /B

—

/A (—s—) L

And since some is bidirectional, it seems wrongly to read like B (some non-athletes are lawyers or some lawyers are non- athletes)?

I’ve been studying for the LSAT exam for a little over two years and I’ve made no progress on the logical reasoning. I always get half right and half wrong, consistently, and most of the time I always get down to two answer choices and most of the time I always choose the wrong answer choice. Before anyone says that I ought to approach this with a memory based effort, my mentality is that I would rather approach it with a critical thinking based effort, because that’s what this exam is measuring. I would rather not shoot myself in the foot all because I decided to memorize each grain of sand on the beach and their names and their elements and their relatives and their language style and their blah blah blah. I just want to learn how to do this exam based on the advice I was already given by some lawyer types, who seem well established, who all said some general advice and were adamant that I should approach it with a critical thinking based effort rather than a memory based effort. So is there at all a tip or method or trick or magic whatever that allows me to look at the question, look at the passage, then look to the answer choices and then somehow go a little bit further in helping me select the correct answer choice?

The last month or so of studying for me has been incredibly frustrating as I keep getting wildly inconsistent results. I have been studying since May and have completed the syllabus and mainly work on drilling, doing sections of PTs or PTs in their entirety. When doing one or two sections at a time I can routinely get -2 to -4 on both RC and LR. However, when I take PTs, all of my progress seems to go out of the window. Even in the first sections of my test I can score from anywhere from -7 to -10. Just today I took a PT that was frustratingly inconsistent in the test itself, scoring -9 RC, -10 LR, -6 exp RC, -3LR. I've also noticed that I tend to score worse on more recent tests, whereas older tests I seem to do far better on. Here is a breakdown of the last few tests I took and how I scored form oldest to most recent:

PT 155 - 159

PT 149 - 163

PT 143 - 160

PT 110 - 167

PT 138 - 159

PT 144 - 163

PT 145 - 159

Has anyone else had similar experiences being able to crush individual sections but not being able to translate that into PTs? And has anyone noticed a trend of newer tests feeling more difficult than older ones? I really don't get test anxiety and I don't usually feel super fatigued after a PT, so I don't think my fall off is attributable to just the long format alone. Id appreciate any advice or insight, I am taking the September exam and really want to hit a 165 or slightly higher which I think is possible if I continue to work hard.

Confused on what the value judgments section of LR questions is and how I can practice these types of questions

Really want to start seeing improvement in my score and curriculum before my October test. Best tutors?

Hey! I am having trouble understanding why A is incorrect. I do see how and why D works but I can't understand why A doesn't.

Here, we are given a correlation between the ad, price increase and drop in smoking. From the correlation, we get a causation that the ad is what caused the drop in smoking.

The flaw here is that the author overlooks all other alternate causes of the drop in smoking. In a strengthen question, an AC that denies an alternate causal explanation wins. For example, an AC that says or implies that X, an alternate cause for the drop in smoking, did not actually happen or that it can't be the cause will be the correct AC. And any AC that knocks out an alternate explanation for a given phenomenon automatically strengthens the proposed explanation.

Coming to AC A which says that the residents did not increase use of other forms of tobacco. Here, X i.e. the alternate cause, is given as people's increased use of other forms of tobacco. AC A denies this alternate cause.

The explanation that the 3% decrease in smoking happened because people switched over to other forms of tobacco seems like a valid alternate cause for the drop in number of smokers. (Cause: people switched to other forms of tobacco; effect: drop in smoking) It is such a small percentage and it is entirely reasonable that people switched how they wanted their tobacco kick. So, "3% people stopped smoking because they had switched over to other forms of tobacco instead" is a wonderful alternate causal explanation. Denying this alternate explanation increases the likelihood of ad causing the drop being true.

I get that D is better because it deals with the alternate explanation mentioned right there in the stimulus but how is A irrelevant?

TIA!

Hi all,

I have been studying for the LSAT since March. I started with a 143 diagnostic, and there was a slow and steady improvement since then. For the last 5 prep-tests, I have been scoring between 157-159 (BR 163 - 165) and I feel pretty confident with my skills to be in this score band. My goal is to score between 163-165. I registered for the September sitting which is in approximately 5 weeks. I feel like it's doable and within my grasp. Are there any tips or advice from people who were in my shoes, to overcome the 160 barrier?

I'm doing two sections daily and one prep test a week.

I would really appreciate any advice on studying tactics, warmup, test strategies...etc.

Hi, has anyone here taken LSAT Flex before and know how this room scan thing works? I know I have to clear my desk, but do I have to clear my shelf and drawers as well?

Hey guys, I've been studying for two months now and have learned all the foundations of Logical Reasoning. Currently, I'm scoring between -13 and -8 in the best-case scenario. Should I just keep drilling and focusing on accuracy, or is there another key to mastery at this point? Even with a solid understanding of the foundations, question types, and stimulus identification, I still find the test very challenging.

I PAY FOR THIS I WANT ACCESS......... RUDE

Help. I have an ERROR 404 message on everything I do

I have been going through the LR curriculum and get -1 in each section with the drills provided. However, when I go to take my own drills I am scoring poorly, and advice?

I have been studying for the LSAT using 7sage since early June and I was actually starting to improve the first 7 weeks or so. However, this past month my scores have dropped slowly with each practice test I take (a point or so every time). The steady decrease is concerning, as I am trying to take the test in September, and it feels like not a whole lot I am doing to study is working. If anyone has any advice to get my scores up, it would be greatly appreciated!

What do you guys think is better, drilling 5-10 questions on LR with a random difficulty level or drill untimed and timed sections?

What has helped you improved the most?

How have you improved with timing?

Does anybody have any helpful tips to improve on RC? it's my worst section

I am a very visual person and the test doesn't allow paper. I am having a hard time keeping track of the conditionals in my head. Any tips for figuring out conditionals during LR in your head?

Hey everyone,

The new LR tags are pretty confusing to me. The basic ones before I found were easy to understand in terms of what I needed to work on. Now it's telling me to work on what seems to be broad types of questions like Value Judgement and I just want to know the specific question types. Can I make it go back to the original analytical tags or is this permanent?

Thanks!

Arianne