I am just happy that I have finished the test today and got sort of valuable experience for sure. A bit lost for some time out of panick. Remote testing at home. No technical issue encountered, proctor was very friendly. Had a ten-minute intermission for the restroom, came back and went through security check.

Honestly, LG was not that hard, and it was the only reason I rushed to take the test this time because I have practiced a lot over a long period.

My goal is 170+, which I know, is only realistic with tons of efforts, at least, for myself.

I will continue to study for the next one in Aug.

Hey all,

I was kicked out of the virtual exam room eight (8) times during the exam, twice during each section, at roughly 15-20 minute intervals. After the eighth time, the Prometric system said that if I 'abandoned' the test again, I wouldn't be allowed to rejoin and finish it. As a result, I had to rush through the final section and guess on half of the questions just to guarantee that I finished before getting kicked again. I have no idea why it happened. It could have been connectivity issues, but I work from home twice a week with no issues and even upgraded my home internet to 5G before the test specifically for this reason. Regardless of the cause, I was kicked out of the test midsection, forced to rejoin the test, and go through the security/screening process 8 times, which obviously wasn't ideal for doing well. 

It's a long shot, but do you know if I have any options regarding whether I can get this test expunged, retake it, or even take the issue up with LSAC or Prometric? I'm not hopeful of anything, but I'd appreciate any help or advice you all could have. 

Can someone explain why the answer isn't D?

I previously chose B and got it wrong. I now see why A is the correct answer.

The question stated "People would not follow a leader if they felt there was nothing they could gain by following that leader. Therefore, even those leaders who are incompetent or evil bring some good to their followers."

In lawgic, this translates to "If they felt there was nothing they could gain by following that leader, people would not follow a leader. Therefore, even those leaders who are incompetent or evil bring some good to their followers."

Nothing to Gain (/GA) --> Not Follow a Leader (/FL). So /GA-->/FL. The contrapositive of this is FL-->GA. (If you follow a leader, then you have something to gain).

Following Incompetent or Evil Leader (FIEL) --> Bring Some Good (BG). So FIEL-->BSG

A most closely matches this.

(Expound upon theories) EUO-->BT (Believe are True)

(Any theory expounded) ATE-->GOT (Grain of Truth)

B talks about worst circumstances and then vicious people. But A sticks with the subject of theories being expounded upon, and the stimulus talks about following leaders.

Admin Note: Edited title. For LR questions, please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of the question."

What is the difference between observation and phenomenon on LSAT?

A lot of people who were part of the 170+ were able to reliably get -0 on the logic games section which gave them more room to make mistakes in the other sections. Someone could get -4 RC, -4 LR, and -0 LG and still get a 170. But now, with the section that people could reliably get -0 on removed, how will amount of questions needed to be correct to get to 170 change? Will the curve be more forgiving now that LG, the typical -0 section is gone, and the other sections that are less predictable and have more opportunities to make mistakes (especially RC) are still here?

I picked C initially. I picked this answer because when the question mentions "malicious" my brain starts thinking for reasons why the toddler is not morally wrong in this situation. While this could be a decent explanation of the first sentence, it falls flat for the second. Additionally, WE DON'T DISCUSS ACCEPTABLE BEHAVIOR. This is really important: for principle questions, you are not going to get new information in the answers. It must be a general summary or explanation of the passage, not with new information.

Question A is right, it summarizes the passage well.

Question B is about attention, which isn't relevant

Question D is about ends, which isn't mentioned

Question E is about effectiveness, which isn't mentioned

Admin Note: Edited title and removed PT questions. Please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of the question" Also, please do not post the entire question and answer choices for the LSAC question; this is copyrighted content and is against the Forum Rules.

I initially chose C. This is a good trap answer, a very good trap answer indeed. The trap comes when they say that rural people communicate less. The passage talks about communicating ELETRONICALLY less, not communicating less in general. If you read this quickly, it makes perfect sense. Rural people communicate less electronically, so answer C is correct. However, because answer C is missing electronically, it is wrong. This is very sneaky!!!

Answer A is a classic difficult answer. It perfectly summarizes, which is the job of a good principle answer, but it does so in verbose language that is different from the passage.

Answer B is irrrelevant and introduces new information

Answer D is irrelevant and introduces new information,

Answer E is irrelevant and introduces new information

Watch out! Trap answers are very sneaky!

Admin Note: Removed PT questions. Please do not post the entire question and answer choices for the LSAC question. This is copyrighted content and is against the Forum Rules.

Hello!

I was wondering if we took the LSAT this June and submitted a writing sample, will we have to write a new writing sample for the August 2024 exam? (Since the format is changing a little bit)

Which type of drilling mode for LR is the most accurate/ close to the actual LSAT? The options are:

1)7Sage Virtual Tutor picks

2) Particular tags

3) Tags and PrepTests

4) Incorrect when last taken (PrepTests)

5) Incorrect when last taken (Autobuilder)

Which option should I select? I usually do option one, but I feel like its practice sections always consist mainly of 3-4 question types. For example, I will generate a practice section with made up of mostly Flaw, Parallel, and Method of Reasoning, while no Sufficient Assumption, RRE, MSS, etc., appear at all. Is this what LR sections are like on actual LSATs?

Specific reference questions ("the author mentions X primarily in order to..." and so forth) are the only RC question type I really have not mastered at all and they come up in almost every PT. If anyone has any resources that would be great.

I took the April test and scored 164, but was PT-ing in the high 160s. My goal is to score in the 168-174 range, but rushed to take the June test under unideal circumstances (I'm studying abroad and was not in an ideal testing environment) because the logic games is my best section. I scored 162 which I'm not happy with, and plan to retake in the fall -- any opinions on whether it would look worse to keep this lower score or cancel it? If I keep it, is it worth writing an addendum at all?

Hey guys! 166 June, wanted 170+. It's nice to say "okay, I'm going to law school," but MAN--I wanted a higher score! I was scoring 170s on PTs, so I'm shook. What can I do to study for August? I've already put 200 hours into this test.

I recently did AP3 RRE1 Exc1 PF1 and didn't get question 10 correct. I chose A because it mentioned synthetic products ... which does not mean that they are natural. However, this choice was incorrect. Can anyone explain how they got the right answer?

Admin Note: Edited title. For LR questions, please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of the question."

UPDATE: False alarm - I was in too deep. AC E is a fine conditional statement alone, but it does not fit into the premise chain. Obviously, you can't say exceed budget this year --> renovate next year - we have no way of knowing this is true. This is why the answer choice must be D.

I'm having a hard time with a fundamental principle exposed in PT94 S4 Q13.

premise chain: renovate this year --> renovate next year --> exceed budget next year

conclusion: exceed budget this year --> exceed budget next year

Gap: where does exceed budget this year fit into the premise chain?

AC D (correct): renovate this year --> exceed budget this year

AC E (incorrect): renovate this year --> exceed budget this year

I understand why D is correct. It would create the following chain: exceed budget this year --> renovate this year --> renovate next year --> exceed budget next year. This would allow the conclusion: exceed budget this year --> exceed budget next year to be properly drawn.

I do not understand why E is incorrect primarily because I do not understand why we couldn't formulate a correct premise chain like this: renovate this year --> exceed budget this year --> renovate next year --> exceed budget next year

This still gets me to the correct conclusion. I guess I just don't understand why renovate this year must be necessary to exceed budget this year and cannot be sufficient.

Admin Note: Edited title. For LR questions, please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of the question."

Can someone explain why A is correct? Paragraph 2 of the passage seems to indicate that there physicists can distinguish between the emission of thermal radiation and reflection, which is why A is confusing because it says it's hard to distinguish between the two.

Let me preface this by saying I know I should be using official questions, but I bought this book in a rush for a trip where I wouldn't have great internet (powerscore books haven't arrived yet). My thoughts on the question at the bottom so as to not influence anyone before reading.

Despite five consecutive years in which global consumption of grain has been greater than global production, it is unlikely that the world is facing a near-term crisis in the food supply. The average shortfalls have been mainly due to reduced output from farms in China, which is moving from a policy of central control over agricultural production to a more market-driven model. Therefore, if demand for grain continues to fall short of supply, Chinese production of grain should increase dramatically. Which one of the following principles most helps to justify this reasoning?

A. Global markets respond more slowly than regional markets, so local rates of production usually change more rapidly than the global average.

B. When agricultural production is centrally controlled, it is unable to respond to changing demand by adjusting rates of supply.

C. Average shortfalls are most readily remedied by local increases in production.

D. When agricultural production is market-driven, it is likely to respond to rising demand by increasing production.

E. Centrally controlled agricultural production has been shown to be more inefficient than market-driven models.

.

Answer/Explanation below.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Explanation:

Correct Answer: D

When agricultural production is market-driven, it is likely to respond to rising demand by increasing production.

The speaker concludes that Chinese production will rise if demand requires it based on the premise that Chinese production is now market-driven. Clearly the author connects market-driven methods with matching supply and demand. Choice A isn't right because it isn't actually about the difference between global and regional markets but about China's transformation to a market economy. Choice B doesn't justify the conclusion but explains how things worked under China's older system. Choice C is wrong because the speaker isn't talking about local production. Choice D looks like the right answer. The speaker bases his conclusion on the principle that a market economy will respond to increased demand with increased production. Choice E isn't right. The speaker doesn't mention inefficiency or even compare a market-driven system to a centrally regulated one; he's only interested in the effects of China's transition between the two. Choice D is the best answer.

I think they swapped the words supply and demand in the conclusion and that it should read "Therefore, if supply for grain continues to fall short of demand, Chinese production of grain should increase dramatically." I know questions don't have to reflect reality, but this isn't even internally consistent. Continues should refer to the situation presented in the first sentence, but the first sentence clearly says that consumption (demand) is greater than production (supply). And the first line of the explanation also clearly says "The speaker concludes that Chinese production will rise if demand requires it", and demand would only require it if demand were greater than supply.

Thoughts?

Hello! Wondering if anyone can offer some insight on where the textual basis is for the correct answer "B." I selected "C" as the answer with the assumption that comments about racism by a Communist Party Organizer would implicitly attack white chauvinism and also denote some sort of involvement in African American issue politics. I was not convinced that this was direct enough evidence, so am open to answer B but am curious where the direct support lies. Is the support the "cautiousness" and desire to appeal to moderates referred to by the author? Thank you for the help!

What one on one tutors have people worked with and found to be effective? I feel like I have maximized everything and I just don't feel like I'm progressing. I'm nervous I won't hit 175 by August exam. Pls help.

For example if in the stimulus the conditional statement is A->B can the right answer be /B->/A? or does it need to take the original form?

Has anyone used the LR Loophole as a study resource in addition to 7Sage? So far I am finding it helpful but I was curious how other 7Sage users have used this in combination with 7Sage.

Hello, I usually drill 2 reading passages a day using the 7sage virtual tutor to pick. I am now done with all my clean passages but when I go to "particular tags" I still have 128 clean passages left. Does that mean I need to start picking from that only if I'm to read passages I haven't read? Why can't 7sage just give me any of those passages to take?

Thanks!

Looking to see if there are any other lgbt+ folks in EST who would be interested in a study buddy?

Last take for me was 164, and I’m shooting for 170. It’d be great to also meet folx with similar score goals, but not required.

PS: happy late pride!

I'd like to discuss this question, as it seems there's no explanation available on 7sage. That should be rectified, as this is a very tricky and unconventional question which therefore warrants a thorough explanation.

In the mean time, I'll give it a shot:

The question stem here seems to be, "Which one of the answer choices will fully justify (or make must be true) one of the two question options, definitively?"

It's an odd question in that it doesn't ask you to justify approach A or approach B -- it instead asks you to identify a principle that will make EITHER ONE OF A or B must be true, whilst simultanouesly making either B or A must be false -- all based on the stimulus information.

So far as I can tell, (B) is the only one that does this with that level of certainty. It says that, based on the stim information available, the renovation was correct while the demolition camp was incorrect.

Unusual, difficult question.

Admin Note: Edited title. For LR questions, please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of the question."

Is there anyone out there who can explain the answer choices to this passage?