Hey everyone. I was wondering if anyone can give some helpful tips for the reading comp section. This is my weakest and slowest section. I struggle to finish barely even 3 passages in the allocated time and the questions I do get to in time, half of them are wrong. Basically looking for a RC holy grail.

Thank you in advance and good luck on your studies!

I have been trying not to think of my test at all since taking it but I made the terrible decision to listen to the PowerScore Podcast. I have been PTing 0 to -2 on LG but this test really threw me off and I just found out the LG section I did terrible in is the one that counts. I cannot contain my tears right now, my score was riding on LG.

So I’ve posted once before and would like to get a new perspective on this question. I thought the second sentence was supported by the first and so picked answer choice C. Why is that not the case? Could I have someone who truly understands the question break it down completely so this post thread doesn’t get too long? Like break down the role each sentence plays? I thought it was premise (people only care about what’s an obvious threat) subsidiary conclusion (that’s why people see contaminated water as a threat rather than ozone) then main conclusion (why we won’t have a grassroots movement to combat air pollution anytime soon) but that’s wrong apparently.

The conclusion reached above depends on which one

of the following assumptions?

(A)

(B)

(C)

(D)

(E)

The pre-Columbian inhabitants of Mexico

played games on all ceremonial occasions.

The making of rubber balls was one of the

earliest uses of rubber by the inhabitants of

Mexico.

The ceremonial game referred to was popular

throughout Mexico.

The game had been played since its inception

with a rubber ball.

The dating of the first use of rubber in Mexico

was due to Cortez.

Admin Note: Edited title. Please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of question"

Also deleted the stimulus because it is against our Forum Rules to post the LSAT questions or Answer Choices on the forum

Hello all,

For the longest time I was hitting around -10 in LR while still understanding the review and having a higher BR scores of -3/-4 per section. For a long time, I was rushing through sections, staring at the time, trying to spend less time on "easy questions" and allot times to questions generally. The result from this, at least for me, was a whopping average of -10 in LR timed sections.

Recently, I switched my approach to the section when doing timed sections. I have started to read slow word for word, and I mean slowwwww, for the stimuli, and have been able to score -5 on timed sections, usually getting my -5 wrong answers on the harder 5-star questions.

In true LSAT fashion, I know multiple competing explanations may explain for this phenomenon or increase. But, I would like to believe it is because I am reading much slower and actually taking time to understand the stimuli in LR which has improved my accuracy tremendously. Also, I think this has to do with my really bad ADD/ADHD that I have been diagnosed with for a long time. It is hard for me to read fast, I have to read slow to fully understand something. But, once I understand something I have read, I usually have a really good grasp of the logic, reasoning, assumptions, etc.

Just thought I would share for my fellow ADD/ADHD sages out there that maybe this can help with the overwhelming timing element of LR, since there are generally 25 separate stimuli that you have to really understand and focus on to get questions right under timed conditions, a task that is presumably very difficult for most ADD/ADHD test takers like myself.

Lawhub shut down about 3 times during my exam. The second time I had to wait over an hour. The second time I was also doing reading comprehension so once it was back up I had to re-read the passage and lost time on the exam.

Has this happened to anyone before? Is it reasonable to ask for a refund on the test or the score be cancelled?

Hello!

Does anyone know I can access explanation videos from prep tests I created? I selected my own practice questions specifically for the Main conclusion/ main point questions. Every time I go to view existing prep tests that I created, it doesn't show me the explanation button only the "Discuss" button which links to this forum. Any ideas anyone?

Where Can I get an explanation for this question?

Admin Note: Edited title. Please use the format "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of question"

Hi fellow sagers,

I have been struggling with RC for almost a year and still can't find a way to stably improve my RC scores.

I've tried connect-back, pre-phrasing, prediction, visualization, etc. But none of them really work for me.

I just finished PT91 and my RC was -10 (-8 on the two harder passages.) In earlier PTs, my worst performance was -7~-8. So PT91 was quite devastating. Thus, I started to postulate the reason for my stagnation might be my ability to understand hard English articles.

I heard in RC the best achievable level is -3; following by the next level -3~-6. I am hoping someone could share how do you improve your RC from where I am to a higher level.

Now I am thinking to really hone my reading skills and focus on really hard english materials, books, etc. I would love to know how others get through a similar struggle.

Thank you so much for your time.

Leon

Can someone explain why B is the correct answer?

Admin Note: Edited title. Please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of the question"

I have a question about Parallel Method of Reasoning.

Can two arguments be considered parallel if the premise matches exactly but one has a conclusion which states "Hence, probably...." and the other has a conclusion without the term "probably" or any other substitute for it?

In that case, the second one is more definite I suppose, so I am just confused if we should regard them as parallel?

Sorry for the lack of context or specific question but I just had this doubt

Time solts are live on PROCTOR U, they will fill up very very quickly so act fast!

Feel like my accuracy is improving on weaken questions but how do I improve speed? Any suggestions?

I've been drilling MSS questions, and this one had me hung up for a while. I initially chose C, but then chose D during BR - would appreciate it if someone could validate my thought process in how I got to the right answer (mostly through POE). #help

Stimulus: For the same crime, it's unfair how famous vs unknown criminals are sentenced, even though the principle of equality says there shouldn't be a discrepancy in how people are sentenced due to fame, etc. (For a while, the "however" really threw me off because I thought for some reason that the principle of equality was used to counter the uneven sentences in a resentencing/retributive manner...I was very confused lol)

A) "only a few": we don't know this. Technically it could be 99% of trials that are for unknown defendants so it's actually a majority

B) "The number should equal" - proportionally this doesn't make sense, since there's maybe like 1 famous criminal per 1000 unknown defendants

C) "Can properly be overridden by other principles" What principles are we talking about?

D) Yes - basically what the author is saying. This sentencing is unfair and a breach of the equality principle

E) We don't know if it does or doesn't allow for leniency

Hello all,

I have been foolproofing the games from 1-35 recently and have seen significant improvement in my overall LG performance. When I started studying, I could barely answer a couple questions and would just stare at the games not knowing what to do. So, thanks 7sage for the wonderful study tips and resources for this section. I used to get anywhere from -15 to -9 wrong per section and now I am going roughly -3 to -6 wrong on fresh timed sections.

My approach recently has been to scan the section games to see which one is the weird/misc game. If I am able to succeed on this first step, I will skip around this one game, complete the other, more standard games (sequencing, grouping, in/out), and, then, leave the last weird game for the end. If I can complete the other three games in roughly 3.5 to 8 mins depending on difficulty, I will then have a lot of extra time at the end of the section to attack a weirder/misc game.

Does anyone else employ this kind of LG section approach?

My understanding of the stimulus is that since 365 isn't exactly divisible by 7, that leaves an "extra" day which causes the calendar to shift forward by 1 day every year and the author proposes to change that by removing that "extra" day and making it a sort of twilight zone where it doesn't fall into any year so we are left with exactly 364 days which means that January 1st and any other date will be on the same day each year. The part I am baffled by is what exactly happens to those "extra" days? Are they shuffled in before January 1st? If December 30th and 31st still exists, are they still part of the calendar year or do they fall in that twilight zone? If December 31st is the last day of the year wouldn’t this be the “extra” day in the first year?

Hi All,

I had the chance to do an LR question again for a recent tutoring session and noticed a few things that could be helpful for your prep. One question I find a lot of students asking me is, "What do I do if I don't see the flaw?" Let's use this FLAW question as a model for possible approaches. (Try doing it on your own if you haven't. The answer is below)

PT 59 S3 20:

P: the lightest moths with the greatest contrast were most likely to be eaten

C: therefore, the darkest moths were least likely to be eaten

At first glance, the argument looks solid. If you're like me and don't know much about moths, you probably thought, "ok yeah of course dark moths would be more likely to survive than light moths...what's the issue? obviously, there's something I'm missing here."

It'd be great if you can immediately diagnose the flaw (authors assumes a false dichotomy). But what do you do if you can't see the flaw? You gotta find ways to finesse!

Let me suggest how:

(1) Start with the big picture: Focus on improving your comprehension of the argument by simplifying it into your own words. The battle is always won in the stimulus, and an argument is always a conclusion being supported by premises. Make sure you get to the core of it.

(2) Zoom in on the details: Next, look to the descriptor words and consider what is being compared to get your clues. At least for this particular question, ​the author is comparing the Darkest/Lightest moths, with the Greatest contrast, and arguing which among them is Most/Least likely to be eaten.

These words indicate extremes--colors and probabilities. Hmm...if there is a darkest/lightest, then there has to be varying degrees of color in between, right?" HA I see it now! Before, I assumed that there was a dichotomy between ​dark vs light moths. Now I realize, oh! there has to be a spectrum between the darkest to lightest! There must to be moths of varying degrees of darkness and lightness in between. Perhaps grey shaded moths have higher rates of survival! Got it.

And that's why D is the answer.

How did we get here? We started with the big picture, zoomed in to the details, and focused on the most relevant parts of the argument to improve our comprehension, then found clues that led us to the flaw.

I hope this helps you find new steps to take next time you're stuck wondering what to do next!

Based on some recent RC translation drills, I've been struggling with "main purpose" questions. It seems I don't have a super crisp understanding of what it is, which was painful to realize and seems kind of silly since it's so basic. But yeah I'd really like to nip this in the bud when it's so foundational and would appreciate 7Sage feedback.

Here's where I'm at. I thought purpose refers to the WHY -- Why is the author telling me about this topic? What is their intent? But I recently realized this approach/question causes me extrapolate too far to come up with an answer. I'll mix perceived attitude or off-hand comments in the passage into an incorrect "purpose" summary.

Can you help explain "main purpose" in RC? How do you approach it? How does it connect back to MP? Thanks!

For those of you who plan to slug through LSAT over the holidays and would like to foolproof games, please DM if you want to do 5 games per week for the next 7 weeks or at least attempt to get through games 1-35 at least once.

Hello, I cannot seem to find a specific video on resolve the paradox questions anyone know if there is one?

Hey guys, when it comes to LR Core Curriculum. I am having a hard time understanding the Introduction to Logic. Example when it comes to Sufficient, Necessity and contrapositive I am lost. For some reason I am having a hard understand JY logic. If someone could help I would appreciate it. Thank You.

What should your thought process be on a question like this? On easier RRE, I could often come up with a paraphrase, but it definitely wasn't the case here. I felt like I was going into the choices blind.

Can someone please give a breakdown of this question? I am having trouble understanding what the flaw is.

P: Tech institute has been using new exp. curriculum for several years

P: survey last year found only1/3 of the plumbing grads were able to pass certification test

C: New curriculum has lowered the quality of plumbing instruction

Anticipation: what if its entirely another cause? or maybe it was just a bad year?

I chose AC A through process of elimination but have no idea why it's wrong and why C is correct.

Thanks!

Would someone please help explain the conditional logic on this one ? It shows AC A is correct.

I thought we weren’t supposed to pick answer choices with “some” in weakening and strengthening questions because the choice would have little to no effect on the argument. Is that a rule of thumb I should forget about? Because this question appears to break that “rule.”