Just messin' around.

California Western was out of line. I can't believe California Western School of Law, founded in 1924 and with an application fee of $0, would stoop to such dirty tactics to drum up business. I, personally, will boycott California Western, located at 225 Cedar Street

San Diego, CA 92101-3090, https://www.cwsl.edu/

CaliforniaWesternSchoolofLawCaliforniaWesternSchoolofLawCaliforniaWesternSchoolofLawCaliforniaWesternSchoolofLawCaliforniaWesternSchoolofLawCaliforniaWesternSchoolofLaw

I propose that "wet" is a relational state describing something in relation to the state of being "dry." We typically don't consider ourselves wet while swimming. We do so once we leave the pool, etc. and we are trying to reach equilibrium with the dry state of our surroundings. Thus, I argue that a fish is wet immediately after emerging from water, but is not wet while it is submerged in water.

.#TeamFishy

I wanted to let you all know that I just unpacked my one gallon plastic ziploc bag from test day. It still had snacks!

Hey guys, let me belatedly tell you something for which I'm thankful.

I am SO thankful I'm on 7Sage instead of one of the other online options in particular with whom I almost signed up. The thing is, I bought paper copies of Prep Tests 73 through 80 before I signed up for 7Sage. So, I opted for the Ultimate package instead of the Ultimate Plus, which does not include LR or RC explanations for PT73 on. But now, having just done PT78 yesterday, I want to see some explanations for a couple of difficult LR questions and I'm checking out the free online options.

OMG! The site with which I almost registered instead of 7Sage? SO much less rigorous than JY. If I would have studied using that person's method, I would be a frigging mess right now. I mean, I'm still a mess. And I now have the basics in logic down to know that studying with that other method is sufficient, but not required for me to be a mess. :)

Yes. Supremely frustrating.

Happy Thanksgiving! On the menu for today is turkey, stuffing, and PT78.

Thanks Leah. I'm actually pretty stoked about it because RC was by FAR my worst section. In my diagnostic PT, I was only able to complete two passages. But, now, RC has somehow become maybe my best section. Ha.

Hi, Jenny. So, this may sound basic and like it won't help. But, two things helped me. The first helped me immediately. And I figure if it can help someone else, then cool.

The first and most important thing I did was I stopped marking the passage. I only circle or underline a couple of things and I rely on JY's memory method. It turns out that, for me, marking the passage added between 30 seconds and one minute (or more!) to the actual reading of the passage. And it slowed my reading down so that I wasn't able to get into the flow or comprehend what the passage was trying to say. Additionally, I never even referred to the markings! Now I complete all the passages. And my comprehension is better.

Second, for about 15 minutes a day, I practice reading using a speed reading app. Not to speed read. Just to increase my rate of reading. I won't say which app. You can Google it and choose your own. But, I can input my own text and adjust the reading rate. I usually choose the most complicated New York Times articles I can find, perhaps from the science section or foreign policy articles. The Economist is good, too. But, for non-subscribers, the Economist's article selection is limited. Anyway, this has helped, too. After maybe two days, my reading rate increased enough so that it made a difference for me.

It was such a relief to realize that it wasn't some mental deficiency on my part that caused me to score at my worst, RC-11. Now, a couple of PT's ago, I got - 0.

I want to emphasize that the increase seemed almost overnight. Perhaps all the practice set me up for this breakthrough. In any case, I attribute my increase to those two tweaks in technique.

It wouldn't take too much time or effort to see if it works for you. Just try it out on one or two RC sections to see if it works. If so, great! If not, you will not have lost too much prep time.

Hope this helps. Good luck on December 2nd!

First, I agree with Alex that 150 is very doable. And I agree that LG is easiest to see improvements. I maintain that you can do it. Given the limited time frame remaining before test day, I propose the following.

A score of 150 equals about 57 correct answers. Your score of 145 equals about 49 correct answers. So, all you've gotta get is 8 more correct. To break it down, that's only two more correct per section!

You can do that in a couple of different ways. First, RC looks ripe for improvement. You're consistently scoring RC-16. One technique you can use is to improve that is to really focus on just two of the four passages to get all the questions right. If you get all the questions right on two passages, say 13 questions, that will already be a +3 improvement. Then, if you guess correctly on 20% of the remaining, say 12 questions, that's a total of about 15 correct which corresponds to RC-10. And now you're LSAT score would be 148 or 149.

Keep doing what you're doing on LG. Fool proof games every day, like my esteemed colleagues recommend.

Also, to improve LR, you can drill the most commonly asked question types. According to PowerScore, the following is the frequency of occurrence of question types between October 2015 and December 2016:

Type # of Occurrences % of Questions on LSAT

Strengthen 40 questions 15.6%

Flaw in the Reasoning 33 questions 12.9%

Must Be True 30 questions 11.8%

Assumption 29 questions 11.4%

These top four question types have accounted for over 50% of all questions of the exams during the given period. That would equate to 25 out of the total of approximately 50 LR questions per exam. Assuming you're answering these question types with the same degree of accuracy as the rest of the question types, you are currently answering about 12 of these types of questions correctly, or 6 correctly per section. If you can get improve that to get just one more question right in each of the four top categories, that's a swing of +4 total, or +2 per section. Completely doable.

So, the improvements in RC, +6, and LR , +4, will translate into a shift from about 145 to 151. You did it! Now if you can improve a little in LG too, that'll be gravy.

It's one way to go about it, anyway. Good luck. Work hard. You can do it.

Good point, lsatplaylist. I'm just going to fire off a few quick, yet thoughtful, responses. Can't hurt, right?

Hey y'all. I'll be turning 52(!) in a couple of weeks and I took the LSAT in Sept and Dec. I underperformed terribly. But, here's the kicker, even with my mediocre LSAT score and my so-so undergraduate GPA from the 1980's(!), I've been admitted to some solid schools with significant scholarships. Granted they aren't Tier 1 schools (although one is... barely.) But, at this point in my life, I don't need to go to HYS. Nor could I make enough money to repay my debts if I were to go to one of those schools. So, my point is, to all you non-traditional applicants, you can do it.

I wrote a diversity statement. It may have helped. But, I feel like writing is a strength of mine. So, any chance that a school gave me to demonstrate that strength, I took. I wrote something for every optional essay.

I'm pretty optimistic about law school. I'll get back to you in three years to let you know if I'm still so optimistic after I graduate and am seeking employment. :open_mouth: :smile:

"Aced it!" - Me, sarcastically at the end of the exam. I don't think everybody knew I was kidding.

I've never 100% finished an LG section and been secure with my answers within the given time. Until today. So, that's both a small victory for me and a testament to the level of difficulty (or lack of difficulty) of the LG section.

Well. I increased my score 5 points from my diagnostic. That’s the good news. The bad news is that I’ll be retaking.

PT 78 had a game like that. 6 students assigned to study 4 different years, 1921 - 1924.

I graduated a long time ago, and they committed an error while transcribing my GPA from the wall of the cave. Plus, there is no accurate conversion rate from mammoth tusks to grade points. I have a letter confirming this from the registrar. It's written in petroglyphs.

Thank you very much. I'm here all week, folks. Try the veal.

I took the exam in September '17 and December '17 at CUNY. I was in one of the smaller, semi-circular lecture rooms. As a matter of fact, I was in the same room both tests, same proctors, almost the same seat even! :open_mouth: Hope the results are different. :) But, in any case, to add to Gladiator's post, the tables are semi-circular and continuous. There were 50 test takers in the room (that was the max, according to the proctors, and we reached the max, again according to the proctors.) People are seated every other seat in cushioned, sturdy, rolling chairs. I didn't see any clock. It's possible that it was in the back of the room. The head proctor maintained a brisk pace when allowing us time to bubble in our personal information. I appreciated that. It got me in the mind set of bubbling quickly right from the beginning. Plus, CUNY is a brand new building and is half a block from the E, M, G and 7 subway lines.

CUNY is great. Spacious and professional proctors.

So Sillius, how did you doo?

Similarly, a young man directly in front of me finished every single section 10 minutes early and just sat there motionless, with good posture, with his booklet closed.

I wonder if he was an android.

HB, D!

Dude, don't do anything (I said "do" hee)... anyway, don't do anything on test day that you haven't tried out in advance. I suggest experimenting today/tonight with different brands and both types of waste. :blush:

I concur. By the way, I gambled last time I took the test. My picture was a year old and I didn't get a hair cut in that year. :open_mouth: I had it pulled back in case. But I don't think my proctors even looked at the picture.

Really? I've gotta check him/it out. Out of curiosity, did you read the hard copy or the e-book?