- Joined
- Dec 2025
- Subscription
- Live
The Fugu fish will reconcile my LSAT ;) @ClaytonAllen
Admissions profile
Applications
Discussions
Since they do not have a diversity statement, but rather a programmatic essay, should an applicant utilize the challenges addendum to speak of their background? In the prompt it states that we should address a challenge/obstacle we have faced yet at the end states "[this is] simply an opportunity, if you wish, to share any additional aspects of your background that may give us a deeper sense of your strengths and who you are." Any insight on how to approach this would be phenomenal. Thanks!
I have the exact same problem. I am high 160s and my BRs are high 170s. At a certain point I feel that for me, sometimes I just miss key concepts and in BR notice them. In other words, I just can't get careless and must read it all before answering. With that being said, I also think it is important to look elsewhere. Make sure your analytics do not show consistent wrong answers on specific types of questions and I would wrong answer journal these questions to ensure you correct the misunderstandings. I noticed your worse score was the RC (which is also exactly me LOL). My best advice is (which is what I have been doing and seen some improvement) is to try to notice patterns on what LSAC is trying to hide from you / trick you to seeing. I have noticed that overtime, I have been able to see problems and answers and realize just through the answer, that this is the thing LSAC is trying to hide/see if I understand. Hope this helps. I'll see you in October for my first official LSAT!
@Peter786 I get that the incorrect mail does complete the gap that allows for the final conclusion to be true. But the problem I have with this question and answer is that it is set up as an RRE almost disguised as a must be true. I had the same problem with the correct answer as the OP of this thread. You can't just assume that incorrectly marked mail arrives late. Nothing in the prompt directs you towards that conclusion. After all, the prompt does not even mention incorrectly marked mail. I have worked in a UPS store and seen mail marked wrong arrive on time LOL. In other words, the question sets up a dichotomy that requires an assumption and on a must be true question, I struggle to jump these gaps, cause in essence, your not supposed to make assumptions on must be true questions. IDK this one is not a typical MBT
I got the answer correct but primarily by rejecting any answer choice that had a "most" claim since the question only made some/many statements. Is that a fair approach?
I had a strange struggle on this question. I chose AC A simply through POE and by the end I was stuck between A and D. The problem I had with D was that the "free installation" does not apply to accessories installed after the time of purchase. So I felt that it did not address the problem of installing accessories at home. I see now that even though it does not apply to all accessories purchased after, even addressing the accessories needed at the start does weaken the conclusion because maybe it lessens the tier of obstacle from widespread to less. I saw A and felt maybe it would help people better understand but the word "purpose" is a great way to trick test takers. Good takeaway is that in order to weaken, it does not have to address every possible example to be satisfactory, even addressing some works.
Hi, I have been studying the LSAT for quite a few months now, and I have built my score from a low 145 to a nice score of 164 at my best, and an average of 161. Especially my past few PTs have generally been around the low 160 area. My problem is when I test sections, I typically have strong scores like -4 being my worst in LR recently and having common -4, -3, and -2. Yet on full PTs, no matter the beginning or ending of the exam, I do fairly worse. I'm talking closer to -4, -5, -6. I'm not exactly sure why this is, but I have some guesses, like the scary feeling of taking a full test compared to a section, but honestly, I am not too sure. This is also corroborated by the fact that, unlike sections where this practically never happens, sometimes on recent PTs I completely bomb sections. I'd love to hear any advice or thoughts on how to approach this, because my room for improvement feels less on the fundamentals and understanding of questions and more on the psychological / consistency side. Thanks for any comments in advance!
@nnglara1211 Wow I did not spot that and that is exactly the mistake I had. Thanks for the comment.
@MayaVM Because the moss contributes more oxygen than rainforest and the practice farmers use remove the sphagnum moss, it reduces oxygen in the atmosphere significantly.
@jwn1060 Yeah this makes a lot of sense. I had the same problem as OP. Thanks for the explanation
@breezyprabahar944 Not exactly. D is correct because although the Cup is the earliest known instance of an alcoholic beverage does not mean that it IS the earliest. What we know and what is true can be incorrect. For all we know, maybe there is another cup somewhere we haven't discovered that really shows alcoholic beverages were produced 3000 B.C.
Ya know, although this question was not hard due to POE, answer choice A is not a great answer. When initially reading the stimulus and AC A, I believed that every time someone loses weight, their cells will dump cholesterol, rather than only one time. In the stimulus it says "when a person loses weight, their fat cells decrease leading to more cholesterol." When first reading this, I thought it implied that this happened every time someone lost weight, otherwise they would have written when a person BEGINS to lose weight. Still got the question correct and realized this mistake after a 2nd pass of the stimulus, but it is another odd example of LSAT trickery.
@zakariaJannane What in the argument points out that they had a small sample size? If anything, "various manufacturing locations" points to a reasonable size.
@fsantos60321314 Yup! I totally overlooked the suggested part and then crossed E out when answering the question. In BR i caught my mistake. I have to read more cautiously.
@BrooklynHope I also thought it was referencing the current regulations not the proposed. I still do not know how the question is implied for the proposed regulations.
Yeah I did not like this question. I read D and remembered that scientists were interested from discovering major craters on the moon and an "analysis of rock samples." I just do not understand how anyone just concludes that D is supported???
I just totally misread the order of premise and conclusion and thought part to whole not whole to part. So I crossed out B and C instantly and selected between A, D, and E. Whoops :/
@LSAT1011 It also does not confuse necessary for sufficient. The argument is saying a sufficient conclusion. If you read labels, you have healthy behavior. If it was confusing necessary for sufficient, it would claim to have a healthy diet, it is NECESSARY to read nutrition labels.
I put this question on the reddit thread as well. Hopefully they see it!