Hello,
Right now the application tracker says "Accepted". This implies (incorrectly) that I have committed to attending that school. A better, less ambiguous phrase would be "Admitted". I realize there's a step later for "Accepted offer", but really clearing this ambiguity would make a big difference in understanding for most users who may not think about it.
It depends entirely on your diagnostic score and your target score. The distance between them determines how long you should expect to study. They usually recommend hitting 2-3 PT's consistently in your target range before the test. I'd need to know that before I could recommend testing in April or later. It only really gives you two months, so probably the answer is later.
What are your constraints? Do you want to apply this cycle? Are you in school? April will be too late for the 2026 admissions cycle.
You should probably be logging your wrong answers in what we call a "Wrong answer journal." I made an app that makes that easy for you, just take a screenshot. I'd love to know your feedback.
Metroidude
I hit a wall early in my prep. I logged every wrong answer religiously in the notes section. But after a month, I realized I wasn't learning; I was just hoarding my failures in a list I never wanted to look at again.
I was spending hours managing data when I should have been fixing the underlying logic flaws and rewiring my old ways of thinking. I realized that re-reading the same question wasn't helping—I was just remembering the answer, not learning the rule.
The inefficiency was driving me crazy. About 70% of my journal was stuff I had already learned from, but it was buried in with the difficult concepts I still needed to work on. I was wasting an hour a day reviewing a massive wall of text just to find the few questions that actually mattered.
I eventually built a tool to fix the workflow. It filters out what I already know and uses AI to verify I actually know the pattern of the difficult ones by generating new variations. If I got it right, it schedules review for longer. If I get it wrong, it shortens the review period so I can focus on the questions that trip me up most. I went from a 157 to a 173 in a few months, and I really think it's because I used this as a "hyper efficient" wrong answer journal to find the signal in the noise.
Does anyone else have a good system for "pruning" their wrong answer journal? Or do you just let the list grow forever, or skip out on using it entirely?
Do you need to be a subscriber? I cancelled my subscription after I finished the test.
I found during my study that:
The "why did I think this way, how should I have thought instead?" mental practice made a big difference. "Why was this wrong?" forces you to write down an answer and think about it deeply.
The review part is critical. If you only enter it once and never review, you miss out.
I made a WAJ app that helps with this exact thing. I'd love to get some feedback on it. It helps you record "Why did I get it wrong" then schedules review at specific times. I went from a 157 diag in August to 171 in November using it.
If you're making the same mistakes, it's probably because you're using the same reasoning underneath and not applying the new ones you learned from reviewing your WAJ.
When doing a blind review, the eliminated/hidden answers in BR selection get overlapped onto the actual take. Example (I chose C in BR and hid it, A on actual take):
@DaisukeKaga Glad I could help. I highly recommend 7Sage's webinars from admissions councilors.
@JoshuaJJauregui Yeah you can totally do it, just ID what your weakest area is and drill that like crazy.
It's extremely important, but I can't quantify it. What I've been told by admissions councilors is that to maximize your chances, you want to aim above your target school's median LSAT. For most T14, that's in the 170's. Some in T14-25 are in the 160's.
I think that's realistic. That's basically two questions higher. What were you PT'ing at? November is coming up fast though, so commit to it and work hard for the next two weeks.
Hey y'all,
I'd like to request a feature. I recently got destroyed by a single passage in RC and wanted to ask "What if I got them all correct instead?"
LSAT Demon has a score calculator but 7Sage doesn't. I'd love some "What if" tools in analytics to explore implications and have it recalculate my score.
It seems like AC's A, B, and C have decent cases that could be made for them. They're all riddled with assumptions and implicit reasoning.
Anika implicitly has an alternatively plan, "Doing nothing", that could count in C.
"Arguing that (doing nothing) could achieve (more people willing to buy antiques) more easily than (hiring experts) (because it helps keep prices low)."
That being said, it's still not the right AC, probably because Anika is contesting the prediction, not the plan. She doesn't explicitly propose doing nothing, but it's obvious that's what she'd rather do.
B also has a good case:
Claiming that (they shouldn't hire experts) because, while (it would remove objects of questionable authenticity), it would (force them to raise prices).
But, if you believe "getting good value for their money" is the "effective", it doesn't flow well.
@AlexJacobs I'll definitely do that. Looking forward to meeting you, Alex!
I haven't noticed it make a difference in my study in terms of how I make decisions. So far I've used it as a feature where I think "Neat", and I like to have it for record-keeping to gauge my confidence, but has no implications for further decision-making and seems somewhat redundant with blind review/flags. I flag every question I'm not sure about already, so it ended up just being "count the flags" (although when it showed up, I wasn't able to look at the flags, so I just estimated).
Perhaps I will find a way to integrate it and make better decisions later.
Hey y'all. I'd love to see "Blind Review" questions show up here separately. Most of the gaps I'm spending looking over blind review questions and really digging in, but this graph makes it look like I'm doing nothing. Happy to do a user interview if more info is desired!
Aw, man! Are you having it on Friday, too? I'll be in NYC for that exact event but only Friday!
Does anyone know of any classes from the tutors that would focus on difficult grammar parsing and double-negatives or other things like that? Those ones tend to trip me up, and I'm looking for a way to improve. All the classes seem to be focused on specific question types, but that may not be what I'm looking for.
Which one of the following best explains this author's post?
A) He's a bot
B) He really likes computers
C) He's practicing for the LSAT writing but is really bad at thesis statements
D) He's trying to sell you a laptop on that website
E) Both A & D
I'd say that's a valid diagnostic. If you weren't able to think quickly, you'll have to get used to thinking like that. Begin the CC anyway because it'll help you build those patterns very slowly but then get faster at valid reasoning. You'll be encouraged by seeing your score go up those next few tests!
I'm gathering folks together for the April LSAT. I'll be hosting weekly review sessions on my server in prep for April! Would love to see some of you there! https://discord.gg/evtP3RwgSa
@viktoriahuerta you may need some more time to get your target score. I'd recommend taking a diagnostic PT under realistic test conditions just to see where you're at.