Why does this say deprecated? Is it outdated or something?

Do we know which LSATs will be disclosed ahead of time? It seems like there were none disclosed in 2024-25, so it would be helpful for this post to be updated to reflect the trend #feedback

Do "describe organization" questions typically describe the organization paragraph by paragraph? Or do they break it down even further?

#feedback It would be helpful to present the entire paragraph at once before any commentary.

How important is it to be critical as we read? I didn't pick up on the question that Kevin asked, but I think I would've noticed it for LR ("Are the “imported programs” mentioned in the study imported from industrialized countries or other developing countries? Presumably they’re from industrialized countries (otherwise the study is irrelevant), but I don’t know for sure.")

#feedback It would be helpful to include the first paragraph above the second

It would be helpful to include the previous paragraphs on this page for context #feedback

Would the assumption in the stimulus, mentioned in answer choice (D), be an example of sufficiency-necessity confusion? It seems like an unwarranted assumption. A tutor from 7Sage told me that ALL flaws would be reflected in the analogous answer so I was surprised by this

Seems like your explanation for D was cut off

Would it make sense to have an extra step for the during-passage phase in which we identify the relationship between this paragraph and the previous one?

#feedback It would be helpful to include previous paragraphs as well

#feedback It would be helpful to have a line-by-line breakdown in the written lesson

JY says passage A (ie. its author) agrees with (E), but we're technically not looking for the point of disagreement between the author of A and the author of B. We're looking for the point of disagreement between "the kind of objective historian described in passage A" and the author of passage B. We don't know the opinion of objective historians on the statement mentioned in answer choice E. #feedback

For answer choice B, Kevin says, "The author later notes that the Third Group supports the view of a “cataclysmic” period, suggesting that the Third Group likewise believes the debris originated from an asteroid or comet." Why would the phrase "cataclysmic" imply that the debris originated from an asteroid or comet?

I don't think answer choice D describes the perspective of Some Astronomers. (D) says that the LHB was linked to a small body distintegrating.

The passage said: "Since the sizes of LHB craters suggest they were formed by large bodies, some astronomers believe that the LHB was linked to the disintegration of an asteroid or comet orbiting the Sun. In this view, a large body broke apart and peppered the inner solar system with debris."

So is answering the guiding Qs a separate step?

#help Is this argument flawed since it chains together two correlations to draw a conclusion?

I thought of it as:

A -m-> B -m-> C

––––––

A -m-> C

#help isn't the second sentence of (A) a correlation? Antique dealers are positively correlated with a specific behavior (authenticating age of antiques they sell)

#help I thought Flaw questions were ones in which we had to identify the flaw in reasoning. In Q14, we're identifying what Lana thinks is the flaw... could this be a different question type?

How do we know that (B) is an example of revealing negative info before the other side reveals it? Doesn't the plaintiff or prosecutor's attorney go first? So what if they already mentioned it in their opening statement? (B) doesn't specify that they didn't, and disclosing something early doesn't mean it's earlier than someone else mentioning it

Since the correct answer was not as comprehensive here, it seems important to note that the question stem asks about which answer choice "most accurately expresses the main point" rather than "most accurately and completely summarizes the passage".

#help When they say "surprising" in answer choice (C), whom is it supposed to be surprising to? Like is it saying the author is describing a development that was surprising to themself, or that the development is supposed to be surprising to the reader?

#feedback The explanation for D says that "the author doesn’t say anything about whether lawyers’ fees will be higher or lower under uplift fee arrangements, so this can’t undermine his criticism". However, doesn't the author say that these arrangements, in the case of a successful outcome, "require the client to pay the lawyer's normal fee plus an agreed-upon additional percentage of that fee"?

From this paragraph, how do you know that this is leaning toward spotlight rather than problem-analysis (problem = critics miss the point)? Bc I thought that the author's purpose for spotlight is about informing/explaining and problem-analysis is more about persuading. This paragraph seems persuasive to me

Can a passage be both problem-analysis and spotlight at the same time?

I know that (A) would be wrong either way, but how do we know that Chopin's work attempted to explore aspects of FEMALE consciousness? Was the gender of her protagonist mentioned?