Independent Tutor

SCOTT_LEBO

I have been tutoring LSAT students for more than 15 years and have accumulated over 10,000 hours of private tutoring experience.

In addition to working extensively with students preparing for the LSAT, I am a former attorney, a current LSAC-licensed LSAT content provider, and I'm one of the highest rated, most experienced LSAT tutors on Wyzant.com.

Over the years, I have found that LSAT success depends on structured, repeatable approaches to Logical Reasoning and Reading Comprehension. While every student has different strengths, weaknesses, and learning styles, the underlying challenges of the LSAT remain remarkably consistent.

My tutoring therefore focuses on instilling clear execution processes, improving timing and consistency, strengthening precision, and helping students efficiently assess passages and arguments.

I am excited to be part of the new 7Sage tutoring marketplace and to combine individualized instruction with the outstanding curriculum, analytics, drilling tools, and testing resources that 7Sage provides. My goal is always to help students develop practical skills, stronger confidence, and measurable improvement throughout the preparation process.

My hourly tutoring rate is $80/hr. However, most students improve more effectively through a consistent multi-session process, so I offer a 5-hour package for the cost of 4 hours ($320 prepaid).

Discussions

Tutoring Marketplace · Looking for an affordable tutor!

SCOTT_LEBO

6 hours ago

You honestly sound like a very strong candidate already, and your score progression reflects that. The fact that your blind review scores are already reaching into the high 160s/low 170s tells me that a lot of the underlying capability is already there — the main goal now is tightening execution consistency under timed conditions.

I also very much like that you’re looking for structure, accountability, and targeted feedback rather than just generic explanations. In my experience, students often improve the fastest once they develop a stronger top-down understanding of what the test is actually asking them to do structurally and process-wise, rather than approaching each question as a completely isolated event.

My approach is heavily process-oriented and individualized. I typically focus on identifying the specific patterns causing score fluctuation, building more reliable execution systems, assigning targeted homework between sessions, and helping students develop a more consistent self-coaching process during the test itself.

I’m very comfortable being available between sessions for quick questions or guidance when needed and 100% ready to provide the needed assignments and tasks to follow up on our lessons with.

Feel free to DM me if you’d like any more information. Best of luck either way; you’re already on a very solid trajectory.

Scott

LSAT · Should I take a diagnostic….

SCOTT_LEBO

9 hours ago

@KathrynLewis My pleasure! Let me know how the next couple of weeks go. Once you get back into prep rhythm a bit, I may be able to offer some more specific guidance from there.

LSAT · I just scored a 174 on PT119.

SCOTT_LEBO

15 hours ago

Forgetting to answer a question seems like a classic macro-level execution issue. At 174, you’re clearly already managing the micro side of the test very well. And your micro-level control is very much activated.

Your self-coach mode has to also be fully activated to include completion checks and staying fully oriented under pressure at all times. That is an indispensable ingredient for a 180.

Sometimes identifying the issue precisely makes it much easier to address deliberately.

I hope that helps, and best of luck!

LSAT · Should I take a diagnostic….

SCOTT_LEBO

18 hours ago

@KathrynLewis So, without knowing a whole lot about your actual prep status/history, I would think do that condensed diagnostic drill first. Then hop back into the prep full force for the next two weeks if you can, and then target a full PT for right around June 6. At that point, you'll be in a better to measure not just overall progress, but also more specific strengths and weaknesses and you'll still have 2 months ahead of you to get ready for August.

LSAT · Should I take a diagnostic….

SCOTT_LEBO

19 hours ago

My thought on the practice test is that might be "over kill". Instead of doing 3-4 timed sections, you can also take a 12-15 question timed drill for each section, that would largely tell you how much rust may have accumulated in the past 2 months.

What's your timeline for taking the test?

Admissions · Application timeline and Sept scores

SCOTT_LEBO

Yesterday

@zach_15 My pleasure!

Admissions · Application timeline and Sept scores

SCOTT_LEBO

Yesterday

Just my two cents based on working with a fair amount of students over the past several years, but I think applying late September is for sure still "early enough". There should be plenty of seats and scholarships still available. I would put the current application "safe zone" cut off as late October. Again, this is based on my own personal observations, but I do get regular updates from my students and I pay attention to the chat forums pretty regularly as well. Best of luck!

General · PT and Drill Frequency?

SCOTT_LEBO

2 days ago

Good question- and the best approach probably varies from person to person. But in general, considering where you are at in the process and your timeline, a great plan moght be that for the next few weeks start doing question type specific drills to make sure that you are locked on those particular questions.

The idea is to really cement the process that you are using for each question type. You could start the drills now for any question type that you have already coverd in the LR unit. Even if it's just 2-3 sets of 10-12 questions, if you start seeing consistent accuracy, then you can check it off and move on to the next question type. If the accuracy is still inconsistent, that’s usually a sign that the process for that question type still needs development.

Once you finish the LR unit, it would seem to make more sense to broaded your drills to be more overall score and timing based. And that's the point that the next PT would make the most sense. But I know the urge to take a PT sometimes can get pretty strong, and sometimes we just gotta scratch the itch! lol

So, I hope that helps and just drop a comment if you have any follow up questions.

General · Answer choices and stim break downs

SCOTT_LEBO

3 days ago

Hi Yasmine!

As far as breaking down the stimuli, I would suggest two things. First, nearly all stimuli present either an argument or a conclusion. A conclusion is the takeaway part of the argument (the argument also includes the reasoning or justification for the conclusion). So, the default mindset should always be to identify the full argument if there is one, or at least the conclusion if there is no supporting reasoning present.

Now more specifically, every single LR question will identify for you what part of the stimuli you are being asked to treat. Typically it will be to find a flaw in the "reasoning", or to stregnthen the "argument" or to identify and apply the "principle".

So, really, in my opinion, breaking down the stimulus should be something we do not only after we read the stimulus but also AFTER we read the Question. This way we can find exactly what the part of the stimulus/passage we are being asked to treat. That tells us exactly how to break down the passage and prepares for answering the question.

Of course, all of these stimulus/passage parts distinct and have a basic, but precise definition that needs to be consistently applied. But you have several months to crush through all that.

That's my hack...hope it helps out!

LSAT · Starting to feel Im not capable of learning some of these question types.

SCOTT_LEBO

Edited 3 days ago

This might be an unpopular opinion, but I think students sometimes get overwhelmed by secondary labels like "Phenomenon-Hypothesis" and "Causal Reasoning" because the LSAT itself tends to define question types much more directly through the wording of the actual question stem.

For example, even the 7Sage "Phenomenon-Hypothesis" drill pulls from question types like Flaw, Strengthen, Paradox, etc. In other words, the underlying answer process is still usually being driven by the actual question type identified in the stem.

Similarly, causation vs. correlation is definitely a major LR concept, but it can appear across multiple question types rather than functioning as a standalone answer process by itself.

IMO, students often improve once they simplify the task a bit and start focusing more heavily on:

the wording of the question stem,
the specific task the question is asking them to perform,
and the identifiable passage parts involved in that task (premise, conclusion, principle, reasoning, etc.).

At a certain point, too many overlapping labels can start making an already difficult task feel even more abstract and overwhelming.

So honestly, I do not think your struggle here means you are incapable of learning these questions. I think there’s a good chance the framework itself may currently be overcomplicating the task for you a bit.

I hope that helps somewhat.

LSAT · Advice on Quicker Testing

SCOTT_LEBO

Edited 3 days ago

Very common problem, and there are certainly ways to improve speed on the LSAT. As was mentioned below, speed does (at it least in theory, it should) increase over time as your experience and expertise increases.

But there are also some more targeted approaches to take. For instance, is the speed problem more related to LR or RC or both? There are some similar speed factors between the different sections, but some of the factors are quite different. And the solutions to those problems either track or diverge, accordingly.

Typically, the LR stimuli that are tough to get the first time around are intentionlly made to be tough to get. And there are some specific micro techniques that can be applied in those cases in terms of unpacking the stimulus efficiently.

Also, the test-makers WANT you wavering over answer choices. But we just don't have the luxury to do that- as you are seeing. Prepare as best you can and then trust your prep. Reason your way to answer choice and then pick it and move on. You might see that the accuracy rate stays high and now you have more time for the last few questions.

So, overall I would say try to get more specific with where and why your timing issues are occuring. There likely will be specific solutions to target those issues.

I hope that helps!

Tutoring Marketplace · Mid 160's fluctuation --> Goal of Breaking 170

SCOTT_LEBO

4 days ago

Hi Ayalah,

The fact that your blind review scores are consistently landing in the mid-170s is a very encouraging sign. That tells me the underlying reasoning ability is already there and that the bigger issue is likely consistency in execution under timed conditions.

This is often fixed through highly structured, repeatable processes that create consistency under pressure. Sometimes those processes operate at the broader section level, and sometimes they’re specific to particular question types/passages. Usually we have to look at both levels to identify where timing and execution are breaking down.

And the good news is that this is often much easier to improve than trying to build the reasoning ability from scratch.

A 166 with BR scores in the 170s definitely suggests we could bring about meaningful improvement before June, and it also means that we could find and fix the issues relatively quickly!

Scott

LSAT · Taking time just to review wrong answers

SCOTT_LEBO

4 days ago

My two cents...

An efficient and helpful approach is to isolate the correct answer choice and your selected incorrect answer choice.

Then articulate why your selected answer choice is wrong. Don't fight with why it's wrong, understand why it's wrong. There is a flaw there somewhere...whether it's general like relevancy, consistency, precision or more specific like causation vs. correlation, raw numbers vs. percentage, or sufficent vs necessary conditions.

And then why is the correct answer "perfect"? How does it fulfil the requirements of the question type. If it doesn't seem obvious or still seems wrong, that's where the real learning opportunity presents itself.

And honestly, I would recommend doing them right after drill, or at least soon after. I see it as a very valuable, even a necessary, part of the prep.

Again, just my viewpoint. Hope it helps!

LSAT

•

4 days ago

SCOTT_LEBO

Independent Tutor

New to 7Sage — Some Thoughts on Reading Comprehension and the Big Picture

Good morning everybody,

Very excited to join the 7Sage community as an independent tutor. I’ve already noticed a lot of discussion around reading comprehension and RC strategy on the board, so I thought I’d share one of the biggest mindset shifts that tends to help students improve RC performance.

A lot of students approach RC as if they need to focus on everything in the passage equally. In reality, strong RC is usually much more about reading for the Big Picture.

What does that mean?

Primarily, it means identifying the author’s thesis and the major supporting reasons that develop that thesis. That’s the backbone of comprehension. Once you can consistently see that structure, the passage starts to feel much more organized, predictable, and manageable.

But importantly, reading for the big picture does not mean skipping details or vaguely skimming. You still read every sentence carefully. The difference is the level of focus given to each sentence based on its role within the larger structure of the passage.

That approach helps create the “one read” we’re ultimately looking for: a read that gives us the Big Picture while also preparing us to efficiently return to the passage for more specific questions.

Part of this is mindset, and part of it is technique. Like most LSAT skills, it becomes more natural with structured practice and repetition.

Happy to discuss further or answer questions if anybody wants to talk RC.

LSAT · Understanding RC Passages

SCOTT_LEBO

5 days ago

@j_w180 Your very welcome and thanks for the kind words. Those other question types all tend to be much more 'detail' oriented. Well, really any of them COULD be directed at the Big Picture, but probably more likely they wouldn't be. So, we have to dive into the depths of the passage at that point to find our proof for the correct answer. That's ok because as we read for the Big Picture, we are "wading through" the details. That's not enough to remember the details clearly, but it is enough to remember where they were located and where we need to dive into for that closer look. Hope that helps!

LSAT · Looking for LR Advice Please!

SCOTT_LEBO

5 days ago

Hi Fiona,

Getting down to two answer choices consistently is actually a very good sign. Usually that means your overall understanding of the stimulus and question type is already pretty strong, and your score is getting ready to improve.

One of the biggest mindset shifts at that stage is realizing that you are not choosing between “two pretty good answers.” One of those answer choices is incorrect. That means that is has a significant flaw that you haven't found yet.

And the flaws at the 4-5 difficulty level are definitely more subtle than the flaws in the obviously wrong answers.

Some of the most common traps I see in those final two answer choices are:

an answer choice that is supported by the stimulus, but does not actually answer the question being asked,
an answer choice that sounds very true or reasonable in real life, but is not directly supported by the stimulus,
or a single-word issue where the answer is slightly too extreme, too specific, too broad, or not precise enough.

I always teach my students that difficult LR questions are often decided by very small wording distinctions. At the higher difficulty levels, a single word can absolutely make an answer choice correct or incorrect.

And as you continue improving, you’ll notice that the same patterns that eliminate the incorrect answer choices also start helping you positively confirm the correct answer choice much faster.

So overall, I’d actually take this as a sign that your process is moving in the right direction.

Scott

LSAT · What are we reading in our spare time to help with RC?

SCOTT_LEBO

5 days ago

Reading nonfiction or scholarly material does help to some degree simply because it exposes you to denser writing and more unfamiliar subject matter.

But I think that kind of reading helps much more when you pair it with the proper reading technique.

A lot of students read difficult material for months but never really improve at RC because they’re still trying to absorb everything equally instead of reading with a very narrow objective.

I always teach my students that the primary objective should be to read for the Big Picture:

the thesis/main point of the passage, and
the general supporting reasons that directly develop that thesis.

If you use outside reading to practice locking onto the Big Picture while learning how to navigate through the details, then those dense articles become excellent RC training.

As for materials themselves, publications like The Economist, Scientific American, law review articles, and higher-level history/philosophy writing are probably the closest stylistically to what shows up on the LSAT.

Scott

LSAT · Understanding RC Passages

SCOTT_LEBO

5 days ago

Hi Michelle,

Not knowing how to properly read the RC passages is probably the most common RC problem that I see. And it sends students in the wrong direction in a number of different ways. You already see that it's causing you to substitute note-taking for understanding.

Your primary objective when reading should be much narrower and much more precise: Read for the Big Picture.

And the Big Picture is not “everything important in the passage.” It’s specifically:

the thesis/main point of the passage (usually a single sentence), and
the general supporting reasons that directly develop that thesis (usually 2-3 sentences).

That’s the structure you actually want to follow while reading sentence by sentence.

Once you understand that, RC becomes much more manageable because you stop trying to memorize details, track every idea, or annotate excessively. Instead, you’re reading with a very specific purpose: “What role is this sentence playing? Is it one of the Big Picture sentences or not?”

Ironically, this usually improves timing significantly because the passage starts organizing itself naturally in your head. You know where information lives because you understood the structure the first time through.

And this is also why excessive note-taking often backfires. It creates the feeling of engagement without creating actual structural understanding.

The details still matter, of course. But the details are there to support our tracking of the big picture, not compete with it. We navigate through the details as we pursue the big picture, and zoom in on them when questions requires us to.

In my experience, strong RC performance is much more about proper reading technique than intelligence or memory. Students who learn how to properly build the Big Picture while reading almost always become more accurate and more efficient.

Scott