- Joined
- Aug 2025
- Subscription
- Live
Admissions profile
Applications
Discussions
This was some tips and criticism that Sage AI have given me
This is a incredibly revealing PrepTest, Yazan. Your actual score was a 147, but your Blind Review score jumped all the way to a 162.
That 15-point difference is the most important signal from this test. It proves that you already possess the foundational skills to score in the 160s when you have the time to think. However, under the 35-minute time pressure, you are likely abandoning your good habits, rushing the text, and falling for traps.
Because your timed score is under 160, your focus shouldn't be on "getting faster." Instead, you need to spend more time deeply breaking down the passages and LR stimuli on your first pass.
Here is a breakdown of your performance and what to do next:
1. Reading Comprehension: Stop Rushing the Passage In your scored RC section (Section 3), your score jumped from 12/27 on the first pass to 22/27 in Blind Review. Recovering 10 raw points in a single section is massive! It shows you know exactly how to untangle these passages when you aren't worried about the clock. Under timed pressure, you are likely rushing your initial read, which actually makes the questions take longer and leads to mistakes. On your next few RC drills, practice taking as much time as you need to fully map the viewpoints and structure before looking at a single question.
2. Logical Reasoning: Causal and Conditional Gaps Across your two scored LR sections, you recovered 10 points in Blind Review. But when we look at the questions you still missed even with unlimited time (like Q5, Q12, and Q14 in Section 4), they heavily feature Causal Reasoning and Conditional Reasoning. These two concepts are foundational. If they aren't completely second nature, the stress of a timed PrepTest will cause your accuracy to crumble.
What to do next:
Put full timed PrepTests on hold temporarily. Since your Blind Review gap is so large, taking more timed tests will just reinforce bad habits.
Do untimed practice. Do untimed drills for both LR and RC. Prove to yourself that you can consistently hit that 162+ level of accuracy on your very first pass by spending more time breaking down the stimulus and the passage.
Deepen your review. For the LR questions you missed in Blind Review, heavily review the explanations. Revisit the Logic of Causation and Conditional and Set Logic modules in the Core Curriculum to patch up those fundamental gaps.
You have the skills to hit the 160s, Yazan. Now it is just about building the discipline to break down the text properly on your very first read!
This was a surprising jump considering the one before I had the same score of 145ish and jumped to 156.
I applied for an LSAC fee waiver and I'm trying to figure out roughly how long it usually takes to hear back. If anyone has gone through this recently, I'd appreciate knowing what your timeline looked like.
Separately, my LawHub subscription is set to expire in 5-7 days. I still don't have a decision on the fee waiver yet, so I'm not sure if I'll be able to renew it in time. Does anyone know if 7Sage charges you or freezes your account if your LawHub subscription lapses while you're still using the platform? I want to know if I need to do anything on my end before it expires, or if there's a grace period.
Thanks in advance for any info.
this is the dumbest shit I've ever seen, if it wasn't already stressful theyre making it 10 times harder especially for students struggling. fuck LSAC
Hi I have a question for Kevin and JY. I just saw this and I wanted to ask how 7sage is adjusting
How I feel now vs how I'm gonna feel if I get through law school and have to take the bar exam ( I am definitely cooked and definitely gonna have 100k+ debt)
Full, Detailed Explanation
1. What the Main Point Must Capture
For MAIN POINT questions, your correct answer must:
✔️ Capture the author’s overall purpose
✔️ Capture the author’s endorsed hypothesis
✔️ Be strongly supported by the passage
✔️ NOT merely mention facts, side issues, or partial points
For this passage:
Author’s goal:
To explain that medieval stained-glass windows are thicker at the bottom NOT because glass flows, but because old manufacturing methods created uneven panes.
This is the central phenomenon the author resolves.
Keep this locked in before evaluating answer choices.
2. Why the Wrong Answer Choices Are Wrong (Detailed)
(A)
"Zanotto's research has proven… viscous flow would take longer than the age of the universe."
❌ Why it’s wrong:
TRUE, but only a supporting detail.
It’s used only to debunk the myth, not to establish the actual explanation.
Does NOT state the author’s own hypothesis.
This would be like saying the main point of a crime novel is “the suspect is innocent,” ignoring who the real culprit is.
(B)
"Window-glass production has progressed…"
❌ Why it's wrong:
This is pure background from Paragraph 4.
The author does NOT write this passage to describe the history of glassmaking.
It ignores the phenomenon at the heart of the passage — the thickness difference.
It’s a detail, not the point.
(C)
"Scientists have developed ways of precisely calculating slow rates of flow…"
❌ Why it's wrong:
This is an invented storyline. The passage never claims scientists were motivated by the myth or that calculations are “precise.”
Does NOT relate to medieval window thickness.
Totally misses the author’s actual aim.
Irrelevant + unsupported = automatic elimination.
(D)
"Flow contributes to noticeable differences…"
❌ Why it's wrong:
DIRECTLY contradicts the author.
The author spends half the passage proving flow played no role.
Also adds an unsupported claim (“several factors”).
Opposite answers NEVER win in Main Point questions.
3. Why the Correct Answer Wins
(E) ✔️ Correct Answer
"Contrary to a commonly held belief, noticeable differences in thickness… are not due to flowing… but result from old glassworking techniques."
✔️ Why it's correct:
Captures myth → debunking → true explanation (This mirrors the passage structure exactly.)
Precisely states the author’s endorsed hypothesis.
Includes both required pieces:
What people wrongly believe
What actually explains the phenomenon
This is the only answer that reflects the passage’s entire purpose.
4. Ultra-Condensed Main Point (Memory Version)
Medieval windows are thicker at the bottom not because glass flows, but because pre-modern glassmaking produced uneven panes.
This is the sentence you should be able to say in under 3 seconds on test day.
5. Main Point Cheat Sheet (Phen-Hypo Edition)
Use this for ANY Phenomenon–Hypothesis passage.
Step 1 — Identify the phenomenon
✔️ What needs explanation?
Step 2 — Identify competing hypotheses
✔️ Popular/existing explanations ✔️ Author’s new explanation
Step 3 — Look for author endorsement
✔️ Which hypothesis gets support, evidence, or detail? ✔️ The author’s endorsed explanation = MAIN POINT
Step 4 — Predict the Main Point
✔️ “The phenomenon is best explained by X.” ✔️ NEVER only describe the myth or the debunking. ✔️ MUST include the author’s final explanation.
Step 5 — Kill wrong answers
❌ Pure background ❌ Opposite of author’s view ❌ Only a detail ❌ Only debunking without the real explanation ❌ Overclaims or inventions
Correct answer almost always looks like:
➡️ “Contrary to a common belief, the true explanation is ____.”
Why did I eliminate the right answer?
I didn't pay attention too much to all the answers
Why did I choose this wrong answer?
i choose A because I read about how stealing thunder can make it old news
I also choose B for the samr reason I did for A because it make the client more credible
What can I do better next time to get this right?
I guess I can be better at examining and making better low res summaries
Additional notes:
i would be down