7Sage has this question categorized as (Misc)(MSS) but I am thinking it may be closer to a principle question type. The question stem appears to be unique and this question threw me off at the start. I want to make sure that I am prepared the next time I see one like this.
https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-61-section-4-question-01/
I can understand how ACs A-D are incorrect. I am truly struggling to see how E is correct.
My contention here is that even if a greater proportion of crimes are reported in recent years, those independent surveys would still include all of the non-reported and reported victims. Therefore, there is no way to make the argument that these two things could be viewed separately. The video explanation really did not clear this up for me. Can someone possibly explain how to understand this more clearly?
Admin Note: Edited title. Please use the format "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of question"
https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-c2-section-2-question-19/
I am curious if there is any data out there that people have compiled showing that specific question types take longer than others. If I could guess, I am sure that parallel MOR and parallel flaw MOR questions would certainly take more time just because of the length of the ACs. Beyond that, I am not entirely sure. I have noticed a trend with RRE question target times being higher than something like MBT questions, for example. I would like to use this data to create a skipping strategy of sorts.
I believe I have a firm understanding of most underlying concepts to questions/passages at this point in my studies. Although, I might easily be incorrect in that presumption. I have read the LR and LG PowerScore bibles page-for-page. I have completed nearly every educational video in the syllabus for 7Sage. I have read the entirety of Manhattan Prep's RC book. I am kinda stuck on where to go from here. Here are my stats currently, which I am only providing as a basis for how I should study:
Generally LR (-2/-3), LG (-0/-1), and RC (-5/-6).
These stats alone -- I think -- reveal my weakness in RC and a need to really focus on it in the coming days. Are there any suggestion on how I can most effectively improve my score in roughly 30 days? I could still take sections and review normally. I could attempt to pay for a tutor -- albeit I am completely self-supporting in college. Any insight on how to make the next jump would be greatly appreciated!
It depends, are you running out of time and that's why you're missing questions? I can only speak for me personally but I found simplifying my RC approach was the most effective way to combat variability. With all of the strategies out there, there are really only a handful of things you need to read for:
Main Point
Author's attitude
Structure
Identify the parties (authors, scientists, historians, etc) and what their opinions are
Outside of these things, actively engaging in the text is paramount. You'll notice that many/most of the questions about a passage ask for inferences. So, think about these inferences as you're reading and what the text might be or could be implying. Specifically to the variability, come up with a solid approach to these passages. If you're just going into the passage haywire, then developing a consistent approach will help reduce variability. Lastly, RC variability might simply come down to variability in difficult among PTs.
It sounds like you might be too focused on strategies and not taking the time to relax. When your mind is bogged down by strategy, you become inflexible during the test. This test is not about memorization but about adaptability. To that end, I would suggest taking a short break and coming back to the test. This will help clear your strategies landfill clogging your memory. When I did this, I saw a 7-point improvement between my two final official LSATs!
A diagnostic score means nothing in my book. It might be loosely correlative to final scores but is in no way necessary for a good score. I know it is nearly impossible to do but try to take your score with a grain of salt.
As already stated, I found meditation (simple breath work) to be helpful. Also, just having something to distract you. In terms of PTs, I always took mine at my school library on the weekends -- no one was there. However, before my PT, I would take a walk around the campus to clear my head and just look around. Lastly, when I take PTs, the whole day is dedicated to that test up until I take it and really nothing else. I didn't work before, have plans, etc.
I think I would need more information to give you any advice! For example, how much do you study each day/week? Are you getting through the entire section or guessing on a number of questions? Have you went through the CC or any outside books?
It is the LSAC GPA but only the "cumulative" GPA listed on LSAC. The degree GPA is not reported.
If anyone knows any books that are dense -- but not too dense -- that you can read while studying for the LSAT, please list your suggestions. I enjoy topics like basic economics, experimental technologies (i.e. quantum computers), social injustice, or history books, just to list a few. Also, big philosophy guy.
@ @ @
Thank you for all of your advice! It is certainly a tricky landscape for first-generation college students to maneuver through but hopefully people like you all will help me get through it!
As @ mentioned, it really depends on the curve of the particular test. For example, I scored a 173 on the January test, which if you give PowerScore's curve prediction any weight, would be around a -4.
First, make sure you don't get bogged down in strategies. Before anything else, you need to have clear conception of what the stimulus is telling you and what the question stem is asking. Now, about the strategies. It's much easier to recount things in categories. So, I found writing out the different question types and understanding strategies as a subcategory was helpful. Also, grouping question types together can be helpful. For example, necessary assumption and sufficient assumption; weaken and strengthen; or point of agreement/disagreement. Lastly, when you do LR sections, DO NOT read the question stem first. Practice reading the stimulus carefully and attempting to recount the question type before you look at the question stem. When you read a flaw stimulus, you will ideally recognize a flaw BEFORE you get to the question stem. I hope this helps and feel free to reach out for more clarification!
It depends on the school so carefully read the conditions of the seat deposit. Some require that you withdraw all other applications. If there is no agreement that you must withdraw (or anything equal), then you only lose out on the money.
The biggest problem for me was overemphasis on standardizing this section. For example, I would learn all of the different approaches and try to explicitly implement them during the test/section. I found my greatest improvement came from taking a break, internalizing those different strategies, and I was left with only the important stuff! I ultimately ended up scoring anywhere from -0 to -2 by the time I took my last official test. Feel free to DM for anymore advice!
I am not sure if there is some psychological phenomenon that underlies this problem, but I seemingly get more of the easier questions incorrect than the most difficult ones. For background, I have managed to generally get my LR down to -2 to -4. Of those, the majority or all of the missed questions are the "medium" strength ones -- think 3rd level of difficulty. I think this might be more of an issue with attempting to speed through the initial part of the test, which tends to be fine, but carrying that speed over into the middle portion of the test where difficulty begins to rise. I think it might have to do with the delay in my mind adapting to the difficulty that causes me to miss those medium strength questions. If anyone has faced this specific problem as well, please let me know!
Not sure what the exact percentages are but if you are looking for a more mature class, Northwestern certainly loves people with work experience!
Just speculating, but it could be the application you are using. I have found using Safari produces some problems. Using Google Chrome usually fixed this!
Practice! For me, I found doing a set of games everyday not only built stamina but quick reactivity to interpreting the rules. You can use the rule diagrams that JY likes to use in his videos on here or you can start to develop your own as you encounter types of rules. For example, you may choose to write a subscript "At 1" next to a rule to denote "at least one." Feel free to message me for more clarification!
Just because you have scarcity of time does not mean scarcity of opportunity. Like some have said here, study efficiently for an hour each day! Also, you can choose to study in the mornings so that you are not fatigued when you study after work. On the weekends, try to do a PT and review. During the week, try to do problem sets/sections. Hope this helps!
I grasp the concepts behind both -- or at least I think I do. I am having a problem truly explaining to myself the substantive difference between the two. The way I imagine Sufficient Assumption questions is that they are the invisible connector between the premise and conclusion of an argument. Similarly, MSS questions ask what would most likely be true given the argument made. In a sense, I feel as though a SA would count as a most strongly supported item from an argument. Is there a better way to understand these question types without overlapping their definitions too much?
I come from a poor household and have been completely self-sufficient throughout college. All of my work experience is important to me. But how do law schools feel about this? I have worked at a number of jobs of all types because that was necessary. I think each of these jobs also conveys something about me that is significant. Harvard's sample resumes, for example, typically only list 1-4 jobs. Other schools also ask to include only "significant" work experience.
@-resistance28 yes it was!
@ I also used the LSAT Demon to study as well. In that respect, I found mixing prep materials allowed me to pick and choose strategies I found the most helpful. So, it’s really up to you but it worked for me! I don’t really see an issue with going to PowerScore if you’re already using 7Sage. In terms of motivation, I am very independent and treated this test like my only way out of poverty. Outside of that, I think being happy and rewarding yourself with progress was fun. I would also suggest finding someone you can celebrate your achievements with that understands this process
Being unnecessarily critical and talking to yourself through the reading tends to be pretty helpful. I might not be the best to ask, given RC is my worst section, but this is my advice!
My PTs typically range 155-157. Per section based on the flex option: LR (-8), RC (-9), and LG (-7). I believe that I have made significant progress in understanding the question types and how to successfully implement strategies. However, this implementation does not go so well when I am actually taking a timed PT. I have a nearly 100% accuracy rate throughout each section but run out of time, thus resulting in many guesses. On average -- on a 3 section test -- it looks like I am having to guess on 15 questions cumulatively. Now, it is important to note that I do not have this timing issue when doing sections alone and not PTs. I think it may have to do with the anxiety associated with taking the full test. On BR, I rarely miss any questions, so it is certainly a timing issue. Is there any advice in overcoming the anxiety aspect of taking PTs and the official exam?
I began my LSAT journey long ago in August 2020. At first, it started with light research about the LSAT and then an intense urge to use Khan Academy's free LSAT services. It was a mistake. After burning through most of the recent available PTs, I found 7Sage and the PowerScore bibles. PowerScore really helped to solidify some basic principles of the test but I also realized it wasn't enough. When 7Sage offered their reduced fee for those with fee waivers, I started going through the core curriculum. Now, over a year a later, I just took my fourth LSAT in January and it felt great. I have gone through nearly every question in LSAT existence (that is available). My takeaways are:
I went from a 154 diagnostic score, which is probably inflated since Khan Academy tells you to keep going when you run out of time, to scoring only in the 170s. By the time I sat down for the January LSAT, my average sections were LG (-0), LR (-1 to -2), and RC (-2 to -5) on average. The LSAT is certainly not an IQ test and is completely learnable if you give yourself the time!
I feel like 7Sage would have the data on how long it takes perfect scorers to read the passage. I wish they would display this target time, especially given how crucial reading the passage (to understand it) is to going through the questions quickly.
Hi 7Sagers,
I am contemplating taking on a new review strategy that I have yet to see others suggest. During our BR, JY suggests that we review and intensively critique our answers for questions that we are not 100% confident in. I think I may take this a step further. I am considering opening a word document beside my answers and writing out why that answer is justified. I think this would FORCE me to review these questions in-depth, rather than idly passing by questions just so I can see my results.
Any ideas on how to refine this or create a separate strategy with similar intentions would be greatly appreciated!
This is great news considering I have almost no clean PTs anymore
To start, I have been studying approximately 4 months. I started with a 154 diagnostic last August but only studied the month of December 2020 and since the end of May 2021. So, relatively a short period of time.
I hit a 167 for the first time back in early June. Since, I have managed to hit 167 in 3/4 past PTs. I have typically been taking PTs once every weekend. My best section scores (from taking individual sections & PTs) are RC (-2), LG (-0), and LR (-1).
Now that stats are out of the way, I have no clue how to get out of the high 160s! I still have a lot of variance in particular sections simply depending on their difficulty but I imagine that, ideally, you would want to minimize this variation regardless of section difficulty. My approach to studying is typically to review incorrect answer choices immediately following completing questions without looking at the answers -- as opposed to going over every question. I feel that going over every question may waste too much precious time given that I will be taking the August administration. Also, I review any questions where I went significantly over the target time.
Has anyone that has been in a similar position found a way to address this issue of being stuck for more than a month in the same range?
I have found that I am much more attentive during my PTs when I consume a moderate amount of coffee. This would be expected. That being said, it comes with the side effect of non-stop bathroom breaks. The alternative is caffeine pills (~100mg), which would not have the same adverse effect. Unfortunately, the FDA will not allow pills to be made with pure caffeine because people could have cardiac arrest. This also means that the pills typically have other sketchy ingredients to fill in the gap. Caffeine would especially help with reading comprehensions and maintaining awareness. Any ideas?
I am looking for someone who is demonstrably good at the RC section of the test. While I have been able to get down to (-1) on the section, I -- more often than not -- get closer to a range of (-6) to (-8). I have a tendency to run out of time by the last passage, which often tends to be the hardest passage. I have better LG and LR scores on average, probably averaging closer to (-3) for LG and (-3) for LR. That being said, I would be able to trade-off my techniques in those sections with someone that already performs well in RC. Anytime during the weekend would be good for me to meet over Zoom. Obviously, if there are multiple interested people, we could start an RC review group. Although I would like to keep that group relatively small to avoid mayhem.
While I have managed to reduce greatly my incorrect ACs in RC, it is still my poorest section. So far, my approach to studying for this section has been incredibly random. I have usually only found that repetition and completing many reading comprehension sections was the best remedy to improvement. If anyone has found a helpful approach to practicing and analyzing RC questions, please let me know!
My understanding is that "tends to" would be nearly equivalent to "more likely than not," which also translates to "most."So, I think you would be correct.
This questions is brief but seems complicated in my mind. I am intending to write a diversity statement for schools that require/offer the opportunity. In it, I plan to write about various diversifying characteristics of my life, including that my father suffers from schizophrenia -- and remains unmedicated. If the admissions faculty member that reviews this statement knows anything about schizophrenia, then they understand that its onset is typically in your early 20s (my age). I am worried that revealing this information might worry the law school personnel that this might happen while I am in law school. Do the risks outweigh the benefits here?
While I take the June 2021 LSAT tomorrow, my LSAT journey is long from over. However, I thought it might be an appropriate time to thank 7Sage. Firstly, for the content and organized approach to studying for this demonic exam. Secondly, that they provide LSAT studiers with the opportunity to study this content at an incredibly reduced rate. As a person from an impoverished background who solely supports himself through undergrad, I cannot thank 7Sage enough. Studies show that tutoring, particularly for an exam like the LSAT, will increase your score significantly. This widens an already massive chasm that exists between poor and wealthy students -- and this is not to scorn the latter. 7Sage's core curriculum and JY's snarky remarks were the closest thing I could get to professional tutoring and I am extremely grateful!
After studying for approximately 3 months, I scored a 163 in June. At the time I was PT’ing at about 164. In August, I scored a 163 after PT’ing at about 169. My PT high was a 170. Last weekend I scored a PT high of 173. I feel as though I was significantly better at the test in August and there were no extraordinary circumstances — albeit two difficult RCs.
I plan on taking the October LSAT. My contention is that it would be difficult for me to afford a pricy tutor. I have an LSAC fee waiver, so if there are any tutors who offer discounted services, I would be very interested in working with them.
@ said:
@ said:
I think I would need more information to give you any advice! For example, how much do you study each day/week? Are you getting through the entire section or guessing on a number of questions? Have you went through the CC or any outside books?
Thank you for answering !!! I study roughly 20 maybe more hours a week! As I work full time and have a part time job. So I do my best. The thing is I am not struggling to get through the section I come done to 2 answer choices and ultimately choose the wrong one. I did finish the CC and I am currently utilizing “The Loophole” by Ellen Cassidy.
I am not sure what other tactics to employ. Because BR does not work for me.
Well, I can definitely respond to this directly. Getting stuck between two ACs can mean two things:
You didn't fully understand the stimulus to be able to make the proper distinction.
There is a single word (maybe a few) that invalidates one of the ACs.
To the first point, you may have to read slower, make better predictions, and hone in on the right AC instead of focusing on elimination. To the second point, I always found it helpful to ask myself "what single word makes this AC wrong?" Most of the time, it actually worked. Now, if you are simply spending too much time differentiating between two ACs, it may be helpful to skip and come back since your best odds of getting the AC right is 50%. Whereas spending too much time and missing questions at the end guarantees you will get them wrong.
Remember, there are natural variations in the difficulty of tests depending on what your strengths are. Depending on that 158 PT, it could just be that you are terrible at RC and that was a difficult RC. BUT, it could also do with luck. You just happened to make a few good guesses on the 166 PT that made the jump. To settle your variation, you have to be more consistent in your approach to the sections/questions. Without this standardization, you will continue having variance!
I have taken the LSAT twice: June 2021 and August 2021. Both were 163. I was scoring well above (low 170s) before the most recent one. Obviously, the test day penalty is severe. But how can I overcome this? I recently hit a -0 LR, which I am ecstatic at accomplishing, especially given I have not dipped below -0 on LG in a long time on PTs.
Studies show that maintaining meditation is helpful, but I haven't been doing that consistently. Is there any internal motivation I could possibly engender in myself before test day in an effective way?
I started out with a 154 diagnostic and with my last PT, improved to 167. Although this is a great PT and could certainly be an outlier, the one thing that remains constant is my RC score. I have NEVER been able to reduce my incorrect ACs below -6. On the 167 PT, I got -7. I am curious if there are any other high scorers who had originally had this issue and were able to resolve it. Any advice?
Without a doubt, reading for structure is one of the simplest and yet most powerful strategies you can employ when reading a passage. However, does this always apply?
Typically, a passage will be broken down into several paragraphs composed of several sentences. With most passages usually being four paragraphs. This is easy to keep track of and read for structure. What do we do when a passage has many paragraphs composed of one to two sentences? This seems to be an exception to the rule. I have continued to read for structure while going through the passage, I just don't try to memorize where things are, since I find that to be unduly difficult.
Hi all, I am unsure if I am going through a natural digression from my typical performance or if it is a symptom of burnout. I have recently began to do considerably worse on PTs and sections, although if feel that I still understand the material fairly well. I will say that I have been getting less sleep than usual recently, but I am not convinced that is the only reason for my atypical performance. What are the symptoms of burnout and how do you treat it while not being entirely absent from studying? Does this sound like a natural progression in scoring that everyone goes through?
As many of you have probably noticed, the previous admissions cycle was bolstered by many more applicants, the most since -- I believe -- 2011. As a result, scorers in the 170+ range increased dramatically. Surely, this is going to result in deferred candidates taking spots at the top schools of already limited applicant pools. In addition, while ABA 509s from 2020 are available, we are missing data for the most recent cycle. After perusing through the social medias of top schools, I have found that Harvard's incoming class boasts a new median LSAT of 174 and GPA 3.92. Georgetown similarly shot up from a 168 LSAT to 171! With LSAT registrants for this year matching or increasing from the previous year, I am worried we may see another -- even worse -- cycle for the T14 schools.
Does anyone have any educated opinions regarding LSAT registrant data or potential competitiveness at top-tier institutions? If so, what are some potential ways that people can overcome and stand out amongst everyone else?
So, I take a really unique approach that may divorce from JY's methods -- although, they are definitely great. I typically build a single game board in a horizontal fashion like such:
__ __ __ | __ __ __ | __ __ __
From here, I stack my worlds vertically and cross out any worlds I realize are inoperable. This way, I can quickly scan up or down and see which worlds worked and which didn't. Of course, if I notice that games can be split into two distinct types of worlds, I might draw out two different game boards for that purpose. I hope this helps and this way you can avoid using pencil!
This is the biggest mistake I made during my studies. Yes, your problem is speed but why is that? Is it because you aren't focused or aren't reading quickly enough? No, it's because you're not familiar enough with the material. Learn to use your BR efficiently and review the questions you did get to thoroughly. Even when you are completing a section, don't speed through simply to complete the section. You should give each question your all and be fully confident in your answer choice before moving forward. This way, you build familiarity and learn how to get the questions right and not just complete them. After that, the speed will come naturally.
@ Agree with this so much. I don't think people realize how reactive this test is. Practice, practice, practice until everything comes natural