Hi 7sage,
I have been scoring between 160-163 on most of the PTs. On all of the PTs 80s I have score above 160 and up. Average is 161. But every time I do the PTs above the 90s, the newest ones from 2020, I always score in the upper 150s.
My question is: are the PTs in the 90s unusually harder? The RC section in PT 91 is mind-blowing hard and it felt abnormally harder than any other PT I have ever taken.
Thanks!
Hi 7Sagers! Moving into 2020, all the LSATs now will be digital correct? Therefore, should all the PTs we take be digital so on a tablet or computer? I am getting ready to start my practice test portion of my studying regime and want to get consistency on point.
Thanks!
What I love about 7sage is how you can just post a discussion in need of help and advice, so I deeply thank you 7sage community for all your thoughtfulness.
First, I plan on taking the LSAT in either August or November this year 2020. Some background - I have been studying since March of 2019 and what I mean by studying is picking at Khan Academy and Powerscore here and there. However, real studying is when I got onto 7sage in October of 2019.
I finished CC and now i'm in the practice test phase and I have taken 3 timed PTs (June 2007,PT 2 and PT 3 from the 90s) and scored a 143 on all (obviously not the gifted kind like many). The problem is i'm just stuck at 143 raw score. Blind review has been around 158-161. GPA is a 4.0 close to a 4.1 since I came from a +/- gpa school. Goal score is 160. I am not the fastest reader and I am pretty bad at puzzles, so Reading Comp and Logic Games have been killing me. I am a full-time worker, 5 days a week, 40 hours a week.
Can a student jump from 143-160 in 5 months? Knowledge and performance seems to be the splitting problem as a have a fine BR but my performance raw score is so bad and wont budge. I just cannot read RC fast enough and I can't help but get the wrong answer when Im stuck on the 2 last answers in process of elimination.
Does retaking past PTs under timed conditions help with performance?
Again, thank you 7sage!
This is a pretty hard question but hopefully I can help break it down. The stem is a bit complicated but it is saying that one of the answer choices is using the HA's argument as support, and we need to find the conclusion that can best be weakened by the critic's argument. So which AC is the best target that the critics can undermine. AC E is basically saying most (more than 51%) of patients, if told to exclude meat, would be just fine and would succeed, meaning they would not have "ill effects" like the HA argument states. But the critic's argument undermines this statement because he states that 1) the study was flawed 2) many of these subjects were not fully successful. So how could a doctor actually tell their patient that information that they would be successful if the study they are using to back it up was flawed and the subjects were not even truly successful? The critic's argument makes AC E a very flawed diagnosis.
Hopefully this helps in some way! This question is a bit hard to articulate.
@ said:
We face the same hurdle. From what I gather, it just takes time (cliche answer), but it's also super important to keep a positive attitude toward the test -- literally talk back to whatever negative thought is causing anxiety, e.g., for RC you might tell yourself, "I'm excited to learn about something new/something possibly from a different perspective than I'd considered." For LR, you might reframe yourself as a detective solving crimes of faulty reasoning presented in each stimulus. You mentioned slow reading as a challenge; I'm right there with you. For RC, succinct (sometime copious yet organized) annotation seems to work for me; test prep calls it "tracking viewpoints & information." I'm still trying to find efficiency, but when I've done it, it takes me to near perfection on a passage. I'm only getting 3/4 done under timed conditions to give you an idea. As it pertains to LR, the skill that 7Sage teaches right up front--namely reading for the subject and predicate, and identifying the conclusion (by rearranging info in the stimulus to verify if necessary)--has helped increase my own comfort with parsing blocks of text without feeling like I'm missing the point. If you can do this, you start to notice how much fluff there is. To be honest, I don't read every word of the stimulus first. I look at the question briefly to see what the test makers want me to do, then break down what is being argued. With games, it's all about the rules and deductions; there are only so many variations and ways to arrange a fixed number of items; you just get better at recognizing the setup by practicing them over and over -- even old ones you've done before -- and watching various videos to see how others approach them. Often there is a key deduction. Hope this helps! Take your time. Meditate! Stay strong!
This is awesome, thank you so much!
Hi Y'all !
So as you can see I have a pretty big gap between my raw scores (Pt 40 - 147) and (Pt 41 - 150) and my latest BR score of 171. What are some helpful tips to close this Gap? My biggest problem is of course timing, whenever I am timed the anxiety and nervousness kicks in and comprehension drops. The LSAT is not friendly to those who have been slow readers their whole life. If you're on my boat, I know you feel my pain.
Thanks 7Sage!
This is def a strengthening question not a weakening.
I thought I had a good handle on quantifiers until now lol I can't understand how C and D in structure are different, so I was stuck between the two. Help would be appreciated on this question.
Thanks!
After studying for almost 2 years I have come to the conclusion that it is nearly impossible to improve on RC and to do all 4 passages under timed conditions. What are some ways that helped you get to all 4 passages under timed conditions as well as get under double digits with regards to wrong answers? I usually get 10-12 wrong on RC sections and I want to at least get to -9.
Thanks.
I'm interested! What time will this take place?
Is the LSAT Flex the reason why a lot of school medians increased?
After 2 years of studying for this crazy exam, I have always been so bad at weakening questions. Sometimes doing problem sets untimed and still getting weakening questions incorrect and continuously falling for the trap answers. I feel like weakening ACs are so subjective and ambiguous. Even when I dissect the stimulus and separate the premises, find the assumptions that connect the premises and conclusion, I still get it wrong because I feel like there is SO much reasoning involved in weakening questions that it is nearly impossible to do under timed conditions. Surprisingly I am pretty good at strengthening questions. So I'm in a bit of a paradox lol
Powerscore says to focus on the conclusion, 7sage says focus on the assumption. Both forms of advice have not really helped me thus far.
Any advice? This exam is so frustrating lol
Thanks Y'all !
Doesn't C also make us assume the tenacity of the disease in question? What if the moose had the flu or a cold or something weak? We would have to assume the disease is a killer disease? #help
I have been going to different forums to understand this question and i'm still having trouble with it. Idk why C is wrong. Wrong timed and in BR. Thanks!
Admin note: edited title; please use the format of "PT#.S#.Q# - [brief description]"
@ said:
Inline translation practice, translation drills (including The Memory Method for Improving LSAT Reading Comprehension, and confidence drills. For LG you really do need to just nuke from orbit (its the only way to be sure) and get as many games under your belt as possible.
Overall mindset is a key component. You can't be stuck in a sunken cost fallacy or you are in effect creating a self fulfilling prophecy. If you think you can't move fast and skip aggressively because you'll have wasted the time invested, and wont have time to come back, you won't... because you are preventing yourself from doing what is necessary to have the time to do so.
Thank you @ , are you still doing tutoring sessions even though you are going to law school?
This is awesome, thank you for sharing this! 1 question, how did you blind review?? What was your blind review method?
Hi 7sage!
I'm doing timed PTs now and so far I have done 4. I am having such a hard time with timing as right when the timer hits I get stressed and anxious and I just can't seem to do well under timed conditions. Feeling rushed and under pressure takes away so much of my reasoning ability and my brain just goes crazy, which i'm sure is why LSAC does this in the first place! When I do my work untimed I get all the answers or most of the answers all correct.
How long did it take you all to get use to the timing conditions? How many PTs did it take you to feel somewhat comfortable?
Thanks 7Sage!
Hi 7sage! I was wondering if anyone knows when LSAC will be releasing the new LSAT testing dates? When I head on over to the LSAC website I only see January - April 2020 test dates and that is all. I might be missing some info and knowledge on how it all works. I hope to take the LSAT in July if it is offered. Thanks !
Hi 7Sage!
My last PT was a 152 and my current and highest BR score stands at 171. Trying to get above a 162 on real test day. Is it that possible for someone who is more of a slower reader and does not have the best focus endurance?
Obviously a big gap that can be found in timing issues.
So my main question is: what are some good timing drills you do in RC, LR, and LG that helped you get better at speed and timing?
Thanks!
If you treat it like a MSS then I feel like E is the best AC but if you treat it like a main point/conclusion then the AC is B. Powerscore forum states this is a main point question.
Hi 7Sage Community!
My question is, how many questions can you get wrong in order to get a 160? LSAT's grading sort of confuses me with some tests needing more points and others needing less points to get a 160. I do not know if in the more new LSATs it is harder to get a 160.
So I have been studying for awhile and I am hitting around a 154. RC is my worst, averaging -11 (slow reader). In LG and LR, I am averaging around a -7 on both. I have only taken 4 practice tests so far. My goal score is a 160.
Thanks 7Ssage community!
@ said:
I'd be wary of individually operating tutors. Not that they can't be good, but just make sure there is a track record, or some way to verify legitimacy. You should be able to verify an official score if they are not otherwise vetted by some established company. They should be willing to do a free consultation. They should be willing to tailor an approach to you specific needs... I'd be suspicious of anyone that tries to force a rigid approach on you or worse someone else's curriculum (unless they are actually working for that company).
Keep in mind that anyone can market themselves as a tutor, and many people who have no business teaching this test do so just to make a quick buck at the student's expense. Also, even if someone has scored well, that doesn't mean they can teach it. And even if they can teach it, that doesn't mean they can teach it to YOU.
Our tutor list is here: https://classic.7sage.com/discussion/#/discussion/4760/7sages-approved-tutors/p1
Everyone on that list is great and vetted by the community/admins.
I've also heard good things about elleSAT, powerscore (if money isn't a concern), and Ellen Cassidy (if money REALLY isn't a concern).
Also, depending on your scoring level, you might consider taking advantage of the forums and looking for someone scoring a bit above you that needs a study buddy.
Thank you!
Hi 7Sage!
I have been studying for this monster of a test for almost 2 years now (working full time) and have finally realized I should probably get a tutor for extra practice. A bit late, I know, but now I can actually afford one. I have seen some Instagram LSAT tutors who have great reviews and are pretty popular. But I also heard of some 7sagers who provide tutoring services I think. Any recommendations? Any advice before you ask an LSAT tutor for their services?
Thank you!
Need help on this easy one. Stuck between C and E. Do not know why this is considered an easy one haha
Thanks 7Sage.
How is this considered an easy question? lol I can do strenghtening questions that are super hard but this one, I was stuck on C,D, and E. Arrowhead for example, we know nothing about whether arrowheads is "new method of warfare" in the conclusion? Maybe it was maybe it wasnt we don't know. E does make us make assumptions on arrowheads. #help
Isn't A just a restatement of the conclusion? How would that be an assumption? #help
Hi 7Sage,
Some people might disagree with this, which is understandable, but after doing many practice tests, I feel like some practice tests are much harder than others. I understand it is standardized, but I felt like PT 62 was way harder than the 11 other PTs i've taken in the past.
For example, on PT 53 I got 3 LR Qs wrong. But on PT 62, I got 13 wrong! I usually average -5 to -6 on LR, so this would extremely weird and I felt like PT 62 was the hardest PTs I have ever taken. PT 62 was so hard I felt like it was so different.
Are some tests just outliers to the rest?
Thanks!
But isn't "any" in the first sentence a sufficient indicator? Do we just pick and choose which Sufficient indicator we go with #help
I do not see how being troubled is the same thing as being concerned about a current situation. #help
Why did JY negate the necessary (RU -> MG/) when without is Group 3 negate sufficient? #help
If we negate D, isn't it "people are different with how they feel" not just "People are indifferent" because isnt "not indifferent" a double negative? #help
Hi 7Sage!
After doing my 5th Practice Test (PT 38) and doing horribly on Logic Games, I was wondering if doing and foolproofing logic games from PT 1-35 is the right course of action to improve my logic games score? Did anyone else do this? I'm sure it took a lot of time. I was planning on taking the August LSAT but my logic games score under timed conditions is horrendous.
Thanks!
@ said:
Typically the answer is a summarization of the stimulus or relates to a strong statement in the stimulus. Try and anticipate the answer - this helps you avoid falling into the clever traps of the wrong answers.
Rule of thumb if you're stuck between two answers choose the weaker answer and move on.
Avoid answers
that have strong language - for example stimulus says "it has been shown car maintenance reduces cost of repairs" and a wrong answer which is too strong may say "car maintenance is the best way to save money" or "car maintenance always saves money"
that say what would've happened
causal fallacies for correlations detailed in the stimulus
say that because something happened once it will happen in all cases
invalid comparison/analogy
Thank you!
Hi 7Sage!
I have been foolproofing all logic games from PT 1-35 the past 2 months now. I am currently on PT 19 and foolproofing until mastery just like the other logic games. I am doing this because logic games is my weakest section and I continue to take around 15-20 min on a normal game averaging 1 or 2 missed questions. Logic games and puzzles in general have always came a bit slow to me. Hopefully if I keep practicing i'll improve on logic games.
That being said, my question is: how many logic game sections did it take you to where you became comfortable with the logic games and were scoring well in the section?
Like I said, i'm on PT 19 and I still have timing issues, hit roadblocks here and there to where I just don't understand the rules and how they are worded, and still get a few questions wrong.
Hope this makes sense, thanks 7Sage!
I have done so many MSS questions and I am continuing to always get them wrong. Even easy ones. I feel like there isn't a great lesson on how to really execute MSS questions. With Must be True types, we can "fact check" and with other types there are ongoing reasoning structures that we can rely on. With MSS, I feel like they are so ambiguous. I always get to the last two answer choices and then guess wrong. With MSS, there so many ways to reason out of the right answer choices. Any good advice on how to tackle MSS? Thanks!
I was stuck between A, B, and C lol
Someone please save me. I chose A because the author is assuming that freedom is worth more than anything else, even more than your life and I feel like A is catching onto to that by saying there could be other things of higher value (like your life in this situation) and the other can't just say 1 thing is paramount at the expense of everything else. Flaw Q are my worst in LR.
Thanks 7Sage!
So I did a little experiment and did 3 questions from each Logical Reasoning stem and found that no matter how hard I try I keep getting Strengthening, Weakening, and Necessary Assumption questions wrong. It is probably my weakest LR family type I don't know if my brain just is not smart enough for the LSAT or it's because there is something off with my reasoning skills, but even after going over CC in this area I can't seem to get questions from the Assumption family correct no matter how hard I try.
Any tips?
Thank you 7Sage !
As many others I also chose E, I think we can say the "efficient" is wrong in E because we may falsely assume that since the pheromones evaporate, then they are more likely to be lost, gain less food, have trouble going about their work, and their productivity drops. But that is all an assumption that is not supported, maybe they have other means to forage for food during the afternoon? So they do not necessarily become "less efficient".
Question 13 is just an absolutely terrible question.
This is hurting my brain. #Help
I am having problems with this question. How is B wrong? The author is saying these critics are wrong because they are not poets but you can be a critic and not be a poet?
Admin note: edited title; please use the format of "PT#.S#.Q# - [brief description]"
@ said:
Someone correct me if I am wrong!
A.) If this were true, then all layers could be contaminated but we know from the premises the correlation is steady between the samples and time. The only sample in question was that deepest sample not the others before it and if this were true that would mess it up.
B.) This just doesn't affect the argument
C.) All because there was no evidence that people were using coal for fuel doesn't mean there weren't coal deposits
D.) This gets the sample-time correlation backwards. The stimulus says we are going further into the past as we get deeper into the rock shelter but this implies the opposite so would strengthen the doubt that the deepest sample was that old
E.) This just doesn't affect the argument; so is it more or less likely the samples were contaminated?
Thanks Ashley! Question, when you state "correlation is steady between the samples and time"; what do you mean by that?
How did you know that H-increases was the sufficient condition in the 2nd premise?
#help
It took me 20 min, and I still could not find the right answer, so I just left it. I was stuck between A, D, and E. Any help? Thanks 7Sage.
I had a hard time discerning which sentence was the conclusion since they are both very straight forward statements, in a situation where there is these two blunt statements, what is a good way to find out which one is the conclusion? #help
Hi 7Sage!
So Logic Games is my worst section in terms of reading the stimulus and rules and then articulating in writing the games onto a diagram on paper. My PTs score are highly affected by my inability to perform well on LGs. So as many people suggest, I printed out all the Logic Games from 6-35 (I already did PTs 1-5) and plan on working on those and foolproofing them. The problem is this process takes awhile, and i'm worried that just focusing on LG might affect my RC and LR studies. But I am desperate to improve my understanding of LGs.
My question is: should I take a month or two to just focus on PT LGs 6-35 with no PTS to improve my LG score, or just do some LGs here and there while still taking PTs?
(Btw, I do work full time from 8-5)
Thank you!!!
But there is a "Not" in the Premise 3, so why do we keep that premise as is yet we negate the conclusion making it P3→CCL/ ? It feels like we are picking and choosing which "No, Not" to be a negated statement. #help
Hi 7Sage!
I was wondering if any of you blind review logic games? Fool proofing has dramatically helped my understanding and my competence on logic games and I am continuing to do the fool-proofing method. But I don't know if blind reviewing my logic games after I first take a game is really necessary.. it seems that logic games is just fundamentally different in regards to study strategy than blind reviewing logical reasoning and reading comp. Blind review for both of LR and RC have helped a lot of course.
Just thought I would ask for some opinions.
Thanks!
What an amazing, heartfelt, and stoic post. You quoted some of my favorite stoics too! haha as someone who had to forgo TWO application cycles, I felt this to the core. Thank you for your encouragement!