Discussions

bradk2so2003222

Joined: Apr 2025
Subscription: Free

General · Best day to schedule remote testing to avoid technical difficulties and system overload?

bradk2so2003222

Wednesday, Dec 06 2023

For what it's worth, I took the November LSAT on late-morning Friday and had no issues!

LSAT · I went from a 136 to a 150!

bradk2so2003222

Thursday, Nov 30 2023

Great work!!! That is no easy feat, thank you for sharing.

General · Parting Words!

bradk2so2003222

Thursday, Nov 30 2023

Congratulations!!! What a story, thank you for sharing.

PrepTests ·

PT120.S4.Q11

bradk2so2003222

Wednesday, Nov 08 2023

#help OK, I have a weird question. Doesn't the "proper inference" of (E) ignore the possibility that the children who misbehave (and were subsequently placed outside) all happen to have, say, higher-than-average self-esteem and projected adult confidence to begin with, and therefore the following reduction in what their adult confidence could have otherwise been simply brings their levels down to the average adult level of confidence? Essentially, it's a bad sample, because there could be other correlations in the two groups that are not factored in. That feels like a stretch, but can we really say with absolute certainty that (E) is correct and this hypothesis is not the case? Thanks!

PrepTests ·

PT118.S4.Q25

bradk2so2003222

Monday, Nov 06 2023

This felt more like a strengthen question to me. In no way does the answer choice seem to guarantee the conclusion (it's doesn't appear "sufficient" at all). I picked the correct answer choice because it was much better than the others and I could feel that it strengthened the argument, but I thought I was missing something. On second look, the conclusion is very weak: "this thing may happen." What would absolutely enable this thing to be possible? Answer choice B.

General · Anyone else having issues with 7sage loading existing drills too slow?

bradk2so2003222

Monday, Nov 06 2023

I've had the same issue. I'm using an older Mac with Chrome.

PrepTests ·

PT157.S1.P4.Q20

bradk2so2003222

Sunday, Nov 05 2023

Love watching these classes!

General · November 4th Proctored PT

bradk2so2003222

Tuesday, Oct 31 2023

Hi Bailey! Any chance 7Sage offers accommodations/alternative days for Sabbath keeping 7Sagers that are unable to participate on Saturday?

LSAT · Feeling Discouraged

bradk2so2003222

Friday, Oct 27 2023

Hang in there, everyone! This test is brutal. I took it September 2022, then decided to retake it one whole year later this September. Come test week, I still wasn't seeing the results I wanted, so I rescheduled (and lost my money) for November. Now, I'm consistently scoring much closer to my goal and these extra two months have been a game changer. There are a lot of factors to consider in regard to rescheduling or even taking a gap year. Just know that no one path is the best for everyone. Go with your gut. Keep at it, hard work pays off.

General

•

Monday, Oct 23 2023

bradk2so2003222

How to avoid Prometric proctor problems?

I've read a lot of horror stories about the last several LSATs taken remotely following the switch to Prometric. I'm trying not to worry. I know there could be sampling bias on discussion boards toward those who had bad experiences vs those who had zero issues.

Does anyone have advice to prepare? Additional items to have/remove, questions to ask, room requirements, etc.

I took the LSAT previously with ProctorU and didn't have issues, but it sounds like things have changed. I read the official guidelines on LSAC and Prometric, but I've also heard some contradictions (which could lead to interruptions).

Thanks so much in advance.

Lessons · Drill - PAI Questions

bradk2so2003222

Monday, Oct 23 2023

I'm not sure what your strengths/weaknesses are for this question type, but here's my approach:

1. Parse out the grammar through the whole stimulus.

2. Look for explicitly stated points of disagreement/agreement, and understand each author’s conclusion (whether it is stated clearly or you must infer it).

3. Remember the spectrum of support. The two authors may not take strong stances on opposite sides of the correct answer choice. It is often weak, and it only needs to be “most” supported. Quickly eliminate wrong answer patterns of “no opinion.”

4. If the point at issue is easily inferred/explicitly stated, then go hunting. Otherwise, use process of elimination.

Lessons · Drill - MC Questions

bradk2so2003222

Monday, Oct 23 2023

My understanding is that the main point refers to the conclusion. "Argument" refers to the conclusion+premise(s).

PrepTests ·

PT153.S2.Q2

bradk2so2003222

Sunday, Oct 22 2023

It seems strange to assume that small animals know that their predators often leave their food in a hiding place before eating it (which seems like the only way the small animals could have such a "survival instinct") but I suppose (B) is still better than the others... I definitely fell for (A).

Lessons · [OPTIONAL] Lesson 3 - Endorsement by the Citizens League

bradk2so2003222

Sunday, Oct 22 2023

I may have missed the mark here, but I would guess that the transition is just moving to faster, simpler versions of the mapping as you practice and become better such that drawing a fully diagrammed map is unnecessary.

Lessons · Lesson 12 - Building a Shelter Site

bradk2so2003222

Thursday, Oct 19 2023

#feedback I believe the written explanation for (A) may have some issues. After pointing out that the answer choice used "against" instead of "in favor of," it fails to switch back to the original wording for the next part. "It’s true that there is a lack of evidence in favor of that view. But that’s not something the author asserted." Maybe this explanation was intentional, but remember, this is the modified answer choice. There is no follow-up explanation for why the actual choice is incorrect with the original wording (and using the shoe factory as the subject).

Additionally, I think there is a typo in the final sentence of (A)'s explanation:

"...the author takes that to be proof that an opposing view (the shoe factory) is incorrect" should conclude with "...is correct."

LSAT · Logic Games is Gone starting Next Cycle

bradk2so2003222

Wednesday, Oct 18 2023

No way, I can't believe they're actually doing it...

General · Prep Tests 80s

bradk2so2003222

Thursday, Oct 12 2023

I had a very similar experience. Those newer tests really knocked the wind out of my sails. Following this thread for input.

Lessons · You Try - Homo Sapiens and Neanderthals

bradk2so2003222

Thursday, Oct 12 2023

Same here... I can sort of follow the explanation, but I don't quite fully understand it.

Lessons · You Try - French Novelist Colette

bradk2so2003222

Thursday, Oct 12 2023

Necessary assumption, sufficient assumption, and strengthen questions make me think of a "get your foot in the door" kind of analogy:

To strengthen an argument, you want to get the door open as wide as possible (even if it barely opens further, just a crack).

Sufficient assumptions swing the door wide open.

Necessary assumptions just keep the door unlocked.

Lessons · You Try - The Core Curriculum Committee

bradk2so2003222

Thursday, Oct 12 2023

Would it be accurate to say this stimulus was a biconditional rule? That is: endorsement ↔ certain conditions

It seems like the phrasing would imply that, and J.Y.'s explanation that it is both necessary and sufficient makes me think of biconditional rules from logic games. #help

PrepTests ·

PT113.S2.Q12

bradk2so2003222

Wednesday, Oct 11 2023

To be more specific: in my mind, all we know is that good meals require NOT bad food. But what if there is a possibility that good meals could be created from mediocre food? In this case, we know absolutely nothing about the necessary conditions for mediocre food. Does the soil have to be good? Does it require halfway-decent farming? Certain cultural values? We have no idea. Plus, why the heck is soil not considered a natural resource? I suppose answer choice (B) doesn't say "some" or "all," it's just super vague. I'm frustrated... #help (Added by admin)

PrepTests ·

PT113.S2.Q12

bradk2so2003222

Wednesday, Oct 11 2023

This question is a nightmare. With so many vague, easy-to-conflate terms, I did not feel that the explanation sufficiently clarified anything. There is some good feedback in the comments, but I'm still lost #help

PrepTests ·

PT143.S3.Q8

bradk2so2003222

Tuesday, Oct 10 2023

(E) was super tempting for me. In blind review, I decided to eliminate it when I realized it's more like a necessary assumption than the conclusion itself. Think of it this way: in order for the conclusion to be true, it must also be true that the local newspaper’s treatment of Clemens is indicative of its treatment of public figures in general. But is that what the author is trying to prove? No, she's simply assuming it to be true (which sounds like a weakness in the argument, but that's not what we're after right now).

Lessons · You Try - Pleasure from Art and Artistic Merit

bradk2so2003222

Monday, Oct 02 2023

Hey hrazavi1! I could be missing the mark, but I thought I would give it a shot to respond to your question. In using the wording "is determined by," I believe the correct answer choice actually goes even further than what is necessary for it to be correct. All we are trying to bridge is the "affecting of pleasure" to the conclusion that "an artwork's artistic merit can depend on... [both critics and the artists]." So in a way, all we needed was to indicate some causal effect from pleasure levels to merit levels. But (A) went even more extreme than we needed to connect the two. Also, I think you could still get by just fine by including both the artist and the critics in the conclusion. As long as the focus is on bridging "affecting pleasure" → "affecting merit," I think you'll be set.

Lessons · You Try - Ms. Sandstrom's Newspaper Column

bradk2so2003222

Sunday, Oct 01 2023

Does the "could have reasonably expected" premise rule out an answer choice that says someone "reasonably expected" something to happen? It sounds like J.Y. is saying that the premise implies that the mindset could have been there, but was not (by the wording's implication). But wouldn't the "possibility of something happening" automatically be met by it's actual occurrence? #help