Per LSAC's website, scores will be released via email on December 19th.

Find out if there's an affinity group for older law students at your law school. UVA even has one specifically for parents/families. If there is one, ask about resources & their own experiences as law student-parents in the city & school. My mom is retired and is willing to move in with us for at least the first year while I find my footing, but if that falls apart for some reason, we will consider using school loans to help either subsidize our income so my spouse can work part-time, or hire help in the home, whichever makes more sense for our situation. No babies here, but multiple children.

Working a treat now @juliet7sage. Thanks!

@alan-91620 as a heads up, I am having the same problem as I Dunt Want It, and I am on an HP laptop using Chrome.

Yup. On the RC section of the CC, 7sage sometimes even includes links to supplemental videos so you can learn more about what's presented in the passage. I look up stuff I've been introduced to in RC passages on the regular - artists, ancient cultures, etc.

I'm so sorry to hear this. I was a refugee from a different online LSAT prep company that is frankly a shoddy operation. You had to request an LG video explanation for any particular game not already in their collection before they would bother to make one. I couldn't wait for them to get around to it IF they ever did (another common problem) so I went hunting for help online and found 7sage. The videos were so helpful that I eventually went on to buy Ultimate+ and have been thrilled with it! Thank you for making the videos available for as long as you could. I hope like hell that a 7sage alumni is involved in the litigation against them when LSAC finally gets held accountable for some of their terrible practices.

I would say that since you're already signed up for November and your boss is cool with cutting back, keep cranking away at studying and see if you're PTing a little above 170 right beforehand. If not, maybe withdraw and aim for a later administration. February is pretty late to be taking the LSAT and applying this cycle, especially as a splitter, so if you don't feel like you can hit your goal or at least improve a few points, I'd say consider deferring another cycle. Don't worry about being 4+ years out of undergrad - another year won't negatively affect you, but a higher score will definitely positively benefit you. Good luck!

What's your goal score? Would cutting your hours as a server negatively impact you financially? Are you hoping to enroll fall of 2020? Can you wait another cycle to fall of 2021?

Sure thing :-)

I second not bothering with November, if you can postpone. Studying until you're PTing just over your desired score and then signing up for an official take is ideal, if you have the flexibility.

My suggestions:

Work through the LG & LR Powerscore Bibles, then practice taking tests with the older official preptests, and using Powerscore's free explanations (http://www.powerscore.com/lsat/help/lsat-explanations.cfm). This will help you get familiar with the whole LSAT shebang.

Then sign up for 7sage (budget permitting) & go through the Core Curriculum, drill sets, preptests, etc. I found that having a base level of LSAT knowledge really helped me get more out of the Core Curriculum here than I would have if it were my first exposure to the material.

The difference of one month in terms of applications would be easily overcome by even a couple of points gained on the LSAT, and here in the US applying in December is still considered "on time". So if things are similar in Canada, I would say writing in November vs. October would not put you at a far greater disadvantage, if you think you can bring that score up.

Possibly, since it has 5 long answer choices to slog through. Skipping is about which question types you tend to struggle with personally, or really any question that when you give it a first read just really doesn't click for you right off. The idea is to move on to ones you feel more confident about, to make sure you get a shot at the ones you're more likely to get right.

The conclusion of the argument is that "it is clear that some residents did switch to phosphate-free detergents". And this is supported by the premise that "phosphate pollution from the municipal wastewater treatment plant decreased significantly in the past year".

This measurement represents all of the water within the municipality that would be contaminated with phosphates from dishwasher detergents. Since the argument is concerned with the effects of the ban on dishwasher detergent within the municipality, it doesn't really matter where else phosphate pollution might be coming from. You could say 40% of the pollution is from the wastewater treatment plant, or 60% of the pollution is from the plant, and it wouldn't make a material difference to the conclusion. There's still a significant reduction in the amount of phosphate pollution coming out of the plant that may or may not be due to behavioral changes by the residents.

I approximate it as: "Just because a reader believes that a poem expresses a particular idea, does not mean that their idea is part of the meaning of the poem."

Because the stimulus mentions nothing about "best interests". We have no idea if it is in Jeanne's best interest whether the promise be kept or not, so it can't be an assumption on which the argument depends.

PT 88 will actually be the upcoming September 2019 administration. As the previous poster commented, July was non-disclosed, so we'll never get to lay eyes on it again (I have mixed feelings about that, as I feel personally attacked by it ;-).

Probably as soon as they start rolling in. Arizona State has already been accepting people this cycle. As far as when they start releasing decisions, that varies from school to school and even cycle to cycle. I looked at Law School Numbers applicant self-reported data to get an idea of when decisions typically come out for a given school.

Anyone else feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe you'd just include the "should" as part of your necessary condition. It would be:

WG -->SBT

which would make the contrapositive:

/SBT --> /WG

or "If I should not buy a toy, then I didn't win the game" A little awkward-sounding but logically valid.

Answer choice A definitely goes into unsupported territory, as you noticed. The stimulus even gives a way that A could be potentially avoided.

But with answer choice D, the premises tell us that:

If condors are to survive in the wild, the breeding population must significantly increase. So, CSW → BPSI

If the breeding population is to significantly increase, more eggs must hatch. So BPSI → MEH

We can chain those up to say CSW → BPSI → MEH, and therefore also CSW → MEH. The contrapositive of that is /MEH → /CSW or what answer choice D says.

I believe it would be closer to "A university is not obligated to approve a grant for a mathematical puzzle-solving project, therefore the project does not help solve problems affecting people's quality of life."

From what I've seen, that happens only for the most recent official disclosed prep test at the time of its release.

It's not always the case that the 3rd & 4th are harder - on my 1st official LSAT take, I felt like the 1st passage was the toughest. One strategy is to tackle the easiest material first, so you pick up "sure" points, instead of wasting time on questions you might not get right anyway. Another technique is to try tackling the passages with the most questions first, so you have more attention for more question-heavy passages, and the knowledge that fewer questions await you might be a psychological boost. Though this can be a time sink if you're not careful.

I think increasing your reading/focusing stamina with extra RC section passage might be the way to go, and trying out a couple of methods (including your idea of working the RC section "backwards") and see which one seems to give you the most reliable results.

Rather than the quality threshold for refining vs. not refining, the point here is what being refined vs. unrefined tells us. Answer choice B deals with the segment of gold that was refined prior to minting.

We know Senegalese gold was never refined, so the refined gold mentioned in answer choice B is not Senegalese.

Since Senegalese gold was the purest unrefined gold known (at 92 percent gold content), some non-Senegalese gold would therefore have a lower percentage of gold content than Senegalese gold (i.e. less than 92 percent). Which is what answer choice B tells us.

It really might be better to postpone, if you can. The prevailing wisdom is not to take the test until you feel ready, and since LSAC has re-instituted limits on the number of takes, you don't want to burn a take for nothing. And by "ready" I mean that your score average over your 10-ish most recent PTs is a little above your goal score (assuming strict reproduction of test conditions during practice, and tests in the 70's and above for the most accurate gauge of performance on actual test day). I don't feel like you'll be setting yourself up for success to take an official LSAT without having gotten through the whole curriculum with understanding, and having taken/thoroughly blind reviewed over 10 recent PTs. I don't know you personally, obviously, and others may have different advice, so do with this what you think is best. Good luck whichever way you choose!

Answer choice A is saying that a law shouldn't be repealed in the short term because of what people think might happen because of it. The argument is saying that a law shouldn't be repealed in the short term until people have had a chance to get used to the change, and see if they can use it to their benefit (i.e. long-term consequences). So A is wrong because it doesn't fill the gap by dealing with long-term consequences or benefits. People's anticipation of the law's results don't figure in this argument at all.