I would love to join! I've already completed CC. I drill individual sections from PTs 1-35, and aim to take 1-2 tests per week. The time/day works for me.

I would love to join! I'm planning on taking my LSAT in October as well.

I would love to join! My semester ends in just two and a half weeks.

Thank you! I will try to make it.

@ I am definitely setting aside time to BR. I haven't taken another test since the diagnostic, since I'm still going through the curriculum; but I do BR all of the practice quizzes I've taken. I will probably need quite a few PTs since I'm 20 points from my goal. Anyway, thanks for the advice, and it definitely helps.

@ What do you mean regarding the recent tests could have helped you reach your goal sooner? Are the recent tests considered to be harder?

The first things that come to mind is donating to programs, such as Meals on Wheels or to local food banks; and supporting local businesses. You can probably donate online. One of my favorite coffee shops closed, and they posted on instagram that the best way to help is to buy a gift card which can be used once they open again.

I hadn't even considered this! I sure hope not. I do not want to wait a year to apply.

I completely understand where you're coming from. I also struggle with anxiety before taking a practice test. One of the ways I handle it is by giving myself a schedule. For instance, every Monday morning at the exact same time, I go to a nearby law library and take a practice test. While I wouldn't say my anxiety has dissipated, it helps to have a consistent schedule. I'm hoping it will get to the point where it feels like no big deal since I take these tests every week. Also, I give myself something to look forward to after taking the exam. Personally, I like to go swimming after a test. It helps release any stress from the exam and feel invigorated to start the blind review process.

Also, remind yourself that you're still in the studying process. Don't worry too much about the timed score just yet, because you'll have a chance to prove to yourself that you know what you're doing with your BR score. Eventually the two scores will match each other with consistent and smart studying tactics. Hope this helps!

Thank you so much! Your explanation is helpful. I will most likely continue posting more questions, since I'm drilling LR heavily at the moment.

I found this question tricky too.

Accept for publication = P

High in plausibility = H

High in originality = O

High in interest to given audience = I

The teacher is arguing P -> H or O or I (aka law of anecdotes). Therefore, if journalists conceal a source's identity-> the journalist's reputation is depends on law of anecdotes.

The student responds with H ->

O-> P

I -> Therefore, no need to quote a source, just invent a story.

There are several flaws:

The teacher didn't mention anything about inventing stories. The context of which the teacher is speaking is about quoting sources. When the student says "But what you're saying is..." the student is altering the teacher's actual argument to mean something entirely different than what the teacher intended.

The teacher argues for H or O or I to be in the necessary condition. The student places H, O, and I in the sufficient condition.

A - False. What marginalistic journalistic practices? There are none in the stimulus.

B - Correct! Flaw 1. The student and teacher have completely different conclusions, however, the student tries to alter the teacher's argument with the verbiage, "But what you're saying is...". The student is pretending that the teacher made a different argument where no real sources are necessary.

C - False. Where are these reported statements and their characteristics?

D - False. Doesn't mention one extreme case.

E - False. Similar to flaw 2; however, remember the conclusion for the student is different. The student says no sources are necessary.

I hope that helps. I got this question wrong during a timed set, but figured it out during blind review.

I don't know how helpful this will be to you, but it made a difference for me. Think of MBT answers with an extremely narrowed focus. LSAT wants to trick you with your common sense assumptions. Don't assume anything beyond what the premises say. Ask yourself why must this be true to each answer choice? The correct answer will follow logically with the premises. If you find yourself using your common sense to make the premises and AC fit, then you are probably on the wrong track. Some MBT questions have heavy lawgic diagramming, so review the CC if you aren't fully adept in it.

The stimulus says no other headache pill stops pain more quickly. It doesn't say that Danaxil is a faster drug. Every headache drug in the world, including Danaxil could stop a headache at the exact same time, and it would still be correct to say that there is no headache drug that stops pain more quickly than Danaxil. The inference is that if no other headache pill stops pain more quickly, then Danaxil must be at least as fast as the other pills. It could be faster, but it does not have to be. Answer (b) makes too big of an assumption.

I find this explanation video unnecessarily detailed and too confusing. It is much simpler to break it down as follows:

less than 50... and duplicate 25%... → /funding.

The stimulus says there will be funding. So take the contrapositive.

funding →/less than 50... OR /duplicate 25%.....

Since the stimulus says there is a duplicate 25%..., then there must not be less than 50 people available for hire.