Because you're new, I would. wait until you've gone over and learned a good chunk of LR question types. It won't necessarily hurt you to start drilling, but it would be like learning a few rules of tennis, then going out and spending an hour hitting serves. You'll get so much more out of the drills once you know the method to approaching them, just like you'd get much more out of practicing your tennis serve after someone teaches you how to do it instead of going in blind.

Aside from the tutor, what studying have you done and are you doing? Have you gone through the 7Sage syllabus?

https://www.usnews.com/education/blogs/law-admissions-lowdown/articles/how-why-to-write-a-law-school-addendum

You might want to write an addendum regarding your grades, basically explain what you said here and that the courses you took as a 15 year old don't accurately reflect your academic potential.

What law schools are you applying to? A 165 is a very competitive score for many law schools, even some in DC. I'm not sure what your GPA is, but if your early grades are that bad, you might want to write an addendum explaining that. But if you've not had a single acceptance in two years, you might want to lower your expectations and consider applying to schools you might be more likely to get into. Plenty of schools in DC/Virginia where that LSAT score alone would give you a solid shot at getting in.

The PowerScore LSAT and the Thinking LSAT podcasts seem like good options

If you're close to where you want to be, no point in hiding it. If you're well below, it might be worth considering. However, as far as I'm aware, schools will still be notified that you took that test, just that you chose to hide it.

@ Yep! It seems like you've got it now! Lawgic is a one way street, you can't go backwards (except for 'some' statements, but if you haven't reached that part yet, don't worry about it)

In addition to the previous comments, because you're just starting out, do a few passages untimed. Get a feel for what its like reading the passages and what sort of questions you'll be expected to answer. And once you start seeing your score go up, then you can start focusing more on timing and getting through each passage quicker.

When it comes to a lawgic chain, you can never draw conclusions going from right to left, everything must go left to right. You seem to have trouble understanding sufficiency and necessity, so I'll include my own examples that might help.

"Bob lives in Japan. Anyone that lives in Tokyo must live in Japan."

So, Bob -> Japan, Tokyo -> Japan.

Can we conclude anything about Bob and his relationship to Tokyo here? Nope! Living in Japan is necessary for living in Tokyo, as in we cannot live in Tokyo without living in Japan. And living in Tokyo is sufficient for living in Japan. If someone tells you 'I live in Tokyo,' you can assume that they live in Japan. But if someone tells you 'I live in Japan,' you cannot assume that they live in Tokyo. That's what we have here with Bob. He very well may live in Tokyo, but he could also live in Osaka or Kyoto, we don't have the info to know for certain and therefore cannot draw any conclusions.

So going to your biology example, I wrote down:

FS -> LS

FS -> /WF

(contrapositive: WF -> /FS)

TS -> CL -> WF

Given LS and CL, we can conclude WF from (CL -> WF), but nothing from LS. Now with WF, we can use the contrapositive of FS -> /WF to conclude that the plant additionally cannot have fuzzy seeds. Therefore, based on what we're given, we can conclude WF, /FS. You cannot read right to left, but you can take the contrapositive and read that from left to right. 'If you live in Tokyo, you live in Japan' becomes 'If you do not live in Japan, you cannot live in Tokyo' just as 'If you have fuzzy seeds, you do not have white flowers' becomes 'If you have white flowers, you do not have fuzzy seeds.'

Yes, you're correct in saying that you cannot conclude anything from the necessary. To use an additional example, it is necessary to have a high GPA, high SAT, and be in many clubs to attend Harvard. Attend Harvard -> high GPA and high SAT and many clubs. If someone tells you 'I had a high GPA, high SAT, and was in many clubs in high school,' can you conclude that they attended Harvard? Not at all! Maybe they didn't even apply, and that's certainly a necessity to attend Harvard!

To sum up, I'll give you one final run down.

In X -> Y, if X then Y must follow. If you live in NYC, you must live in the US. If you attend college, you must have graduated from high school. Living in NYC or attending college are sufficient to lead us to conclude that you live in the US or have graduated high school. But if I asked you to list out everything that is necessary to attend Harvard Law School, you could spend all day. High uGPA, high LSAT, letters of rec, fill out the application, be admitted, be eligible to attend a US law school, etc. We can't take just one of these and conclude that, based on just that, they attend Harvard Law School. That's what you're trying to do when you go from right to left in lawgic.

Can't go wrong with asking now. I'll be applying in the fall and have already asked one professor to write a letter for me. Even if it's just an email saying 'I'll be applying to law school in the fall, would you be willing to write a letter of recommendation for me.' I plan on reaching out with more details for them around summertime, but there's no harm in asking now. It gives them more time to think and potentially write a better letter for you.

The score on a single preptest shouldn't matter to you as much as you seem to think it does. Even the best in the world have off days where they don't perform well. I'd analyze the mistakes you made and why, maybe you didn't get a good sleep the night before, maybe you skipped your usual pretest routine. The way you're talking, it seems like you'd have answered those questions right 9/10 times, so just understand why you missed it that one time and what you can do to make sure it doesn't happen again. Don't let one preptest get into you head, you got this!

It might not work for everyone, but I went from having a 3.6 GPA after my first year to graduating with two majors and a 3.9 GPA simply by changing my mindset and approach to grades. I began approaching classes with the mindset of 'I'm going to do my best in this class, and whatever grade I get, if I gave it my all, won't disappoint me.' I began checking my grades less frequently (still check to make sure a teacher doesn't miss something) and think that that simple mindset change relieved a ton of pressure for me and may have actually allowed me to do so well my final three years.

Find a list of all of them and create your own examples. It might be easier if you can put them in terms you're familiar with.

Like the comment above says, doing a wrong answer journal will help with this, and even with other questions you may get wrong. I'm not sure how you do on time, but typically I aim to be done with the first 10 questions in 10 minutes, ideally the first 15 questions in 15 minutes. You're never going to have one of those dealbreaker, level 4 questions as one of your first questions, so without knowing why you're getting them wrong, the only advice I can give you is to make sure you have enough time for those last 10, 15 questions so that you have that extra bit of time to really think through your answer.

Personally, I find I've progressed the most by wrong answer journaling, as well as getting enough sleep the days leading up to a test. I found I was also getting some questions I changed wrong, so I stopped changing my answer from one I wasn't sure on to another I wasn't sure on. That's become my general rule going forward, with the extra minute or two, review one or two flagged answers, but don't change them unless you're willing to bet money that you're changing it to the correct answer.

It might just take some time to sort it out in your mind. Exact same thing happened to me, all the strengthen/weaken questions and the strengthen/weaken EXCEPT questions flowed together. As you're learning, take a second to understand exactly what the question is asking, then read the stimulus. Maybe make a little cheat sheet for each question stem so you know what mindset you need as you read the stimulus. It takes time, but with enough reps and experience, the small differences in question stems will become clearer.

I'm a Waseda student planning on taking the LSAT over the next few months

Like the previous person said, law schools predominantly care about undergrad GPA and LSAT scores. That's essentially 90-95% of the application. The median LSAT at Northeastern is a 163, so if that's where you want to go, that's what you have to aim for. A few extra LSAT points are worth infinitely more than work experience.

For the first 10 questions of the section, I would almost turn my brain off and think to myself "The answer is going to be the most obvious of the answer choices. You aren't going to need to diagram (for the most part) or spend three minutes thinking about every minute detail of the sentence structure." I found it helped me get more of the early, easy questions right.

As far as I'm aware, it's the exact same test. I'm living abroad and taking it in April.