Would love to join and contribute!

Picked (A) on Q15 timed but changed to (E) in BR because "the client's question can be answered by direct reference to the wording of statues". but i guess "court decisions" makes (A) the right answer in the end.

No idea what happened on #5, but (E) went right over my head lol

@ said:

I took the November 2021 LSAT with an external monitor, an external USB webcam, and a closed laptop on my desk. I didn't have an issue.

Thanks! I'm confused why the person I spoke with from LSAC said they don't allow that.

For 21, I don't know why I thought "Group" referred to researchers other than B & H lol the brain acts funny under stressful conditions

Interested!

wow.

holy god I completely used the wrong definition of"patronize" for (E) LOLLLLLLL

I went -0 on this WHAAAA!!

I wasn't convinced by (B) because even purchasing one device could still me much more expensive than using a fence-- we just don't know. But we use the same skepticism to eliminate (E) off the fact that it also calls for additional assumptions. Man, answers just seem so arbitrary sometimes.#help

(A) is wrong because it's not the flaw relevant to the main conclusion of the argument.

Q12 confused me because it's not explicitly stated that artists like Estabrook are "late-twentieth-century artists". We only know that he is one of today's artists. I guess in the context of this test, "late-twentieth-century" = "today's artists". Though we're in 2022 now lol.

If we negated (B), that would allow other earthworms to eat the leaf litter. Wouldn't that destroy the argument that L. Rubellus is probably responsible for eating the leaf litter? #help

A friend of mine got a full-ride to a T-20 school with that score! Of course, there were other extremely attract aspects of her application, but you are rightly stoked!

(B) was attractive because the first thought in my mind was that the systems failing doesn't necessarily mean that false inflation accidents must happen. What if there are other forms of failing? So I zeroed in on this flaw, but (B) is wrong because it's simply too strong.

(A) is more correct because it is specific to the premise - conclusion relationship.

I thought Speaker B did mentioned the harm as a consequence of treating others as they treat others because so AC (A) would be incorrect because B states that this very case would be "excessive".

Fine, I'll concede (A) for question 16. But then HOW is (D) correct for Q 17???? This literally contradicts 16's correct answer, (A), that the speaker doesn't mention a consequence of treating others as they treat others. Fam, what?

#help (Added by Admin)

I was skeptical of AC (D) for #15 because we are only discussing Kingston's writing and not Chinese American talk-story in general. I thought it was too broad of a statement to infer. But ok, LSAC.

I came to (E) off of POE. But the main flaw I actually saw in the argument was that the argument assumes that economies in these isolated places were the very first economies. Did anyone else also notice this? (A) - (D) can be easily eliminated because they are not descriptively accurate, so (E) stuck out in this regard for me.

I completely overthought this question and assumed we were looking for an strong language-type AC similar to a SA question and picked (B). If I recognized this question simply as an MSS, I would've chosen (D) in a heartbeat.

Hi! Excited to attend tomorrow. How long do you anticipate this tutoring session to be? Thank you!

A little late, but I would actually say that the argument presumes the opposite of (E). The professor assumes that theories about one type of art CAN be compared to theories about another. That is why he argues Costa's theory about different art should be discounted. (C) is correct but just my two-cents on (E)

But would love someone to check my reasoning on this.

Chose (B) over (D) even in BR. There are some 5 star flaw questions where we attack the support from minor premise→ major premise/ sub-conclusion but there are other questions where we accept the premises and attack the support from major premise → main conclusion. Flaw questions can ask about either while also arbitrarily selecting which support structure to attack. Ahhhhh man this test.

(D) makes sense. But, when do we abandon accepting the premises as true? I thought we're always supposed to accept the premise as true and identify the flaw between the premise --> conclusion. Ahh

Vacillated so much between (A) and (B) and incorrectly chose (A) :/. In question 15, the correct AC uses "guarantee" to indicate the idea of a sufficient condition. Though "guarantee" in this question's stimulus is used to indicate the idea of a necessary condition. Ahhhhhh this test sometimes

@ said:

I think this is probably not super realistic, and I'd suggest having another test registration as a backup. The reason I'm hesitant to say this is super likely is that 6 weeks just isn't a ton of time - doing well on the real day, in my experience, requires PTing at or above your target score over a fairly extended timeframe (think 10 or so PTs). Most scorers have a test day penalty of a few points, so I'd want you to be PTing at around a 172-173 consistently for me to feel confident that you'd hit the 170. The other limiting factor is that LG is the easiest section to quickly improve in but, as you know, you're already superb at LG. RC and LR take time.

However, definitely don't be discouraged! Over a slightly longer timeframe, those are super realistic goals. If you shoot to take this in late spring/early summer, I think this looks a lot more realistic. Doubly so if you're studying more than just a few hours a week/closer to full-time.

Thanks for your response, Raphael! I am currently studying full-time and I have been encouraged to delay my test, since March would be my first take and I wouldn't want to use up the score preview ability if there's a relatively good chance I don't score my goal.

That being said, over my six PTs taken over the past month, My LR score has certainly improved (I started from - 11 on my first PT), but my RC score has dramatically diminished (I started on - 4 on my first PT!). So for the past month, I've basically exchanged my scoring ranges between these two sections to somehow end up at my first PT score of 165.

To attempt to offer an explanation: I have refined my LR approach during that improvement but have continuously tried different RC approaches which led to that decreased performance. I believe that I'm missing that "click" with RC, so once I can figure that out, I would see major improvement again.

Though I only have until this Thursday, 2/3, to reschedule my test to April for free (2/11 w/ a fee), I'm still grappling with what I should do.