To my understanding, no they're not scored differently. Sometimes test day can just get the better of anyone, so it's hard to say what went wrong (especially without specific section scoring to refer to).

If you really are consistently averaging where you want to be, brush it off and try again. Sometimes things don't go your way, but they will eventually.

@ Thank you. The vote of confidence really means a lot, and I'll send it right back to you. Pressure is the ultimate silent killer, but I'm confident you'll be able to focus on the test. Sticking to your guns and not changing your approach in the face of a funky question, game, or even the fact that you want to make this test count is the best way to finish strong.

@ off/on in 2022, then consistently beginning in February

Scheduling does not open until about a month prior to the test date. As far as I know, tests from August onwards can either be taken in-person (here is the list of test centers, but it can change: https://os.lsac.org/LSAT/PMCenterLocations/CenterList.aspx?master=general ) or online through ProctorU. This LSAC page should have all the dates you're looking for: https://www.lsac.org/LSATdates

@ said:

@ said:

maybe you're taking too many PTs. I try to limit myself to 1-2 a week. Go back to the basics and start drilling the question types you miss the most.

Just an update. Took a three day break and got a 171 on PT 67. Seems I just needed a break.

I'm dealing with a similar issue, but not necessarily as extreme. I suspect taking a break, as well as a few days focusing on drills/conceptual review will be helpful. Though taking PTs has been good for exposure and stamina, I feel like emphasizing PTs so much has lead me to cast some of my foundations aside and overthink too many questions.

@ Proposing one or two specific times might be a more effective approach for the review discussions. I suspect groups of strangers in various time-zones will have a hard time coordinated by ourselves.

@ You're amazing.

#help

Immediately after I got the question wrong I saw why E is best, but I strongly feel the principle is ambiguous.

We're looking for Interference & ~preventing harm to others. Right?

Call me crazy, but how is E not preventing harm to others? AC wants to make it illegal, so interference. Check. But, they want to make it illegal to stop people from being harmed.

There is no reason that the principle cannot be interpreted to mean preventing harm to others (as in, preventing the action from harming people other than the action-er), or preventing harm to others (as in the person restricting the action doing so for the purpose of preventing people, other than the restrict-er themself, to be harmed.

Clearly E is the right answer via the first interpretation, but I eliminated it immediately because I intuitively saw it as the second interpretation.

Oppenheimer

@ I understand the arbitrariness of the symbol, but I'm confused as to what exactly it is haha. Do you just draw overlapping Ls? That's what it looks like to me...

Thanks for the help

Wow, took me 6 months to learn that there is a pause on 7Sage facepalm.

4 RC passages, 4 LG games, and the number of questions/section can vary. Most of the recent PTs have about 27 questions in RC, 23 in LG, and 25 in LR, but it can vary marginally.

@ @-1 Not sure if anyone is still struggling, but I was able to get my test scheduled by calling Prometric (rather than LSAC). Woman on the phone was very helpful and I got a confirmation email before she even finished talking.

@ Ultimately, it comes down to preference as to how often you decide to write down formal logic. If I had to guess, I'd say somewhere between 5-10 questions I'll write things out (very rough estimate). I tend to write out most, if not all formal arguments to prevent mixing things up in my head, but it's really up to you.

@ To my understanding, you get 6 double-sided pieces of paper that you can use as you choose. I've never heard of anyone not being able to use scratch paper for any specific sections...

I can't be the only one who interpreted "more temporally remote" to mean something along the lines of more cognitively abstract...

I think JY also missed another key reason why A is correct. The principle states "if you don't have overwhelming evidence that fulfilling the duty WILL have disastrous consequences, then you should fulfill the duty."

For A, it's reasonable to assume that not getting the internship is not a disastrous consequence, but more importantly, her fulfilling her duty only MIGHT lower the student's chances.

An action having a chance of some consequence is not the same as saying that an action will have that consequence.

Important for everyone:

I've noticed that the tool does not work unless you input 3 or more characters.

E.g., if you're trying to find the word "in" you'll need to enter a space after for the word for the tool to kick in (i.e, "in "). Similarly, if you needed to find a one letter word (for whatever reason), you need to enter a space before AND after for the tool to kick in (i.e., " a ").

This is just something I noticed while experimenting. Probably better to know this now, rather than be confused on test day.

#help In both PT and BR I chose D because ABC didn't fit, and E seemed to require too many assumptions. What if the region surrounding Granville also pushed back school and still had an increase in accidents?

On the other hand, D seemed to strengthen the argument because if "many" of the accidents in Granville were not occurring in the morning, then an even smaller amount of the already decreased accidents could have been related to tired students...

Even after watching the explanation, D still seems to requires a shorter leap in assumptions.