Proctors: Decent, actually kind of funny, very relaxed. Made a couple of jokes throughout that eased the tension a bit 9/10.

Facilities: Older building, temperature was perfect, probably right at 65 degrees 9/10

What kind of room: Class Room

How many in the room: About 40

Desks: TERRIBLE!!!!!!!!! Tiny desks, LG was a nightmare 0/10

Left-handed accommodation: A couple of spare desks

Noise levels: Great building for an older university 9/10

Parking: Free parking on Saturdays, ample room 9/10

Time elapsed from arrival to test: About 30 minutes

Irregularities or mishaps: Stupid obvious questions from other test takers

Other comments:

Would you take the test here again?

Absolutely not. Based solely on the size of the desk. I actually felt as if it was a terrible disadvantage and not only slowed me down on LG logistically but also added an extra stress that I needed to accommodate for. other than this, no other complaints.

12/5/15 (The day of reckoning)

Hi all, I'm curious to hear everyone's thoughts regarding addendums for GPA's that may not necessarily be terrible. Before this last semester I had a 3.93 GPA. Unfortunately this last semester, between taking on an additional course and studying for the LSAT, it dropped to 3.79. I considered my GPA to be a fairly strong point considering I scored a 158 LSAT but now I feel like everything took a hit last semester alongside working full time as a paralegal. I'm wondering if it's worth my time to write an addendum to explain my drop in GPA due to studying for LSAT and work, I feel like since I'm applying part-time, a hectic schedule is what law schools will expect.

Hi, is anyone willing to pass some judgment on my personal statement and a character and fitness addendum.

Pretty personal stuff and I'm willing to have it read by whatever judgmental eyes will read it.

Definitely will exchange statements if anyone else is comfortable. PM me if interested.

Happy Gray Day ladies and gentlemen. So I got 158, 3 points above my average. Solid 22 points above my diagnostic but 7 points below my goal.

I'll be debating retake right up until our deadline Friday but in the meantime I was still in the midst of PT and BR.

My question to the community is whether or not to start BR on 77 as I didn't bother looking at any of the answers and I want to eat Game 3 alive.

What are everyone's thoughts? I still have all of the 70 tests to take and I just don't know if it will be worth it quite yet.

Admin's note: Thread hijacking! I'm turning this thread into the Official Dec. LSAT Discussion. Here's some ground rules, taken from my usual sticky:

We know that everyone will be excited to discuss what was on the December '15 LSAT, but mentioning specifics about the test (e.g., "Question 4 was odd" or "I got B for question 6" or "the 3rd LG was sequencing") can get both us and you in a lot of trouble with LSAC.

Saying that the test was hard/easy without going into detail is okay, but anything more specific is not okay. LSAC monitors this forum.

One exception is you can say which section was the experimental. For example, the LG with "flowers" was experimental. That's okay.

TL;DR: PLEASE don't talk specifics about December's LSAT!

Have fun discussing!

So far we've found out:

Real RC - 27 Questions:

– Gender Studies/Women in Rome

– Black National Theater

– Corporate Crime/Punishment

– Lamarack Theory

Real LG - 23 Questions:

– Concerts

– Pottery

– Office

– Committees

Real LR - 25 & 26 Questions:

– Waste Management

– Dolphins/Elephants

– Amber

– Ships in the Ocean

– Lemurs

– Psychic Girl

– Honeybees

– Vaccine X

– Gold Mines

---------------------------------

@dj768083724's original post:

Going to go with LR with question about elephant seals and dolphins experimental.

(Read Dillon's post and think this should be ok to say, sorry in advance if it is not)

So this is a slight spin off of a different post reading RC. On Sunday I had a huge score drop from my high of 162 back down to 150. My clean copy BR was 176.

The break down was -7/-8 on LR -15 on LG and -14 on RC. LG I completely understood the score drop, a couple of bi-conditionals I wasn't familiar with and caused me to freeze. I BR and I feel fairly confident that if I see these issues again I will know what to do.

However, this is actually reflective of an overall trend I am seeing here. I've seen my LR improve significantly and I am fairly consistent w/ -7/8 and this was certainly and LG outlier and I'm usually seeing -3 or so. But I have just not seen RC improve, and it's stayed roughly -10 since day one. My diagnostic had me at -8 which would have put me at pretty decent shape for test day in Dec.

So far it's been either accuracy or speed. If I go for accuracy, I'm down -13/14. If I'm going for speed I've seen -10. As the PT have progressed I feel like both have steadily gotten worse and I can't tell whether the sections are just actually more difficult or my strategy is getting more and more off-base. Any ideas how to shore this up in the next couple of weeks?

So I recently took RC 67 and I saw a relatively large drop in RC score. While I admit that I have paid less focus to RC and this was the first test I really implemented 7Sage/Trainer strategies in my approach, and this may have slowed me down, I also think this set was relatively more difficult. I found myself bogged down in the first few passages and didn't get to the fourth at all, something I haven't done since my diagnostic. Passage 3 was difficult for me and had only 5 questions while Passage 4 had 8 questions that would have been relatively easy points upon my BR.

So my question to you all is, have you found any benefit in skipping around passages and putting some early work into those with the most questions?

So is order to avoid burnout and a brain drain, I'm curious to see what absorption time you guys give yourself after blind reviewing before starting a new pt session. Today for instance, I've BR and drilled all day since 9 AM, and I'm debating about a PT tonight at 9PM. I'm sure with less then 30 days left til DEC lot of cramming is being done around this time and subjectivity aside, some guidance from the vets would be much appreciated.

Hey guess, know BR timing is really a subjective thing here, I can reasonably spend 45 minutes on a question until I've really understood the question. Alternatively, I can figure out a question the second I finish rereading something that I missed the first leg around. So I'm curious, how long do you take on average to BR a PT?

So I'll start by prefacing that I've really been drilling LG hardcore for only the past 3 weeks or so, so not exactly a great deal of time. I followed @Pacifico guide, here's the link for the curious http://classic.7sage.com/discussion/#/discussion/2737/logic-games-attack-strategy and I am definitely seeing an improvement. Granted, I'm going from possibly finishing a game and a half, to at least getting to the fourth, but I'm still having so much difficulty up front. I'm at PT 29 and hope to hit the 60's later this month. My biggest struggle right now is time (surprise). I almost always freeze for almost 8 minutes on any given game figuring out the board, trying to split the board, or figuring out whether the game is rule driven, before finally getting fed up and hitting the questions. Afterwards, I find myself hitting the questions and then by the second or third question the light bulb will turn on while I'm brute forcing my way through and I'll realize the stupid inference I missed and then I'll breeze through the rest. However, those initial wasted minutes are killing me and putting me into panic mode before I barely finish the first game. At this point, I've rarely needed to come back and check out JY's video because I'll realize the inference or issue mid game, but by the time I figure it out, the damage is essentially already done. I was really hoping that by the time I started getting into the post PT 36 games that I'd have a more solid foundation to comfortably move on to the more modern games and not waste any that I could use for full PT. I can't tell at this point if I'm actually improving significantly from when I started drilling LG through this process, or whether it's because I'm starting to hit the modern games. Anyone have any thoughts/advice?

Hey guys, what's the consensus on drilling the weird games from the early 90's? I''m not finding that similar inferences come across these games and I don't know if doing one will help with another. However, I understand that these styles of games have been popping up again on modern LSAT's but unless I'm completely missing something here, I'm finding that a lot of intuitive inferences arise from the individual games, but don't parallel across the misc game range. I've been doing them for the sake of flexing some mental muscles here and there, but not necessarily drilling using the Fool Proof Method.