My all time highest PT is still a few points lower than my target. What made me think about delaying is that I haven’t been able to stay consistently around a score. I think the chance of me doing better/well on June is higher than that of not doing well. But I’m just not sure if I want to take the chance of having two unsatisfying scores on my record.

Interested!

More info here: https://www.lsac.org/lsat/taking-lsat/about-digital-lsat

I called LSAC and was told that using the July freebie for September may or may not be an option. She said “I don’t know if that will even be an option at this point. You can call back closer to the test date to check again.”

It will also still take three weeks to release the September test score.

Is there a way to set the time to less than 33 minutes (-6% of the standard time), like 30 minutes per problem set?

A similar question is Pt54.4.20.

This question rests upon the concepts of true positives (sensitivity) and true negatives (specificity). Here are their respective definitions and those of other related terms:

True positive/sensitivity: correctly diagnose positive cases.

True negative/specificity: correctly diagnose negative cases.

False Positives: get a positive when it should have been negative.

False Negatives: get a negative when it should have been positive.

Precision: values that are close to each other, forming a cluster. Consistent

Accuracy: values that are close to the actual measurement. Correct

This question reminds me of PT59.3.16 where there is also a qualifier in the author’s conclusion.

I’m shocked to read this because that is not the Heart Shaped Box I know. I tutored with him for four months. I have to say that he is the best tutor I have ever had, and this is coming from someone who had had tutors from 7Sage and other prep companies. He is always prepared and incredibly generous with his time. He would ask me to send him questions that troubled me before every session, so he can make problem sets for me, which often included other similar questions so we can really drill on the pattern. He has never charged the times we spent reviewing homework, nor has he stopped tutoring simply because our allotted time was up, which has not been the case with my other tutors. In fact, he would often say “you know I’m not going to charge you for this. Take your time. You should really understand this pattern because I guarantee you that it’s going to repeat”. Heart Shaped Box also charges at such an economical rate for his superb tutoring skills, something that is truly rare in the LSAT world. I have never had to cancel a session with him, but he has always been flexible when I had to reschedule.

How does the argument fail to exclude the possibility that there might be legitimate evidence motivating those who rejects Shakespeare’s authorship? I thought the argument does do that, so it does not FAIL to.

#help

Hi @ thank you for the fixes! I no longer experience issues with highlighting chunks of the section when scrolling. But now it seems that the highlighting is not sensitive enough. I have to click the highlight function multiple times to get it to start. This only happens when I first start to highlight. The problem disappears for later highlights. Also, am I suppose to see a light blue band/highlight that appears over the section that I want to highlight just before the actual highlight takes place? I’m not sure if that’s a problem on my end since I’m using an Apple pencil-like stylus for my iPad Pro. But I didn’t experience the same problem on the LSAC website.

How do you know if an action performed freely is also free? I thought that was a trap to equate those two ideas.

I had LG-LR(25)-LR(26)-RC-LR(25).

Don’t remember anything from the first LR section. Had a lactose intolerant question for the second LR, I think. The third LR had CFCs(?) and damage to the ozone layer, haunted house/chambers, Napoleon, and voting/wining campaign.

I’m not sure if you can do that yet. You might just have to create a separate problem set and use that as your experimental.

Thank you!

If you scroll down to the bottom of the page, there should be a red trash can icon in the lower left side.

@ Same issue here.

@ I just tried highlighting on my side, with smaller font size and full screen, it is better for small sections. However, parts of the passage still gets accidentally highlighted when I’m just trying to scroll down the page with my finger. Im not sure if this is something that can be fixed. I can just remember to turn off the highlighting function after use for now. I also want to point out that I don’t have an Apple pen but a cheaper version of a stylus I bought from Amazon. Could this be an issue?

Thank you so much for answering my questions and what you said about the line numbers totally makes sense!

I usually finish a PT in the morning. BR 1-2 sections in the evening and will finish the rest the next day. I don’t BR LG as intensively as I do with LR and RC. I will also take time to look at JY’s videos, summarize what I need to improve on and come up with strategies accordingly.

The only unacceptable world for /C —-> A or B is for both A and B to be out. So it could be true that either A or B is in, or both are in?

I would use LGs from PT1-35 for drill. They are harder and have a lot of the miscellaneous games that are making a comeback in the more recent PTs. Not only do you need to understand the fundamentals, but you should also be exposed to a large amount of material in order to see patterns. I drilled 2-3 games everyday for 1.5 month to get to the -2 to -0 range. There are times when I had to redo a game 3-4 times to fully understand the logic behind it and to get a perfect score. It seems tedious now, but it really does pay off!

Knowing when to split the game board can be a huge time saver. For instance, when multiple rules apply to the same item, a long block for a short sequencing game, or many MBT/MBF questions that require you to make inferences. I also start to eliminate answer choices for acceptable situation questions (usually the first question for each game) as I read the rules. Seeing how the LSAT writers present the answer choices can also help you to set up your own game board, especially when you are not sure which group of items to use as the base, and which ones to use as the game pieces.

Reading for structure is important, even if you don’t understand all the details. How much time are you spending on each passage? It’s worth it to spend more time on the passage up front because it will actually save you time from re reading when doing the questions. I would also pay close attention to the question stems. JY has always mentioned how the question stems of each RC question is unique. They actually tell you a lot on what you should be looking for and can help you eliminate some of the ACs quickly. For instance, if the question stem reads “according to the passage...”, then you know that it has been explicitly stated in the passage.

Hope this helps!

I actually found the LR sections from earlier PTs (17-39) very comparable to the difficulties (I.e. complexity of language, length of stimuli/answer choices) of the modern tests. Some of the sections have a 4/5 star on the 7Sage difficulty scale, which I don’t recall any for the more recent tests.

Stimulus summary: when ice melts, it releases pressure from above. As a result, pressure from below causes cracks in earth’s crust. Sweden had severe earthquakes at the end of the last Ice Age. Therefore, melting ice leads to severe earthquakes.

The assumption is that cracks, which resulted from the melting ice, leads to severe earthquakes.

A: there are cracks, but do they or do they not lead to earthquakes. Also, it says “sudden change” in pressure. One would think that melting ice takes time.

B: there are cracks in other parts of the world. Irrelevant. Doesn’t answer the question of how cracks contribute to earthquakes.

C: earthquakes happen in other parts of the world. Irrelevant. Doesn’t answer the question of how cracks contribute to earthquakes.

D: bridges the gap

E: an alternative cause. Weakens

Interested!

I understand why C is correct but how is A wrong?

Good Manager → Understand People

Good Manager → Defuse → Understand people

Defuse

(Defuse → Understand people → Good Manager)

—————————————————————-

Good Manager

A) confuses a quality that shows an understanding of people, Good Manager, with a quality that is necessary for understanding people. Good Manager is stated as a sufficient condition for Understanding People but is mistakenly taken as a necessary condition.

Why can’t being a good manager being a quality that shows understanding of people?

#help#help#help

@ the entire passage shift left and right when I try to highlight in an RC passage. I’m using the 7Sage app on my iPad Pro with a stylus. I don’t think it’s my iPad or the stylus because they both worked well on the practice sections posted on the LSAC’s website. It seems that the screen is overly sensitive because whenever I try to highlight a single word or a short phrase, the whole paragraph gets highlighted. Should I be using 7Sage through google chrome?

Also, there are line numbers in RC. It’s a feature that has been eliminated by LSAC. I think it’s misleading by having it there.