- Joined
- Apr 2025
- Subscription
- Free
Admissions profile
Discussions
#feedback when are these going to be updated with explanation videos? I just did a whole drill and every single explanation videos is from a live recording. One of the comments said it will be updated, but the comment was from nine months ago.
#help how is E right but C is wrong? seems like they're both making the same assumption even tho the stimulus says nothing about whether it is unacceptable for a rehab. theory to want longer sentences for repeat offenses?
My issue with parallel flaw is i feel like the guidelines of what to pay attention to and what to ignore changes question to question, so I really do not have a concrete method with these. One question its important to match the amount words like "most, all, some" and eliminate those that don't match, but then for this one, the reasoning on picking A over D is soooo convoluted and requires so much over-thinking. Just nothing tangible for me with parallel in terms of a plan of attack. Could really use anyone's tips or tricks?!
As title says, at this point in my studying i am only really getting the 5 star difficulty questions wrong. When i take untimed tests, I'm scoring in the high 170s (ik this doesn't matter lol), but on timed, I'm still scoring in the mid 160s and sometimes high 160s because of these dang 5 star questions!
Btw I am taking August lsat, no LG.
What seems to be the preferred method of studying when you reach this point? I recently also got an lsat lab subscription so I have more explanations available for these 5 star questions (7sage is great, but many explanations are missing or seemed rushed through). But other than drilling 5 stars and the ones I've got wrong, and going over them until i am 100% confident why its right, is there anything else I can be doing? Maybe specific types of drills or like confidence drills? I honestly don't know. I'm getting so tired of months and months of studying. I also have the loophole book so maybe that for LR help? I know I'm capable of 170s but not sure what that final push I need is. I feel like I've hit a plateau.
Same happened to me. I've heard, like the above comments say, that the best way is to submit it, appeal the denial, and explain that your parents do not assist you with your expenses.
misread A in 14 to say Sun's mass, not Earth's mass. Are you kidding me. And I literally remembered that they said asteroids contain iron (C) so UGHHH. read carefully yall. check descriptive accuracy of key words.
THANK YOU OMG SUCH A GOOD EXPLANATION OF WHAT THE ISSUE WAS!!!
@joecool70212 said:
I see drilling as really perfecting a technique or question type that you can then apply on a PT. Drilling is like a fighter practicing a certain move and PTs are like a sparring match, they both serve a different purpose. Drilling for me is helpful to really key in on issues I'm having, such as with a certain type of problem like LR Weakening or RC Science. You can do different types of drills, such as speed drills, to really nail down things like timing and what to look for specifically. If you find yourself hitting a score plateau while taking PTs, like I did, try looking up some different types of drills you can do and try to complete them in the target time.
ditto! For me PT = assess where I'm at if I were to take the real deal right now. Drilling = mastering skills for specific question types
7sage usually recommends using the earlier PT's for practicing / drilling and saving the newest PT's for actual PTing when you are farther along in your studies.
@luis16alexis546 said:
I can't print out any of the prep tests due to the file having a password on it and I cannot change the permission. This has been a continuous problem and would like some help
The password to open the files is your email to your 7sage account. It should say that when you click to print it!
i guess i would probably group this under a hasty generalization flaw? because we have no reason to think that the 60 issues of the people in this study are representative of common MH issues the gen pop has
This was my order: diagnostic --> core curriculum foundations --> core curric. LR --> drilling LR --> core curric. RC --> drilling RC --> drilling both sections --> began weekly PTS and drilled based on weak areas from each PT, reviewed related lessons as needed
hmm... maybe take a fresh practice test, timed, and then go to analytics on 7sage after, which will show you your weakest question types. Then go into the core curriculum and rewatch the lessons for your weakest sections/types and then begin drilling those. Then take another PT, assess strengths and weaknesses, repeat
i waited to PT until i finished the CC and even before that i focused on drilling first
When I'm not busy at work, I try to do most of my drilling then so I can have more time to relax after work. I focus my drills on my weakest question type areas and drill until 100%. then I'll do a full LR or RC section on some days during the week as well. I take a PT on Saturday and BR it on Sunday. Then i use those results to plan my drilling and focus areas for the next work week. I will say though that I tend to get lazy with PT'ing on the weekend bc im so tired so some weekends i dont do one (:/)
@davidbusis895 said:
@davidbusis895-legally-brunette , out of curiosity, which version of this idea is more appealing to you? Drop-in events on the live class calendar or the calendar to sign-up for small-group sessions?
For me, drop in events because if I have nothing planned for studying and need some motivation, I can join whenever. But I also think study groups are a great idea for a more planned group study!
It says the form can only be viewed by people in the owner's organizations. Please change the permissions to allow access to anyone with the link :)
Think of this as a weakening question and not a flaw question. A is simply bringing in a fact that would weaken the argument, because its quite possible that there are many mammals that have short o.p.s and are not predatory, in addition to predatory mammals also having short o.p.s. We aren't expected to 'know' this or infer this from the stimulus -- it's adding a fact that, if true, would call into question the author's claim.