The stimulus tells us in order to get hired to testify you need:

P1. Know how to make convincing presentations

P2. Able to present steps clearly and confidently

C: some less expert authorities with convincing testimony testify rather than the skilled but less persuasive experts.

So, the principle is: sometimes the most skilled (A) person isn't selected, but rather the persuasive (B) one.

AC A conforms to this principle because it's basically saying that successful politicians can be seen as successful not because they know how to help their country (A -- not the most skilled), but because they know how to conduct an election campaign (B -- they are persuasive).

This was a very tricky question, but I'll give it a shot in explaining.

P1: Lower numbered plastics most often recycled.

P1: Higher numbered plastics are rarely recycled.

Conclusion: Refusing to buy high numbered plastics ---> reduce amount of waste not recycled (AKA the high numbered plastics)

Answer C says that a lot of the higher numbered plastics were once lowered number plastics. So, a lot of the higher number plastics were already recycled, which means that refusing to buy high number plastics will not reduce the amount of waste that goes unrecycled ... because a low numbered plastic turns to a high numbered plastic.

In other words, the stimulus assumes that the higher numbered plastics were high numbered to begin with, so if one were to stop buying them then there would be less high numbered plastics that go without being recycled. Answer choice C disproves that assumption.

Kind of make sense?

Quitting your job to be able to dedicate more time on the LSAT sounds like a smart decision and I don't think it would make your resume look bad.

I do recommend you look for places to volunteer (a few hours a week) while you're unemployed, so that you can add that to your resume. More softs never hurt anyone.

P1: Body weight = Energy animal needs to move uphill

P2: Surface area - Energy animal has to move uphill

Conclusion: Small animals can run uphill, while large animals slow down when moving uphill

So basically the premises are telling us that an animal's surface area determines how much energy they have while their body weight determines how much they actually need to move uphill.

Therefore, why do large animals slow down when they move uphill? Because they don't have enough energy to do so. And why is this? ---- because their body weight is bigger than their surface area.

This is what Answer Choice C says.

It might be easier to illustrate with another example

EX) A dog's surface area is 55, but he weighs 135. He only has 55 of engery to use, but he needs 135 to move uphill ...... so, he slows down because he does not have enough energy to keep running uphill.

Let me know if this kind of helps?

Just heard from USC .... dinged

@ohnoeshalpme804 said:

It depends on your standing with similarly/higher ranked schools. If they're your top choice and you have no other schools waiting on you then it's unlikely that they'll be willing to send you any money. They hold all the cards - or they think they do! However, if you notify them of other offers that are superior to theirs financially or academically, they will have to step up their financial offer if they want to keep you.

If that doesn't work then you can always look for aid from fafsa.

UC Hasting's which is ranked higher gave me 30K, and I'm still waiting for 2 other schools. But, I'll for sure mention Hasting's aid in the letter. Thanks!

@ivettechow129 said:

Take a look at Loyola's 509. According to the 2016-2017 data, 87% of their students received some level of financial aid. You might want to ask if they consider you part of the bottom 13% of their admitted students for this year (your self reported numbers would say you are not).

https://www.luc.edu/media/lucedu/law/Std509Disclosure.pdf

ETA: The question I posed above was slightly tongue-in-cheek. You are obviously not statistically (at least as measured by GPA/LSAT) in the bottom 13% of their class (or bottom 10% if you are a full time admit). I would carefully craft a statement referencing their 509 data specifically, your placement within their bell curve, and a polite request that they reconsider, given their demonstrated history of merit aid. There is no way you should be paying full freight given your numbers.

Thanks for this, I appreciate it! But I was actually talking about Loyola Law School in LA (:

My friend proctored for an accomodated LSAT where the test taker was pregnant and he mentioned she had it pretty nice. She was alone in the room, could take as many breaks as she wanted (bathroom/food breaks).

Having a quiet room to yourself means absolutely no distactions, so your focus is 100% on the exam and the additional breaks allow to you get a breather if you feel stressed in a section of the exam. I personally think it's to your advantage, so, if I were you, I'd take it.

Has anyone heard anything from USC?

I'm from San Jose and the only bay area school I applied to was Hastings. All the rest are in SoCal. Born, raised and went to undergrad in the Bay, so I'm excited to try my luck elsewhere :)

I saw the LSAC email and decided I'm not ready to check my score yet. All my applications are submitted, soooo the score doesn't really matter much at this point. Anyone else doing this LOL.

Check these out: https://www.discoverlaw.org/diversity/scholarships.asp

Yes, you are supposed to ignore that possibility because the question is soley asking you which AC can be justified according to the statements above. In other words, we have to accept the reasoning of the AC's as stated, so long as they are supported by the stimulus.

The stimulus tells us:

Valid --> a legitimate offer is accepted

Reasonibly believe the offer was made in vest --> ^ legitimate

AC (E) is correct because:

^legitimate offer --> ^valid.

Hiii, I know you asked J.Y. but I figured I'd take a shot.

The question is basically asking us which AC is false according to the stimulus. Below is my thought process and how I approached this question --- I hope it helps you.

For the most part, you're right. Most of the AC's are irrelevant to the stimulus, which is why you can't really reject them.

Answer Choices:

(A) We can't reject this based on the stimulus because nothing in the stimulus addresses this. It could be true or false.

(B) We don't have enough information to know whethere this is true or not. So, we can't reject it.

(C) Again, this could or could not be true.

(D) Correct. This we can reject because Demosthenes was reading silently to himself. This is why his companion pressed him for information about what the oracle had written.

(E) We know that the prophecy in the stimulus was writte down on writing tablets, but we don't know if this was a rare occurence or not. So, we can't reject it.

@leahbeuk911 said:

By priority so they know I’m interested now, and to get the fee waiver. But it says applications not complete by feb 1 are at a significant disadvantage. So that factor still applies

Ok, yea. I was asking because I'm in the same boat as you. I'm applying to USC but going to retake in February. I was also scoring in the high 160's during PT's but scored in the low 160's in the December LSAT.

A section in the application asks whether the LSAT score accurately reflects your potential as a law school student, and I took the opportunity there to let them know I will be retaking in February.

That beings said, I'm crossing my fingers and hoping for the best. Good luck to you!

Are you planning on applying by the priority deadline or in April?

I would strongly suggest to keep on studying until you get a score that's in your preferred law schools percentile range. Another incentive for you is that a better LSAT score means better scholarship opportunities. Also, keep in mind that IF you were to transfer after 1L, some schools don't give financial aid to transfers.

23 is not too old, but I understand where you're coming from. If you do decide to take another year off, look at it positively. You have more time to study, spice up your resume by traveling or internships/jobs.

You can do it!

Hi, I took the December LSAT and got a 162, when I was PTing in the 165-169 range. I'm also retaking in February in hopes of scoring in 165+.

I understood E as saying that: Domestic wine sales can go up (because of the reduced price) while the competing imported wine sales do too (for any random reason).

Are there specific question types that you're continously getting wrong (ex: NA or Inferences)? If you pinpoint those, you can review that question type and drill them.

@ilikephilosophy993 @ivettechow129 @roystanator440

Thanks you guys!

I would ask at the beginning of the semester because as Seeking Perfection said they're not grading assignments at that time and aren't as busy. This way you also have plenty of time to meet with them during office hours if you'd like.