Step 1 is to do an evaluation. Do another section and start with the last 10. See if you're getting them wrong because of difficulty or because of endurance.

@ said:

Hi There,

I wrote the LSAT for the first time during the July exam and I feel like I completely froze. I barely feel like I even read any of the LR questions (my first section) as I couldn't take in any of the information and then panic that I had taken too much time reading, guess and then move on. Needless to say it did not go well. Does anyone have any suggestions surrounding this? I felt calm the morning of the exam but as soon as I logged on I felt like I couldn't read/ process. I am scheduled to take the August exam as it will be flex, however, I am worried it will be the same situation and that it will be a huge waste of time and money.

Thoughts?

Might just be first time jitters. How many PTs have you done? Did you get a good night's sleep? Takes a lot of work staying calm in situations like that to be honest.

https://classic.7sage.com/the-three-worst-lsat-mistakes/

"1. Underestimating when to start studying for the LSAT (Three months is not enough time to prepare!)

When should you start studying for the LSAT? The first mistake students make is underestimating the difficulty of the LSAT. So, let me be very clear. The LSAT is a beast. I don't know you. I've never met you. Maybe you're a beast too. But, I'm telling you right now that you need more than 3 months to adequately train."

Thanks @ @ @

I've signed up for August. It's nice to know there are others in the same boat (at least so I know we're all suffering together). Fingers crossed for those who don't cancel that we don't need to go through the LSAT again and we just get the scores we want. Having August on the table is worth it and now I can stop thinking about the LSAT so much until then at least. I'm going to take a couple weeks off from it and just relax before getting back to it near the end of the month.

@ said:

#help - Is there anything like this for Canadian Law schools?

Echoing this person's statements -- would love something like this for Canadian law schools.

@ said:

Does anyone know if they proctors mute themselves ?

Mine muted herself for the entire test after wishing me luck.

@ said:

Hey everyone, I took the test yesterday at 10:50, and the format was LR26 (electric bacteria) - LG (tv or print) - RC (volcanic ash plumes, Algonquin tribe, Literary theory and science, Women’s marriage law reform in England). I did very well in LR and thought it was pretty easy as it had short prompts. LG was same as usual but you had to be on your toes. RC killed my perfect test tho, as I thought the algonquin passage was brutal and the comparative passage was hard too. If you had this format or any of the sections mentioned, What did you all think about it?

I feel the exact same way and also took the test at the same time as you did. LR was fair with a few trickier questions but nothing crazy. LG seemed average since I finished with time to spare, but I invested a shitload of time to prep for LG.

The middle two passages were super killer. Had to take a few moments to re-collect myself since I initially didn't feel like I was understanding one of them at all.

I'm no expert but since the other two sections were likely average while the last one was harder, I would imagine a pretty standard curve for us. Though I have also read that lots of people thought that the LG we got was quite hard? So I'm not sure. Everyone I saw talking about it agreed that the RC was tough though.

@ said:

Anyone have issues highlighting?

I did some tests on the lawhub interface beforehand. Highlighting/Underlining is a crapshoot on it, never seems to highlight what you want and you run the risk of randomly highlighting half the passage. No idea how to make it consistent. Thankfully I recognized this early on in my prep and made sure my strategy for RC didn't need highlighting.

@ said:

My system keeps crashing, and I was supposed to start half an hour ago. Did anyone else experience these issues? I'm worried I won't be able to take it today anymore because of all the technical issues.

Are you using a MAC? If so there's been lots of issues for MAC users from what I've seen

I had LR->LG->RC. LR and LG were fairly straight forward (LR had a few tricky questions, I remember something about electric bacteria, and another question about mulch and soil). LG had no curveballs that I noticed.

RC I had volcanos, native tribes, along with contemporary lit theory and Marriage Laws. This was the hardest section, I normally do solid in RC too and don't feel super confident about it.

I've been doing 4 sections. Getting some extra LR practice is good.

One thing that helped me is to ask myself why I don't get perfect untimed. You should theoretically be able to do that. And when I looked at where I was going wrong, it helped me start seeing trap answers, and simultaneously helped me start zeroing in on the right answer.

@ said:

@ If I could ask, how do you think the Trainer and 7sage are complementary, and in what ways? I am planning on getting the Trainer, but I am unsure if it will help substantially.

Hi Anthony, I have a bit of a complicated history with the LSAT. I did the test a couple times back in 2015/2016 and went through the CC then. I decided to take again at the end of last year after not touching LSAT at all.

Trainer was helpful because it gave a broad overview of everything to refresh my memory before diving back into LSAT, and I thought the lessons on RC were pretty valuable. I liked the simplicity of the way he handled the flaws in LR as well, and the notation system in LG sometimes has merit when integrated with the LG methods recommended by 7sage.

7sage definitely gets much more specific than Trainer. I'm not sure if going from the CC to The Trainer would be the best use of your time. How much time do you have before your test? If it's still months off and you notice a specific problem you're having with a section maybe you can get some other material, but like someone else said that means you're not doing PTs or sections and learning from those.

Wow, I remember thinking I was dumb the first time I took this PT months ago. After going through months more of prep and going back to this section, I still didn't get everything right. What an incredibly difficult passage! There's so much nuance to the answer choices. I don't think I'd ever be able to get 16 right, and the tricks in 20 and 21 hinge on just a single word. Very impressive, LSAC really outdid themselves w/ this passage.

Unfortunately there's no silver bullet to improve by 20~ scaled points in a month and a half. A score of 139 means you're getting more than half the questions wrong. Even if you foolproof LG and get 20 extra raw points (assuming you basically went -20) that still only drags you up to 151~ scaled.

If you can, I'd recommend taking the test in September or October instead and really take the time to foolproof your LG and review the aspects of the test that you really struggled most with.

I think the key is to get enough games in your rotation. This is important because one major initial problem I had with foolproofing is that I remembered the answers. But at some point, I was grinding out multiple sections a day, and had a lot of LG to go through. You start forgetting the specifics (which is what you want) and have to focus on the bigger picture ideas, AKA how to read the language of the test and how to get to the right answers.

I started off with -9 in LG and I'm down to about -0 to -2 for the more normal LG sections. I know when I first started doing Foolproof I was wondering how on earth it could be helpful to repeat games that you remember. But really really focus on the pathway to the right answer and be honest about it. There were still times I remembered the right answer, but if I couldn't remember the way to get there I didn't let myself pick the answer choice. Be really tough on yourself to remember the ideas and that's what will let you see the forest from the trees for LG.

This process took me months since LG didn't come naturally to me. To date I've done over 1000 games... but the grind has created noticeable results. It's not easy, but I can tell you that it's worked for me and worked for plenty of other people!

Might as well do October if you can do October. It's realistically possible to get to -0/-1 with good LG foolproofing. Look at what happens to your current score if you just go 0 in LG. LSAT isn't a crammable test, have to take it low and slow and let the learning slowly integrate with your brain (I don't know how to really explain it, but to me it's felt more like working out than studying).

In that case, you should definitely go through the Core Curriculum! It will reinforce certain aspects of the Trainer's lessons or add to them. That way you're better equipped when you actually start doing mixed problem sets/sections/PTs. Take special note for the parts of the syllabus about Blind Review and Foolproofing and really take it to heart. Good luck with your studies. Remember to ask lots of questions!

Hey, I started off with the Trainer too. I feel like 7sage and the Trainer are quite complimentary.

Have you done a diagnostic yet? I think that's step 1 to see where your strengths and weaknesses are. That way you can work out a study schedule based on that. And depending on where you start off, you can get a more realistic idea of how long it'll take for you to get where you want to be.

Depending on how far away your test is, I think it's a good investment to go through the core curriculum. The CC has problem sets for you at the end of the sections so you'll get to work specific question types. There's no need to overload yourself with everything at once -- having a basic idea of some of the strategies, techniques, wording, etc. removes an initial layer of difficulty so that you can get to the actual meat of the problems without being caught up in superfluous elements.

Mostly reviewing my old material. I did grind out one last new LG set but other than that I want to review what I got wrong, at least make sure I don't fall for what I've fallen for before. I read 1 RC passage a day and do the questions, and I review 4 games that used to give me trouble a day, and then every other day I'm reviewing some LR problems that I struggled with.

@ said:

Honestly don't know what either of those are eek

Well, I think I see your problem! These are both key parts of the core curriculum/your study. Doing PTs is only one part of it, and not even the most important part. The most important thing is how to take your PTs and turn it into a training tool that helps build your knowledge, techniques, and comprehension of the material.

BRing is Blind Reviewing your PTs after you've done them before looking over the answers. So when you're feeling like you have trouble with a question, you flag it, and then you come back to it to see if you can solve the question untimed. You want to figure out why each answer choice that's wrong is wrong and why the right answer is right.

This is not just looking up the answers and going "yes that makes sense". You need to methodically go through the procedure of working it with your brain yourself, or else you won't learn how to do it. It doesn't matter if BRing takes a whole day (like it took me when it first started). if a question takes 20 minutes to figure out, so be it. You need to do this to ingrain the processes into your brain. There's only so many things the LSAT can ask you, and there's only so many different forms that this can come in. You spot patterns by forcing yourself to work it out yourself.

https://classic.7sage.com/lesson/the-blind-review-is-a-habit/

Speaking of patterns, Foolproofing is doing games in the LG section over again to learn the inferences (not the answers). The goal isn't to remember the answers, but how you get to the answers because once again... there's only so many ways games can be made and set up. A sequencing chain is the same whether it's cats, CDs, courses, artifacts, paintings, etc. for example and results in the same inferences (the leader can't be in the last slot, the follower can't be in the first slot). LG is the most learnable section because if you do this honestly without just filling in the correct answer choices, you will build your sense of how things work as well as how to read the language of LG.

https://classic.7sage.com/lesson/fool-proof-guide-to-perfection-on-logic-games/

You can do the Flex this time to get a feel for it (you've already signed up for it and can't cancel at this point anyway). Unfortunately, while I hate being the bearer of bad news, based on your current situation it's likely you're not going to get the results you want because it seems that you haven't followed some key improvement steps that the majority of people need to take to really consistently get better.

For the record, I started off at 159 (probably lower in fact... since I actually wrote the LSAT twice back in 2015-2016 before taking a 4 year break from it). Back then I did what you did and noticed very minimal improvement even though I was grinding out PTs.

This time I followed methodologies recommended and my most recent PT was a 175. I'm in the same boat as you, did about 20 PTs. It's all learnable stuff, and a 160~ is indicative that you have the capability. But if you don't study the 'right' way (or at least the way that works for most people), all that effort you put in is going to have a lower chance of producing significant results.

I think sometimes having an anticipation is good, but for now if you're still fairly early on in your prep it's okay to not anticipate for now. This might sound counter-intuitive, but you kind of have to see what the LSAT's 'meta' is so to speak and understand the usual methodologies that they use to weaken. As you see more and more of these patterns, THEN you can start anticipating because

You'll have seen more, and thus get a better grasp of when they're looking for what

Even if your anticipation doesn't match, you'll know the general patterns and routines that means you don't tunnel vision too hard on any one possibility.

So I think this is a bit of a case of trying to run before you walk. Let the answer choices guide you -- since it's just prep, it's actually completely OK if you're wrong. Wrong answers are more memorable anyway. Also, for many of the harder WKN/STR questions, it's very difficult to anticipate how the right answer does the job since they approach from an angle that most people wouldn't think about. Anticipation is only one of many tactics you should have when approaching the questions.

Do you have to take July? Sounds like burn out/psyching yourself out. This might suck but you might need to take a break and re-evaluate, especially if you're not scoring where you want to score.

What interests me is that you've done 20 PTs. How is your BRing going for those? And your foolproofing for LG?

The sounds stupid, but it works stuff in case you haven't already done it:

Sleeping properly

Cut out booze

Get rid of social media (sounds like you've already done this one, I got rid of FB since I found myself checking it all the time personally)

For question stems, sometimes it's a matter of just seeing the key words so you know what you're going through. I do find sometimes I need to re-read AP questions but usually I pick out the key words within a few seconds and know my task and just move back. Might need to drill that a little if you find yourself re-reading stems a lot.

If you're talking AC or stimulus, it's sort of a matter of getting used to the language. There are so many different ways to say "confuses necessary for sufficient" or vice versa but they all ultimately mean that for example.

I think 3 points is doable with good BR and consistent focus on weaknesses. Good luck.

@ said:

What did they mean by this? As in some questions, verbatim, were repeated? I would assume this is in the LR section, if so.

From my understanding, there are some tests that are undisclosed. Usually in February every year. Since test takers only get the scores, these tests can sometimes be re-administered. This is fairer than it sounds because for example, a test done in North America in 2015 might end up being done as an international test in 2019. Or in the case of the Flex, they may give you a section from one of these undisclosed tests but then combine it with a section from another undisclosed test to basically create a new test. This is doable because of equating and the data they get to gather from multiple takes of the test.