Well, if something is not imperfect, what else could it be than perfect? That is a dichotomy like cat vs. non-cat. Everything is either perfect or imperfect.

there is actually a one minute delay between sections one and two, as well as between three and four. So you can definitely take 20 seconds to breathe. There's even a little countdown informing you how long you have before the next section begins.

I don't think that they are mutually exclusive. I would try doing both. Perfect logic games and let that be your main focus, but also take some time every day to work on RC. If it's an issue of timing with RC, then you can make some big improvements on that in the next 5 weeks.

how are your blind review scores? are they improving? if so, your issue might be timing. If your BR score is the same as your PT score, you'll probably want to review the core curriculum for your problem areas

Even if the math does work out, you are finding what is most strongly supported in the passage. What if alcohol wasn't the cause of fat gain at all and it was some other factor not even mentioned in the passage? The only inference that we can make based on the passage is that fat gain isn't based solely on caloric intake.

I used to really struggle with parallel method of reasoning questions too. They are really big time sinks on tests even when you get better at them. I have a few tips that might help.

You just have to gain as much exposure to these questions as possible. Do all the core curriculum for them and drill them frequently. Be sure you have a good understanding of argument types and lawgic from the CC as well because that will help you immensely.

Skip them on PTs. If you already know you struggle, answer all the questions you will get right before trying the one you very well could miss. Flag it and come back at the end.

Look for words that point out argument types (unless, only, most, all) and compare those with the answer choices. You can usually narrow them down significantly off this alone. If the prompt says unless in the argument and an answer choice does not have an unless-type modifier as well, its wrong and can be eliminated.

Map it out. Take 5-10 seconds and draw out the structure of the argument. (ex: a->b unless c) Then you can draw out the structure of the answer choices and compare if you really need to. When I first started, I had to draw out both the prompt and the answer choices, now I only sometimes draw out the prompt. You adapt to it.

So for PT1 S3 Q6 the prompt says that if Max were guilty, he would not ask the police to investigate, but he did ask so he is not guilty. (Mapped out A->/B, B->/A)

B: (A->/B, C->B) Structure is wrong so the answer is wrong.

C: (A->/B, /B->A) Wrong structure, wrong answer

D : (A->/B, /A->B) Wrong again

E: (A->/B, A->/B) wrong

A: A is correct because the structure is the same If L were in the next room, I would not be able to see her, but I can see her so she is not in the next room (A->/B, B->/A)

If you have a hard time mapping the lawgic, fret not! There are other ways of spotting similarities and differences without mapping it:

A way to narrow this one down is to catch the negative-positive phrasing. The prompt and the correct choice both share the structure of saying "would not" and then "did" or "could" (He would not ask/he asked, I would not be able/I can see). This eliminates C and D because they both have a negative-negative structure (Joe would NOT want/ the fact he does NOT want, Mark would NOT put/is NOT a good cook).

B is wrong because it introduces an additional point (the Bahamas) when the prompt only has the two points.

E is wrong because it claims the sufficient condition confirms the necessary condition rather than the other way around. If answer choice E were to be correct it would have to say "If Sally were sociable, she would not avoid her friends. Therefore, the fact that she does not avoid her friends shows that she is sociable."

Hopefully that is helpful and makes sense. I would be happy to clarify if you want. Good luck!

based on what the passage alone, we can only say that the institutions have a purpose and that does not necessarily mean that their staff members share that purpose. That doesn't mean that in this specific case all of the employees are not working altruistically. That's why the answer correct answer choice says "not all of its members" rather than "none of its members." Some staff can share the aims of the institution, but that doesn't mean all of them do.

It is, but that isn't really what the question is asking, right? C is incorrect because we can't actually say, based on the passage, that people claim altruistic motives for selfish reasons.

All the passage says is that hospitals, universities, labor unions, and other institutions have public purposes and achieve them even though their staff members aren't necessarily working there for the same purposes. So we can say that (B) an organization can have a property that not all of its members have.

@ramondabiryan264 said:

Hi Jess,

I know exactly how you feel. I recently scored a 176 on a PT and was feeling great only to score 10 points lower on the two subsequent PTs which really triggered my anxiety. I felt like perhaps my high scores had just been luck or I had happened to do easy tests. My mind then jumped to the actual future test day; I was filled with dread that I would get anxious and let that impact my test performance. It is really scary to think that one's acceptance in to law school can depend on a single number which can vary wildly between any two given tests.

What I have noticed is that if I know that I've done poorly on a particular section during the test, that tends to impact my focus for the rest of the test and thus I do worse overall. Finding out what triggers your anxiety before or during a test is the first step in overcoming it.

A score regression can be painful, but is normal. Every test is different and a regression can sometimes be a great indication that there is a particular question type or game that you are weak in. When I regressed in my score it helped me realize that some of the more difficult Necessary Assumption questions can really trip me up and waste a lot of time. So that is where I need to put in the work.

Study time is never a waste provided you take your time and really try to understand the material. PTs where you do poorly are the best form of studying because they really show you what you need to work on. I suggest regularly going over those tests and understanding why you got a question wrong and why the correct answer is right; cement that reasoning.

If you are someone who struggles with anxiety in general, I would strongly suggest meditation. Even a few minutes every day can really help if you do it consistently. Apps like Insight Timer are really good. Another exercise I find helpful is doing PTs in different conditions (like time of day, location, etc...). The more varied your practice test atmospheres are, the less likely you are to be worried about everything needing to be exactly right on real test day.

My last suggestion would be that if you can afford it financially, it might be wise to register for the LSAT two months in a row. Knowing that you have a second chance ready to go if you do not do well on the first test can really ease anxiety and take some of the pressure off of needing to hit a certain score.

I am sorry you are dealing with test anxiety. I know how you feel but know that you aren't going through it alone and that you are not defined by a number. Feel free to shoot me a message if you need an test anxiety support buddy!

Best of luck!

Thank you so much! This was very helpful. I had the same experience (scoring the mid 170s and then getting mid 160s and wondering if it was a fluke), so your advice really rang true for me. Thank you!

I see where you are coming from. B is incorrect because it isn't the assumption needed to make the argument follow logically (haha duh, I know, but hear me out). The astronaut is already saying that all the moons orbit the same planet right? So what could we assume that would ensure that this is statement is accurate? Answer choice C, because if Alpha is the only planet, then the astronaut has to be correct and all the moons, by definition, have to orbit that planet.

does that make sense?

I will preface this by saying I hope it makes sense lol:

Sometimes with tougher parallel flaw questions it is easier for me to look at the argument structure of the answer choices in comparison to the prompt because it helps me visualize the lawgic in a way. So the prompt says Kostman's copy of Rosati's painting was inaccurate, so if you copy Kostman's it will also be inaccurate. The structure I picture: piece of info->if-> then.

AC B says that an artist that paints an ugly scene is necessarily painting an ugly picture, unless the picture is a distorted representation. Structure: if A->B unless C

Those structures do not match up. There is no unless in the prompt and it is not saying that a copy of an inaccurate copy will be inaccurate. It is saying that a painter's painting is ugly if the scene it depicts is ugly, unless the painting is distorted.

AC A says that a speech is full of half truths and misquotes so the recording must also be of poor quality.

Does that make sense? In a way it is sort of an intuition I can't explain, but let me know if you have questions.

Nothing can really replace going through it all, but if you're going to condense it I would say focus on the core curriculum for areas in which you struggle and start taking PTs/blind reviewing. Use the analytics function to narrow down areas in which you should focus.

I had a similar issue with similar scores this month. The only thing that helped me was cutting back on the number of PTs a week. I now take one or two PTs a week and spend the days in between really focusing on problem areas. When I was taking more practice tests, I found that I didn't have time to blind review thoroughly enough to actually understand what I was missing and improve on the next test.

Maybe this goes against intuition or other advise you've received (it did for me), but I changed where I was taking practice tests because I realized I was having trouble focusing in the space I was in and it was affecting my timing. That little change helped me a lot. Ask yourself too, is it a content problem or a timing problem? It might just be a problem of not getting through the problems as quickly as you had been which gives you less time to go back through. Just keep working and you'll bounce back. You've got this!