On question #4, I discounted answer A because the passage didn't indicate that Getting Home included any other types of literary materials. I still don't see it.

On question #1, I didn't read into answer D any intent or goal on the part of Latina writers, only that they "have shown X can be Y."

In such a dense passage do you recommend we take the time to make a detailed diagram like you've made with the 20 plots? If so, how do we determine we've not just bought into a time-sink?

Good explanation. Thank you.

On point at issue/disagree questions, I do it the opposite way. I read one person's statement, fill in X or √ (usually end up with two choices), then decide between those two by reading the other person's statement. I find that that is quick and easy as I've quickly narrowed my answer choices down to two without too much thought.

I like the discussions being on the same page as the video explanations. Otherwise, we'll have to go searching for the prompt rather than having it right at hand.

I chose E for this question because if you negate it and say that the tuition has increased in recent years, and yet the applicant pool is decreasing because (he says) they charge too little, then it breaks the correlation between > fees and > applicants. This was not addressed in the video. Can anyone explain why it is not necessary that the correlation remain positive between # applicants and > fees?

While I agree that answer C provides the necessary bridge. However, if (answer A) youth do not accurately discern whether their society is changing, then the amount of deference they give may not be an accurate gauge of the rate at which society is changing. Hmmm...?? This is analogous to our saying that we can measure the distance of a pencil using a ruler, but what if that ruler were a poor indicator of actual distance, then our conclusion falls apart, correct?

I agree that answer E is the best illustration. But would also like to note that the language in which a judge presents jury instructions can bolster his "perceived status" in the minds of jurors, making answer B also a possiiblity. If I went to a medical clinic and someone came in to treat me and if that person used language way above my head I might assume that that person was of a higher status (i.e., doctor) than perhaps a CMA - and would perhaps give more credence to what he/she said. So, maybe this question is not the best in that it can be said that answer B could also be (and even is likely to be) true.

Very good explanation & nice review of "most" conditional chain assumptions.

Oh my gosh -- I don't understand the explanation of this question at all. I don't remember learning anything about this in our lessons on embedded conditionals. Not sure why we have to check the sufficient condition both by affirming and negating the sufficient. Perhaps it's just one of those super-rare question types that we are not likely to ever see again, but hopefully, someone can help shed light on this for me. I saw answer A and since I was rushing to finish this section on time, chose it.

I understand why the correct one is correct - just not sure why answer A is incorrect.

Sad people ---> LOLOLOL. Too funny!

I couldn't follow how the diagramming was done on this video.

Answer B really was a tempting answer. It had all of the elements, but satisfying the necessary condition does not trigger the sufficient condition

,

Mvaillani8, I had a similar thing happen on my prior test. The girl next to me looked ahead and got booted out of the room, which took 3-5 minutes. Unfortunately, it was on RC and it totally made me forget the passage and lose out on 1/4 of the section. On top of which the proctor kept harassing me repeatedly bcs there was no room on my very small desk so put my pencils in my shirt (which she was sure meant I'd stab myself and pushed & pushed me on the issue). My appeal with LSAC got me nowhere - not allowed to retake for free or anything. Simply chose to cancel. Good luck with those folks - they weren't very nice to me.

I had a problem with this question. My interpretation of this prompt was that the word "although" does not mean "and" as your video suggests, but rather means that ("even when" employment rises) it is true that prices remain constant when the economy is weak.

I finally got the question right after realizing the writers must have meant "although" to mean "and." But this wording really threw me for a loop and wasted lots of my time.

I don't get why A could not be the right answer. The Physician says they are quite dangerous & should be supervised. The Enthusiast says that despite sales having gone up 260% injuries went were 154%. Doesn't this mean that the Enthusiast disagrees that "trampolines cause injuries to a significant number of people using them" ?

Nicer, color-coded LSAT timer watch for $25 with free 2-day Prime shipping on Amazon:

http://www.amazon.com/LSATTimer-Analog-Watch-LSAT-Prep/dp/B006A9SCU0/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1391624202&sr=8-1&keywords=180+watch

It would be helpful if you gave us a key listing the types so we can refer to it while we are labeling and call it the same as your answer key does. That will help us know if/when we get the answer correct or not.