What would we need to be true for AC D to be supported? We would need to know that some people's dietary needs diverge from others (the second premise), and that those people's divergent needs cannot be accommodated by a single, narrow range of nutrients. I would have chosen D without hesitation if it had said "some" instead of "most." But I guess flexibility in AC language is rewarded in the newer tests.

Hm, I actually eliminated D because it mildly lends support to the argument. Imagine if the kids in the experiment were shown a very, very boring documentary about tax brackets in the US (i.e. contexts that do not generally make kids excited and active), the experiment would be a bad one. Did anyone think about D the same way?

#help (Added by Admin)

Would love to join! I have the same target score, test average, and timeline.

The key word in the stimulus that immediately confirmed E as the correct AC for me is "current" in "current workers." It left me wondering, well what about past workers? What if a higher percentage of them end up terminally ill or dead?

#help (Added by Admin)

following!

Bizarre to say the least. I contacted them almost three weeks ago and have yet to hear back why I was denied a makeup test and whether the “repeated section” bit was misleading information.

I only began scoring consistently in the mid 60's once I got a tutor so it might be worth investing in one. If you are not sure whether you want to make that commitment yet, perhaps seek out a study buddy who is scoring within your target range and walk them through one LG/LR/RC section (preferably timed but 36' or 37' is okay too!). They might be able to diagnose any strategy/timing/fundamental areas of improvement that you can later hone in on alone or with a tutor. Echoing @, nailing LG is the easiest, best way to see a significant score increase. I did find the Trainer helpful for LG but I prefer 7sage due to the game type analysis feature that shows you exactly which game types you are struggling with.

I completely misunderstood the first paragraph in Passage A (I thought it was arguing that we should not dispense WITH cosmic justice just because of human limitations, when it was arguing the opposite) yet only got 1 question wrong lmao. RC is pure sorcery.

Have you tried the skipping strategy on LG? Do the typical "complete and accurate order/list" question first as usual then skip to the "If X is..., which of the following must be true/false". Once you finish these questions, you will already have additional inferences to your original board and rules list, so it should make attacking the rest of the questions easier. How do you do on LG during BR? Do you typically nail LG when untimed?

I would also add that you may have picked A on Q19 because you assumed that those inefficiencies that the industries that relied most heavily on computer technology struggled with were absent or irrelevant to the businesses that increased their reliance on computer technology. However, we cannot make that assumption based solely on the info we have.

By the way, D is not a perfect Weaken answer. It leaves open the possibility that even those businesses that had the greatest productivity growth actually experienced a decrease in growth since computer technology became widespread. But whatever the cause of that decrease was, it was not because of an increased reliance on computer technology. Remember, "greatest" does not mean "great": the growth of the businesses D refers to is relatively greater than other businesses, but it is not necessarily 1. greater than pre-computer technology world 2. nor great at all.

For A to be better, we would have to know that the passage rate was worse PRIOR TO implementing the new curriculum, but we have no indication of that. All we know is that a third passed, and that the national average is above a third. But, where is there any mention of the quality of instruction?? Curriculum =/= instruction, a curriculum could be great but instruction is poor (perhaps the instructors were not properly trained in the new curriculum). Another possibility is that the curriculum is actually bad but the instructors are the best nationwide. You must have scratched your head when the conclusion mentioned "quality of instruction" for the first time and rightly so. The trap here is in making you harp on the relationship between the new curriculum and the passage rate (i.e. did A cause B or the reverse), rather than the real issue here, which is the relationship (or lack thereof) between passage rate and quality of instruction, i.e. the passage rate being below the national average is not grounds for concluding that the quality of instruction is poorer.

AC C can be quickly eliminated because we cannot reasonably make a superlative conclusion ("best") on the basis of relative facts. If we had a Descriptive Weakening questions whose stimulus combines AC C with this stimulus, the correct AC would say that one cannot make superlative statements when given solely relative statements. You will see an AC like C on MSS questions with stimuli that have solely relative statement, so AC C is a cookie cutter incorrect answer - learning to recognize it fast can save you time!

Can we always assume that if the proportion of X decreased, (X here being thieves who abandon cars before owners realize), then the proportion of Not[X} increased (i.e. more thieves are failing to abandon the cars before the owners realize, so those thieves are more likely to get caught and convicted)? #help

Can you start a gofundme? I am sure you will find supporters in this community that will help you cover the cost of 1 or 2 1-hour tutoring sessions. Let us know if you are creating one!

AH I would love to join but the time difference poses an issue - if you plan on offering it earlier some day please lmk by replying to this thread I'll keep an eye out!

I would also add that you are less likely to be punished for skimming LR stimuli in the first 10 questions and more likely to be punished in the last 10 questions. I find that the first 10 questions are typically cookie cutter, and if they pose any difficulty, it is typically in the ACs not the stimulus. For example, you will have a cookie cutter necessity-sufficiency confusion for a flaw question, and the ACs all look so similar that you have to read each one carefully and find the one that correctly identifies the conditions in the stimulus in the correct order. So, if you are going to use this method, definitely consider switching gears in the last half of the questions.

Does anyone who to contact if I had a really bad experience using ProctorU that affected my performance and I want to discuss ways to remedy it?

If you are still struggling with AC C on Q26, note that the author's alternative explanation does explain why proposers insist on fair divisions because fair divisions are less likely to be rejected than say 70-30, and fair divisions increase the chances of survival (line 51), therefore fair divisions are in the proposer's survival's interest. Also, even if you did not have enough time to confirm C as the correct answer, go back to the purpose of the passage. The author is interested in explaining fair divisions, i.e. why proposers propose 50-50 and why responders reject anything less. So it makes sense that the author's alternative explanation accounts for both things. If it only accounted for responders but not proposers, then how is it more valid than the explanation that the author argues against in paragraph 3?

I am going to get a 173 on the October 2021 LSAT!

What do you typically struggle with, understanding the passage or attacking the questions? If you are not sure, here's one thing you can try:

Find an RC lesson on 7Sage that explains each paragraph of a passage in detail, listen carefully and maybe jot some things down. You want to make sure you have a clear idea of where the author stands on the issue vs other people, what the purpose of the passage is as a whole, and what the main point is.

Move on to the questions - DO THEM BY YOURSELF first, do not listen to the questions' explanations until you have answered all of the questions. Once you have answered all the questions, check your answers and watch the explanation videos to confirm/correct your thinking.

Ask yourself, as you were doing the questions, did you feel like you had to reread the passage over and over again, or did you rely on your memory + notes? What were the questions that you struggled with the most (i.e. could not eliminate 4 answers with confidence or took too long to arrive at an answer)?

After reflecting on your performance, it should give you an idea of what you need to work on. For example, if, even after watching the passage explanations and jotting down notes, you still needed to reread parts of passage before every question then it would be useful to focus on reading strategies and memorization. However, if you struggled more with attacking the questions and eliminating obviously wrong answers, then you may need to brush up on RC question strategies, better understand the Explicitly Stated-Strongly Implied spectrum, and practice spotting trap answers.

Most importantly, (this is echoed in every blog/comment/advice on RC), you have to stay engaged with the material, as boring as it may seem to you. If you struggle with staying interested, try shifting your mindset: the RC passages you read are more often than not on topics most people go a LIFETIME without ever hearing or learning about. If you come across a passage whose topic is totally out of your field of study or expertise, think about how cool it is that you are among very few people in your field who have this nugget of knowledge (that is seldom practical or useful but cool nonetheless).

interested!

Can anyone comment on whether the LSAC has improved its accommodations to those who need access to internet/quiet space/etc.? When I took the test, they offered me a voucher to stay at a hotel and sit for the test there, which was ludicrous given that the one hotel in my area was closed due to COVID, and the closest open hotel was 50 miles away and unlikely to have a strong enough internet. In short, can I expect something better this time?

What tripped me up in this question was that the conclusion was about future change (will increase), whereas the premises are all about past change (over the past 8 years). I saw the shift from the preserve's population to that of the valley's in the conclusion but kept looking for an AC that shows that just because X happened over the past 8 years does not mean that Y will happen next year. #help

It's a "normal" LSAT but it is different from the pre-COVID LSAT in that it has 4 sections instead of 5 and one of the 4 sections is experimental. When you get your score, it will say LSAT, not LSAT-Flex

Would you be willing to sit for the October test instead? Yes law schools take your highest score but, worst comes to worse, if your August score is lower than your June score, my understanding is that law schools generally do not look at that drop in score favorably. Waiting until October will 1. buy you time to recover from burnout 2. help you craft a study schedule you can stick to while working full-time 3. give you a fresh perspective on some parts of the test after taking some time off.