- Joined
- Apr 2025
- Subscription
- Free
Admissions profile
Discussions
Focus on timing, being able to identify parts of an argument, and eliminating wrong answers. Being able to put all these skills together and applying them efficiently is how you start to master LR.
Retake. If you're not an older prospective law school applicant and/or don't have responsibilities that may prevent you from attending altogether, take another 8 months to a year to study, law school isn't going anywhere. The most important thing is that you attend a really good school with $. With a 3.9GPA, all you really need is a 160 to get into most schools outside the T21 and perhaps another 5 months with the help of a tutor can get you to your goal.
Exactly. JY doesn't do much explaining on this question. He just assumes we understand the inference in Romney's position. Not good.
Why would they refer to the Spring generation as "summer generation?" Such aholes
Don't take too many PTs, you don't want to run out of practice tests, that can be a significant problem. Also, take the LSAT when you're ready and scoring above, at, or near your target score. The LSAT isn't going anywhere. Be patient and apply yourself to understanding and dominating the material.
I'm sad to see it go too. It was my strongest section throughout my prep and at times could be fun, compared to the other sections. Goodbye LG, we'll never forget you.
Same: I selected A thinking that because Nomads hunted big game and because big game is dangerous, Nomads must have hunted small game. But we're not told Nomads hunted big game, we're told they're portrayed to have hunted big game. The portrayal doesn't support anything because it's false and so the conclusion is attacking this portrayal.
In the moment, I didn't even think about the second definition of investing (use) since we're talking about businesses. Frustrating.
I spent way too much time on this question. I think I got distracted by the idea of "toothless beaks and weak jaw muscles" and felt that this is somehow relevant.
One of my frustrations at the moment is that I've been studying for more than a year and I've dedicated a lot of hours to LG and if I don't do well on LG or on the entire PT itself, all that work and time dedicated to that section goes down the drain. I'll definitely retake but all that I invested on LG will be for nothing if I don't do well on June 8th. Wish you could choose which sections you take.
I almost chose B, but at the last moment I realized my mistake and chose C. When you're going through the section, the pace and urgency to answer and move on to make sure you try to answer as many as possible really hurts you on crafty questions like this one.
Tough passages. I hope the June LSAT isn't as tough as the last two passages of this section.
It would be nice to hear how JY would approach a question like #16 where you're forced to scan the entire passage for a few lines. Other than having a photographic memory, what else can you do to answer this question in under a minute? This RC section was particularly brutal.
You have to be gifted to be able to dissect this argument and identify the right answer in less than 2mins and under pressure.
Do well on the LSAT (165 and above) and you've got a decent shot at a school in the 25 to 50 rank. Now, another option would be to improve your softs: work for a year or two, volunteer for an extended period, intern/clerk in a law related position, work on a political campaign, etc. Then write a great personal statement, get some letters of recommendation, and maybe take a course or two in a law related program. Then do well on the LSAT (165 and above) and perhaps you can break into the Top 25.
Question 17 hinges on your understanding of the definition of "investing." If you don't know the secondary definition of that word, they hurt you. So unfair
The problem with JY's economical approach to questions is that is assumes that you're correctly answering 75-90% of all the other questions that aren't curve breakers. Considering RC is by far the most difficult of the sections to improve upon, it's unfeasible to assume that you can guess on 3 or 4 questions and that won't hurt your RC score significantly. What if you missed 5 questions on 3 of the passages, and on passage 4 you miss another 2 questions and you decide to guess on two curvebreaker questions. Now, you're looking at -8 or -9 on the RC, which is disastrous.
D is wrong because it doesn't explain/resolve either of the situations in the stimulus. If we're told that consuming a lot of sugar leads to the inability of the body to metabolize sugar, we would expect someone who consumes a lot of sugar to have a lot of or at least an above avg level of unmetabolized sugar in the body; and yet, the stimulus tells us that the opposite is true (ppl who consume a lot of sugar have lower levels of unmetabolized sugar). Moreover, this answer choice doesn't address what happens in real time when you consume sugar (the level of unmetabolized sugar increases). It only addresses what eventually happens i.e. down the road.
Does that make sense?
Law school isn't going anywhere, so unless you have a personal reason why you absolutely need to attend law school as soon as possible, I'd suggest you take your time, retake, and get a solid score.
Hello everyone,
I plan to apply to law school this fall but at the moment I'm going through a difficult time at work. The job isn't very glamorous, I'm an Operations Assistant at a Real Estate brokerage, but it pays the bills and is giving me networking opportunities as well as a Letter of Recommendation. With that said however, I've decided to quit this job because there's just too many problems and it's time to move on. However, I'm a little concerned when to quit because law schools dissect every part of your resume if you're a nontraditional law school applicant.
I reach the 2yr threshold in July and I'm more than capable of putting up with these problems til then. However, if I don't have to, I'll give them my 2 weeks and quit sooner.
So my question is: do law schools place a bigger emphasis on the number of years (an even 2yrs) that you've worked at a place or does it just not matter after you've crossed 1yr or 1.5yrs?
Maybe I'm overthinking this but I'm concerned that working less than 2yrs at this job will seem suspect and will weaken my application.
Please participate in the poll and/or let me know your thoughts.
Thank you
There's a significant jump in the logic that I feel that answer B fails to address. The conclusion addresses assessing a discipline's scientific value based on its shady origin. What does that mean? Presumably, it means that a discipline is not taken serious or considered a true science if it had weird origins. So how does the fact that alchemy is different than modern chemistry help us determine whether chemistry is a serious or true science? It doesn't.
#help (Added by Admin)
Law school isn't going anywhere: do well in college, get a high GPA, find what you want to pursue as a career, have a great college experience. After you graduate, get some experience in the legal field and then start studying for the LSAT. Whether it takes you a year or three years after college, you'll be better equipped with a high GPA, experience, and hopefully a high LSAT score.
Some questions require you to look back at the passage. Trying to hold every detail of the passage in your memory is impractical - most humans don't have that capability. You need to be able to go back to the passage on questions that ask you to explain a reference to a word or what a historian would agree with given his views in the passage. For example: Question 15 and 19. C'mon JY
This isn't scientific or exact, but as an older person studying for the LSAT, I would like to share my own experience. I started studying for the LSAT around the age of 30 full time (4-6hrs per day x 4 days a week) and after about year I didn't feel ready so I put it off and went back to work. During the 2 years that I worked, I studied part time (1-3hrs per day x 3 days a week) and at the end of those 2 years I didn't feel ready so I went back to studying full time. To make a long story short, during the next 4 years, I repeated the same study schedule and I finally took the LSAT two months ago in June. In summary, I studied a total of 4yrs full time (2yrs, worked, then another 2yrs) and I studied part time for about 3 years.
I scored a high 150s on the LSAT but never broke the 160s as was my goal. During my time studying, I took a 7sage class, hired a Testmasters tutor, and also hired a 7sage tutor. I took about 12 full PTs, completed the 7sage course, and drilled old passages, games, and questions endlessly. I definitely think my age and time away from undergrad affected my LSAT mastery. I don't have any other explanation since I personally feel that I did more than enough work and practice to warrant a higher score. I tend to believe that if you put in the work and effort, you'll get to your goal, and that just didn't happen in my case. So, I don't want to discourage you from going all in on the LSAT, but other factors outside of studying affected my comprehension on this test. Kind of sucks.