I am also about 5 years out of school and definitely don't have any relationships with my professors from 2020 still. I was planning on having my LOR written by the attorneys that supervise me at my current Paralegal job.

it's entirely possible

So it's just "put that thang down flip it and reverse it" again?

conjunction junction, what's your function?

I have been having trouble grasping this concept, but this video has helped me tremendously.

Was 30 seconds over, but got it correct. Although, I have been feeling very confused and frustrated by these concepts, so I am not sure if it was just a lucky get.

#help I got 0/5 because all of my answers were backwards.

For example, on question 3, the answer was:

bird → /tree

tree → /bird

But I put:

trees > /birds

bird > /tree

Why is this happening?

Finally finished well under the time average AND got it right! Woohoo

“Does this tell me an exact position, or just a boundary?”

If it’s a boundary, don’t over-infer. The comparison may not have a clear winner. Be aware of the possibility of a tie between A and B.

• Negative comparatives give ceilings and floors, not locations.

When you see “more X to A than to B,” the comparison is between A and B, not between two versions of the subject.

If “than” repeats the preposition (“to,” “for,” “with”), the comparison is between the objects — not the subject.

Referential “that”:

The plan was flawed, and that caused delays.

(“that” = the plan being flawed)

Object-clause “that”:

The author claims that the plan was flawed.

(“that” introduces the claim)

If “that” is followed by a complete sentence and comes after a thinking/speaking verb, it’s introducing an object clause, not referring to anything.

If the sentence… - You’re likely in…

Gives reasons to believe something - Support

Sets a rule or requirement - Conditional

Explains why something happened - Causal

Compares two situations - Analogy

Got a little confused on question 2 on how "acted" is referential, but I boiled it down to this:

“Acted” and “this decision” both refer back to the single action already described — rejecting the plan proposed by parliament — with “acted” evaluating that action and “this decision” serving as a shorthand label (and more obvious referential) for it. "Acted" does not introduce a new action, but instead just refers (!!!) to rejecting the plan.

I got sentence 2 off the jump, but I saw a lot of people questioning it, so it made me go back and consider why I understood immediately that "its support base" was referential to the authoritarian regime and not "society".

• The phrase is “part of its support base” ... ask: "support base of what?"

• A regime has a support base (people who politically support it).

• Society does not meaningfully have a “support base” — it is the broader population. It is the people.

• The later clause confirms this: they realized that the authoritarian regime is dispensable. That’s the thing they had been supporting and then abandoned.

It's modifiers all the way down

Phewww feel like I'm in 1st grade circling the subject and predicate on the white board. This part is fun!

Aced all of the examples. Trying not to let that instill false confidence in me lol

Wasted most of my time on question 2 where I really frustrated myself, but would have saved a lot of time if I read the question stem prior to the stimulus and was able to pick out the information it was looking for.

Went 3/3 only going over a minute on question 2 and being right on time for the others.

Was torn between A and D for a minute, but then I felt a lightbulb going on. Feeling pretty good about identifying the premises and conclusions

Was 38 seconds over, but got it right. At this point, I believe I am trying to absorb all of the information and think through all the possible responses. I'm sure my process will get more efficient as I go.

5/5 Even if I hesitated thinking about no 5 being a trick question

I see a lot of people getting tripped up on question 5 — debating on how it is a premise and not a sub-conclusion. I was as well, and this is how I broke it down to understand it.

A statement is a sub-conclusion only if the author argues for it and then also uses it to support something else. (It both gives and receives support)

“This is not a sustainable, long-term solution” is a premise because the author never gives a reason why it’s true — it’s just asserted. (It is used to support another statement and not supported by anything else in the stimulus)

Even if a statement helps explain the conclusion, it’s still a premise unless it is also supported by another claim.

Feel free to disagree or explain another way!

5/5. Feeling good about this stuff!

Hey, I'm Mike. 27 years old working as a corporate paralegal in AZ. I graduated with my BA in Film Studies in 2021. Looking to take the June 2026 LSAT for the 2027 admissions cycle. Let's get this!!

Took my cold diagnostic with a 148 yesterday. hoping for at least a 165 in June. Good luck everyone!