Hey 7Sagers, I think it would be great to get a bunch of Calgary LSAT geeks together to work towards the June 2015 exam. PM me if you'd like to set something up!
- Joined
- Apr 2025
- Subscription
- Free
@, that's exactly what I was thinking: I'm banking on the "never give up, never surrender" strategy!
@ - I was surprised to learn that UofC averages scores from multiple LSAT attempts, so I visited their site and it says, "If an applicant has written the LSAT more than once, the highest score will be used to group their file statistically, however all of their scores from the past 5 years, their average score, and the number of times they have written the LSAT will be taken into account when reviewing their application." What I want to know is how much do they care that you've taken it more than once? How much does it put you at a disadvantage? Is it a provision that they only enact when breaking ties between candidates? With all that being said, if UofC's the only school who's averaging these days, it sounds like UofA isn't doing it anymore, which is kind of interesting.
It would depend on the context and how "generally"/"usually" are used in the stimulus.
Well, what about neck tattoos? Are they allowed?
Holy moly - that's amazing - rock on! Congratulations! :)
I'm going to save your post and use it for encouragement in the coming months. I've been at this for a long time, so it's good to see persistence pay off. Congratulations! :)
@ - I'm going to try the "Why" method the next time I write a preptest. I imagine it not only helps you get a deeper understanding of the argument's structure, but it also points you to some of the assumptions the author takes for granted or fails to consider.
@ Yeah, I wonder that too. I love it when I encounter a weird game, nope it, come back to it after completing the other games in the set, and suddenly the weird game's superficial difficulty melts away.
@, I totally agree - some of the early LG's are freaky. I'm running through the logic games bundles (no longer available on the 7sage) and some of the geographical games throw me for a loop. What I've learned is that you have to keep moving and sometimes you have to jump around, so the unrepresentative games can help you train your response to uncertainty. With all of this being said, @, if I didn't have the LG bundle, I probably wouldn't bother tracking the games down for purchase - I'd just focus on the stuff provided by curriculum and the practice tests from PT36 onward.
Hey @ hang in there - you're going to get it. Do you know which areas you need to improve on? If it's logic games, you can really improve your score if you foolproof the heck out of all of the games provided in the core curriculum and the ones you encountered in your prep tests. If it's LR, let the easy questions be easy and don't dwell on the questions for too long. I used to get stuck on questions and I'd spend too much time thinking about them, now I just skip 'em and come back to to 'em. I'm still working on RC, so I'll leave that section to the other 7sagers to comment on, but keep at it and learn from your mistakes - you've got this. 
I use indicators, but if I run into difficulty identifying the parts of an argument, I take what I think is the conclusion and ask myself if the other sentences serve as premises. Sometimes, I have to shuffle what I perceive to be the conclusion and the premises around in my head until it feels like an argument. Occasionally, it takes me a few seconds to fully understand a stimulus' reasoning structure, especially if the it contains a complex argument. Eventually, you will get really good at labelling the argument parts.
That's a cool idea - like how you based it on a guitar fretboard! When I'm doing a linear game, I sometimes just number the game piece that's identified in the modifier question. For example, if the question says "if X is the sixth racehorse", I'll just put the total number of dashes for all of the horses and mark 6 under the sixth horse. As long as I've counted up to six and know the rules of the game, I'm good.
@, thanks for posting this. I'm going to give it a shot as soon as possible!
@ Not yet - it's sitting on my bookshelf waiting to be read!
@.hopkins: "Keeping it to ~10 Q's should enable you to do some really quality BR, and that's where the learning takes root." Excellent advice!
@ I read 1Q84 last year - when you get through it, let me know what you think of it. @ you should also consider something by Hari Kunzru. His "Gods Without Men" was fantastic: http://goo.gl/DC3jal
I initially chose "B" because I figured the dismissed employees were getting back at their former employer by filing for job-related injury compensation, but your statement about the dismissals' suppressing effect makes total sense.
I'd recommend 2666 by Roberto Bolano!
Alright everybody, here's something I viewed last night and thoroughly enjoyed. "Tim's Vermeer" is a documentary about a man who sets out to recreate a painting by Vermeer using the tools that he believes the artist used to paint photorealistic paintings. I think this documentary captures a lot of the argumentation that we encounter while studying for the LSAT and it illustrates what you can accomplish if you put your mind to it: http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/tims_vermeer_2014/
Thanks for this thread - I'll definitely check out some of the suggested pencils. Here's my story: I've been using the Staedtler Norica HB2's for a while and I like them (they're the blue pencils with white erasers). However, they seem a bit soft and end up dull after each LG game, each RC passage, and each LR section. In addition, you have to sharpen them a certain way, so the lead doesn't splinter when you first use them; if that happens, you get wide lines or worse - two parallel lines until the tip has worn down enough so there is only one part of the pencil engaging the paper. To alleviate these issues, I make sure to have a cache of sharpened pencils ready, so I can swap them out as I go, but this leads to a cluttered "mise en place."