Subscription pricing
Hello 7sagers!
I will be hosting two of my favorite classmates at Northwestern, Rachel Corella and Jordan Gerlach. We will be talking about targeting T-14 schools without a score in 170's. We will also be happy to share our experience as 1L's at Northwestern, but we will not taking any specific LSAT questions.
I am really honored and excited to have them speak to all of you.
Saturday Nov 28, 6 pm EST
Join Zoom Meeting
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/6968325413
Meeting ID: 696 832 5413
One tap mobile
+13126266799,,6968325413# US (Chicago)
+19294362866,,6968325413# US (New York)
Dial by your location
+1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)
+1 929 436 2866 US (New York)
+1 301 715 8592 US (Washington D.C)
+1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
+1 669 900 6833 US (San Jose)
+1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)
Meeting ID: 696 832 5413
Find your local number: https://us02web.zoom.us/u/k4gmyyIew
Answer choice A is interesting.
First, does the conclusion in the stimulus talk about general population? The conclusion just says "more people" but that could just mean the people that were polled.
Moreover, even if the conclusion in the stimulus had drawn a conclusion about the general population based on the sample of people polled, is that a flaw? It's not. It is acceptable to use a sample to draw conclusion about the general population provided that there is nothing wrong with the sample such as it is not representative of the population, is too small etc.
Often times we spend so much time in the stimulus but we rush through being careful in the answer choices as well. The LSAT writers love to be sneaky in answer choices as well and even if you understand the stimulus, they can write answer choices in a manner where if you are not careful they can sneak in and make it a trap.
I hope this was helpful.