Hey everyone! Check out this week's newsletter for some tips on improving your Wrong Answer journal, plus a link to our webinar on the same topic: https://7sage.substack.com/p/wrong-answer-journals-and-you?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
Hey Catherine.helle!
My best recommendation is to drill throughout the week as often as possible with your time schedule, and then PT on the weekends. When you drill, you want to focus on a specific section and/or concept that you want to target. For example, you might want to do a drill focusing on only Necessary Assumption questions, if your analytics tell you those questions are a priority. You may also want to drill specific strategies, like trying to complete the first 15 questions in LR in 15 minutes or completing a logic games section without brute forcing each game. Get creative with your drilling!
Most importantly though, you should be reflective with what you do. Never do something for the sake of getting LSAT work done--you want to be critically thinking about the skills you're using. After each PT, review your analytics to see where troublesome sections still exist, and use that to craft your drills throughout the week.
This can be confusing and hard to come up with on your own, so if you wanted to speak to a tutor about the best way to proceed studying, you can schedule a free consultation with one here: https://calendly.com/7sage-tutoring/7sage-tutoring-free-consultation?utm_source=FCA_A
We'd love to help you think better about drilling and practice tests!
All the best,
Ryan
ClaudioD21
Depends on a lot of factors! If you’ve been studying for a while, definitely continue to do practice timed. I’d create a timed drill with only 4-5 star difficulty questions. You also might be getting into your own head—your brain will read a 4-5 star question and already “count yourself out”, so to speak.
If you’d like someone to go into a much more in-depth response, check out our tutoring program: https://calendly.com/7sage-consult/7sage-tutoring-free-consult?utm_source=HD
Our expert tutors will design a plan for you that can help, and can help you pick up on bad habits in regards to hard questions.
Best,
Ryan
Hi dzxu,
The equal sign, as someone pointed out earlier, acts as a biconditional.
If Most Realistic —> Most Truthful
And
If Most Trustful —-> Most Realistic
If Superman is Clark Kent, then we’ve got:
If Superman —-> Clark Kent
If Clark Kent —-> Superman
Same sort of relationship you’re pointing out.
You CAN use conditional arrows, but you’re only mapping out half the logical relationship. Equal signs are a more intuitively way to teach these as well.
Best,
Ryan
jomartin1,
As JShepherd said, I'd continue to utilize the foolproof method for LG. Personally, I'd hold off on PT'ing until you feel really comfortable with LG. Depending on your goals, I'd wait until you can get close to, if not, perfect on any given set you tackle (from the ones we provide in the core curriculum!). Once you're hitting that (or have foolproofed to the max), I'd transition to PTs.
Also, you only mentioned LG in your post, but I'd also hold off on utilizing PTs until you've made it through our (or your other course's) range of LR/RC material as well. To me, PTs are a chance to test both your foundational skills + timed skills, but its almost sort of a waste to PT without having your foundational toolkit fully completed. PTs are limited, and so you want to make the fullest use of them as you can!
If you find yourself still stuck on LG after foolproofing, or are still confused as to how to proceed with studying itself, feel free to schedule a 30-minute consult with one of 7sage's expert tutors! They can spend some time diagnosing your issues and how we can help you work past them: https://calendly.com/7sage-tutoring/7sage-tutoring-free-consultation?utm_source=FCA_A
Feel free to respond to this comment too for more help.
Best,
Ryan
caitlinmattar,
I'd definitely avoid going through each and every problem set, especially before your first real exam. First, an effective use of each problem set will mean that it should take you a long time to go through all of them. Second, imagine you take your first exam and don't hit your goal score, but you've gone through every problem set possible! You wouldn't really have a way to gauge what section you're still weak in and need more help with.
Go through the Core Curriculum at a pace that is right for you, but also don't worry about finishing all the problem sets. Do 1 or 2 of each type, while also effectively processing each question--that means blind reviewing and watching the video to see where you went wrong. Once you feel relatively comfortable with a problem type, I'd move on to the next. The Core Curriculum is all about introducing concepts to you; you're going to get the most practice through PTs, so don't expend the Core Curriculum doing something you're already set to do after you finish it.
In general though, there is no science as to when you should do specific problems and for how long. It is a very personal decision! If you wanted more help deciding where to go next and after the Core Curriculum, you should schedule a free consult with one of our tutors:
https://calendly.com/7sage-tutoring/7sage-tutoring-free-consultation?utm_source=FCA_A
Any one of us would love to discuss this further with you!
Best,
Ryan Lattavo
Hi Catherine-12,
7sage's admissions team would love to talk through this question further with you! If you'd like to schedule a free consultation to talk with an admissions specialist about your question, here is the link:
https://classic.7sage.com/admissions/pricing/
You can schedule a consult at the bottom of this link.
Best,
Ryan Lattavo
Lots of fantastic advice in this thread overall, but I think I also want to add that just having a for-sure idea of what you're looking for going into a specific question will really help! For example, learning what exactly is required of you within a necessary assumption question, versus a strengthen or weaken question, can narrow down what you search for within a stimulus and sharpen your pre-phrase in general. That will always lead to time improvements!
If there were specific questions you had in regard to implementing a timing strategy in any section, then there's no harm in scheduling a free consultation session with a tutor here!: https://calendly.com/7sage-tutoring/7sage-tutoring-free-consultation?utm_source=FCA_A
We'd love to help discuss this further.
Best,
Ryan
ScottsTotts,
First, I just want to note that this is a really unusual miscellaneous problem. Do it for the practice of generalized logical thinking, and don't worry about it in the long-run--modern LSATs don't use such unusual question stems anymore.
This messes with employed people who work when we run into a 'weekless' day. If the last day of this year, under the author's proposal, is December 31st, consider the following:
Since January 1st is always a Sunday, then the last 'calendar' day is a Saturday (December 31st). For religious people who work, this is okay--for the first year. However, the one-to-two 'weekless' days are real, actual days--thus, the religious person now will take their 7th day off on a Friday. And next year, they'll take it off on a Thursday. And since they are employed, the stimulus assumes they will have work on these days, which creates a conflict--they are supposed to take it off for religious purposes, but are scheduled.
Hope this helped,
Ryan
ninaaaa15,
As a lot of other commentators have said, I think everyone deals with this anxiety on their first PT.
What helped me push through it all is knowing that everything that I get wrong on a PT translates to more right answers later. It's a learning tool, and shouldn't be treated as entirely comprehensive of your skills at this point in time!
Further, you should focus on utilizing your PTs properly at this stage! Make sure you're properly reflecting on why you got an answer wrong--I love to recommend to students that they utilize a Wrong Answer journal specifically for this purpose. At this stage in the game, you want to track your foundational skillset and your timing skillset, and the best way to do that is analyzing your performance between timed (which tests foundational + timing) and blind review (which tests strictly foundational skills).
By the way, if you want further help with this process and someone in your corner guiding you through it, you can schedule a free consult with a tutor here: https://calendly.com/7sage-tutoring/7sage-tutoring-free-consultation?utm_source=FCA_A
They'd love to tell you how 7sage tutoring can help you!
Best,
Ryan
selah403,
I find the best way to study for MSS questions is to get really good at both Lawgic and Must be True questions. While MSS aren't as clear cut as MBTs, they benefit from the same skill you use in MBT questions. A lot of the time they utilize indicator words, so thats where learning Lawgic can help a lot too.
Also, make sure you have argument structure down! Some practice with Weaken/Strength or Necessary Assumptions can build on the same skillset that Most Strongly Supported tests.
As a rule of thumb, I always tell my students to search for the answer choice that most closely is a 'must be true'. None of them will be (since its an MSS question), but whatever comes closest to being a Must be True is probably your answer for that question.
If you want more in-depth help with MSS and the LSAT in general, you should schedule a consult with a tutor to see how we can help! https://calendly.com/7sage-tutoring/7sage-tutoring-free-consultation?utm_source=FCA_A
Our tutors could directly observe you performing MSS questions and give feedback/performance tips, much better than I could from a forum post!
Hope this helped,
Ryan
To further the other commentator, insert different logical relations into the translation word and I think eventually it'll click. For example:
Where there is rain, things are wet (R-->W).
The presence of one thing (rain) implies the presence of another (wetness).
Hope this helped,
Ryan
PirateParty,
Like others in the comment section of that lesson indicate, you can complete this question the way you've done it here--utilizing Lawgic. I think JY uses the subscript here because its much simpler than drawing the conditional arrows, but in essence it is exactly the same.
As a general principle, whatever is true of a property is generally true of whatever thing contains that property. For example, 'wet' as a property generally means, well, wet, and things that are wet (having that property) are wet.
Here, we know that material bodies are imperfect. So whatever is a material body must also be imperfect. Therefore, you can more simply represent "Spirit" by MBs because it falls into the things that are NOT material bodies; and we know that whatever is a material body is imperfect, so whatever is perfect CANNOT be a material body.
Basically though, he used the subscript to save himself the trouble of reiterating the conditional over again, replacing MB with MB. For all intents and purposes related to the LSAT, Set Logic can be represented using Conditional Logic.
Hope this helped,
Ryan
ClaudioD21,
It's hard to know exactly how to prescribe a solution without sufficient insight into how you're taking Reading Comp sections, what you're missing, etc. I think what BWMurphy said (and the thread they shared) is really great advice in general.
If you wanted one of our tutors to glance over this for you and talk to you about how tutoring could help improve your results, check out this free consult link here: https://calendly.com/7sage-tutoring/7sage-tutoring-free-consultation?utm_source=FCA_A
We'd love to take a look at your analytics and help you narrow down this issue!
Best,
Ryan
Hello Gerald__,
As a tutor, I've both taught students at this stage of their studying and been in this stage of studying myself!
For me (and for most of my students), the key at this point is no longer about fundamental work. To get low 170s on BR, you gotta be able to get the fundamentals! Instead, studying at this stage is all about bridging the gap between your timing strategies and those fundamentals.
I bet giving you unlimited time to work on an LR/RC section would result in an almost-perfect score! At this stage then, it might be helpful to keep a wrong answer journal to document why you got a question wrong during timing, but right during BR. Did you misread the question? Run out of time? Less panicked? Less focused on the previous question? Had a good understanding of the passage? All of these questions might provide answers to help you, but you can't focus them down without some consistent way to evaluate your thought process.
If you find that sort of self-reflection difficult (because, really, it is) then it sounds like you'd benefit greatly from our tutoring program! Our tutors can diagnose those issues for you. If you're interested, schedule a consult for more info: https://calendly.com/7sage-tutoring/7sage-tutoring-free-consultation?utm_source=FCA_A
Best,
Ryan
Hi candacestubblefield,
I think your best bet at this time is to utilize the Foolproof method from the Core Curriculum to greatly increase your LG score. At the same time, I would recommend taking one PT to add to your Analytics page, and then focusing on improving on the Priority questions that the Analytics page informs you of. That'll be the best way to quickly increase and improve your score. In addition, continue practicing RC--its always slow to improve in, and there aren't any 'get rich quick' tricks for it like there may be.
In addition, our tutors would love to still get a purview of your analytics and describe to you in better detail than I can the best way to improve, even if you can't afford the tutoring service: https://calendly.com/7sage-tutoring/7sage-tutoring-free-consultation?utm_source=FCA_A
Please, feel free to reach out and schedule a session--its completely free to you!
All the best,
Ryan
@ ,
It sounds like you'd make a great candidate for 7sage's own tutoring program! Our tutors can work directly with you to improve that games section you're talking about and help accelerate your own studies, should you choose to retake in January.
If you'd like to learn more about our program, you can visit this page here: https://classic.7sage.com/pricing-tutoring/
And, if you'd like to speak to a tutor directly and have a free consult, check out this link: https://calendly.com/7sage-consult/7sage-tutoring-free-consult?utm_source=PT_L&month=2022-11
I can also answer questions about the program directly here!
Best,
Ryan
Hey SmokyMountainBear,
I don't think there is a wrong way to go through the CC, per se. Going in the order that we present it in works for most folks, but if you're catching onto a concept quickly and feel like going through some sections feels tedious, feel free to skip around a little. After you hit the diagnostic, use what you got wrong in that practice test to hit certain sections of the CC; that'll be the most effective usage of your time. Throughout your studies, odds are you'll use all of it. @ is also really on the nose about the hard stuff for you--it'll suck, but that is where the most improvement will happen.
Hope this helped,
Ryan
theo1106,
We differentiate between SA and PSA because there does seem to be some difference between the question types, but I think its a marginal one at best. Here is how I go about differentiating:
SA requires you to bridge some gap. Always. You will always be filling in some blank in the argument to make the premises support the conclusion.
PSA can ask you to do two things, depending on whether it is an Application question (PSAa) or a Rule question (PSAr)
a. If it is an Application question, you'll typically be given some Principle, and sometimes a corresponding application, sometimes not. For the easier questions in this category, you'll just utilize the Principle to form an Application. Suppose the principle is "If a number is even, it is divisible by two". Then, the question will ask you "Which scenario best conforms to the principle", "Which is best demonstrated by the principle" etc, for which you'd then give some even number (in my little scenario here). Or, if they already give you an application, something about the application will be incomplete. Just like in SA, then, you'll have to bridge the gap between Principle and Application by modifying the principle.
b. If it is a Rule question, I'd treat it almost exactly a SA question type. Usually, some conclusion will seem unjustified, and the question will ask you to give some principle that fills in the gap. This is, of course, exactly like the SA question type, except the principle tends to be some broad thing that is applicable to many scenarios, whereas SA's tend to stay local with what is happening in the question type.
What I'm about to say is some pretty advanced logical theory, so if it goes over your head, know that its really not essential to getting these questions right. What is essential is generalizing the scenario with some Principle. But in any case, PSAr answers tend to be normative, i.e. they tend to command you to do something (most of the time, with the word should). Thus, when we take the principle given by the answer choice to be true, our conclusion follows from the normative claim. Consider the argument below:
The sky is blue
C: The sky should be blue
That's incomplete, right? No way does it follow. But in a PSAr, the answer choice would say something like "If something is blue, then it should be blue". In an SA, the answer choice would say "If the sky is blue, then the sky should be blue". Nuanced and subtle difference, but there it is!
If you want to talk this further with a tutor, use this link here to schedule a free consult: https://calendly.com/7sage-tutoring/7sage-tutoring-free-consultation?utm_source=FCA_A
If you have more questions, feel free to respond as well!
All the best,
Ryan
LSATRando,
To me, it sounds like you're doing everything correctly! This process takes a lot of time, and so plateau's like this one are unfortunately pretty common. Best thing to do is to continue forward with how you're operating. Like another commentator said, you want to be open and critical to your own procedure and how you're taking tests. You also want to be super reflective of your own mistakes, and really reflect on what you can do next time to be correct, rather than just continuing to drill/grind questions out. You're really close to a breakthrough with all that variance, so I hope you stick with it!
If the January test doesn't work out, I know you can hit your goals with a little while longer continuance. If you're interested in talking with a tutor about how tutoring with a later test date would work, visit this link here: https://calendly.com/7sage-tutoring/7sage-tutoring-free-consultation?utm_source=FCA_A
Overall though, keep at it! You'll hurdle over the plateau soon.
Best,
Ryan
B_Maximum,
I think the most pertinent piece of advice I'd recommend is definitely to space your PTs out more effectively. Right now, you're just taking tests back to back without reflecting on what is going wrong, what concepts you're still weak on, etc.
It is hard to point you in a direction without knowing specifics on your scoring, but I think in general you still have a lot of core concepts you need to review. In general, a strategy that works is taking a PT --> returning to the Core Curriculum (or Loophole, or whatever you're using to study) and refreshing yourself on why you got the concept wrong. At your score, this should take you a long time, and only by effectively reviewing like this will you make score progress.
I think you would make a fantastic tutoring student, by the way, and benefit a LOT from one on one instruction. Having someone to watch over what's going on and be in your corner during this process can really accelerate gains. A tutor would also create a study plan for you that could help you more effectively study and learn core concepts. If you're interested, schedule a free consultation here: https://calendly.com/7sage-tutoring/7sage-tutoring-free-consultation?utm_source=FCA_A
Best,
Ryan
SmokyMountainBear,
You're definitely picking up on the 'old' way LR is done. As you can probably tell, the newer PTs--usually the 40s and beyond--become much more standardized in regard to the question stem and methods of solving questions than the older PTs. Feel free to skip these in your drilling and PTs if you feel that they aren't helpful
However, one thing I will note is that these weird and unusual question stems do test the same things that the newer PTs test. Therefore, if you want a really good place to challenge yourself on the material, the old PTs are a way to do it. If you can get those LR right consistently, you're going to be in a great place for the new LR, which seems more standardized and consistent.
You're also right that we don't have video explanations for these. However, users often post questions about them on this forum, and many tutors and others have written extensive explanations on a lot of them. If there is a specific question you were having difficulty with, let me know and I'll help you answer it!
Hope this helps,
Ryan
theo1106,
I really like what @ sorr said about being the 'total jerk' person--approach the question with a skeptical mindset. Look for places to poke holes in the argument, be pedantic, etc. Further, I like to approach weakening questions like this:
Layout the argument. Make sure you're set on what the premises are and where the conclusion is.
Find a relatively unconvincing premises. This premise should feel weak to you, especially from a skeptical mindset. Something about it just seems not strong enough to support your conclusion. This is a good place to begin pre-phrasing
Using that premise that doesn't seem to support a conclusion strongly, head into the answer choices. When I read an answer choice, I think to myself "Does this answer make me less likely to believe the conclusion when taken directly with the other information in the stimulus?" Usually, the right answer in a weaken question will hone in on some weakness of the premises and expand upon it, so having good knowledge of the relationship between the premise and conclusion is a great place to start.
Thats a simple layout of how I go about answering these. Same method applies to strength questions, except they're the opposite of weaken. If you want to talk this further, schedule a tutoring consult and one of our tutors would love to help: https://calendly.com/7sage-tutoring/7sage-tutoring-free-consultation?utm_source=FCA_A
Respond here as well if you have further questions!
gahe1999,
I think your strategy for marking up a passage should be directly tailored to whatever keeps you the most engaged, i.e., actively reading, with the passage. I think one essential thing to highlight is always the main point of the paragraph you read. Once you have a low-res summary in mind, try and match your summary to something in the paragraph that you can highlight.
Really, the main issue you're going to have to balance is between highlighting too much and highlighting nothing at all. Its a nuanced thing that takes a lot of time to develop! Play around with a bunch of different strategies until something you like clicks. I like your idea of doing time indicators, but I think you could benefit more by highlighting referential phrasing instead. (This, that, this claim, etc). That'll point you in the same direction as time indicators (i.e., toward an idea transition or shift in perspective) with much more concise highlighting.
If you wanted to dive deeper into this, schedule a free consult with a tutor. We'd love to talk to you more about highlighting in RC: https://calendly.com/7sage-tutoring/7sage-tutoring-free-consultation?utm_source=FCA_A
Hope this helped,
Ryan
Victhegreat,
Like other commentators have said, just having someone to guide you along in this process helps a ton; report your progress to someone you have that can support you and encourage you!
Also, it seems like you're relatively new to studying--that means progress is going to be slow. Don't forget that you have 6 months--its a marathon, not a sprint, and taking your time to really dig in to material, even if slowly, will save you time in the long run.
Space it out, and don't expect progress just yet. You're still learning! You can't be the star quarterback when you're learning how the sport works still. Its a slow process.
If you want more guided, direct help, I think you'd make a great candidate for tutoring. You should check out a free consultation session at this link if you're interested: https://calendly.com/7sage-tutoring/7sage-tutoring-free-consultation?utm_source=FCA_A
Overall, you've got this. You care! You just gotta pace yourself and know that progress is slow in this game.
Best,
Ryan
paige.k.anderson,
I think its a good idea to use the Core Curriculum to learn some of the fundamentals (which you test your knowledge of by completing the easy sets!). Once you get the easier version of all problems down, I think you're good to move on to drilling sections/PT'ing. Only when certain question types start to bring issues would I go back into the Core Curriculum.
Imagine if you went through every hard question, in order. You'd probably end up wasting your time on questions you didn't really need to study hard for! Therefore, I'd come back to the CC only when you really need a refresher and want to review some of the harder question types. Even if you run out of CC drills, you can always make your own difficult version of question type drills using the drill builder. So in the end, it's also not a critical decision to make--it won't make or break your studying process!
If you want more guidance on how to go about studying, feel free to talk to one of our tutors about your own studying process: https://calendly.com/7sage-tutoring/7sage-tutoring-free-consultation?utm_source=FCA_A
This consult would be completely free, and we'd love to help you out!
Best,
Ryan Lattavo