I love the proctor app! I generally opt for relatively high background noise and distraction settings (7 out of 10). I don't mind the distractions at 10 but the grainy, white background noise at 10 drives me crazy. It sounds so unnatural.
Is it fair to say I'm fine PTing at 7? There are other natural distractions around - people, TV, the lawn mower, my cat.
What setting do you use?
Folks who already have taken the test, how did the settings match up with test day?
@ said:
With 5 days left, I want to wish everyone who is taking the upcoming LSAT the best of luck. I also wish anyone going to the class of 2020 the best of luck, too.
We salute you.
Couldn't agree more! Good luck everyone :) We got this!
Work has interfered with my prep so much that I'm using a fat chunk of PTO to prep for this LSAT on Saturday. Every hour counts now. I stay focused by taking little breaks, for example by messing around on this forum between LGs.
@ Me too :) Just drilling 78 LG now, lol. We got this!
I work in DC and it's impossible to escape a literal feeling of doom;
@ Your note made me smile. I was born and raised in DC. You guys are making me proud. Keep fighting the good fight.
@ You're not alone :) I'm definitely having trouble focusing "with everything going on." I felt the same way after the elections. I think regardless of where one sits on the political spectrum, things feel very tense time right now.
I've been compulsively checking the news but I think it's just putting me on edge. My plan is to stop checking, start doing a bunch of yoga and meditating until I take the LSAT on Feb 4. Assuming it goes well, I'll resume being an active, informed and non-LSAT obsessed person.
@ Yeah, sometimes it happens when you have a PT through a test prep source that's not LSAC. I think some test companies may type the tests out themselves.
I once had a question where the letter "l" was dropped from the word "general" on an RC question. It was a one word answer choice, so I kept thinking - it's got to be "general" and not "genera." When I reviewed the video, 7sage had it spelled correctly.
@ Haha, thanks :) Sometimes I have to worry.
Is it weird that I'm so excited to take this test? So happy it came out before the Feb test. Yay!
@ Unless he is going to press charges, which seems highly unlikely, I wouldn't worry about it. His input will have no bearing on the admissions process.
Schools are concerned with your character and fitness. But all relevant materials that would influence their assessment of you in regards to those matters are addressed in the application.
You're totally fine :) Think about happy things, like starting law school in the fall!
@ said:
LR!!! In December I nearly died with RC first followed by an experimental RC. Just a wonderful combination :)
Haha. Oh man. I remember having one PT where that was the arrangement. I wouldn't pick it for test day. Here's to PT 81 :smile:
@ 180 Bro_OVO said:
5 straight sections of Games would be ideal.
Please no. I just wanted it first to get it out of the way.
Just curious :). I hope I get an LG section first. And I'd rather have my experimental section up front. I generally pick up momentum in the second section. What about you guys?
@ When I struggle with a game, I look it up its classification in the question bank. The classifications are very specific - it's not just grouping, in/out, sequencing, etc. Then, I sort by that type and tackle the games listed across varying degrees of difficulty. It's worth checking out :)
The key to this problem is to see that the only circumstance in which Shayna should congratulate Daniel, is one in which she believes that he'd prefer it:
If she congratulates him, then she believes that he'd prefer kindness (C --> SB).
Conflating what Daniel prefers with what Shayna believes he prefers is a logical flaw that's often tested formally in Flaw questions. Don't let it fool you here.
E. Perfect. We're told that Shayna does not have an opinion about whether Daniel would prefer kindness. This means that she does not "believe that he'd prefer kindness" (/SB). Therefore, she can't congratulate him (/C).
A. Nope. Avoiding hurting his feelings is not relevant to our principle.
B. It's irrelevant what Daniel prefers. What's relevant is what Shayna believes Daniel prefers. Here we don't know.
C. It's irrelevant what Shayna prefers personally. All we care about is what she believes Daniel prefers. Here we don't know.
D. So what? Again, what does Shayna believe?
Paradox Advertising tends to have greater influence on consumer preferences for yogurt vs. milk. A supermarket chain begins advertising it's store brand products. Sales of milk increase more than yogurt.
Answer A Furthers the paradox. Why is it that with more demand for its brand of yogurt AND the tendency for ads to have greater influence on yogurt preferences that milk sales are increasing more?
Answer B So what? This requires me to assume that people going specifically for milk actually don't end up buying yogurt AND that somehow there are enough of them to offset yogurt sales numbers.
Answer C So what that their shoppers buy their store brand more often. Why did the milk sales increase more than the yogurt sales?
Answer D Yes, a drop in yogurt sales overall would explain why milk sales increased more than yogurt sales.
Answer E If consumers tend to purchase store brands of yogurt already wouldn't one think that the advertising about the yogurt would be even more impactful? Also, so what if consumers buy the least expensive brand of milk. We're making the assumption that the store brand is the cheapest brand.
Here was my quick way of getting to D:
Pre-phrase: I need to show that the glutamate (G) is a cause of the deterioration. All I know right now is that IF it leaks it can kill surrounding cells. I need to show that it DID in fact leak.
A. So what? This says that IF a neurotransmitters (G) leaks, it will damage surrounding cells. It doesn't say it DID leak.
B. So what? I saw this as a weakener. If these patients have all sorts of abnormal blood issues, maybe G is just one of many issues that have resulted from the disease itself.
C. No. It's great that G is the only neurotransmitter that CAN leak. But DID it leak?
D. Perfect. The only way G can appear in the blood of these patients is if it leaked (B --> L).We know it's in their blood (B), so it must have leaked (L).
E. Who cares? This is irrelevant to the gaping hole in our argument.
I couldn't find the answer to this in my searches but apologize if this is a repeat.
I am taking the Dec 2016 test and will apply with that score during this admissions cycle. If I do a Feb retake can I send that score in as an additional way to bolster my application? Or, do schools not accept additional information after their application deadlines are over?
Any insights would be much appreciated!
I just drilled the LG section from PT 18 and it totally threw me for a loop! Train lines? The random promotions game? What was that? I'd happily take snakes and lizards. For those of you looking for weird games, look no further :).
Off to drill them until I hit time... it was such an odd section I felt it deserved a shout out.
Hi All,
https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-18-section-2-question-07/
I was between B and C for this question and was hoping folks could weigh in on why C was wrong. I did listen to JY's explanation but still have some hesitations for getting rid of C. Here's the overview:
Context: Scientists are said to assume that something is not the case until there is proof that it is the case
Conclusion: The characterization (above) of scientists is false.
Premise: In evaluating a question of whether an unresearched additive is safe, scientists would say the following based on the characterization:
1. The additive is unsafe because it has not been proven to be safe
2. The additive is safe because it has not been proven to be unsafe.
Premise 2 : No scientist can assume without contradiction that a given substance is both safe and unsafe.
My Pre-phrase: Argument shows that taking a statement to be true results in a contradiction, so the statement cannot be true.
Answer Choice B: A statement is argued to be false by showing that taking it to be true leads to implausible consequences.
My Thoughts: I circled this upon first reading it but wasn't crazy about the word implausible, which I read as unlikely or not probable. If they would have given me something more like illogical, I would never have read on.
Answer Choice C: A statement is shown to be false by showing that it directly contradicts a second statement that is taken to be true.
My Thoughts: I read this as...a statement (ie the context) is shown to be false by showing that it directly contradicts a second statement (Premise 2) that is taken to be true. JY's explanation stated that there was no second statement, which seemed to me to exist. I can throw it out for not being a "direct" contradiction since the contradiction is in the application...
Would love any feedback on C!
I was hoping to get some advice from those of you who have been studying for a while.
I recently finished the CC and have done 2 PTs. I see LG as a major area of opportunity as I consistently do not get to 1-2 games. I saw on the boards that many people recommend full proofing games 1-34 so I've started doing these as timed sections. I've gone through 2 timed sections, alongside the 2 from the recent PTs.
I have not finished any timed sections but I do, of course, finish them during my BR. I don't have accuracy issues as I expect is normal once a game "clicks". I then like to do the section again (sometimes directly after, other times after several hours or the next day) and I have found that I am able to finish with 5-10+ minutes to spare. Next, I check JY's videos - for these past sections, my strategy and timing line up with his recommendations.
Should I still be printing the games from the recent sections out 10 times if I'm able to move through them with confidence on R2? During the CC I full proofed any games that I struggled with but those generally did not come to me in R2 and I did not hit the recommended timing. I'm taking the December test and want to use my time as wisely as possible (I can't believe how close it is!).
Separately, I'm considering taking a video of myself doing the sections. I suspect that I spend a lot of time understanding the game layout. For more complex games, I often have to re-read the set up that comes before the rules several times to understand what is being asked of me and how the game pieces interact. Unfortunately, I already know these things when I re-take the sections so I can't push myself further here. How have others overcome this?
Any advice would be much appreciated!
What are your guys' thoughts on drilling PTs 1-10 for anything other than LG? I just drilled one of the LR sections out of PT 5 and it seemed to me to have a pretty different feel than even a PT in the later teens. Curious as to the general consensus.
I picked PT 5 randomly because I was trying to leave the PTs after 34 whole and the CC appeared to draw more heavily from the early 30s/20s.
@ said:
@ I am still waiting for UC Berkley, Vandy, Georgetown, and UCLA. But my choice is likely between GW and BU(waiting for their email that contains scholarship). Hahaha, I am doing a bit more research now. I am grateful for this thread. It is much much more respectful than TLS (please check out their forum, people use moron, fuxx, retard etc when they come across different opinions, lmao).
Haha well it sounds like the decision making is just getting started :smile: Wishing you all the best and hope you end up at whichever school on there is your top pick!
@ said:
As someone who currently works in DC, I can assure you, as of about 2 weeks ago, it is a miserable and stressful place to live. It's also the #1 target in the (increasingly likely) event of a domestic attack or global war. Some food for thought since everyone on this thread seems to love Washington.
I'm from DC and can't wait to move back. I think it's not for everyone and @ is right that it can be miserable and stressful :smile:. But that said, it's similar to NYC or SF in that for some career paths and lifestyles it's the place to be and nowhere else will give you that sort of access or feeling. Don't get me wrong, I also love Boston and think it's wonderful.
It just kind of depends on what you want. Either way, I'm sure you won't regret your decision. Congratulations on your acceptances! They're both wonderful schools :smile: You'll have to tell us which you choose!
@ said:
This may sound dumb but are we allowed to blow our noses during the exam; I remember that LSAT rules were pretty strict about not being distracting to our fellow test takers?
This made me laugh. I'd be surprised if this was not allowed in non extreme circumstances. Like if you cough quietly once, I think that's ok but if you're coming off of bronchitis maybe not? I was hoping to blow my nose very, very quietly lol :smile:
@ said:
I thought the alleged practice of yield protecting was really only implemented by waitlisting. I don't think they'd want to straight up deny you just because they're thinking you might go elsewhere.
I was kind of thinking that if you're at above the 75th percentile they might?
Now if only that hypothetical applied to my life and University of Michigan was a safety school for me :smile:
@ @ Well I'm glad to know I'm not alone. I've also got a cold. Talk about timing :smile: I'm just drinking a lot of tea with raw ginger, lemon and honey. I am staying med free tomorrow but will be taking my tissues. That said, when I'm super sick but still need to work I usually go down the dayquil route. It doesn't make me drowsy - it actually gives me a bit of extra energy.
I'd personally avoid mucinex the day of because one of it's common symptoms is drowsiness (though if you know it works for you like @, then by all means go for it!). I'd give whatever you want to take tomorrow a try today.
We're going to kick butt tomorrow even if we have to sniffle our way through it!
@ said:
Lets hope this pays off.
It totally will! :smile:
@ Thank you so much! That's so nice of you and 7sage.
@ said:
Not necessarily the biggest: Flaw Questions that incorporate two flaw, only one (the major flaw you have to attack) being the flaw tying in support and the conclusion.
Yeah I agree. I think the subset of this where the speaker makes a logical error in the premise but we have to assume it to be true is one the worst.
Also questions where the logic is so erroneous that I'm actually not so sure what's going on :smile:
Michelle, you may have already made your decision but I thought I'd chime in with a plug for upgrading up to ultimate+ over time if you're concerned about the investment.
I went down this route and my experience was a good one. I didn't feel like I missed anything. I made the last upgrade for the explanations tied to PT 73+. I felt the 70s were a different ball game and I wanted to hear everything JY had to say on them :smile:
Either way, welcome to 7sage! I've found it to be such an incredible resource and hope you will too.
> @ said:
> For those of getting close...
> https://media.giphy.com/media/xTiTnvrJXN3lH8VPcQ/giphy.gif
Haha! I love it. Exactly like this.
@ It may be that U of M felt your application would be more competitive amongst the T5 and wanted to yield protect.
Either way, congratulations :smile:! U Chicago is such a wonderful school. A few members of my family are alums there (not the law school) and they all just love it.
@ Thank you!!!! You're the best :)
Honestly, I think they should all be black and 72 should have featured a casket on it :smile:
@ said:
I think the lovely diarrhea brown of PT 75 is by far the most appropriate color for any PT. Honestly, they should just start using the poop emoji as the cover for future PTs.
This is too funny. I just literally laughed out loud.