Coming back to say it'll all be okay. I graduated from a T-14 school with a very average LSAT score. You guys got this :)

Still waiting to hear back from quite a few schools (I applied really late in the cycle), but it’s looking like I'll be attending UCLA :)

If schools see you took the January LSAT and you listed that on your application

even after you submit most of them wont evaluate your application until those scores come in though anyways right? Definitely think you made the right decision to apply now :)

@jcarte38958 said:

Was the walking the dog logic game part of the experimental?

yes!

I believe apartments was the real one, but I could be wrong @luwenxi486 @cuij2344

It isn't contradicting a premise because the premises are referring to the "peasants" piety, while answer choice C gives us new information that we can use to weaken the argument, referring to "merchants" and "nobles". If the written records don't portray merchants or nobles as being dedicated to religion, then it weakens that the clergy exaggerated the peasant's piety for the purpose of making them seem more religiously devoted because if they wanted to exaggerate religious devotion why wouldn't they also do the same for the merchants and nobles? If C contradicted the premise it would say something like " Written records produced by clergy in medieval Europe very rarely portrayed peasants as being dedicated to religion." That statement does literally nothing to weaken the support between the premises and conclusion.

"Okaaay so I kind of went overboard" LOL

i dont see what other types of music has to do with anything #help

I had trouble with that too, it confused me. But the way I see it is, "buying home insurance makes good fiscal sense" is a statement that connects the analogy "governments fund NEO research for the same reason that people insure their homes." to the conclusion. That "for the same reason" part establishes the analogy. Although I feel both parts of that last sentence contribute to the analogy I can also see how the first part connects the second part to the conclusion when I ask the question why? Why is government funding of this not a waste of money? You can't say, well its not a waste because buying home insurance makes good fiscal sense. That doesn't make sense. You need the second part of that sentence, and the first part to connect to the "not a waste of money" claim. Don't know if this helped in any way haha but I hope it did!

I would say don't watch JY's videos until you've done absolutely everything you can to understand the question on your own. If you're timing yourself right now, then blind review whatever questions you are unsure about after your time is up and try to write down or explain out loud your reasoning for why each other answer choice is wrong and why the one you picked is right. I know it's tempting to jump to the video and watch the explanation after spending a few minutes with the question buy try to resist doing that, because then you're not optimizing the opportunity to get there on your own. Sometimes we can fool ourselves into thinking we totally understand the question after watching the video explanation but we don't truly understand until we can explain it all on our own.

Also, you can't foolproof LR in the same way we do LG, but what I've done is gather every LR question I've gotten wrong in the last 8 or so PTs I've taken into a question set and print it out. Then I go through every question untimed and answer them, explaining the reasoning to myself. I don't always remember the mistakes I made on a PT from like a month ago so its helpful to see if I can look at it again and get the right answer with the correct reasoning. Sometimes I even get the wrong answer AGAIN haha (and on a question I've BR'ed before too!) but that just means it's a big weakness of mine that I find and address.

Can someone help me with A? What if the reason was theres a huge hole in the ground, then you wouldn't be able to park there anyways even if there wasn't any maintenance. Am i making too many potential assumptions that would make A relevant?

#help

#help, still don't understand why it's not A :/ I thought the stimulus said P-->O and A is the contrapositive of that. But maybe I'm looking at it wrong since its a necessary assumption question. Still struggling understanding d, i can see how the stim translates to how JY wrote it, ought and can do but don't see how that takes us to d.

This might be a totally amateur question, but what does ASW stand for? :) @leahbeuk911

Thanks! Will you be doing a BR session for PT 86 by any chance before the January exam? :)

CONGRATS!!

Im interested!!

Can someone go into more detail on why D is wrong for #8? #help please

Can someone explain to me why A is wrong? At first glance it seems like the conclusion of the stimulus. #help #help

Me!

Don't mention accommodations. Because all those accommodations did was give you as equal chance as everyone else that doesn't have ADD. It's not fair to yourself to mention it. You put in the hard work full-time, and you deserve that score! I agree with @sarahshammaa229 , if you get asked about it, which I feel like you wont, but if you do just say the truth : you worked really hard for that score! Good job :)

Hey there! I'm down to meet online :) I also got a 163 and am aiming for 168 or higher in January!

Wow that's annoying :/ sorry you had that happen to you