I started out with a diagnostic of 148 and got 158 on my first administration before coming to 7Sage. Delayed applying for another year to relearn the foundation with the Core Curriculum and practiced for months on end. The progress took so long that there were many days when I felt there is no way I am getting to that 170 mark but alas! It may feel like it's not going to get better but I promise you, it will! Wish you all great success on this devilish test we call the LSAT and sending good energy to everyone applying this cycle :)

#HELP!

I took the October exam, scored 168 which wasn't too surprising since that had been my score on several PTs leading up to the test. I am signed up for next week & goal is to score 171+. Took the newly released PT 93 today & scored my highest ever, 175!!!!

I am super conflicted because if I take the test next week, it will be my 4th time & if I score lower than 168, I don't want admissions to think that the score is a fluke and not something I worked hard for. If I score higher than 170, great! However, is this a risk worth taking? For reference, I would like to attend a T20 school with substantial scholarships, looking at USC Law for which I fall right at the median LSAT but lower than median GPA.

No specifics about the test, just a general question regarding experimental sections. Are experimental sections used multiple times in different years? For example, if a section was included in an administration last year or 2 years ago etc., would its inclusion in a current administration mean it was experimental previously but is now the graded section OR would it be experimental again?

I'm taking the LSAT in 2 days and yet I am not feeling nervous. It hasn't even registered that I am taking the LSAT, it just feels like I am taking any other practice test. I started RC section on PT 88 yesterday but midway through I just stopped. Usually, when I start a section I complete I never just stop. What can I do to re-energize myself? It's not a bad thing that I'm viewing this as any other test because that may actually help to mitigate anxiety the day of but the lack of energy is a problem. Any thoughts?

I’ve noticed that in the more recent PTs (80+) the following question types show up more than others: flaw, weaken, NA, RRE, PSA, strengthen. Almost all of my incorrect answers have been one of these types. I’m trying to find a new way of looking at these questions and approaching them in the most efficient ways. The strategies in the CC only help to a certain point, does anyone have a good way of answering these question types? I am especially weak on weakening and RRE questions. I’m taking the October test so I am looking to hone these strategies in ASAP. Any advice would be helpful!!!

I am preparing for the October test (been studying for a year and a half) and I took PT 92 this past weekend, scored 169 (170 if the experimental LG had been the real one). RC is harder than previous PTs (I missed -5) but something even stranger is the LR section. I can't put my finger on it but the recent LR sections are more difficult and a bit scary during timed sessions even during the first 10-15 questions which in previous tests were lighter and practice for the difficult questions later in the section.

How should I prepare for October? Has anyone noticed the difference and what exactly is different? For me, it feels like the language is the issue in that not only is it more abstract but also unnecessarily convoluted, whereas previous PTs were worded fairly legibly and focused more on the formal logic behind the questions.

I am aiming for 173+ and I just need some help in figuring out my LR strategy. I think if I can conquer this new LR format and control RC a bit (even go to -3 from -5) my score would improve tremendously.

Why is C wrong? Wouldn't the uncertainty of who is handling the networks still be an issue if the government funded?

Admin Note: Edited title. Please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of the question"

Starting to stress out because my scores are regressing and October LSAT is exactly a month away. Scored 170 once and haven't been able to since, ranging between 164-169, 163 being the worst in the last few months. My original aim was 175 (aiming for T-14 schools) but after studying for more than a year, I'm just so tired. I feel like I have made so much progress in terms of understanding the test but my scores do not reflect this (although I scored 158 last two real exams so not reverting back to 150s is a good sign I guess). I am lowering my goal to 170 which is not a low score by any means but I'm afraid T-14 will not be possible for me with anything lower than this. What can I do to make sure I am able to score this on the real thing?

I think my main problem is not knowing what to do after BR and going through the wrong answers. I BR thoroughly and my BR scores are almost always in the mid-170s (although for PT 90 this past week was 168). I watch the explanations for questions I missed and I was unsure about. However, what do I do next? I have tried writing in the wrong answer journal the way to approach missed questions but I don't think they have helped. I take one test every Saturday and BR thoroughly but maybe I'm not doing the necessary studying and drilling the days between those PTs. The day I take the test should be the least hectic day, correct? At the moment, it feels like the most. How should I be studying or drilling on the days I'm not taking a PT? Should I go back to fundamentals, drill a question type or passage or take full section tests every day? Maybe I'm not taking enough section tests (I take maybe one or two the whole week) because whenever I start the full PT, it feels like oh shit what do I do now so maybe the section tests would be helpful in establishing good habits under timed conditions.

It feels like I am nearing the finish line but haven't achieved remotely what I set out to. Please help, any and all advice appreciated!

Since mass can be determined by the brightness, if the brightness is lower than previously thought, shouldn't it be that the mass is also higher than previously thought? If the brightness was thought to be 40% and mass 50 but brightness is actually 20, wouldn't the mass also be less than 50, hence lower than previously thought?

I'm not sure I understand this question - what does 60 times less light mean? Is that supposed to be an absolute number? It seems pretty relative to me.

"not a problem in well-ventilated house but it is in well-insulated house" implies that a well-insulated house is not a well-ventilated house, hence D, correct? I picked E because I mistakenly read the well-ventilated as well-insulated in that a well-insulated house with a houseplant would have fewer toxins in the air than a well-insulated house without houseplants.

Hello, can someone please explain how answer choice C supports the conclusion and how D does not?

Hi everyone! I'm dedicating most of my time to achieving the highest LSAT score possible. However, I'm curious as to what role one's GPA plays in the admissions process. Are the LSAT and GPA of equivalent importance or can a higher LSAT compensate for a GPA that may fall at or slightly below the 25th percentile? I understand the process is subjective and depends on a case-by-case basis. I studied abroad for a semester and the overseas school's grading system is stricter than the way my home university transferred my semester GPA so I graduated with a 3.82 (magna cum laude) but LSAC has processed my cumulative GPA to be 3.78 (still magna cum laude). Will this .04 drop have a significant impact on my application? I identify as a minority but probably not URM and I will be applying to T-14 schools aiming for 171+ LSAT score.

PT 9, S2, Q12:

I was looking for an answer choice that said something along the lines of non-purebred dogs being just as expensive for reasons other than genetically determined abnormalities and thought B addressed that. Is A correct because it's stating that even if there are genetic abnormalities, it is not necessary to treat them through surgery and cost-intensive procedures because the overall health of the dogs is fine? What was wrong with my reasoning and why is B wrong?

PT 10, S1, Q16

Found this question difficult overall, still don't understand what I'm supposed to be looking for in the correct answer. Asteroid-collision with the Earth was the popular theory but new theory available so question stem is asking to weaken the asteroid-collision theory? If so, how does E weaken? #help

I'm confused on what ac B is trying to convey. Is it trying to state that he should not have inferred that just because some people did not like the segment, others must have OR is it stating that he should have inferred but did not that since some did not like the segment, others must have. I interpreted the latter which is why I eliminated the ac but if the former is true, this choice makes sense as the correct answer.

Hi guys! What is the best way to approach RC? I tried the low resolution method which helped tremendously and I was able to raise my score from -12 to -3 to -5. However, I am aiming for 175 for October so I tried the Blueprint. It was helpful to learn about structure but now I find myself going back to the passage about 5-6 times because I get so focused on structure that I miss out on the content of the passage. I only went back to read referenced lines when I was using the low res method.

Is there a way to combine the two or approach the section another way to score -0 to -2 consistently? I think it can be done but only with the right approach. Thank you!