I foolproofed a section of LG today after not doing anything LSAT related since the June exam and got through it sooooooo much faster than how I did two weeks ago. I usually take notes on how long it took me to do each games, recommended time for those games, level of difficulty, how many questions right/wrong. You might just need some time off for your brain to digest and recover from the intense foolproofing session. Doing more won’t necessarily help... While I believe in intense study sessions, sometimes doing less could actually be more beneficial.

https://classic.7sage.com/lesson/synesthesiacs-causation-question

4:30 and on lol

This came to my mind when I was on a break from studying:

Efficiency -> Effectiveness.

efficiency is: achieving maximum productivity with minimum wasted effort or expense.

effectiveness is: successful in producing desired or intended result.

I think being efficient means being effective with minimum wasted effort (falling for trap answer choices, time sinks, etc.) or expense (getting questions wrong, losing time, etc.). You can be effective (answering correctly) without being efficient but you must be effective in order to be efficient.

I feel you there. I can't believe it's only been a week since the exam. I think I might be slightly burnt out or have some sort of post LSAT blues. I've been trying to distance myself from LSAT to really enjoy some time off but here I am lurking on 7Sage forum again haha. I've been playing a lot more tennis with my friends lately and it has been very helpful for me.

Causation weakening = bring in alternate explanation

Causation strengthening = block alternate explanation

@ Thank you! I really appreciate the support and love from 7Sagers :smiley:

@ said:

September'18 Study Group | Blind Review PT 39 | Thursday, June 14th | 7:30 pm EST

Note: Take the PT under timed conditions; BR to the best of your abilities; join us for all or part of the call! For the purposes of the group please don't check the answers beforehand. If you happen to know the answer, keep it to yourself, and win the argument using your reasoning. Also, please don't go "so I know the answer is C but I don't know why B is wrong?" as the purpose is so that we all collaborate on improving our reasoning skills.

Ohhhhhhh so this is how these calls work. Just take the PT under timed condition and BR without checking the answer choice and give the reasoning for your answer during the call. Is this a weekly thing? Can I join in next time?

@ said:

I am so glad I was able to face my fears and take the exam. I have been studying for a while now and kept thinking that I was not ready. My friends encouraged me to simply take the exam and do my best. I am really happy that I listened to them because now I know what I need to work on and it gets me started on my path to attending law school (instead of just sitting in fear).

For everyone who is thinking about cancelling their exam in the future, I would advise to take it....because like @ said, there is no place to go but up!

Right? It wasn’t really as bad as I thought haha.

@ said:

@ said:

:warning: The only exception: you can say which sections were real or experimental. For example, asking questions like “Was the LG with "flowers" experimental?” is okay. You can say “The LG section with "flowers" was real!” But you cannot say “the 3rd game of the real section was In/Out game.”

Wait, @ how did you know about the flowers? Hmmmmmm...

I had 2 RC sections... I started my very first LSAC administered LSAT with a chemical compound punching me in the face. I thought the experimental RC section was SOOOOOOOO much easier. I’m kind of annoyed that that was the experimental section.

I think the real LG had Bonds, WXYZ, flowers, and offices. I thank God for foolproofing and 7Sage...

This is good though. I feel so much better now that I’ve taken the real thing.

LOL

I think it was a pure coincidence because 7Sage uses the same template for years. Haha

Riiiiigghhhttttt.

:warning: The only exception: you can say which sections were real or experimental. For example, asking questions like “Was the LG with "flowers" experimental?” is okay. You can say “The LG section with "flowers" was real!” But you cannot say “the 3rd game of the real section was In/Out game.”

Wait, @ how did you know about the flowers? Hmmmmmm...

I had 2 RC sections... I started my very first LSAC administered LSAT with a chemical compound punching me in the face. I thought the experimental RC section was SOOOOOOOO much easier. I’m kind of annoyed that that was the experimental section.

I think the real LG had Bonds, WXYZ, flowers, and offices. I thank God for foolproofing and 7Sage...

This is good though. I feel so much better now that I’ve taken the real thing.

“ABA requires law schools to report score information based on an admitted student’s highest score.”

@ , I’ve been using the sheet protector for past few days. It is WONDERFUL!!!!

@ said:

Hey! My heart feels for you. Throughout your post, you seem to be beating yourself up. You have added so much pressure for yourself that it's not too far fetched to see a dip in scores. Breathe. Remember that you are capable. Your past tests have shown that.

I don't have much in ways of what you should do in the last few weeks, but I think you should maybe approach the exam with a positive framework. Maybe dropping off some of the pressure will help. Show yourself some compassion.

I agree one hundred percent. Too much pressure on top of already increased level of stress! I realized that when I'm frustrated, my focus and thought process are more easily influenced by emotion. When that happens, I just take a few deep breathes (or meditate) to calm the nerves and re-focus. I've been noticing lots of similarities between LSAT preparation and music performance preparation and I hope you won't mind me sharing.

I had the enormous honor of playing as a soloist with the orchestra a few times and the very first time I played with them, I was a nervous wreck. Anxiety, stress, and negative self-talk hit me all at once resulting in a memory slip near the end of the performance. When I revisited the recording three years later, it wasn't as bad as I had remembered (but at that time I thought the whole world was ending)... With the subsequent performances, and after many trial and error, I realized that EVERY performance (timed PTs, drills, fool-proofing, memory method, etc.) counts and you can learn from EVERY performance.

I'm purely hypothesizing from the parallels I see from my experience with music and LSAT preparation; but, I think, "the real thing" should be seen as time to really enjoy the work you put in. It's easier said than done, of course. I see the preparation as slow, intense, and incredibly disciplined process while performance as the time to "let loose and hold nothing back"---at this point, relying mostly on my instincts.

When I think I'm nearing the time to perform, I try to discipline myself by slowing down (because I know that my base line of stress will naturally increase). Obviously, I'm not neglecting the possibility that all of this might not work and I'm just fooling myself, but hey, worth a shot.

I've been meditating using Headspace before and after study sessions. It really helps me with clearing my head. Also, I'm looking forward to drinking something other than miller lite.

@ said:

@

I am only a tad bit into the 1-35 bundle, my wife and I moved on a whim during my prime post CC period, but what I find helpful that I actually used a lot while teaching is sheet protectors.

I put the game in the sheet protector and write on it with a fine tip expo marker. This allows me to erase the board when I’m done, but still have the same piece of paper. I used to use this method a lot when I did stations in my classroom, to save time at the copy machine and paper. Obviously it stinks not using a pencil, but for me my fool proofing is not about real testing conditions but truly mastering the games presented to me. It also allows me to not have to carry copious amounts of paper with me wherever I amamos rushing nor have a pile of games on my desk.

I also normally have two sheet protectors out side by side so I am not flipping one over constantly or taking a picture of my main game board to reference back too. I hope this helps you, it’s been a tree saver and a life saver for me.

Good. God. Jesus. Almighty. Christ. Brain. Orgasm.

THANK. YOU.

@ @

Thank you for sharing guys... You guys are awesome...

@ said:

I started foolproofing what's in the curriculum. The sequencing unit is about 40 games alone with all the problem sets. I found this super helpful because you get exposure to everything through the curriculum so by foolproofing those it's easier to see patterns and identify weaknesses.

That’s what I’ve done. I’ve been fool proofing the bundle recently and I’m glad I did what @ said because I now notice that sequencing games (fool proofed them while going through CC) are pretty much freebies.

Do you guys also print out copious amount of paper? I feel like I need a paper supplier. I’ve done fool proofing using just notebook paper by jotting down question numbers (like a scantron) on the side and drawing out all of my game boards and rules on that paper—keeping the printed out section unmarked. I do this a few times until I feel like I “own” the game then proceed to the unmarked section to emulate it for the last time before moving on.

@ said:

OHHHH. okay. yeah this flaw is common lol i literally misread the answer choice lol. I just feel like it's been worded differently. Instead of the word "notion," I've seen it used with other words before and grew accustomed to that I guess lol whoops thanks though @ @

@ i have been wanting to go through the cc again. i think reviewing the advanced logic really helped me tenfold

Oh yea for sure! I’ve been starting off my days by reviewing notes on general and specific theories from the CC and I’ve noticed slight improvements in timing and accuracy—of course, not discounting the fact that I’ve still got MUCH work to do haha.

Flashcards for valid/invalid forms are always the first thing I do (usually takes a minute or two to get through a few rounds).

Oh sweet, I’ve actually been reviewing (and adding) my notes on logical fallacies this morning lol.

The one you are describing is Equivocation Fallacy .

(I found it really helpful to review the “19 argument flaws” lesson in the CC)

JY gives the example of the term “public interest”.

What does it mean?

Is it representing what the best interest of the public is? (Roads, schools, etc.)

Is it representing what the public is interested in? (Celebrity gossip)

Basically, the meaning of a term is being inconsistent because there are multiple meanings.

I’ve seen many people compare the LSAT as learning to play and master a musical instrument. I agree. Here’s a little insight from the Distinguished Professor of Indiana Univeristy’s Jacobs School of Music, Janos Starker (god rest this incredible man’s soul).

The actual content I want to share with you is from 1:23 - 2:14.

Hmm... good question...

Revisiting the lessons from the "Introduction to Arguments" unit helped me with the second question.

For me, I look at the context as the frame of the world in which the argument takes place. I noticed that the context and the argument are sort of holistically connected to each other to form/provide a bigger and clearer picture of what's going on within the stimulus.

(Can I quote stuff from the practice tests? If not, I apologize!)

For example, this is from 2-2-12, a context might look something like:

"People have long been fascinated by the paranormal. Over the years, numerous researchers have investigated telepathy only to find that conclusive evidence for its existence has persistently evaded them. Despite this, there are still those who believe that there must be 'something in it' since some research seems to support the view that telepathy exists. However, it can often be shown that other explanations that do comply with known laws can be given. Therefore, it is premature to conclude that telepathy is an alternative means of communication."

Can you see how it provides a frame of reference for the subsequent conflicting views? Like, it gave some background information that works like a breadboard for the author and his/her opponent to construct functioning circuits for themselves. If you take away their breadboard, their circuits won't really function.

Basically,

This is the objective nature of what the world (X) is like right now.

But some think (A) because (B).

However, (C) weakens the relationship between (A) and (B).

Therefore, the conclusion, within the context of the world (X), is (blah)."

I hope this helps.

> @ said:

> > @ said:

> > I reloaded my Starbucks account! A few weeks back, I actually got a fortune from a fortune cookie that said, "you will receive some prestigious prize or award within the month". I kept it on my desk hoping that it was something LSAT related lol.

>

> That fortune would have applied to your LSAT. But 7Sage intercepted it. Now you have to rely on your skills only.

Damn it 7Sage! Where did you hide the cameras?!

I think you are desribing Descriptive Flaw questions.

Inglourious Basterds

I reloaded my Starbucks account! A few weeks back, I actually got a fortune from a fortune cookie that said, "you will receive some prestigious prize or award within the month". I kept it on my desk hoping that it was something LSAT related lol.