You are not alone! I always KILL LG and this Time the last two games had me in tears.
It seemed like most people struggled with this section too, hopefully there's a curve there. I registered for January just in case. So many people struggled do not feel bad. You probably didn't do as bad as you think, just think positively, and if you hate your score re test in Jan :)
I had only one RC and it was the whig/hydrogen cars one too.
I had 2 LR sections, I do remember one question being about Marie Antonette too. The first LR felt easy, last one felt way more difficult.
I had LR RC LG LR,
I did HORRIBLY on LG, choked the last 2 sections which sucks bc LG is usually my strongest section.
RC was difficult but I think I may have done okay.
@jersong393 said:
Alright looks like the ban is over, so I'll post the contents of my exam and maybe they'll be useful to somebody.
LR-RC-LG-RC
LR: 26 questions. Few topics I can remember: goats in the fertile crescent/Azerbaijan, sperm whales and orcas in different regions, patterns for popular startup companies, something about coal. A little on the hard side? Felt like there were some tricky questions, moreso than usual but I'm pretty bad at discerning LR difficulty.
RC: Functional extinction, Rap/Rakim, redoing psych experiments, neuroimaging. Not too bad? Maybe a single tricky question per passage but nothing crazy.
LG: I never remember the first game, presentations, Assignment of senior VPs to juniors, Wed/Thursday Work Schedules. First three were fine but I can see how the third can be tricky. Had to brute force most of the last but thankfully finished with time. Pretty fundamental section with some tricky rules. I think knowing when to skip and when to trust your gut was key here.
RC: Indigenous sovereignty, work hours & consumerism, whig history, hydrogen cars. Probably leaning on the difficult side, especially the first passage and maybe the third passage. Key was definitely spending more time on the questions than the passage.
From what it looks like online, the last RC was probably real? Honestly pretty ambivalent as to which one is the experimental. All I'm hoping was that I went -0/-1 on LG and my LR+RC wasn't too bad. Honestly predicting the last RC will tip the curve -1 but doubt the LG and LR will adjust the curve in any way. Will just have to wait Thursday for Powerscore's curve prediction.
I felt the same about LG!
I was great until the 3rd game then I went back and fourth and I ended up guessing on like 6 :(
@juliabreault871 said:
RC-LR-LG-RC
I was golden until game 3 of LG. Still don’t even know what that was about. Super bummed because LG has become my best. Switched to game 4 midway, then went back to it, only to have to blindly guess on 2 questions. Second RC wasn’t bad, but didn’t go as smoothly as the first for me.
Hi Everyone!
So I'm a bit confused on the scoring. I took PT 91 and PT 92.
PT 91 I received a 54/75 which was a 158
PT 92 I received a 53/75 and my score was a 159.
How is this possible? I missed -10/RC and -9/LR on both, then one I missed 3 on LG and the other I missed 2. How did I get a higher score when I missed more questions??
Hi!
Omg I'm in the same boat as you but instead I'm getting like -10 on RC but usually -0/2 on LG.
You're really in a great spot bc LG is the easiest to improve on.
I'd recommend doing the games over and over until you're getting them all right and you can completely understand why.
I recently did this question and I'm still confused to how it could be choice B.
"the argument relies on the testimony of experts whose expertise is not shown to be sufficiently broad to support their general claim."
What do they mean by sufficiently broad? Sufficiently broad enough? Doesn't it seem like their argument is TOO broad? That large institutions such as universities and schools tend to get hacked therefore security needs to be a top priority?
Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-june-2007-section-2-question-17/
How do we know the most recent scores/improvements of people? lol Where are you finding out that so many people are improving their 170s score?
So this is a NA question.
Both options D and E make sense to me, but E is supposed to be the correct answer.
E says "anyone to whom safety is an important factor in purchasing a car will consult an objective source of vehicle safety information before buying"
But what if the consumer believed ads and promos were objective sources of vehicle safety info? If D. was the correct answer it would make sense, because if they were aware that ads weren't objective and they only viewed those, safety probably isn't that important to them.
Maybe safety is their #1 factor but they truly believe ads and promos are objective sources of information. They could just be very unaware and ignorant and believe ads are an objective source.
Let's say health is my number one priority, and I'm drinking these shakes that contained tons of sugar and chemicals because the commercials say they guarantee fat loss. I didn't consult a nutritionist because (for arguments sake I'm just stupid) and I truly wholeheartedly believe the commercials provide an adequate source of information. You really can't say health isn't my number one priority, like you can't say safety isn't their priority. Now if I KNEW the commercials were full of lies and I still drank the shakes anyways, you could say health isn't my number one priority.
Explanation Video: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-75-section-3-question-15/
Admin Note: Edited title. Please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of the question"
I'd only retake if you're SURE you can do significantly better, like a 167+
Because god forbid you score worse than before (they'd only take your higher score but a lower score just wouldn't look good)
This would mean that the TV show is being paid by their sponsors. So Coke or Pepsi doesn't care how many people see their ad but who will actually purchase from their ad.
If 100 people saw Jurassic Park and hated it, they still made the money.
If 100 people saw a Pepsi ad during a Friends commercial break and didn't buy Pepsi, then Pepsi isn't going to pay that TV channel to run their ads anymore.
I think the best thing to do is stick to 4 sections as per usual but then switch it up by sometimes doing a flex and adding an additional LR or LG section.
I'm also taking the Nov lsat!
I honestly wish they'd just give us the flex
Hi!
So answer B isn't very relevant to the argument itself. The argument is that people should switch to low watt bulbs because they're more advantageous.
The amount of money the light industry makes has no advantage to the consumers
Which schools are you applying to?
I struggle with seeing E as the answer because it seems like the reduction of production costs would indicate a reduction in retail prices. Is it irrelevant because it's just an assumption that prices would decrease because production costs decreased?
That's why I chose A, because I thought that if there's no change in the CPI, then the retail prices may have stayed the same regardless of the production costs.
#help (Added by Admin)
where would we find that?
@reillyjdodd275 said:
Anyone having trouble accessing the score breakdown? I thought that the score breakdown would be immediately available to all of us once our scores were posted on LSAC?