Do you still get to know your score if you cancelled it?
Of all the timed PTs I did (ranging from 164-171), the actual LSAT ended up being the worst one!! My brain was just completely paralyzed during BOTH of the LG sections!
I hope none of you messed up like I did. Good luck to you all!
I remember him saying it like twice...
But if you are concern just email JY he's really nice, though I'm sure he's just trying to lighten the mood and make the lessons less tedious with occasional jokes and profanity.
Actually I think there is a new type of LR called "help to evaluate the argument". The stimulus goes like this, "which one of the following would be most useful to know in order to evaluate the argument."
I only encountered these questions in the last 2 PTs, both of which are after 65. However I didn't do 61-64, so I could be wrong.
If you've been constantly achieving high scores on a very consistent basis, say, like in all of the past 5-8 PTs, then I think it's safe to say that you've got the skills to maintain that score, assuming that you've done your PTs in a environment that's closely modeled after the test day environment. Just keep your current style, strategy and pacing. Tackle the few question types that you get wrong, and maybe you will even get better score :D
http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-61-section-4-question-14/
I simply had no clue for this one. And the correct AC seems to be making a huge assumption so I didn't choose it. Can we really reasonably infer that thieves who do not abandon cars before their owners notice that they have been stolen are more likely to get arrested and convicted? This just seem to be way too big of a gap, and frankly an unreasonable one, to be made.
Why do car thieves steal cars? To sell them or to keep them. So it's totally reasonable to assume that thieves DO NOT abandon the car right after stealing it. And I simply don't see how this makes them more likely to get caught as they could have driven really fast and got far away before the cops could do something.
Has anyone else had trouble with this question? What do you think?
I don't know about you guys, but I feel that the LSAT has taught me sooo much, knowledge that I would never have acquired without writing this test, from diverse fields such as literature, arts, science, etc. The best thing though, is that I actually retain these information, most likely due to the fact that I have to actively think about and reflect upon the information I read, and as a result my head retains it, as opposed to boring school stuff that I quickly forget because my brain was not actively processing them or simply trying to remember without thinking.
But of course the validity and truthfulness of the information presented in LSAT is a necessary assumption in order for my claim to be made. Imagine if all the stuff are just made up, how embarrassing would it be when I try to show off my knowledge in front of my friends :p
JY said a 4 section should be totally ok, do not concern with the marginal endurance required by an extra 35 min. If you have the time and can get extra sections to put in there, yeah I don't think it's a bad idea to do it though.
I think that's entirely optional. It does not affect your LSAT at all, it's just to make the process for Law schools to find the right applicants who have the characteristics they are looking for easier .
I know the September one is going to be at 8h30am, but I have school, and I have the whole afternoon free. I know I should be consistent but will it have any negative impacts other than not being able to get the benefits of consistency? I will still write other PT in the morning on the weekends whenever I can.
Yup I think it's caused by tunnel vision. Thanks Jonathan.
Great tips guys! Thanks a bunch!
I know a lot of people who advocate prephrasing an answer in your head for certain type of questions (assumptions, flaw, etc) before you go through the AC because you can get an idea of what the problem is with the stimulus. I don't know if this happens to anyone else, but I find this process actually hinders, rather than assist me, in finding the right AC. For example, if I notice a certain gap/flaw in the reasoning of the stimulus, I tend to generate an answer in my head, and while looking through the AC, I become so focused on finding an answer that matches my prephrase that I would often gloss over the right one, which is sometimes not exactly the way I imagined it would be, or sometimes just phrased in a subtle way that makes it easy to miss.
In these cases, I often find myself not liking any of the AC, because none of them matches my prephrase. And this would force me to go through the AC again, wasting valuable time.
Anyone else has similar experience? When I don't prephrase the answer, sometimes it's easier to spot the right AC because it will remind me of the gap/flaw in the stimulus and it doesn't have to conform to a pre-existing model.
Thanks a lot guys! These were some really helpful tips!
I noticed some questions ask specific question about a small part, e.g. "the text supports which one of the following..." and it's about a small detail that was mentioned in the text, for which no line reference was given. Sometimes I just have no idea because the memory method on 7sage focuses on the big picture of each paragraph rather than every little detail.
What's your strategy? :D
I find myself constantly getting 5-8 questions wrong on each LR section, which really hurts my final score. I noted down my weak types of questions and revised them, and made sure I understood the questions. But somehow I still make mistakes for these type of questions in the next PT.
Anyone has a good strategy on how to improve specific question types? I always try to finish all questions, but I don't know if I should be doing this instead of spending more time on the hard questions I'm struggling with.
Thanks!
Thanks! Good luck to all taking it!
Is it in the morning or afternoon? This is my first LSAT and I want to adjust my PT taking time accordingly. Thanks!
The reason why I didn't choose D is because it seems to be making the assumption that socialization, will it could cause sufferings, will also lead to less sufferings (the behavior that sometimes leads to a phenomenon cannot also decrease the occurrence of that phenomenon). This seems to be a pretty big assumption to me...
Although I got this one right, I vacillated between A and C, because I feared for the trap of putting sufficient assumption on the first slot. A sounds like a good enough bridge to be a SA, while C sounds necessary. If students can't even know who (human or computer) gave them the criticisms, how could they react positively or negatively?
I chose C because all other AC are wrong, but I don't actually understand it. The author agrees with the evidence that there is a decrease in the strength and frequency of strike, which the article interprets as sign of weakening of unions. The author believes that calling strikes shows that unions are too weak, but if these unions are not even able to organize strikes that are large in number on a regular basis, doesn't it actually show that unions in Britain are extremely weak (since they can't even rely on the last resort), which supports the article's conclusion?
I really feel bad for those of you in the states, who have to take the LSAT. I got a 159, 4 pts lower than my worst PT, and i'm very pissed. So i will never take the LSAT again. But here in Quebec you can attend civil law schools without this bloody test.
Good luck to the retakers, you have a lot more courage than I ever could amass.