@ Thank you for posting this. Super helpful 2 months later.
Good idea! Thank you!
Freaking out a little bit.
That sounds awful.
I'm about to register for the July LSAT as a back up to my June LSAT. (You can't register for July after the June administration.) I'm pretty sure this would take registering for September out of the question after you get July's score back.
Hey everyone-
I'm on the LSAC's website looking for the building I'm supposed to go to at my adminstration site, and my admission ticket only lists the generic website for the university. I have to drive 90min - 2h to get there, so I'm going the night before, but that doesn't help much if I don't know which building I'm going to be taking the test in.
Anybody have any advice?
Congrats @! I was in Chicago a couple weeks ago and took some time to walk around Northwestern Law's campus. Absolutely beautiful place to be, and a great school to boot.
Thanks for your posting and support of others. It's invaluable for the whole community!
This happened to me. I was freaking out, as no building was even listed.
I took it at a small university 90 min away that I had never been to.
I contacted the LSAC a week out and the registrar's office. Once I emailed them, a location appeared on my ticket and they responded.
It'll be ok, just stay relaxed and know you're far more prepared than most people.
Hi Nicole! Thanks for doing this.
What's the time zone for the poll? :)
@ Thanks so much for taking the time to write out responses. I really appreciate it.
Hey everyone-
I am going through the core curriculum for the second time (a year apart) and had an idea I'm playing with and think is helpful.
I started fool proofing both solving the game completely (as JY often does in his video) and never splitting the board. I realized that when under time pressure, I may not see all of the inferences that lead to a full and complete solve, but I still need to find the correct answers in a timely manner.
For an idea of how this looks from a process standpoint:
*Repeat until I can answer all of the questions correctly and well under time without the fully solved game board.
After doing this, I felt there was another skill set being developed and felt less flat footed going into games if I couldn't fully solve a game board.
I am going to provide these caveats...
What do you guys think? Anyone else experiment with doing this?
Hey 7Sagers-
There are a fair number of discussions about doing untimed section drills or untimed full PTs, but not one with some consolidation of purpose, goals, best practices. I know there is apprehension about wasting PTs, not to mention some old forum posts including lines like, "No untimed PT's. No untimed sections. Not even once."
I've currently stalled in my progression a bit from going from CC to timed PT w/ BR. I'm going to start doing some untimed section drills and/or untimed full PTs, but want to make sure I have everything straight.
My questions remaining are:
Without further ado, here is what I found in the webinars and forums.
If I have misrepresented anything, or you have additional insights, I would love to have them.
What: When 7Sagers refer to untimed section drills, it means taking a full section of a PT without the time pressure, but finding a natural pace. This does not mean taking all of the time in the world like you may with Blind Review. You will likely be over time at the end of the section. The idea is that you can work at being more efficient later, but you need practice to get the score up without the arbitrary time pressure.
When: In the Post Core Curriculum webinar, Sage Josh says these are great for Phase 1 where your blind review is under your target score, but leaves the door open to this being helpful in Phase 2 as well.
Purpose: @"Cant Get Right" Untimed work is really great for learning the fundamentals. Once you've got each section where you need to be, it's time to work on strategy... Before you master these elements [for example: conditional reasoning] of the test, taking timed sections isn't going to be very productive." Discussion
@AllezAllez21 I think untimed work is so critical. You could do the occasional untimed section if you wanted a variety of LR questions to deeply study. Or you could maybe be focusing on a particular process for LR (like really identify the flaw, or the conclusion, or something that is pretty universal to LR questions).
For LR, I would just do deep dives on your weaknesses, untimed. That could be by question type, it could be "lawgic" or maybe argument structure. Discussion
@Ohnoeshalpme: Following a deep understanding of these errors and a correction through untimed drilling, speed and accuracy will come naturally. Discussion
Sample Study Schedule with Untimed Section Drills: s/o @kimpg_66 Discussion
Once I had fool proofed (took over a month), I started drilling and PTing. My schedule was:
Monday: 1 LR and LG section
Tuesday: 1 LR and RC section
Wednesday: 1 full PT/blind review
Thursday: 1 LR and RC section
Friday: 1 LR and LG section
Saturday: 1 full PT/blind review
I used all of PTs 40-52 for these section drills. I started out doing each section untimed, underlining the keywords in LR with a highlighter and writing a line # for where I had pinpointed the answer for RC. I would take 15+ minutes on each RC passage at first, and 45+ on LR. I figured it was better to get the basics and concepts down to a science before I moved on to timed. Eventually, I started timing my sections.
Thanks to those who have unwittingly supplied information to this thread and anyone who can provide additional insights.
Premise: Acceptable to offer experimental treatments for patients with extreme symptoms.
Conclusion: Never acceptable to offer experimental treatments for patients with no extreme symptoms.
X → Y
/X → /Y
A – This is wrong because it says the expert can lose money instead of something definitive.
B – This is wrong because though the order in which items are presented are negated, there is an if in the first statement that makes it valid reasoning. B if A. If not B then not A.
C – This is correct. I missed this because of the many words and the failure to recognize the negation in the second statement. It appeared to be a non-conforming statement.
Born + raised in A & lived abroad and returned → qualified
not lived in country (negates ^) → not qualified
D – This answer choices leads off with the negation.
E – This is a value statement instead of a direct conditional statement.
Premise: Archaeologists discovered Clovis points in Siberia.
Conclusion: Previous theory about Clovis points being invented in North America is wrong.
A – This strengthens the argument because if the Clovis points found in Siberia were older than any of the Clovis points found in North America, it supports the fact that the Clovis points did not originate in NA then make their way back to Siberia.
B – If the Bering land bridge disappeared before any of these Clovis points were found then they could have been independently been invented in both Siberia or NA.
C – We really don’t care about how effective the Clovis points were. Actually, if they were completely ineffective, it would not hurt the argument at all.
D – Great, this answer doesn’t even refer to the specific Clovis points but general artifacts, not sure if this is more or less useless than C.
E – This has the possibility of weakening the argument, but definitely not strengthening the argument.
Role of: rocket technology is much simpler than the human psyche
Context: People argue that since we send people to the moon, we should be able to solve our domestic problems.
Premise: Rocket tech is much simpler than human psyche and social problems.
Conclusion: Criticism is misplaced.
A – This is absolutely not an objection.
B – This fact has not misled critics. Critics believe the opposite.
C – Not the conclusion.
D – This was my BR answer. This is wrong because the critics do not assume this, actually to the contrary, critics falsely do not believe this.
E – This is correct because this premise undermines the critics’ argument and supporting the editorial’s argument. Though the answer choice does not say this is a ‘premise’ it is used by the argument implies that it is not a part of the context.
Premises: Associative result in mental exhaustion for more than a day. Dissociative strategies do not. Runners need to enter races mentally refreshed.
A – This is the correct answer because it says that associative strategies should be avoided the day before competition, leaving the runner mentally refreshed. Simply connecting the premise with a logical conclusion.
B – This is wrong because we simply know nothing about the training strategies of distance runners from this passage, and how that translates to race strategy. We only know the fatigue factor in using associative strategies.
C – We have no idea the cost benefit of these training methods.
D – We have no idea about the strategies actually used by distance runners.
E – We have no idea what is most effective for any given day’s training run. We only know a very limited amount about training and racing.
This is an argument by analogy. The patron is presenting two analogous journals The Brick Wall Review and some other journal. The BWR has a yearly anthology that all of the authors who are published in the regular journal to have their work included in without additional compensation. If the other journal did this, they would not have to rely upon donors to keep their journal afloat.
We weaken arguments by analogy by finding differences in the two things being compared.
A – Initial selection. This answer seemingly contradicts the premise about why the journal should have the anthology (less reliance upon donors) but it doesn’t differentiate the two journal anthologies. Just because they do not need donor funds for their operating costs doesn’t mean that they should not publish an anthology or would make substantial money from doing so. The argument still holds water, especially considering this contradicts a side premise instead of a crucial premise.
B – We don’t really care about the acceptances or rejections of the poets who appear in The Brick Wall Review.
C – We don’t care about the compensation of the poets in the regular issues either. Not directly related to the argument about the anthology.
D – This should have been an indication of the red herring nature of answer choice A since this is also about the donor funds, but this is only about The Brick Wall Review so seemed pretty irrelevant.
E – This is the correct answer choice because it creates a separation between the analogous journals. Since TBWR includes poems by famous poets not in the regular issues and the other journal would only include those poems first published in the regular issues, we have more questions about the viability of the latter’s success in raising money for the journal. TBWR has this other factor that could lead to its success.
Premise – Effective law, a command must be backed up by an effective enforcement. There is no international police force unlike in societies.
Conclusion – International law is not effective law.
A – This answer is far too strong to be a necessary assumption, and maybe people do obey commands when there is no enforcement mechanism. We have no idea.
B – This could be a sufficient condition but not a necessary assumption. If this were true, then the argument is absolutely valid, but that is not our task for this question. Maybe something else can happen to make international law effective law.
C – The only difference between intentional law and individual society’s law does not need to be only the enforcement mechanisms. I’m sure there is a lot more than this actually. Totally not necessary.
D – The primary purpose of a police force is not necessary for this argument.
E – This is a necessary assumption. If something other than an international police force could effectively enforce international law then this whole argument completely falls apart. The argument says that since there is not international police force, international law is not effective law. The conditional statement of B leaves the door open to the fact that something else could lead to the same conclusion whereas this being a necessary condition does not.
@ said:
You've (likely) studied for months, so just relax your brain, talk to the other people and see how they are even more nervous than you, etc.
I can confirm this. I took June and am taking July.
I had two people ask me for a pencil. One person brought in their bag with cell phone and tablet. Most of the discussion before the test was debating how many sections there were and what was in each section.
If you're here, you have prepared much more than most people in your test center. So you got this!
@ said:
What studying techniques did you use? Did you only use 7sage or did you supplement with other materials?
I used only 7Sage.
I went through the core curriculum, then started doing practice tests to identify my gaps in knowledge. After doing those, I stalled out around 165, so I did first untimed then timed sections and saw the biggest gain in my raw and BR score.
Once I seemed to stall out with broken sections, I tried putting it all together into full length, proctored, practice tests. A slight regression was followed by getting near the score from untimed sections.
Here are the notes I took during the webinar for those anxious to know what Dean Le said:
• Pitch for Texas Law
◦ Austin, TX is a livable city with a lot of cultures
◦ Low cost of attendance and COL
◦ Elite public institution
◦ Breadth of programs, one of the largest faculties
◦ 300-350 students per class
• Admissions Process
◦ Individual processes each application (24 hrs)
▪ UT checks for all documentation
▪ LSAC sends a PDF with personal statements and a PDF with CAS, letters of rec
◦ Full admissions committee reviews challenging cases
◦ Quicker turnaround earlier in the cycle. Slower near LSAT score releases.
▪ Generally about 6 weeks
• We are looking for...
◦ What is the student bringing to the law school along with mission and vision of the school?
▪ How will the experiences enrich the classroom?
▪ Quality of personal statement is key here
◦ Is the student prepared for the intellectual rigor for the law school? (typically LSAT and GPA)
• What about students not interested not looking to work for public?
◦ Employment numbers: majority going into big law (250+ employees)
◦ As a public law school, they have a different role to play than private (community). Serving the underserved communities (i.e. environmental or criminal)
◦ Underlying your role as an attorney is to give back to your community in different ways.
• If you resume shows your interest in law, then your personal statement doesn’t necessarily have to?
◦ Every admissions dean is looking for something different. Ask them.
• Encourage applications tailored for each law school
◦ Stakes are high, so put your best foot forward. We can tell when it's a generic PS.
◦ Tying to mission of school will have a better impact on admissions committee
• Half are above the median, half are below
◦ those below convince the committee that they are a good fit
◦ diversity is encompassed in the broadest of terms
• LSAT
◦ Multiple LSAT scores – We do look at all of them. Multiple scores are common. Knowing what’s at stake, many schools have a threshold for scholarship. Median LSAT and GPA are competitive for scholarship. Only a problem when the student sits for 4 or more.
• UT-Austin does accept competing offers/try to match
◦ try to offset as much burden as possible
• Encourage soul-searching, what will be a good fit for the student's
◦ Rankings issue, may lead to negative experienced
• Advise not to do/common mistakes
◦ Have someone review the application, spell check, grammar
◦ Not being true to themselves, everyone’s experience is different
▪ Show commitment to public service in whole application
▪ How do the pieces fit together?
• What are some successful ways students have recently demonstrated interest in UT that has allowed them to get off the WL? Thank you!
◦ We try to be as communicative as possible. Proactively reach out to students. Some may remove themselves from waitlist.
• Do waitlisted students ever get scholarships?
◦ Yes, but it depends on availability. Generally, not disadvantaged in that respect but will have less money than earlier in the cycle?
• Early decision
◦ Criteria for admissions is no different for early decision than regular decision
◦ You do get a decision earlier than anyone else, and there is a financial incentive.
◦ Traditionally, do not get additional aid.
• Low GPA addendum
◦ Keep it short and sweet to explain trend or performance
• Transfer applications
◦ focus on grades in 1L
◦ Top 10 in class will position themselves strongly
◦ Experiences you have during first year (leadership, community service)
• International students, how does that affect chances?
▪ Analysis and evaluation is no different
• LSAT Writing Sample
◦ They do not look at the writing sample strongly. Personal statement is far more important than the writing sample.
◦ Put your best foot forward, but it is the least important part of the evaluation.
• Non-traditional students
◦ Not having academic references is fine.
◦ Have conversation with employer about what the law school is looking for (analytical skills, top 1% of students/employees, etc)
• Reciting your resume is not a good use of your personal statement
• Think about balancing your application between the two previously stated questions (unique applicant and good academic fit academic)
• LSAT is a better predictor of 1L performance than GPA so is considered more heavily
• If your whole resume is one topic, then consider making your personal statement about something else.
• Resume – UTA gives you up to three pages, and some other law schools will let you have more than one page as well
• Try write two kinds of personal statements
◦ Tied to your resume
◦ Something more creative
Thanks for doing this David!
I moved to my parents' due to a family situation, so my job right now is studying.
Let's be honest, the LSAT is a grueling test to take and to study for. I'm not sure if either of you are athletes, runners, weightlifters or anything like that but let me present an analogy:
Distance runners don't race every day, or even run hard every day. Weightlifters don't max out every day or work the same muscle group every day. Rest is crucial for these groups, along with people studying for the LSAT.
A crucial part of rest has to do with hormones, notably the stress hormone cortisol. I'm a distance runner. Some of the best distance coaches talk about how after workouts, they engage with their athletes, try cracking jokes. It's not just about being social, but it's about bringing those stress levels down so the athletes can recover and be ready for the next hard session. High cortisol levels impair recovery and socializing lowers cortisol levels.
I've found this to be the case with the LSAT. Sometimes my PTs don't go well because of non-stress related things. But it is undoubtable that my retention, productivity, and efficiency are best when I have properly recovered from the last PT (a hard workout or race in the analogy) and that usually includes some social time to help bring the cortisol levels down.
So, think of social time not as something getting in the way of your goal but as something helping your reach your goals.
I will also say that it is worth taking another month or three if you need it instead of stressing to hit the June test. I was trying to be ready for March, and was stressing when that wasn't coming together. I pushed it back to June and it was a great decision. I used my PTs far more efficiently in the process.
@ LSAT is full time for me right now. I have a family situation so I quit my job to help out. With that being said, it is easy to do too much and burn out when you're doing LSAT "full-time."
I don't track the time I spend on studying, but I would guess it's a 15-35 hours a week range with an average in the mid to high 20s.
I'll keep my reply short since we have some many awesome responses above.
My first PT after CC was 152. I wish I did a diagnostic but it would have destroyed my confidence. My confidence was in the dumps after my first PT already.
Here are my top 5 full length PT scores, all within my last 10 PTs:
173, 172, 172, 172, 171.
The point is you can do this. It takes time to learn the test.
Especially for your first practice tests, your score is a data point and not an evaluation of your capabilities. Wrong answers are an opportunity to find what you an work on. You'll find gaps in your understanding of core curriculum, basic logic, approach to RC. It is all in the process. If you analyze what you were thinking during the timed test, find out why you made the mistake you did, your score will get higher.
Keep your head up, study hard between PTs, and you'll get where you want to be!
Here's an abridged version of what I did in a similar situation, but was looking for a bigger jump.
Hopefully this may help you game plan how you want to use your time between now and October.
April 2018 - stopped. My top score was 162 and had stalled out at 159-160.
November - January - Core Curriculum
February - March - 6 PTs, decided against March LSAT (score maxed at 167 w/ 164 avg)
March - late April - 12 PTs as timed sections. Score steadily rose to 174 in the broken down sections.
Late April - June - Took 11 full length PTs, was burnt out and didn't do as well as I wanted.
June LSAT - burnt out and didn't do as well as I wanted.
June-July - 2 more full length PTs, doing sections to stay sharp before July on Monday.
I don't want to speculate on timelines of other people, mostly because I don't know how many tests you have taken during your last prep period. I think hitting the LR CC could be really helpful for you though. I found it really helpful to go through the RC sections untimed and writing out where the answers came from, and writing the paragraph summaries. It is the most fragile portion of my test still but I started at -10 and got it down to -1 on a full length test.
I have a Google Sheet that I'm happy to share with anyone looking for more information.
Hope this was helpful!
I had 3 LR sections: 1-3-5.
RC (2) included a passage about Blues and a wolof genre/cultural group.
Anyone have any idea which LR was the experimental?
Good luck to everyone taking the test on Monday!