@ I didn't read much of the other replies, but here's what I can tell you. A lot of the times, especially growing up, we feel that there is some natural talent and capabilities that people inherently have that allow them to accomplish great things. "Oh he's just naturally smart", "She never has to study she just naturally understands everything so well". Maybe not to this exact extent, but you get the idea.

Here's the truth, as corny as it may sound. You are truly capable of achieving anything you want. Now this is definitely not easy, but it doesn't require you to "have what it takes". Hard work and overcoming adversity triumphs each time. You know the saying, hard work beats talent when talent doesn't work hard? It's certainly true.

Don't question your character, or what is inherent about you. Do be critical of your studying process, how much work you put into preparing, whether you went in confident with yourself and the knowledge and skill you accumulated throughout the studying process. At the end of the day, if you know you put the hard work into it, then there is nothing else to worry about. You may have doubts about your preparation, but do not doubt your character or your own ability to achieve what it is you're set to accomplish. Believe in the process. If it just so happens that you don't get a good score, don't doubt yourself. Doubt your strategies and the amount of work you put into writing that test. Perhaps there's need for improvement in the way you study, perhaps you just didn't devote enough time. Nonetheless, do not doubt your capabilities. I don't believe in talent, neither should you. Work hard, insanely hard. You'll achieve it. Best of luck to you.

Same problem here, and I myself am going through the curriculum still. I think that it actually does boil down to practice and familiarity with the different stimuli. Seriously, I feel that the most important part is being able to understand the stimulus very well. Sometimes this boils down to reading very carefully and trying to play the stimulus out in your mind, other times it may just depend on your need to simplify the stimulus so you can understand it (science type questions aren't my forte). For me though, it feels like its usually because I miss something in the stimulus, a tiny error perhaps, but one that definitely can make or break whether I get the answer right or wrong. I asked a similar question a few days ago in a discussion of my own, and I think its common to experience this when you're getting through the curriculum. You're not expected to get perfect on each set, and probably not as much on the hardest difficulty sets. Just keep working at it, make small notes to yourself about what you should pay more attention to, how you should've gone about analyzing the stimulus, etc. Hopefully we can both work our way up through these sets. I know it's disheartening, I experience it too... Just keep going at it and do your best to highlight your errors. Be critical of yourself and your strategy in tackling the questions. This is all I do, and I'm hoping it'll gain me some improvement.

The Q&A alone makes it worth attending. Will be there!

Not too sure about the conditional indicators but what I took from that sentence is that "if Juarez has evaluated an introductory textbook, then Rosenberg can evaluate the introductory textbook". I came up with this because the only way for Rosenberg to evaluate a book is if Juarez has evaluated it. Not too sure how else I can explain my reasoning, but yeah. I didn't pay so much attention to the indicator as much as making sense of the sentence.

Also to be clear, I haven't yet finished the CC myself, so someone else may be able to provide a better response.

Eliminate the answer choices by considering what could be true. For example, if the answer choice talks about something that isn't really mentioned in the stimulus, then you cannot say (because you don't know enough) that it must be false. In this case, such an answer choice could be true. The correct answer choice in must be false questions is one that conflicts/opposes what was mentioned in the stimulus. I consider the stimulus as fact, and then look through the answer choices to see what must be false if the stimulus is 100% true. Idk if that's clear enough, but that's how I approach it.

bump

Remember, all implies most which implies some. Also remember, many is equivalent to some. So when you see many, just mentally replace it with some.

Are you capable of identifying context, premises, and conclusion of an argument? If you work on improving that, I'm sure it will become easier for you to do those question types, as they seem to be easier than other types of LR questions (for me, anyway).

@ @.busis I'm applying in Canada though, but I imagine a theme of story telling mixed in with my observations of the legal world and why I want it, and what I would do with it, is a good focus?

I mean, the negation of little could be not little. This would then include a range from moderate to a great amount. Remember, contrapositives are not oppositions but rather contradictions. You opposed little with a lot. That's like going from hot to cold. Whereas, you are supposed to negate it by saying not hot.

@ thanks a lot for the responses. So, I'm assuming the categories the schools provide on the personal statement (i.e equity, work, academic life,etc) are just suggestions? I could, in fact, talk about a moment in my life that sparked my interest for law? I'm just worried that if I don't mention volunteering or work experience that they might look negatively at my application, not too sure how the personal statement works though.

Thank you both for the quick replies!

@ Thanks, got that corrected now :)

Thank you @ , very good and detailed response to help understand the rule in an intuitive way. I thought of it in this way as well when doing the question, but it ended up colliding with my previous knowledge about how to contrapose these statements. In this case, can we not get the same practical understanding through using our lawgic rules for AND/OR statements? I ended up getting stuck for this reason, since much of our ability to solve LG is based on conditionals and lawgic...If we can't get this right through strictly lawgic, then its kind of an eye-opener for me.. Will have to remind myself not to solely rely on lawgic

@ said:

Please confirm "Beads and Gold" and "Homophones" as questions if you did NOT have experimental LR.

Did not have experimental LR; the beads and gold, and the homophones question was from the real LR section(s).

Don't know how much time you have to play around with, but the first thing I'd do is focus on improving into my ideal score range, rather than working towards an established date. If you're forced on time, then writing in December will probably be best. Work very hard NOW, don't waste any time.

References are pretty easy to deal with, just get trustworthy people to do them for you. I told two profs, and one of them sent his letter in within like 3 days of asking. The personal statement you can work on for like 2 hours Saturday and Sunday or something, typing it up usually isn't too hard. Just be genuine with what you're writing. I'm from Canada, so our personal statements aren't much like American ones...But yeah, what should take more time than writing the personal statement is the editing process and making it all nice and tidy. LSAT studying should be prioritized... especiallyif you're doing school or work at the same time, don't let the LSAT work slide to the back of your priority list. December is crawling up on us rather quickly. But I can understand where you're coming from, it gets extremely hard to juggle everything, especially when school or work is added into the mix. Just do things step by step, don't worry yourself too much about the bigger picture. Talked to profs for references? Good move onto personal statement. Got a rough draft for it last weekend, good edit a little bit and then do LSAT work, etc. Make a schedule that works for you.

I'm from Canada and our conversion tables are very different for calculating the cumulative GPA. My Canadian cumulative gpa is a 3.83/4, but when I convert it according to the LSAC chart I get 3.996. Is this out of a 4.33 system (so 3.99/4.33) or a 4? Just trying to understand how my GPA is much higher in the US. The only decent explanation I have that may have helped me out a lot (if it is out of 4) is that I had something like 20 A+'s on my record, and the 4.33 conversions for A+'s helps tremendously because of that.

Testing my knowledge (correct me if im wrong)

~ L -> (EW & D) can also be split since it's an "and " in the necessary condition. In this case it would be ~L -> EW and ~L -> D, same can be done for the other version too, I think. Can someone confirm this for me? (im also trying to learn)

I wouldn't have bothered taking it again if I scored a 173 lol. To each their own I suppose. I think it'd be worse to have a cancel - 173 - lower LSAT than a cancel - 173 - cancel.