In last May, I got a meningitis during final exam/paper period, so I couldn't work well on my final research papers in two classes.

For those two classes, I received B and B- while all other grades in my transcript are mostly in A range with a couple B+.

I don't want to get an unnecessary negative attention because these grades are not terribly bad, but I am bit worried because one of them are a senior capstone research course.

So I just want to hear about your opinions. If I need to write, I will make it just one short paragraph.

Hello!

For almost every summer, I have worked as an instructor at private education organization in my country, teaching SAT, essay writing in English, AP courses, etc.

The primary reason was to earn some part of my tuition and living expenses, though I genuinely enjoyed teaching students.

Should I put this work experience on my resume?

I am not sure how law school sees such "private" tutoring.

For September exam, which was my third shot, I ended up getting 173.

This is still high score, but I am still wondering whether smudges for 2-3 questions in my answer sheet affected my score or not.

During the exam, I found I had marking mistakes and corrected for some questions. I erased as cleanly as possible but some gray marks were still noticeably visible.

The problem is that I took the exam in Asia, which is a nondisclosed exam, so I cannot check whether the machine correctly marked my answer or not.

What do you think guys? Should I apply for handscoring? I don't want to waste my money but since higher score with 2 or 3 points will give me much better chances of scholarships so honestly I am leaning toward handscoring... Is there anyone who was or is in similar circumstances?

I got this question right first but after BR when I just solved it with my logical intuition, but I got wrong since I made some logical diagram for the question.

Please clarify whether I had any error.

"Their new shows are all police dramas" : NS -> PD

(C) None of the shows that W&W produced last year that were not canceled were police dramas: /C(NSL) -> /PD = PD -> C(NSL) (It means every police drama that W&W created last year was cancelled

So if (C) is true, doesn't it help the premise (NS->PD) to create conclusion that most of new shows will be cancelled ( NS -m-> C) as it creates ( NS -> PD -> C(NSL) )? In other words, every police drama that W&W created last year was cancelled and new shows for this year is all police dramas, so it is highly likely most of new shows this year will be cancelled.

I think it would not be good to solve this question in this way but still logical appeal of (C) confuses me.

Please help me to understand it.

Thanks!

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-76-section-2-question-25/

Hello!

I was confused between (B) and (C).

I thought the basic structure of argument in passage A is that since something has a bad assumption, so it doesn't work and thus must not be used.

I understand (C) is a good answer choice, but I wonder how (B) is different from (C).

It seems economic models, which presume rationality of actors, have indeed a bad assumption, so it must not be used to predict human behavior.

I would appreciate if you clarify difference between (B) and (C) and explain me why (C) is better than (B).

Thanks!

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-74-section-3-passage-3-passage/

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-74-section-3-passage-3-questions/

I chose (A) because I thought verbal explanations of those medical experts are not effective enough for judges and jurors to understand such testimony, which is explained at the end of the final paragraph, and "appreciation of the difficulty involved in explaining medical data" is explained in line 57-59.

(C) also looked a good choice, but I couldn't find the exact moment of "acceptance of accuracy of such testimony" in the passage.

Could you clarify why could (C) be better answer choice than (A)?

Thank you!

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-62-section-1-passage-2-questions/

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-56-section-3-question-21

I understand Jon's explanation on this question, but I was tricked by the question's word choice "revival" in the answer choice (D).

Doesn't "revival" imply that the ballroom dancing had been once popular before?

The passage doesn't mention anything about this.

Probably, I was too nitpicking, but could you clarify this?

Thanks!

Hi!

Though I watched JY's video explanation on this question,

I cannot still figure out what is a significant difference between an answer choice (A) and (C).

I thought "cultural relationships" in (A) can entail the meaning of how much external cultural influences affect the lives of people.

Could you explain these two answer choices further?

Thanks!

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-51-section-2-passage-3-passage/

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-51-section-2-passage-3-questions/

I took my first LSAT exam in Hong Kong (the test was different from US tests) today and got panicked in the first section since the last game was EXTREMELY hard.

I found that it was experimental afterward, but at that time I was so panicked and hardly focus on the next LR section in early questions.

Thankfully I could manage myself to become a usual pace as time passes, but due to initial panic I was running out of time in the LR section (2nd section).

The 4th section was LG again. It was very difficult (although not insanely hard as the first experimental one) and I made some silly unusal mistakes in the first two easy games so couldn't have enough time at the last game and made a random guess for four to five questions.

Since I usually kill LG section (I got all questions right nine out of ten and got wrong at most two), this unexpected situations in LG screwed up my exam.

Unfortunately I did only a few full time tests as practice and I think this was a big problem for me.

Well, at least I learned lots of lessons from my first exam and now know what I should do for my second lsat exam in February.

So I just need advice for score cancellation.

I am ultimately targeting 176+ and I have solved about 20 PTs and for recent 10 PTs my scores have been from 172 to 177.

For this October exam, I was targeting 170+.

But since I did very bad in LG, which I usually kill, and panicked in one LR section, my expectation for the score is mid to late 160s .(can be worse if my panic was worse than I am thinking now...)

In this situation, I am feeling it might be better to cancel the score since it is definitely not reaching my target score.

Can you guys give me some advice on this? Would there by any drawbacks in canceling score?

Also, just curious, is LG getting more difficult in very recent exams?

I just wonder I failed it because I wasn't in usual pace or just LG is getting way harder.

I couldn't solve PTs from 71, but for PTs in 50s and 60s I feel the difficulty level was lower than the actual exam.

I'm getting better on timing LRs, but still struggling for timing RC.

I solved PT 60 today and left 4 questions at the end in RC although I got all questions right after blind review.

I often run out of time in RC, remaining one to four questions untouched.

It gets worse if I feel nervous and get panicked.

I think it might be primarily because I'm not a native English speaker so sometimes it takes me time to understand very complex sentences or get nuances of some words.

But I would really appreciate if you provide some tips on timing RC.

Thanks!!

Hi, I understand why the answer choice (D) is correct, but I have a question on (B).

The stimulus states that since "faculty salaries constitute a small part of the university's expenditure," the administration's explanation is not believable.

So I thought even though faculty salaries constitute a small part of expenditure, if they "significantly" increased after the tuition increase, the faculty's explanation can make sense, so this can be weakening argument.

To counter this weakening argument, I thought (B) can be suggested that increase in faculty salaries is only 5% which is lower than general increase in tuition. This is why I thought (B) can be strengthening argument which can fight back against possible weakening argument.

Probably I thought too complicated in this low number question (supposed to be not this tricky).

But could you explain further why (D) is better answer choice than (B)?

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-41-section-1-question-09/

Hi, while solving MSS questions, I often confront the situation in which whether I should use logical translation or not.

For example, in this question,

as the passage states "technological improvements will enable food production to increase as population increase," I translate it to TI --> FPI.

Then, according to the statement "increases in food production will be negligible unless societies become more centralized..." I translate it into FPI --> SC.

Thus, I got TI --> FPI --> SC.

This is why I chose the answer choice (E) which I thought as TI --> SC.

Perhaps this type of logical translation might not be appropriate for this question, so could you point out what was a problem in my reasoning and further explain when is the time I should use logical translation or not?

Thanks!

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-21-section-2-question-13/

I wonder whether this is really necessary assumption question.

Isn't this most strongly supported question or anything else?

There's no clear conclusion in the stimulus and although I negate (D) I am not sure if I can entirely wreck the argument.

I got this question right, but just wonder whether this question is properly categorized.

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-18-section-2-question-04/

I got this question right, but not perfectly clear why (D) is correct.

Could you elaborate the answer choice (D) - why is it a clear-cut answer?

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-33-section-3-question-08/

In JY's lecture, for the group 3 logical indicators such as "without", he mentions that we should negate any idea and make it as the sufficient condition. So for this question, I first negate "doing research of their own" and make it as a sufficient condition; that is, translate it into /R -most-> PISM, which was why I got wrong on this question.

But JY translate it into PISM -most-> /R. So I want to clarify whether this translation rule for logical indicators does not apply to "most" or "some" relationship.

Thanks!

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-18-section-4-question-14/

At first, I thought the answer might be (D) since before I saw the answer choices I noticed that there is a problem in assuming that atmospheric ozone levels are equal in every global region. So I expected that the answer must be something like the ozone levels are getting higher in polar region and lower in other regions so that global ozone levels are remaining constant.

However, the answer choice (D) is exactly opposite to my expectation, saying that ozone levels are increasing in other regions and decreasing in polar region. But can this undermine the government official's dismiss on the concern that "polar" marine life is damaged? If ozone level in polar region is decreasing since quantity of ozone is shifting away from the polar cap (as (D) says), there would be no harm to polar marine life.

Or did I wrongly catch the argument of the government officials? Is the argument of the gov't official simply that protective ozone layer over the Antarctic is not decreasing?

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-20-section-1-question-06/

I understand why the answer (D) is correct, but not sure why the answer choice (C) is incorrect. Is it because the answer choice makes an assumption that natural nesting sites will be less crowded than the nesting boxes? I thought this can be a logical conclusion from the passage rather than just assumption. Please explain me why (D) is a better answer choice than (C).