Through the BR process, I've noticed that I can attribute 1-2 missed questions per LR section to "misreading" the stimulus. It seems that I am prone to skip an important adjective that clarifies the correct AC. Most of the time, I approach the AC's with a good understanding of the argument/facts, but for the few questions that hinge on these small clarifiers, I often get burned.

When I read the stimulus, I typically follow the end of each line with my pencil. I've noticed in JY's live commentary videos, he tracks literally every word with his pencil. Does anyone have a method of reading (specifically in terms of pencil usage) that they feel allows them to capture even small details? Do you think I would benefit from switching to this more methodical approach? Thanks in advance!

Recently, I've been PTing around 164 -167, and my goal for the June test is 170+. LR continues to be my weakest section, and I am remarkably consistent in missing around 5 questions per section. I BR and study the question types I miss after each PT, but I am not finding any patterns in the types of questions I miss. I feel like once I study and master one concept, I miss a question for a question type I previously thought I understood. In my blind review, I am generally able to score -1 or -2 per section.

Any ideas on how to study since I can't exactly pin down one question type as problematic?

Hi 7sagers... I've noticed that in my recent PT's I have finished the LR sections with approximately 5 - 7 minutes left at which time I will go back to the questions I circled because I was not completely confident with my answer. When I go back through the section to these questions, I get worried about time and tend to spend no more than 45 seconds on them before usually confirming my first answer and going on to the next circled one. I am missing an average of 5 questions per LR section and mostly on these circled (curve breaker) questions.

How do you approach your second time through a section? Would it be better for me to hone in on 2 or 3 circled questions and absolutely get them right at the expense of not double checking all of the circled questions? Any light you can shed would be greatly appreciated.

Hello friends. So now that the LSAT is behind me, I'm starting to think ahead to all things admissions. I'm hoping to have scored well enough to give HYC a shot (nothing against Stanford in particular; I just don't want to live in CA). As I'm sure many of you are familiar, Yale requires the infamous "Yale 250" essay. I've read through the Yale 250 part of the CC, but I still have a few questions about it.

Is it always best to tell a story or would more of an abstract argument do, so long as it is not too political in nature?

Does third vs. first person perspective matter much? Is one preferred?

I've published a paper in a philosophy journal... Would it be an okay idea to pick out an approximately 250 word section of that paper and format it more specifically to the Yale 250 requirements? Or should I start from scratch with a new topic idea?

Any comments are welcomed!

I've been thinking about where I want to apply in a few months and if I want to apply early decision to any school. I'm from the midwest and I'd like to stay here at a top 20 school with more of a national reputation; I'd eventually like to work for the federal government or in the AG office of a state government. My top choices are Chicago U, Northwestern, Wash U STL, and Notre Dame.

Wash U and Northwestern both offer full rides if you apply and are admitted early decision, which makes those schools look extra tempting. My question is this. Wash U promises a two week turnaround for a decision from the time you apply. If I were to apply to Wash U early on and receive either a rejection or a note saying I'll be considered with the general applicants, would I then be allowed to apply early decision at Northwestern? Or any other school in any order for that matter?

My gut would say "no" based on the early decision agreement most schools make you sign, but I figured I'd confirm that. I'd appreciate if anyone could help me out!

I just hit 170 for the first time on a PT and wanted to give a quick little word of motivation for everyone who is going to take the June test. You can do this thing! I didn't think 170 was possible, but if you stick to the BR method, keep up to date on the forum, and occasionally study on a Friday night (me right now...) it is possible! So pumped right now. Thanks to all the sages and mentors for your awesome advice via the forum. 37 days until game day!

Hello 7 Sagers - I'm in the post-CC stage preparing for the June '17 test, and I'm almost averaging my goal BR score, which is encouraging. I have a question about anticipating the correct AC in the LR section. For which question types should we be doing this? I know strengthen/weaken can bring in outside information to affect the amount of support, but should we try to guess the answer for all other question types before moving to the AC's? Thanks in advance!