Hey 7sagers,

Ive been experiencing the so-called (i named it haha) "first question panic" in my LR sections.

I happen to be very anxious and spending too much time on the first question, which is supposed to be among the easiest questions in the section. Yet I find the first questions difficult and it takes a couple of more questions until I calm down and find my pace.

Does this happen to anyone else, perhaps??

Should I skip the first question then come back? Hahah.. I wonder if that just transfers the burden of "first question panic" on the question that I choose as the substitute.

Thank you!

I know this has been asked before, but the list of tutors approved by 7sage is almost two years old. Is there an updated list or tutors from that list that are still active and have space for a student?

I'm having trouble understanding the logic behind this one. I feel like i'm missing something basic. Got it wrong during BR too :(

I sat for the December test last year and was ill-prepared for it. My prep leading up to that take was filled with most of the common errors laid out in the 7Sage curriculum. I'm now planning to sit for this December's test and while I still have lots of work to do, I wanted to share this one thing since it is probably the only reason my goal score of 170 is within reach.

Spend A LOT of timing mastering the fundamentals upfront. That is shared regularly in this community but only because it is so important. I did nothing but fundamentals (Lawgic, grammar, QT strategies, LG Foolproofing) from February of this year through July! Here is why this was so important to me:

High Score --> Mastery of Fundamentals

not(Mastery of Fundamentals --> High Score)

Now that I have been taking full timed PTs and timed sections, I realize just how intuitive all the material has to become in order to be applied consistently when the clock is ticking. It is really difficult to perform at your peak for each section of a PT and then to do that consistently enough that you are confident you'll do it on D-Day. There is so much that I've had to learn beyond fundamentals like skipping strategies, comparative RC strategies, POE strategies, endurance, and durable composure. I tried to learn these things concurrently with the fundamentals last year and it resulted in a unideal score because I wound up learning neither. Even learning those "extras" now when I have a pretty good handle on fundamentals is difficult.

This is probably most useful to those who are just beginning or those who are debating whether or not to delay their take. I hope some of you find some use in this and will learn from my mistakes. Best of luck!

I'm taking the Sept test and am looking for suggestions of hard/weird games to drill with over the next week (don't worry, I've been studying for the past year so it's not like I've just now decided to take games seriously :) ). I just know that games have become a bit more unconventional in the more recent tests, and I want to practice these types of games to get my brain in the right mode before test day.

So, any recommendations for hard/weird games that have similar properties to the hard/weird games we may expect on the Sept test?

Thanks and happy studying :)

A great grouping game with conditional logic, but I am having some trouble...

I am having trouble understanding how to link up the new condition in this question. I understand what JY is saying in the explanation video and it makes sense but I have no idea how I can apply that in future questions that are similar.

With the new condition I cannot help but see H -> /S -> J .... "contraposed" as /J -> S -> /H. I don't see how the /S -> J relationship changes, I am trying so hard. Any advice?

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-33-section-4-game-2/

What skipping strategies have worked for people out there (especially for LR)? I haven't found something that really works for me yet, and while I usually finish sections, I don't find myself with much (or any) spare time. At this point, I skip the Parallel Flaw questions when they're past #15 or so, but that's really the only thing I stick to. I am able to move on from a hard one after 2 minutes or so, but I'm having a really hard time getting past the mentality of "just a couple more seconds and I can get it" and "I've already put this much time in, it doesn't make sense for me to leave it now."

What do other people do?

I'm struggling with Reading Comp.. pretty badly. I miss like a total of 10 questions on my Reading Comp sections... that is not good.

Has anybody here ever struggled with Reading Comp but found a technique/way that helped you perform really well on Reading Comp now?

I always summarize each paragraph, underline/circle key words and try to understand how all the paragraphs are connected/related after I finish reading a passage. However, I still keep missing like 8-10 question. But I'll usually get down to 2 answer choices (wrong answer choice and correct answer choice), but I'll often times end up choosing the wrong answer choice! Augh.

Timing is also a problem for me. I take about 3-4 minutes reading and analyzing the passages and I Feel like I'm not spending enough time on the questions. I feel rushed and when I see that I only have about 10 minutes left to do my last passage, I start panicking.

Please help. I feel like if I can just do better on my RC section, I'll be able to reach the score that I want.

If you have ever struggled with the RC section in the past, but you've now found a way to do well on it, please teach me your ways!

Hi everyone,

I am really not sure how to relay my situation but I'll try my best. I am sorry in advanced if it seems all over the place. So here is a general background (can I even call it that)? of my situation: I was fortunate enough to be able to spend extensive time studying for the LSAT since last summer 2016. I should have used my time WISELY. Instead, I continued to procrastinate and push back studying for the LSAT. I had a lot of time and because of this, I kept telling myself not to worry; however, the few days that I DID study for the LSAT (which was usually two or three times a week for about 30 mins to an hour) I did not put my full effort in either. I purchased the Powerscore LG and LR books and essentially rushed them for the past year. After finishing them this summer 2017, I began taking PTs untimed. My scores started to increase up to mid 160s untimed after a few. Similar to reading the Powerscore books (two or three times a week), I only did the untimed PTs once or twice a week with several breaks (yes, I know. Terrible). Throughout this period, however, I frequently consulted LSAT discussion boards such as this, TLS, and the reddit forum.

My current situation:

I am currently registered for the September 2017 test (which is about a week away now). I started taking my FIRST timed PTs for about a week now and my scores are continuing to stay in the low 150s. I also made the mistake of not thoroughly reviewing the PTs or using BR. I am pretty sure I will do just as poorly on the test next week as I have on the PTs I am taking. I am not really sure what to do... Do you recommend I start from learning the fundamentals properly? I was considering using the 7sage course to study for the LSAT. Even if I did bomb this September test next week I am signing up for December to retake it with much better study habits because I have learned (the hard way) that there really are no shortcuts to this test.

What I have been hoping for is my GPA (cGPA of 3.90) to compensate for the low LSAT score in this September test since I am applying this cycle and thinking I am a splitter. I am a Canadian applicant and have hopes of getting into either Osgoode or U of T. What are your thoughts/advice/opinions? I know my approach was really, really bad and I will likely get criticized for it but I chose to ask this question in the 7sage forum instead of TLS and the Reddit forum because having I find the help here to be much better and I feel the sense of community is much stronger here.

Thank you for taking the time to read my lengthy post. Apologies again!

Like, why is it called PrepTest C2? Why isn't it PrepTest 76 :(?! I'm confused.

Is there such a concept?. I have been at RC for a couple months and it still feels far more volatile than i am comfortable with.

Thoughts?

I am having trouble understanding why answer choice A is a necessary assumption. I eliminated this answer choice because of the word ANY. I think it may be due to how I negated this answer choice, focusing of the "quantity" and not on the word "work well."

The way I negated it was: A type of school system that works well in one country will NOT work well in SOME countries." Even if this was true, I don't believe that the argument would be wrecked, as a country could just defer to the next best possible choice of system.

However, if I were to negate focusing on "work well": A type of school system that works well in one country WILL NOT ALWAYS work well in any country. Were this to be true, I can clearly understand why the argument is wrecked.

How are we to go about negating such necessary assumptions? I thought negating "all" was to simply state "some are not." Is there a rule to when we are to negate quantity or note?

Thanks in advance!

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-54-section-4-question-03/

Does "nearly all" equate to most?

Spotted it in a parallel reasoning question!

Hello!

I really need some help understanding why my answer is incorrect. I believe my board follows all the rules but would love for a set of fresh eyes.

PT6.S4.G4.Q21--> correct answer is C but I chose D.

So I had my game board looking like this:

J ------ O

|

K ----- M -------L

Hi everyone,

I'd like to introduce our newest editors, Clare and Maura. They've actually been working on your behalf already, but I haven't gotten around to welcoming them yet.

Clare graduated summa cum laude from Yale, where she won two different prizes—one for academics and character, the other for writing. She went on to receive her MFA in fiction from NYU, and her writing has appeared around the web. She's so razor-sharp that I always wrap myself in kevlar before I talk to her, but then I feel like a chump, because she's so nice too, and generous, and kevlar is so hot in the summer.

Maura graduated from Harvard and, like Clare, earned her MFA in fiction from NYU. She's taught writing at USC and at NYU, where she won an award for teaching excellence four years in a row. Her novel BABY OF THE FAMILY will be published by Penguin Random House in March of 2019. Maura's pen is so hot that she often melts her journal. Fortunately, she does most of her editing on a computer.

I can't tell you how excited I am to have these two on the team. They've already blown me away with their perspicacity. I know they can help make your application sing.

Either my brain is fried or im thick as a rock bc i cannot put into words why C is correct.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-79-section-4-question-21/

I tend to do a full review rather than a blind review because I hate using test time to figure out whether I am convinced of my answer or not.

I know it's more time-taking when you're reviewing questions, but do you think it has similar benefits to blind review?

For those of you who found the RC difficult from the June '17 (PT 81) test and want more practice like that, you should check out PT 5's RC section. I thought it was structured in a really similar way to PT 81 with a similar distribution of difficult among the passages like PT 81.

Hi all,

For question 8, I confidently picked answer choice E and was stunned that this was correct. Upon looking into the explanation for this it seems that the line reference was at 47 to 48. While doing this timed, this was the exact line reference that I thought made answer choice E the correct answer (unsupported from the text).

Lines 47 to 48 state that : For drilling deeper wells, OBM is normally used.

I thought answer choice E was too strong as it states "required." Normally just states that it is more generally used, while required states a necessary condition. While a different mud recipe can be used (or may be more preferable) for deep oil wells to that of shallow oil wells, I thought "drilling deep oil wells REQUIRING the use of a different mud recipe than shallow wells" was too strong. Who is to say that there aren't other conditions for a specific deep oil well that makes the mud recipe for shallow wells more preferable for a specific case?

Thank you for your help in advance!

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-54-section-1-passage-2-passage/

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-54-section-1-passage-2-questions/

link to JY's explanation video: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-66-section-4-question-14/

Hey guys,

This is a PSA question that I'm having difficulty with. I can't seem to understand why A is not correct. What is it about the language here that fails to make this the contrapositive of the principle? I understood A to read: "A uni denies a grant application... because the math puzzle has no practical concerns. But isn't this exactly the contrapositive? Aren't we justifying the action "denying the application" (which equates to NOT promoting research, back in the principle's language) specifically because of the math puzzle's impracticality?

That being said, I clearly see that (E) is the correct answer. But during the PT, I was confident A was the contrapositive, chose it, and moved on without glancing at E. A hard lesson that I'll be learning from for sure.

Thanks!

For the last week, Ive been having a really hard time focusing on my PTs, my mind starts to wander after the first section and I want to take a day break or two but Im also nervous of doing that so close to the test date, does anyone have any advice on what I should do or any tips?

Thanks.

Would anyone be willing to walk me through this one? I just can't step back enough to see it clearly and feel certain I understand (and I don't have access to the explanation video). Thank you!

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-61-section-4-question-25/

I got the MP but I wanted to further analyze... Could someone review my thought process please? (This is a question in CC!)

Part of the stimulus: "But there is a positive role to be played even by these extremists for the social &political inertia that attends environmental issues is so stubborn that even small areas of progress can be made only if the populace fears environmental disaster..."

Does "only if" introduce necessary condition? Thus would the diagram be the following: Small areas of progress can be made --> populace fears environmental disaster (or the other way around...?)

Since it's a conditional statement, it's wrong for A to assert that "little progress that HAS BEEN MADE in improving the environment is mainly due to the fear created by radical environmentalists." We don't know in the stimulus if the progress has actually been made-- it just gives us a conditional. Is it safe to say that (A) requires you to assume something that we have no basis or support for?

Someone had commented, "(For the sake of practice) Notice the gap in the argument – author assumes that the radical environmentalists incite fear in the populace through false extremes (possibly about unlikely environmental disasters) and thereby, allows the possibility for small progress to occur (this is the positive role)." Is this correct? Could someone shed more light into this gap in the argument/ any other flaws?

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-34-section-2-question-18/

When discussing this passage during a BR call, I thought a certain meme would be appropriate, given the unusual insights of the psychologists. I visualized expanding mental horizons and became one with the universe:

http://imgur.com/a/KrCnA