I live outside of the U.S., so the only test dates I have left this year are June and October. However, I am flying back to the U.S. in August to see my family and take the August LSAT.

On my practice exams, when it's time, I got a 154. When it was untimed but I tried to stay close to the recommended target time (though I still went over on some sections), I got a 158. With blind review, I got a 168. My goal LSAT score is between a 168-170.

I find myself getting really stressed by even the presence of the timer. I'm wondering if I should take the June LSAT to hopefully get some nerves out of my system and get a feel of the test and give myself the opportunity to take the LSAT up to three times this year. However, I'm not expecting to get near my target goal. Also, I will be testing at a test center for June if I take it.

Thoughts? :"")

Hi everyone! I’ve been on the self-study live plan for about 8 weeks now, and I’m currently in week 8 of 11 of the foundations phase. I actually started studying back in January 2026 on my own, then joined 7Sage in February.

I feel like I’m improving, but I haven’t had a clear checkpoint yet to see how I compare to my initial diagnostic, which is making me a little unsure about where I stand. When do you all usually start taking practice exams? Is that something the schedule will guide me into, or should I be starting on my own around this point?

Just want to make sure I’m on track and not falling behind, would really appreciate any advice!

It would be amazing if the questions could link to live class sections where that question was covered so we can see it in action and almost check to see if our thought process/approach was right.

Let me start by saying I LOVE the 7Sage WAJ template. I however found it more helpful to keep track using an excel. I find this helps me build Drills on days I'm feeling scattered so I can group by Question Types. Additionally, I can color code questions to revisit that I've learned my mistakes, and ones that still need work. Including screenshot below!

Hi, wondering if I should retest and reapply or start school in the fall. Here are my stats

160 lsat, 3.86 ugpa, 4.0 masters in human rights gpa and currently working with crime victims. First gen student and urm.

I got waitlisted to BC, BU, Columbia, Northeastern, and Brooklyn

I have a scholarship that covers nearly all tuition at a T100 school and I’d like to go into public interest law. I feel like I could do better than this school but I’m not sure if I want to delay law school further. Any advice?

NEVER GIVE UP GUYS!!!!!!!!!! ROCK LEE MENTALITY!!!!!!! BE EVERYTHING YOU WANT TO BE!!!!!

So, I just signed up for the June LSAT... I was hesitant to do so because I felt like I've been seeing little improvement, but I decided I could take the test again in September if push came to shove. For context, I had a 164 diagnostic (it was timed and under real test conditions), and that was at the beginning of March. I have been pretty stagnant for my scaled score, and my raw score has stayed consistent or gone up by around 5. I know I have the potential to do it because on some timed sections I've been able to consistently score -1/-2 but recently, with finals, I've been stressed and my scores have declined.

I'm hoping now that that craziness is gone and I have all of May to study, I will see a lot of improvement, but does anyone have any tips? Is this realistic? I seem to be falling for trap answers when I get down to 2 choices and running out of time at the end of my tests.

Looking for a study group in Ottawa that can study at 6pm ET. Please join if available.

I've been wrestling with a few particularly tricky necessary assumption (NA) questions (PT116.S2.Q16 and PT127.S2.Q20) where I find myself quite unconvinced with the right answer. I won't spoil those qs in particular, but spending some time with them + re-reading a prepbook section on NA questions has gotten me to the following understanding:

Steps for NA assumption q (e.g. "which of the following must be assumed for the argument to hold"):

1. Identify the conclusion (C) and support (S).

2. Roughly identify the gap/weak point between C and S.

3. Go through each answer choice -- which one is required for the argument to hold?

More on step 3:

Step 3 is where I've gotten tripped up. A straightforward reading of "which one is required for the argument to hold?" = "If the assumption is false then the argument does not hold." i.e. negate the answer choice, and check if the argument is destroyed. I think this works the majority of the time but requires a little more nuance for some qs.

There are times where "if the assumption is false then the argument is severely weakened (but not destroyed)" seems to be the correct answer. (Another tricky nuance is that the assumption could be needed, not sufficient enough on its own to fill the gap in the argument and still be the correct answer).

What seems to never be the correct answer is an answer choice that goes beyond what is required.

The reason I find this confusing is that you could be faced with two ACs (and I contend PT116.S2.Q16 and PT127.S2.Q20 are examples of this) where neither of two answer choices seems to be strictly necessary, but the narrower one is correct.

Would appreciate any thoughts/pushback on this!!

Hi!

I am a first year teacher getting ready for the EOC exam and trying to study for the LSAT, my biggest problem is juggling work and my crippling self-doubt. I know I wanna take my test closer to August or September but I need help on just getting over myself and setting a real plan.

I've been using the Adaptive Drills a lot, but I was wondering if there could be another drilling feature to mimic the question difficulty order to match the real LSAT.

For example, on the current Adaptive drills, within a 10 Q set, a 5 star could be in the middle and the last 3 questions could be 1-2 stars. What if this other drilling feature could generate within a 10Q set 1-2 stars towards the beginning, mix of 3-5 stars from middle to the end, or a sequence that mimics the real LSAT?

Also, would it be possible to have a timer setting where on top of the current timing conditions (standard, 150%, 200%), you could choose to continue the clock, even if you run out of time? Let's say that you have a drill of 10Q that you want to do in 100%. You would click this additional time button on the drill generate page. When you are doing the drill, everything is the same until you finish the 100% timer. Once you hit 0:00, the clock starts counting back in red or another color and you have time to do finish the drill but in over time. Once you finish the drill and BR, you can see the timing you got in the 100% time and the extended time.

My reason for suggesting the timing feature is that sometimes I do a drill and don't get to finish the drill. I just run out of time. So, I see the question for the first time in BR, which means I don't really get to BR those missed questions. It would be great if you could have equal chances to BR on questions you answered and questions you missed in the selected timing.

Thanks 7sage Team!!

Hi all, how is everyone treating these few weeks between taking the LSAT and receiving the results. I don't want to totally stop studying so I try to do some drills - but I find it very hard to focus and want to study. But I don't want to lose momentum and get out of the groove.

Hi everyone! I’m wondering whether there is a way to adjust the balance of LR vs RC drills in the practice section of your study plan. Right now it gives me basically 3.5 days a week of LR and 1.5 of RC, but I’m pretty solid on LR and need more RC practice. Is there a way to customize your practice schedule to achieve a more even balance without ignoring my study plan and just doing drills outside of it? Would like to have them laid out for me automatically and be able to track how many I’ve done/have yet to do for the day/week. Thanks!

Hi, wondering if I should retest and reapply or start school in the fall. Here are my stats

160 lsat, 3.86 ugpa, 4.0 masters in human rights gpa and currently working with crime victims. First gen student and urm.

I got waitlisted to BC, BU, Columbia, Northeastern, and Brooklyn

I have a scholarship that covers nearly all tuition at a T100 school and I’d like to go into public interest law. I feel like I could do better than this school but I’m not sure if I want to delay law school further. Any advice?

Hey everyone,

I am currently six months pregnant and I have zero motivation or energy to study. I wanted to retake the LSAT in August but I will have a new born so that is not ideal for me. However, I do plan on taking it January 2027 so I can have the whole year to study. What can I do to study?

Also, are there any study groups in Raleigh, North Carolina? or anyone in NC that wants to be study buddy?

Has anyone see anyone score more than 176 here?

I'm just curious.

I'm an international student and my reading/writing sucks. The only reason I'd pursue a law degree is because I have immense interest in Philosophy (particularly Epistemology).

That being said, if anyone whose English wasn't "ready" enough to tackle LSAT, what was your strategy to supplement your LSAT study? Please shed some light on this poor thing.

So far, I've subscribed the Atlantic magazine and am thinking of subscribing to Economist as well.

What are you thoughts? I've always been looking into those high school must read classics like the "Call of the Wild"? as well as practical books like "How to Succeed in Big Law Firms"

Hi, I'm looking for someone who can help me write a personal statement. I want help brainstorming what to include, writing it in a way that is honest and makes me look like a good candidate for law school, and proofreading my personal statement.

Looking to form a an LSAT study group in the LA SO-CAL area with the goal of having both online and in person collobrations

I just scored a 172 on PT153.

I've heard the following claim (in one form or another) here, and elsewhere in LSAT discussions: vacuous truths are a quirk of conditional logic that makes for an interesting philosophical discussion, but aren't really important for the LSAT. I think this is a mistake, and it has gotten a bit under my bonnet, so I thought I would post about it.

First, what is a vacuous truth? Typically it's described as a universal conditional statement, which we would represent in LAWGIC as A -> B, where the sufficient condition is contradictory or impossible, making the necessary condition irrelevant to the truth of the conditional. If pigs fly on their own power, then I have a 180 on the LSAT might be an example. Pigs do not fly on their own power, so I can put whatever I want in the necessary condition and the conditional will still be true. We can also think of this in terms of set logic, given an empty set, A, we can make a true statement A -> whatever we would like, because there are no elements in A.

Why do I think this concept is important on the LSAT? First of all, I grant that one does not have to think in this way in order to get a good score (even a 180) on the LSAT. People can have strong intuitive reasoning capabilities, and so grasp that saying "if I had a million dollars, I'd buy you a fur coat" doesn't mean much if one doesn't have a million dollars. Nevertheless, if we're to take a formal and rigorous approach to conditional logic, I think it is CRUCIAL to examine the formal representation behind that intuition, a truth table, for example, where we can list out all the possible combinations of having a million dollars and buying a fur coat (but not a real fur coat, that's cruel). This may not be understood as vacuous, as I'm sure many of us here will go into big law and at some point have a million dollars, but in the domain of right now, for me at least, I do not have a million liquid in any account, so in the domain of here and now, right now, I could say whatever I want about what I would do if I had a million dollars and be under no obligation whatsoever. So, lets examine the different cases. HM is I have a million dollars, BC is buy you a fur coat.

HM. BC. HM -> BC.

T. T. T.

T. F. F.

F. T. T.

F. F. T.

The conditional is satisfied in any case where one does not have a cool million, and in those cases where one does, only when one buys the requisite coat. That's what a conditional MEANS, and one must understand that to properly deploy them. If we're operating in a scenario where the conditional must be true (say it's a premise in a MBT question), we're limited to three rows of that table (the ones where the conditional is true, rows 1, 3, and 4). This is where we get modus ponens (assert the sufficient, conclude the necessary), and modus tollens (deny the necessary, conclude the sufficient is false). One MUST understand that the truth value of the necessary is irrelevant if the sufficient is false in order to do well on the LSAT, either formally or intuitively. This is precisely the concept of a vacuous truth. In a restricted domain, where nothing can satisfy the sufficient condition, the necessary can be whatever we want. That's where "the oldest mistake in the book" comes from (confusing the necessary condition for the sufficient condition).

Conceptually, understanding the empty set satisfies any conditional comes into play very clearly as an illustration of that oldest mistake in the book, for example, in PT 159.S1.Q21, which I won't spoil here, but might recommend for anyone questioning the relevance of the strongest form of a vacuous truth. To be clear on the lesson, I think it is pretty legible to moderately well prepared students that the stimulus is a necessary for sufficient error. But when you go hunting for the answer, you're left scratching your head UNLESS you understand that the reason necessary for sufficient is an error is because the conditional is satisfied in cases where the sufficient condition is an empty set.

Hi there, I would like to call help for a quesiton finds me really confused. this is a RRE question:

"Recent investigations of earthquakes have turned up a previously unknown type of seismic shock, known as a displacement pulse, which is believed to be present in all earthquakes. Alarmingly, high-rise buildings are especially vulnerable to displacement pulses, according to computer models. Yet examination of high-rises within cities damaged by recent powerful earthquakes indicates little significant damage to these structures."

The correct answer is (B), which states that "Scientific predictions based on computer models often fail when tested in the field." My question is, isn't it attacking the truth of the phenomenon? If I change the answer choice to "It is very difficult to predict the impact of earthquake by computal model precisely.", would it still be the right answer choice?

One possible explanaiton I thought of is that B is denying the plausibility of the estimation instead of "the existence of the estimation". comparatively, D or other answer choices require more assumptions. Therefore B is the best answer. But this question is still perplexing. #help

To preface, I may just be very tired and dramatic right now.

I have been steadily studying the core curriculum for the last 5/6ish months with the hopes to finally make it through to the "Next Steps" tab after the on and off journey I've had with 7Sage since I started studying in early 2025. I was really excited to get to that tab and learn about the methods recommended to continue studying and prepare to actually take the test, but with 7 hours left of RC, its GONE!!! 😭 😫 😫

Did it move to a different area? Is it on another page of the site? Where can I find it? I was really looking forward to that, and I'd really like to still go through those modules as I begin to start drills & PTs!!

If anyone knows where I can find those modules, please let me know!

Hello, I have a C&F addendum ready and am looking for someone to give me an opinion on it.

Hi All,

I scored a 179 on my first official LSAT attempt, and I am looking to take on students who think they would benefit from tutoring. Over the full body of my practice tests, my median practice test score was 178 and I scored a 180 on 25% of attempts. I have extensive experience tutoring the SAT, math, economics, and physics, along with more recent informal experience with the LSAT.

If you feel as though you may benefit from my help, leave a comment below and I’ll DM you. I'd be happy to schedule an informal consultation before we schedule any sessions. The rate is $45/hour, as I currently am fairly available. If you have an LSAC fee waiver, I'd be willing to slightly adjust the rate downward. However, if this is your particular circumstance, I'd highly recommend paying for test prep software (like 7Sage/Lawhub) before paying for tutoring, as the former will get a much higher return on investment.

Happy studying!

Edit: Given the abundance of interest, I'm including a link to a scheduling and intake form here. Please fill the form out and comment/dm with any issues: https://tinyurl.com/intake-scheduling