I understand the diversity course gives socioeconomic + early respond ability which I have both. However, I am a white, straight male and have been told by pretty much everyone that I am not diverse and would have nothing to in that department. TLS for instance is universally negative, and to be honest most adcomms have given lukewarm responses at best. Is it better if I don't do it even if I think it would add to the diversity, or is it really just race/sexuality?

By the wrath of the old gods and the new, they actually did it. Little did I expect when I woke up yesterday to be most psychologically traumatized not by Reading Comp or Logic Games, but by the blasted writing sample.

Using the writing sample to have us write about whether a brother of the Night's Watch should be allowed to renege on his vows -- a sick, treacherous ploy by those above us to erode our confidence in the protective blanket the Watch provides the realm.

Mark my words my brothers and sisters, there is a darkness in this world, more cold and tormenting than even the four-hour exam by the name of LSAT. Winter is coming, with or without the Watch. Without the brothers on the Wall, however, along with Winter so too will come an unending shadow, shrouding our hearts in unspeakable darkness.

To those who argued that oath-breakers should be forgiven (or, gods forbid, encouraged), may the Seven protect you from what is yet to come, and may I remind you of the words that each brother of the Watch swears, with both men and gods as his witness:

"Night gathers, and now my watch begins. It shall not end until my death. I shall take no wife, hold no lands, father no children, discuss any specifics about the June 2017 LSAT. I shall wear no digital watches and win no glory. I shall live and die at my post. I am the #2 non-mechanical pencil in the darkness. I am the watcher on the walls. I am the shield that guards the realms of men. I pledge my life and honor to the Night's Watch, for this exam and all the exams to come."

Did you argue against the Watch? I welcome any traitors to out themselves below.

The efficiency last week was awesome. I think the google form worked greatly to streamline the process and cut down on wasted time contemplating which questions to cover. The only thing I'd like to see improve is the number of people who are actually contributing on the calls. I just want to remind you all that at some point these will stop being public and the open door policy will cease to exist. If you want to stick around you have to contribute and pull your own weight. There has been 4-7 (regular) individuals talking so far and 15+ on the call. If you vote for a question for review, I want you available to discuss it.

Question review form : https://zach191.typeform.com/to/tHraGa

Also worth noting - I am including the experimental section in the poll. We will review the experimental section at the end of the call if anyone wishes to stick around for it.

###Test Details:

PT: 51

Experimental Section: RC from PT56

(I recommend inserting the experimental in between sections 2 and 3, or 3 and 4)

Date: Sunday, June 18th

Time: 7:00pm Eastern / 6:00pm Central / 4:00pm Pacific

For our full PT schedule please see the following link : https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1NqvbW4p83dpFmihrUOeWf6Dx8ETo25rLE1q1nPzOrpg/edit?usp=sharing

Notes:

###GoToMeeting Details:

September '17 Sunday Study Group

Please join my meeting from your computer, tablet or smartphone.

https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/410064813

You can also dial in using your phone.

United States: +1 (872) 240-3311

Access Code: 410-064-813

First GoToMeeting? Try a test session: https://care.citrixonline.com/g2m/getready

So i am 13 PTs into foolproofing and i am noticing that i am solid with sequencing but i am having a hard time with grouping games, both in out and multiple groups. So i was considering drilling those extensively and then going back to drilling chronologically. I was wondering if anyone would be so kind as to make a list of specifically fundamental in out and grouping games that they found to help them nail down the methodology and send it my way. Thanks in advance

Hey guys! Here's the official June LSAT Discussion Thread. Please keep all discussions of the June 2017 LSAT here!

Here's some ground rules, taken from my usual sticky:

We know that everyone will be excited to discuss what was on the June '17 LSAT, but mentioning specifics about the test (e.g., "I got B for question 6" or "the 3rd LG was sequencing") can get both us and you in a lot of trouble with LSAC. Saying that the test was hard/easy without going into detail is okay, but anything more specific is not okay. LSAC monitors this forum.

If you're unsure what may be too specific, feel free to PM me with what you'd like to post.

The only exception is you can say which sections were real or experimental. For example, the LG with "flowers" was experimental. That's okay.

TL;DR: PLEASE don't talk specifics about June's LSAT!

Here's where you can see the current Real/Experimental Sections:

https://classic.7sage.com/discussion/#/discussion/11428/june-2017-lsat-real-experimental-sections-keywords

Have fun discussing!

I just took my third take yesterday and quite disappointed in my performance. I was pting within my goal of mid-160s. After my second take of 154, I decided to access my strengths and weaknesses and do drill sets accordingly. I fool proofed the LG Bundle, revisited the CC and drilled by question type with PTing and BRing once a week. However, I have this condition where my neck gets excessively tight and I just lose focus. I've had a spinal tap done and multiple ct scans but no diagnosis. This happens sporadically and unfortunately it happened Sunday morning and I just didn't want to take the test come Monday but I did anyways. I failed to pace myself, missed whole bunch of questions in LR, and missed a passage in the RC. LG was easy but I could have finished in half the time if my neck didn't tighten up. I even forgot to reset my watch on two sections. I don't think I'm eligible for accommodations nor do I even want them but would a fourth try be even worth the attached stigma.

Hi all!

So I need some clarifications...! Please help!

Contrapositive for "some" doesn't exist because it's reversible.

A (-s-) /B (Some A are not B) = /B (-s-)A (Some not B are A)

Right?

Then why do we have contrapositive for "if and only if" even though it's reversible? A (-) B = /A (-) /B

I know that A (-) B = A -> B + B -> A, so the contrapositive has to be /B -> /A + /A -> /B.

So my questions are as follows:

(1) Since the reasoning proves that contrapositive exists, does that mean that "Contrapositive for "some" doesn't exist because it's reversible" is wrong?

(2) When I am taking the contrapositive A (-) B (= A -> B AND B -> A), I say /A (-) /B because /B -> /A AND /A -> /B. In this case, why don't I change And to Or? I know I did the contrapositive, but I am starting to get confused...!

Thank you so much in advance!!!

Hey guys!

I'm finding that I'm still having trouble really intuitively knowing when my job in Parallel Method of Reasoning q's is to mirror the lawgic/structure of the argument, and when we're being asked to carry that train of thought/conclusion/principle into the answer choices (please don't say it's always about structure; maybe I'm not articulating what I mean correctly, but it's defintily 100% the case (after watching many many of JY's videos) that we're asked to carry the salient claim/reasoning into our selection of answer choice. (Ie. PT17.s2.q24 from Problem Set 3; or PT28.s3.q26 also from set 3).

The second q stem reads "which one of the following arguments is most similar in it's reasoning to the argument above?" Both answer choices seem to emphasize an especially strong match with part of the argument, not just a simple structural match...but the stems don't really do all that much to tell us that.

But after going through the practice sets in the curriculum, I can't seem to accurately/quickly distinguish whether paralleling the pattern of reasoning will refer to finding a parallel conclusion, or more broadly, overall parallel structure.

So sorry if this post sounds beyond confusing--I realize my attempt to articulate my struggle isn't great--but I'm just a little surprised that (if this issue really does exist, and I'm not just creating problems....happens) that it's not distinguished/discussed in the curriculum "as a thing".

N.

Hey, guys! I'm starting to work on my app process and I wondering if I should or how to write a DS? I was recently diagnosed with a cognitive disability. I haven't been in school since 07 so I haven't really had to deal with it in a learning setting but def at work and everyday situations. I also didn't have the issue until after I completed undergrad. Can or how can I write a DS statement if I haven't had to deal with the issue in a learning setting? Or, am I not looking at it the right way? Also, do you think that DS around learning disabilities hint that the writer may have received accommodations? I know we don't really know, but do you think this would help or hurt? Any suggestions are welcomed! TIA

First off....kudos to everyone who took yesterday's exam!!!! I was right there in the hick of it with you all! My question is not regarding the actual exam, but a complaint about the eating site. I have researched and I see that two options are given usually. They usually let you retake for free (I doubt I would need to do that) or they allow you to release your score with an addendum. Does anyone know if you can know what your score is and decide what you want to do beforehand or will they just make you choose the options without knowing your score?

Thanks,

~M

Did this RC section seem exceptionally hard to anyone else besides me?

Hey everyone!

I just got through the CC and am moving on to fool proofing the games. I am hoping to foolproof about 3-4 games per day depending on difficulty using the @pacifico method. As of right now, I am sorting the LG's into a binder and was wondering how you ended up sorting it. I'm conflicted on whether or not to sort them chronologically and foolproof them in that order; or if I should sort them by category/difficulty in order to cement in pattern recognition.

What do you guys think?

Hi everyone, as a person who doesn't speak English as a mother tongue, I would like to ask one very basic question of how to interpret certain sentence(I think it is a grammar question..)

"The colonials and the English had differing interpretations of the language and institutional structures that they shared"

In this case, it seems to me that it could be interpreted in two different ways

Is the only solution to look at the context to understand in right manner? or is there a rule to understand this kind of sentence structure?

Thanks in advance!

I've been working through the Cambridge LR Flaw pkg and I've noticed that a good amount of the correct AC are E. Now before anyone jumps, I wouldn't go as far as to say choose E when in doubt on the question type. There are 284 questions in the pkg and E has been the correct AC enough for me to notice. Pretty useless info here but if I remember I'll give an exact number when I'm done. I believe the questions are from PT 1-38. I wonder if they say something like, "we'll go with E for flaws, C for MSS, A for MBT..." when determining which letter to select for the AC?? Again, this is pretty useless info and why did I hone in on it anyway?? Leave it up to me to be extra! LOL :)

Hey everyone, I have some idea about this topic but I was wondering what others think about this, and if anyone else had other insights or can help.

Since I graduated from my transfer school I technically graduated with two GPA's, one from my community college and one from my University. I graduated from a top university in California and was wondering how the admissions offices view my GPA as a whole.

Do they JUST look at my cumulative GPA cold? As in they just look at that and nothing else?

or

Do they consider also my last two years at the University that I graduated from?

My cumulative GPA is: 3.62

My last two years at my University I graduated from is: 3.75

I am a little unsure about how they read transfer GPA's.

Maybe other transfers can post similar stories and can get answers as well.

Thanks.

I took the LSAT yesterday at the University of Delaware. They had us sit in an auditorium, and the only desk space we had were those small side desks that you often find at the side of auditorium seats. There was not enough space to even lay out the entire test booklet, let alone the the answer sheet. You would think that LSAC would ensure that testing centers are adequate for test takers. These testing conditions were particularly difficult for the LG section, which requires a lot of writing in the test book, and looking back to another page, where the main diagram is.

Sat for the exam yesterday. It went pretty well, but you never know with these things. Do people generally register for the September exam and then just withdraw if they get the score they were aiming for? Will the testing centers probably fill up by the time we get our scores back? If I sign up now and then withdraw, do I get a refund / will it show up on my LSAC report?

Thanks!

Hi,

For me, the toughest part of the test has always been not letting my brain get tired from analyzing minutia and subtleties over and over... and over and over. I scored best on PTs when an LG section broke up LR and RC. I kind of think of LG as a "break" or a mental energy boost. Yesterday the LSAT hit some of us with LR, RC, LR right out of the gate. I was fine with the first LR (experimental :/) and the RC, but mentally gassed by LR #2. So, my question: Does the LSAC take section order into account when standardizing? Like, if the average score for takers who had the above order is 4 questions less than those with a different experimental section, is that considered? In a test where mental stamina is potentially the most important factor, not doing so would strike me as a little unfair.

Thanks!

Taylor

I had a question about phase 2 of the memory method.

The following was stated, "The second phase of the memory method is exactly the same as the first, with one exception: you only spend 30 seconds on step two (Check Your Memory). Do this 6-8 times".

Is phase 2 done with the same passage or different ones? Also, i'm assuming phase 2 happens when we become comfortable with phase 1? Can someone provide more insight on this?

Thank you :)

How did people find this section? It seemed pretty smooth but not enough to compensate from the hardest RC ever

Hey y'all

I'm going to retake in September, and for the last two weeks I've been chipping away at Logic games from PT 1-15. However, I've seen marginal, if any, improvements. When I foolproof them, I can get perfect on the entire section with 10 minutes left, but the moment I see a fresh set I go -6 to -9. I planned on spending a total of a month straight on LG, but my patience and determination is waivering.

Now that I've given you background, please read my questions: 1. Any particular LG sets you think will help me for the most recent tests? 2. Should I go back and do the LG portion of the CC? (haven't done it since last summer) 3. How to maximize what I learn from the Fool Proof Method (i.e. what questions do you ask yourself/what do you observe about the LG set)

Thank you

Hey all,

Wondering if you might have some opinions about this: I'm ideally looking to apply to schools in October, right after taking the September exam, and need to give my recommenders enough time to write their letters, which means asking them no later than, I'd say, mid-July. I'm fairly confident that I can raise my score to my goal number by September, but also don't want to risk asking for letters now and realize in August that I want more time to study. How would you say I handle this? One of my three recommenders offered to provide a recommendation first, so that's out of the way, but the other two are still up in the air.

Thanks!

Hi everyone,

I plan on fool proofing LG using the typical method of using the PT 1-35 bundle. I was just wondering what are people's thoughts on fool proofing LG by type versus just going through the bundle from PT 1 to 35 in order. I read the Pacifico guide and he states that one shouldn't record the type of game one attempts, which makes sense to me, since we don't have that luxury during real test conditions. However, I have since read some other guides by people who have done really well on LG, and they recommend drilling by LG type (I guess to really drill the strategies for each type) So I am now having second thoughts!

So, I guess I'd just like some input from the high LG scorers out there, what are the pros and cons of fool proofing by type/not, and what method do you think is more useful for a beginner?

Thanks!

Cross posted with r/lsat

While prepping, how many full timed PTs did you take? I have access to 1-80+ (but am using 1-35 for drilling/fool proofing). I'm very overwhelmed by the prospect of doing 45+ PTs. That feels like... a lot. So how many did you do - do you feel you didn't do enough? Too much? Just right? If you have Ultimate+, did you utilize all of the PTs?

As of now I'm looking at doing 2-3 a week with blind review, starting in July. That would allow me to get through every single PT 36+. But damn that feels like a lot and wouldn't give me any more material if I decide to retake after Dec.

If I had three LR sections, one first, third, and last which one was the experimental section?