Discussions

All posts

New post

630 posts in the last 30 days

Hey Everyone,

So I'm currently drilling NA question types through the Cambridge packet things. I'm looking at question 20 in section 1 of PT 36, and it says its an NA question type.

I got the right answer quite quickly, but for the life of me I can't seem to figure out how this isn't also a sufficient answer choice - something which has never happened to me before. What I mean by that is, answer choice E being true seems to be sufficient to make the argument true.

Core:

P1: Ensuring Justice in the legal system ---> Citizens capable of criticizing anyone involved in determining punishments

P2: Legal system's purpose is to deter ---> System falls into hands of experts whose specialty is to assess how potential lawbreakers are affected by the system's punishments

P3: Most citizens lack knowledge about such matters

C: Justice is therefore not ensured in the legal system

E) Citizens without knowledge about how the legal system's punishments affect potential lawbreakers are incapable of criticizing experts in that area

I JUST THOUGHT OF THIS: Is the reason why E isn't sufficient for the argument is because P1 never states the number of citizens who must be capable of criticizing lawmakers? P3 says MOST citizens, meaning some citizens do possess the knowledge necessary to criticize lawmakers, and therefore justice CAN be ensured in the legal system? The argument requires it to be necessary, if you didn't need to understand the affect of the legal system's punishments, then the conclusion is completely wrong. But with E being true, the conclusion can still be true - we just don't know if it has to be true.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-36-section-1-question-20/

0

I've often contemplated and discussed this with many on this forum and others like it.

We now are going to have over 85 PTs available to prep from and drill from. But at what point are we going to have to just say, "only PTs 52-81" are worth doing?" Will there ever come a time? It is unsustainable to keep just starting from tests from the 90s and going working towards the most recent tests.

I've studied a bit for the GMAT/GRE and it seems that the idea of going through 80 tests is insane. When you have more and more tests, it seems we get less and less out of each test because subconsciously we know that there are 79 more left.

There's also the idea of diminishing returns. So many of the games, logical reasoning questions, and RC passages follow such a similar format that doing so many tests may hurt us by not giving us the time to focus on and get every last drop of juice out of newer PTs.

Sometimes I wonder if I'd be better just focusing on PTs 52-61, 62-71, and 72-81 (when released)?

I get the argument that fool proofing and drilling older games is what will help with the newer stuff. However, I'm just playing devil's advocate by asking if this might not be the best approach going forward. Those who oppose this mentality will claim the logic hasn't changed, and that's true, but the newer tests have a different voice and style and perhaps our time may be better spent spending an increased amount of time on newer exams?

Edit: Again, just paying devil's advocate and I don't actually 100% believe this to be a valid solution to the over abundance of tests. Just starting a discussion.

4

So I took the December LSAT last year and scored a fabulous 143. I knew I wasn't ready, but couldn't bring myself to lose $190, so I tested anyway hoping to get lucky. Well, no luck came my way for obvious reasons. But after going through the curriculum I find myself scoring between 141-145 still. I dont know where I am going wrong. I take each PT under exam conditions, I circle the ones I am not sure of (which is about 15 or less questions a section) and when I am done testing, I go back to the test and reread the questions. I dont think I am rushing, I try to stay focused and engaged in the questions. But I am obviously doing something wrong. I thought I would be able to take the September test, but I know I am not ready. I am not concerned so much about that, as I am the fact I am not improving. Has anyone faced this problem? I am really getting frustrated because I seriously feel like I am doing everything the way we are supposed to but I am not getting any increases in scores. (BTW my highest BR score was a 151 and that happened exactly one time)

Any advice, tough love or people who have had similar experiences would be greatly appreciated.

0

Hey everyone,

I have just started to add RC into my prep. So far I have drilled about 4 RC sections without keeping a strict time clock (i.e., I give myself about 8-11 mins on each passage) and I typically get -1 to 0 on each full section.

My question is, should I keep drilling RC sections as my only way to learn RC? Or is it safer to use additional prep material (e.g., the LSAT trainer) before drilling sections further?

Any advice would be appreciated, thank you!

0

Hi all!

I want to start by saying thank you for welcoming me into this great 7Sage community. I just took the June LSAT, and after consistently PTing in the mid-160s in the weeks before the test, I scored a 161. I have decided to retake in September, because I am aspiring to get into law schools ranked #7-#25 ish, ideally with funding. I have a 4.0 GPA.

How would you recommend I approach the next 10 weeks? I took 18 PTs in prep for June and did extensive BR of them. I struggle with Reading Comp, typically missing 5-9 questions. And LR ranges too, missing 3-7 per section. LG are better, but one hard game has the potential to throw me.

Any advice?

0

I have just finished the core curriculum for Logical Reasoning, would it be better to continue with the core curriculum or start reading the LR Bible?

Option 1: 7sage LR --> LR Bible --> 7sage RC --> RC Bible --> 7sage LG --> LG Bible

Option 2: All of 7sage Core Curriculum --> All the Powerscore Bibles

5

To put it bluntly, my UG scores are below average - the LSAC will probably have a seizure looking at my transcripts. My transcripts will most likely have a ''Below Average'' evaluation.

I am from India - which has grading similar to UK. A 2:1(60%) is considered standard good marks while a 2:2 - ( 50 -59%) is considered death knell.

I have a 2:2.

I am certainly not expecting a T14.

So hypothetically if I manage a good LSAT score - 175+ I know that sounds a stretch.... will any T20 or T30 consider me? To what extent does LSAT scores mitigate a very low GPA?

If it helps - its been 4 years out of undergrad. I have had a great grad GPA ( wont help much), cracked a national level exam with great marks, and presently working as a lecturer.

Please help out guys.

0

Some of you might be like me out there and are unmarried, will be receiving no help from parents, and are fully self-funding. I'm expecting to take out loans to live on, but is anyone planning on working to help subsidize expenses? Even if it's only like ten hours per week? I know the ABA has rules about not working more than 20 hours per week, and some schools ban you from working your 1L year. I've tried to do some online research on the schools I'm interested in but can't seem to find their rules on working while in school (I plan on reaching out to their admissions' departments). Does anyone know if this ban is pretty common across schools?

During college I waited tables at a nice restaurant on Friday and Saturday nights and would usually make $300-$400 per weekend. Even this small amount could really help with expenses.

Just curious as to what everyone else's plans were?

0

Hi all!

So after taking the LSAT for the first time September 2016 and getting a 145 after 2 rounds of Kaplan programs I decided to take a year off to work and study and try again September 2017.

I got a paralegal position at a law firm in NYC which has kept me busy with work and a long commute. I thought I'd be able to study more often (on the train, after work, etc) but it is proving to be a struggle. I am about halfway through the core curriculum as of now (studying since March) with a diagnostic score of 147. Regarding background info, in undergrad I was on the Dean's list every semester and in multiple honors societies as well as having this new job that will provide me with almost a year and a half of experience come Fall 2018.

**More time would be nice obviously, but I worry about whether or not it will lower my chances as far as admissions to push the test back to December. My goal is 160, but seeing as I can't seem to break 150 I realize that might not be possible and wonder if the time will make enough of a difference in the strength of my application.

Any and all advice is welcome!

0

Hey Everyone,

It was great seeing all of you who were there yesterday. It was an absolute pleasure. Thank you :).

I hope going over conditional arguments and seeing how they work in different question types was helpful. This weekend, on Sunday, I will be going over the causation argument type.

The session yesterday gave me a couple of insights and I would like to change a few things about the next session. To get the most out of the next session I am assigning homework. It is of course up to you to complete it and I will not check if all of you do the assigned work. But how much you are able to get out of the session will depend on how much you know about causation argument type before hand.

So before joining in I recommend watching the following seven videos that are part of 7sage core curriculum:

https://classic.7sage.com/lesson/causation/

https://classic.7sage.com/lesson/causation-theory/?ss_completed_lesson=1207

https://classic.7sage.com/lesson/correlation/?ss_completed_lesson=1206

https://classic.7sage.com/lesson/correlation-ideas/?ss_completed_lesson=1205

https://classic.7sage.com/lesson/4-possible-explanations/?ss_completed_lesson=1204

https://classic.7sage.com/lesson/chronology/?ss_completed_lesson=1203

https://classic.7sage.com/lesson/causation-strategy/?ss_completed_lesson=1202

Each of these videos are about 5 minutes each - some even less than that so it shouldn't take that long.

For those of you who do not have 7sage core-curriculum please see if you can read up on causation argument as they are used in LSAT before coming into the session. This will give you the background knowledge necessary to see the pattern when we do go over the questions.

But just in case I will be going over the basics quickly at the start of the lesson. It just will not be as in depth as these videos.

I am still debating if I should release the questions I will be using for the upcoming session before the session. If I do, I will post it here before Sunday.

Let me know if there are any questions or thoughts in your comments below. I look forward to seeing all of you again (3(/p)

To join the session, please click on the link below at the specified date and time and I will see you there. : )

Free LR Tutoring (Sami)

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

https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/589887541

You can also dial in using your phone.

United States: +1 (646) 749-3112

Access Code: 589-887-541

Joining from a video-conferencing room or system?

Dial: 67.217.95.2##589887541

Cisco devices: 589887541@67.217.95.2

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

P.S.

I have not forgotten to post the information for the questions I used yesterday. I will do so soon in that post in a couple of days. : )

7

Hey all,

So I'm starting to feel convinced that at a certain point in prep, it's better to focus on later tests. That is, if you aren't going to prep test every test out there (who has time for that, not me), then I think you have to somewhat chose your best use of time. I've raised the question here before about taking a stab at a later test (I had done all tests from 37-50 diligently in a row), and I was mostly advised not to jump ahead to a later test.

I decided on my own to try a later test (I know, sorry :), mainly just because I really wanted to see how much more "difficult" or "different" the test was down the road than the ones I was doing. I saw a significant drop in my score when I took Prep Test 79. I gave myself some leeway for the fact that it was a big jump, but I'm also more convinced than ever that at this point I'm best focusing my last 2 months before I take the test on the late 60s and 70s tests. I say that because they seem more representative of what the test I take will actually look like, and I think it's essential I get used to the more subtle wording of phrases, convoluted referential phrasing, and weird logic games that are more common on the later tests.

I'm still open to any thoughts on this though. I just kind of don't see the point of working through every test in the 50s and using up the time I have left on tests that aren't as representative of the test I'll be facing. Does anyone have any good arguments to the contrary?

0

I know there are no contrapositive for some, and that contrapositive is just another way of stating the statement, so must be equivalent to the original statement.

.

Then I started to think that then "some" does have a contrapositive, since we can change the place of variables.

For example, if we have a statement that "Some A are B: A(-s-)B"

Then the contrapositive (the equivalent statement) would be "Some B are A: B(-s)A"

.

.

Do we say there is just another way to stating the original statement, but no contrapositive because there is no sign involved when creating an equivalent statement?

Then does that mean contrapositive requires statement to involve change of sign in terms of negativity or positivity?

.

.

I hope I am making sense! Thanks all (3(/p)

0

@"JYP JYP" @twssmith @danielznelson @"Daniel.Sieradzki" @"Cant Get Right" @"Alex Divine"

Are any study group leaders, mentors or sages interested in leading a session on LG in CC and PT's??? Since we'll be having sessions for LR and RC, it seems practical to have one for LG as well. Any thoughts???

0

Hey Everyone,

This weekend on Saturday I will be going over PT 35, Passage 2. It's an art passage.

Like the previous times, we will first do the low and high resolution summaries then the questions under time before going over the answers. For that reason, you do not have to do the passage before coming to the session. But you do need the passage in front of you but we will also have it available on screen.

If this will be your first time please do not worry, I will go over what low and high resolution summaries are before we begin reading the passage, so you will quickly catch up.

Please click the link below to join the meeting at the specified time.

I'll see you all there! : )

Free RC Tutoring (Sami)

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

https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/557824877

You can also dial in using your phone.

United States: +1 (571) 317-3112

Access Code: 557-824-877

Joining from a video-conferencing room or system?

Dial: 67.217.95.2##557824877

Cisco devices: 557824877@67.217.95.2

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

2

Thank you so much for having all the real MBE questions on here for such a reasonable price! I do have two things that would make it more valuable. I am not sure if it would be possible to implement them but I figure there is no harm in asking.

First, it would be great to see analytics based upon the set of problems (e.g., oldest, aging, and recent) that way I could see how I am progressing with each set individually rather than just overall. It is also more useful to see how I am doing with the more recent sets because of the possible differences in the law from the oldest to the newest. Also, having progressive analytics would be useful too. For instance, if it could show me how I am doing based upon the most recent 100 question's I've taken that would give me trend information as well or even if it was just broken up per 100 questions, that would be a great tool as well.

Second, I know this would be more work but it would make studying old practice problems that are not current law more useful. If you could provide what the answer would be based upon the current law, then we could know if our thinking was correct and it was just the fact that the law has changed that affected whether or not we got the right answer.

Again, thank you so much for providing real MBE questions! I've found them to be invaluable as I prepare for the July California Bar.

5

So i have foolproofed games 1-35 thoroughly. Probably 5 to 6 times each. And the hard ones closer to 10 times. Now i am in the pt phase and during the time after a pt, after review and drills, i spend time going through those old games and some newer ones. How many games do you foolproof a day.? New and old?

0

Hi All,

I am trying to get accommodations for the September LSAT. I was diagnosed with ADHD due to attention in high school and I have issues with processing speeds/short term memory. I recently got re-tested since the first testing is over 12 years old and I'm going to submit psychologist's report. My question is, does the psychologist also have to fill out the "Statement of Need" or is her report enough? I tried to ask LSAC today, but they wouldn't tell me over the phone and then I e-mailed, but it might take a while for them to get back.

I received accommodations in high school (well I have a 504 plan) but I didn't really take any (that I remember at least) in college. I've been scoring consistently 154, but then around a 163-167 when I BR/go back and answer the questions I ran out of time to answer.

Thanks!

0

Hi 7Sagers,

On Monday, July 17, at 9 p.m. EST, I’ll lead a personal statement boot camp. We’ll cover everything from choosing a topic to shaping your story. When I’m done, I’ll answer your questions about the admissions process. Hope to see you there!

Personal Statement Bootcamp

Mon, Jul 17, 2017 9:00 PM - 10:00 PM EDT

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

https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/985678109

You can also dial in using your phone.

United States: +1 (571) 317-3122

Access Code: 985-678-109

Joining from a video-conferencing room or system?

Dial: 67.217.95.2##985678109

Cisco devices: 985678109@67.217.95.2

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

19

Confirm action

Are you sure?