So, I joined 7sage May 24, 2017. As of today, I have completed all 91 hours of the course. Do I jump into taking a timed test? Or, do I just take a test - no timer- and see where I am on questions?

Any advice would be appreciated! & I would be grateful! :)

Hey all,

What's really tripping me up is that this question stem is written in the passive voice. The stem saying "could have remained unchanged in force and focus IF which one of the following had been advanced as a counterexample in place of the word 'absentee'" makes me believe that the original explanation wouldn't have to be amended if it weren't for the counter example of "absentee" being used. So I was trying to find a counter example that talked about an individual performing the action unilaterally, while not needing the explanation that resolves the impasse which is what I thought the question stem was asking me to do.

If the question stem was "the reasoning could remain unchanged in force and focus if which one of the following words is used in place of the word 'absentee'" rather than the goddamn passive voice, then it really would be much easier.

Can someone clear up my confusion? Am I just crazy???

Paging JY

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-27-section-4-question-22/

hi guys,

so when you have a SUPER long inference Q, how do you approach such questions?

I know that for argument type questions, we MUST understand the relationship between the support and the conclusion before moving on to the answer choices.

But since inference questions are just statements, not arguments, do you move on to the answer choices even if you don't fully understand the stimuli?

Proctors: There were a bunch of proctors - maybe four? Only one woman read the instructions, the others just helped with passing out and collecting papers. I didn't notice any noise from them, but the woman keeping time gave the 5-minute warning early on one section, which really threw me off. She corrected it by giving a second 5-minute warning at the correct time, but it really made me freak out a bit since I thought my watch wasn't working properly and I was going to be screwed up for the rest of the test.

Facilities: Facilities were fine. Bathrooms were close enough, there was a water fountain nearby, the room wasn't too hot (although it was a bit chilly, it was perfect for me).

What kind of room: Lecture hall with auditorium seating.

How many in the room: 50-100

Desks: Flip-up tablet desks!!!! Seriously, these were so horrible! There wasn't even enough room to have the test booklet spread open, much less the test book and the answer sheet side-by-side.

Left-handed accommodation: There were left-handed desks available, and the proctors asked if you needed one as you entered.

**Noise levels:**Very quiet.

Parking: Parking was across the street at the closest.

Time elapsed from arrival to test: About 30-45 minutes.

Irregularities or mishaps: As I mentioned above, the proctor gave the 5-minute warning early for one of the first sections.

Would you take the test here again? Absolutely not. The tablet desks were crazy uncomfortable and I was super cramped. I feel sure that lowered my score, which ended up being -7 from my PT average. I really don't understand why any location would think that tablet desks are an acceptable way to hold the test, they're so insufficient!

Date of Exam: February 2017

I am taking a 10 hr flight tomorrow, I would love to study in the air. There is no wifi, however. Any way I can view the lessons without internet?

When answering questions on the logical reasoning section, I found myself having a difficult time distinguishing between common answer types. I feel as if my problem is that I don't know the clear cut distinction between these types. They are as follows:

Would someone be willing to help me out with this? Whenever I am doing a PT I often find myself delving into these answer stems for too long.

Thank you!

If the conclusion does not HAVE to be true, then the argument is invalid?

HI everyone,

I have been struggling to correctly answer sample logical reasoning/weakening the argument type questions. Unfortunately, I am repeatedly selecting the most attractive wrong answer choices for each of the questions. My LSAT preparation material is advising me to use conditional reasoning techniques to identify the correct answer choices. So I am wondering if anyone can tell me whether using necessary condition and sufficient condition strategies works with finding the correct answer to logical reasoning/weakening the argument type questions.

Hi all,

I've been stuck between 168- 171 on my practice tests. It does not matter if I do them timed or untimed, I've been stuck at this level for 1 year, despite my best efforts of taking the PowerScore advanced LR course, drilling, taking 30 exams or so with blind review, doing explanations of questions myself, etc. I am planning on taking the exam in September and would like to give myself a +/- 3 cushion, so achieving a 173 consistently prior to test day is my goal. Any suggestions on how to improve?

I am missing usually 3-4 on each LR, 2 on RC, and 1 on LG.

Any advice would be appreciated.

Hi 7Sagers, I previously prepared using Manhattan's prep course, then found 7sage, watched all the LG videos which were very helpful and stood out from other prep courses. Now wondering how much 7sage's lessons on LR and RC differ from Manhattan, will I learn anything new or different/helpful in terms of breaking down the arguments and zeroing in on answer choices? Manhattan had a pretty solid system. if anyone has used manhattan and can offer their feedback I'd especially appreciate it. Also might not be able to purchase the ultimate package.. will something basic like the starter pack help me improve on LR and RC or is it only the ultimate package that provides comprehensive training on LR

Hi, i received 170 on the 3rd LSAT last October. As of April i have requested for a deferral for 1 year.

Recently i heard the news that LSAC removed the restriction to take tests for 3 times in a 2year time-frame.

I am planning on working as a paralegal and retaking the LSAT for re-negotiating my scholarship option.

I have two questions and i will greatly appreciate assistance if anyone can give me 2cents.

Is it likely that i may receive higher amount of scholarship from the school i have requested for deferral, assuming that I score higher?

Anyone with an idea of strategy from 170 to 172+? my track record has been 164->170.

Hello,

I was working on PT35.S4.Q11, and came across the expression "if all and only those", and it seemed to me as a biconditional indicator, but I haven't come across it yet. Do you agree?

Lawgic: real (---) "entities posited by the most explanatorily powerful theory of the science"

?

I'm at a point with Logic Games where I can consistently get -0 in 30 minutes, but I acknowledge a significant reason for this is that I've done every game at least twice -- the ones that gave me particular trouble, many more times.

I want to stay sharp on the section as I gear up to retake in September, but I also don't want to be blind-sighted on test day, when I will be faced with a new set of logic games for the first time in over 3 months.

So -- is anyone else in the same boat? Would anyone recommend a testing prep company that writes their own logic games instead of using LSAC official ones? For LR or RC, I'd be very skeptical about using questions not asked on the actual exam, but given the nature of LG, I think the benefits outweigh the cost, as I'd be supplementing the made-up games with real sets.

I'd like to really hammer down and improve my RC score. What are the best things to read to improve RC score? My problem is reading speed/comprehension and just a general lack of reading. I have the LSAT Trainer on the way so hoping that'll help as well. Any tips would be greatly appreciated.

Hi I am having some issues with chaining double arrows/double not arrows.

I know that:

A--> B (--|--) C = A (--|--) C

A (--|--) B --> C= A (--|--) C

A--> B (----) C = A (----) C

A (----) B --> C = A (----) C

But I am unsure about:

A (----) B (-----) C

A (----) B (--|--) C

A (--|--) B (--|--) C

Could somebody help clarify this?

I was looking at the wrong column when transferring my answers from my hard copy to the computer and now my test score is artificially low... Is there a way to edit the information I uploaded? Or can I delete the prep test and re-enter the information again? It's throwing off my analytics/trends :(

Hey guys,

I plan on drilling every RC passage from PTs 1-35. Just wanted to get some input on whether this would be a good strategy? I understand that RC changes in newer tests with the addition of the comparative passages. I'm also unsure whether there's a drastic change in the question types in PTs 60+. Or does it not really matter, and it would still be useful to drill from RC 1-35?

Thanks for the help!

If I want to practice validity questions....which questions should I be drilling the most? NA, PSA, SA, and MBT....is there anything I'm missing?

Understanding and applying validity has been suuuuuch an uphill battle for me. And just to make sure it's sunk in, I want to drill as many of those question types as I can.

Thanks!

So I'm approaching an interesting quandary in my studies. I tested in June and got a 170, which I'm happy, but not content with. Reason being I hit 162 with my blind diagnostic in March and my study mainly consisted of PT, l look over my incorrect answers and compare to the correct choices. Admittedly I was a little lazy and mostly rode my knack for the material.

I'm planning to retake in September and have begun studying the right way. I'm going through CC now, then planning to begin Pts with proper, exhaustive BR.

However, going through the curriculum on grammar, subvocalization, etc, I'm worried that I may drown my natural ability in a sea of technique and strategy. I can visualize an eventuality where I approach a RC passage an analyze it's structure, perspective and grammar flawlessly, break down the prompt and ACs effortlessly, but fail to achieve the only thing that matters, correct answers.

Admittedly this is all hypothetical, and as yet unmanifested, but I thought it would make for an interesting discussion. Curious to hear from others who have experienced this, or testimonials proving my worries premature.

Spin-off: The idea of a course designed for naturally gifted LSATers. Maybe geared toward boosting scores from 165 to 175, leaving out some of the more basic breakdown. Not sure if that would be counterproductive, perhaps you truly need to build a base knowledge before attacking the curve-breaker questions, but an interesting idea nonetheless.

So I'm currently studying for the September LSAT, but wondering if the December one would be too late to take when it comes to the admissions process. Would it be better to take the September LSAT because it is right when the admissions cycle opens up?

Do questions get harder as you go from #1 to #20's?

YIKES!

I have finished the core curriculum work and I have a book of 10 Actual PT's 7-18. I'm taking the September test and I am studying full time (ie not working). As I understand, 7Sage considers these to be too old to be fully relevant as timed PT's so I'm wondering how best to use them. To note: they are all contained in one big book so getting a realistic testing feel will likely take more effort and time than I'm willing to commit.

Would you use these as a mainstay of drilling or start getting through some of the higher numbered PT's and use those for drilling? What about the logic games? Are they more or less likely to be relevant today?

Any thoughts about how and when to use this 10 pack in conjunction with the remaining PT's I'll be taking through 7sage (starter) would be greatly appreciated! Thank you!

Here's the situation: during many of my times practice tests I find that I get bogged down in the middle of the section. I can make it through the first 10 questions with little issue and recover by the end but I find large chunks of wrong answers in the middle. Of course, there are questions I still struggle with and I understand that I can approach individual question types but does anyone have experience with this? Is it also true that the middle of the section is where the hardest questions are?

Hey everyone! Quick question about the Academic Summary Report -- LSAC just processed my transcripts and the numbers are what I expected them to be, but I just noticed the statistics they include about your degree granting institution. Specifically, the story they tell about my university is that 65% of students got below average on the LSAT and too few students exist to calculate an average GPA. I was wondering how this is viewed by admission officers and what sort of impact it would have if I'm at the median for my top two law schools.