Hey everyone,

I'm currently registered for the June LSAT, and have been studying since December. I've been aiming for the 166-170 range since my diagnostic. I eventually worked my way up throughout the semester to averaging a 163, and immediately following my final exams, I scored a 169 (maybe because I had a break from looking at the LSAT for 2 weeks?). For about 3 PTs after the 169, I averaged a 166 or so. Since then (so in the last week and a half/two weeks) I've seen a steady decline in my scores, to averaging a 164 again after another 4 PTs and a low 160 this afternoon (sigh). Other than the few tests that I performed really sub-par on, my BR has been sitting consistently around 173-175.

Has anyone else had a similar experience while studying, or have any advice about this? Obviously it's pretty frustrating to see a decrease in your scores when you'd expect some improvement in the final stretch.

Thanks!

Hello all, and

https://m.popkey.co/af8654/MM856.gif

This week we are going doing the following :

PT: 44

Experimental Section: LG from PT56

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

Date: Sunday, June 4th

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

Hi everyone,

I've taken the LSAT once (last September) and decided to retake the test in June (two weeks from now).

I have been studying rigorously since April and have initially been hitting around the high 150's and low 160's range. Maybe it's because I have been burning myself out. I try to study around 3-4 hours everyday and light studying on weekends. I've been attempting to finish a PT once every other day and then writing down how/what I did wrong on the BR questions I have circled and the questions I actually got wrong.

Recently, I've been dipping.. I was able to get about 5 wrong on a LR section but now I get only about 13 correct.. I'm not sure what's wrong.. I feel like I am understanding the stimulus/questions correctly but I am getting so many questions wrong so I'm obviously not. I have also tried to take at least one entire day off, re-looked at the basics of the LR questions, but none seem to have helped.

Please let me know what you think is wrong/give me some advice!

Let's say I'm taking the newer LSAT questions 2011-2014 and I've been scoring well and for the 2010 LSATS I'm not doing as hot.. does it matter that the tests are older and perhaps made a bit differently/harder?

This one tripped me up quite a bit. I need a better explanation than J.Y. gave in the video. In a flaw question, are we to assume all the premise are true? In this question it says;

"...to play a card game devised to test perception and memory."

When I read this, and this might be my major issue, I automatically assumed that this card game was perfect to test perception and memory. I did not see a reason to question its credibility. Then I read the conclusion which said the idea that perception and memory are reduced by 80 is false.

This lead me to believe that I had to show that perception and memory could not be tested in any real way. So I chose answer C.

C.) Perception and memory are interrelated in ways of which we are not currently aware.

My reasoning here was that if we didn't know how perception and memory interact, then the card game could not have allowed for an accurate reading and therefore the conclusion could not be properly drawn.

the correct answer choice just seemed to easy and to not really do anything to counter the argument. Answer E. says;

E.) Playing the study's card game perfectly requires fairly low levels of perception and memory.

this just seemed so weird to me. How can I just say "oh hey, your card game that you designed to test perception and memory does not actually test perception and memory"? This seems like I'm attacking the premise directly, and I thought in arguments we were not allowed to do that.

help...

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-35-section-4-question-08/

I believe that brushing up on English grammar is necessary for RC and LR success. JY also mentions the importance of referential phrasing and grammar in general in the CC. However, I think that it is beneficial to go beyond the grammar lessons covered in the CC and independently build a strong foundation on grammar. By a "strong foundation," I mean the ability to effortlessly capture the grammatical structure of a sentence: being so skilled to the point that one no longer needs to consciously "identify" the grammatical structure, but the grammatical structure just reveals itself to one at a quick glance. It is like unconsciously seeing the skeleton first and then filling in the flesh.

https://www.englishgrammar101.com/

This free website covers grammar pretty comprehensively, if anyone wants to check it out.

I personally have benefited a lot after seriously studying the grammar using the above website: my speed, confidence and accuracy in LR and RC have improved.

Below are my speculations on why a strong grammar foundation is critical for RC and LR success.

Reading accuracy. Oftentimes, the difference between the correct and the incorrect AC lies in a single word, modifier, or even a verb tense. It is really difficult to capture these subtle shell games, because they seem so random and negligible. However, if we really understand the grammar structure of a sentence, then these differences no longer appear so random. They are no longer a hard-to-find nitty-gritty detail; rather, they become structurally pronounced. For example, if we can identify not just the verb of a sentence, but also the nature of the verb (is it an action verb? helping verb? Combination of both? etc) , then the subtle differences in the ACs stand out. If we saw a helping verb in the stimulus (for example, a qualifying "may") but don't see it in the AC, we can articulate the difference in a grammatical language. We can even anticipate the wrong ACs based on the identified grammar structure.

Confidence and speed. As we all know, the LSAT purposefully uses convoluted stimulus structure. It is testing whether we can capture the "essence" of the stimulus while getting rid of and paying less attention to unimportant details. Therefore, when we are reading a stimulus, we practice identifying the premise and the conclusion and reorganizing the stimulus in a way that the essence of the stimulus is more pronounced.

Reading a sentence is the same thing; the LSAT purposefully employs convoluted sentences to make active reading difficult. However, reading becomes easier when we understand the grammar well. The essence of each sentence is the subject and the verb; they are like the premise and the conclusion equivalent of a stimulus (in terms of the relative importance). Identifying the subject and the verb, and then reorganizing the sentence in terms of the distilled essence-- "who did what" --improves speed and retention, because we know exactly what happened in each sentence. This in turn helps with confidence in RC and LR, because no matter what kind of complicated sentence or difficult topic is thrown at us, we know that we will be able to distill it down to the core and understand what is going on. No sentence is daunting anymore.

If you are struggling with active reading and accuracy in general, you might want to brush up on grammar b/c of these reasons. I certainly struggled a lot with mindlessly reading a paragraph, not retaining anything, and going back to the beginning completely panicking.

Hi everyone,

So sorry for the stupid question, but I'm trying to print PT 80 and don't see an icon to print it when it's opened. Am I missing something? How do you print the PTs off?

Thanks!

would anyone else be in favor of adding a six section preptest option to the proctor on the 7Sage app?

test day is six sections: 4 actual, 1 experimental, 1 written. and six section preptests can help prepare for the grueling nature of test day.

lastly, who is responsible for the remarkable impression of bruce wayne as a proctor?! is it @TheBatman?

The difference between my actual timed score and my blind review score is a very big gap. Even from 157 to 165-8 (respectively). Timing is my main weakness. My goal score is a 170+. If I plan to take the September LSAT, which gives me roughly three months from now, what can I do to better my endurance, speed, and accuracy? How many simulated prep tests a week? I will be studying full time this summer and taking a couple online classes at my university, but not working –– so I anticipate having a lot of time to study if I'm not working for my online classes.

How many simulated practice tests had you all done when you began breaking into the 170s? etc.

In between practice tests, I usually drill games, the 10 copies I have of each one from PT 1-35. I still have plenty more copies! Anyways, I need as much advice as possible so please enlighten me, guys!! xx

So i am just finishing the CC and i have always struggled with LGs. I find that sometimes i can finish a game which is rated at a 5 in difficulty with no problem at all. But then i will completely bomb a game that is apparently really easy and after 7 or 8 minutes i give up and watch JYs explanation. Not sure why this is happening. Any insight would be much appreciated.

I haven't seen a post about the experimental section in a while, so here's my nagging question I keep having about it when doing PTs: what section do most of you insert the "experimental" section into your test, and how does it compare to the rest of your score?

On and off I've PTed with an additional, "experimental" section so I can really work on my endurance. I've randomly inserted the experimental section in the middle of the exam, the very last, and the very first section. I generally use a random section from a PT I've done in the past, but several months ago. My "scored" portion of the exam doesn't seem affected by the experimental section being there. I tend to get better and more accurate the further along in the test I am, so adding the experimental first doesn't make me burn out faster or anything. It's more just a nuisance section that annoys me while I'm taking it, but doesn't otherwise effect my overall score.

Even though my overall scored section isn't effected by the experimental, my experimental section is always terrible. The last PT I took (yesterday, actually) I inserted a LR experimental as the first section in which I missed 12 questions! - but overall I actually gained 5 points, finally getting back in the 160s. I'm beginning to think that since my experimental section is 100% dreadful despite the section type or order, that I must have some psychological barrier to doing well on it. Like I "know" it isn't part of my scored section so I don't really try. (That's my theory I tell myself so I don't freak out at the low score, anyway.)

Has anyone else experienced this weird experimental section slump? Are there better ways to drill with it, or should I just keep doing what I'm doing? Or maybe just ignore the experimental section entirely, considering it doesn't seem to negatively effect the other sections?

Penultimate PT before the June test. Come join us to review PT 79 and to determine what PT we do next week!

Test tip: don't forget to expect the unexpected.

PT 79 Review on Saturday, June 3rd at 5PM ET

Click here to join this conversation: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/617377325

Please click the link and comment if you plan on participating.

You can also dial in to the BR call by using your phone.

United States: +1 (872) 240-3212

Access Code: 617-377-325

The Full Schedule

And if you’d like to see the full schedule for upcoming sessions, here it is:

https://calendar.google.com/calendar/embed?src=il5ia3a4dmghh6lku7b0lh0ed0%40group.calendar.google.com&ctz=America/New_York

Note:

Alright, so I've been grinding for the last 3 months to prep for the the June LSAT. Done upwards of 30 PTs with Blind Review and I seem to have plateaued at about a 168-172 score under timed conditions. Wondering if anybody has any tips for the next two weeks that might help me eke out a few more points. I would be ecstatic with a 170, I know what an achievement that is, but the difference in scholarship money between a 170 and a 173 is probably tens of thousands... I usually ace the Logic games unless I run out of time, LR is usually -2 or 3 per section, and RC is toughest for me, averaging -5/6.

I am currently hovering round a BR score of 174.

I usually make about 4 to 5 overconfidence errors, spread out over LR and RC.

Sometimes I get a question wrong in my BR as well. How do I fix that?

I usually go through the whole exam.

Also, what are your thoughts on retaking PTs?

I was going through the Ultimate+ study plan to see what I'm going to be covering over the next few weeks when I realized that there aren't any lessons on the writing sample. Are there any resources for it? How are you guys preparing?

Hi dear 7sagers, and sages,

First of all, I am having trouble understanding the difference between negation and contrapositive but I think I am slowly getting it.

What troubles me, however, is how to negate a relationship, or in other words deny it, which has an And/Or statement in the conditionals. So, for example, I will use @JY's example from his lesson on DeMorgan's Law:

"If Tom plays, then Jerome and Simmi play too"

Translated into lawgic that would be: T→(J and S) (which could be split)

Now, if we negate the statement altogether, what happens then? "It could be the case that if Tom plays, neither Jerome nor Simmi play" am I right? ....T→NOT(J and S)

Moreover, how do you translate that? T→/J and T→/S ??? Or in other words, T→(/J and /S) (which could also be split)

Hi,

I've been taking PTs with 32 minutes for all sections and felt quite challenging to get those difficult curve-breakers right in 32 minutes, especially for LR. I definitely think those extra 2-3 minutes could be very useful (currently getting 5-6 wrong combined), but for those who score high in LR, do you think 2-3 less minutes should not make a huge difference? How do you guys use the last 5 minutes of the section (in full 35 min section)? Should I rather go back to doing 35 min section PTs?

I found this watch on Amazon that says LSAT perfect score watch and wanted to know if this was allowed on the exam. I'd attach a picture if I could.

Hello 7Sagers!

We are launching new study groups, and also making a few adjustments in order to make these an even better resource. With lots of new workshops happening, it seemed like study groups could be tweaked in order to provide a more distinct experience. So instead of open sessions—which really is not how study groups work at all—we will coordinate groups openly on the forums to allow groups to bring members in, and then close groups once a core membership has been established. We hope this promotes a larger number of groups which will be smaller, more intimate, and better able to develop unique dynamics and close working relationships. So keep an eye out for the new groups forming soon, and many more to come!

Hello! Welcome to the official 2017 September Study Group! Navigating and communicating in the old thread was a royal PITA so I have decided to create a new thread that should be easier to communicate on.

Tonight I am hosting an informal "kick-off" of sorts. I want to get everyone who thinks they will be committed to this group in the call to discuss our goals and desires for how to make this study group as beneficial as possible.

https://media.giphy.com/media/p2FmUZ8rR5IBi/giphy.gif

Note: We will not be using Go To Meeting. It is going to be too hard to coordinate around scheduling conflicts tonight, so we're going to try Join.Me instead. It should work almost exactly the same way, except there will be no dial-in #. This means you must have a stable internet connection. Sorry for any inconvenience this may cause.

Time: 7:30p EDT / 6:30p CST / 4:30p PST

Link: https://join.me/SeptemberLSAT

Requirements: All I ask is that you come prepared and willing to talk. This will work best if I get feedback from you guys. This group isn't going to be me leading and making all of the choices; I want it to be a collaboration between all of us. So the more you guys talk, the less I have to, and the better that is for everyone :lol:

BR Schedule:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1NqvbW4p83dpFmihrUOeWf6Dx8ETo25rLE1q1nPzOrpg/edit?usp=sharing

Above is a link to my tentative BR schedule. I have options of both 5 and 6 section PT's. It's kind of hard to follow so maybe don't look into that area too much since I'll be discussing it in detail tonight to see what you guys think. I just want to give you all time to digest the content so that you have time to formulate ideas and feedback for me.

I'm sort of in a dilemma: I use a watch because I need to keep track of time in each section, but when I look at my watch and if I see I'm a bit behind my pacing, then I get stressed about not having enough time to finish a section, and do worse!

RC is a good example. Sometimes I'll get to the last passage with, say, 6 minutes left, but then I get stressed that's not enough time to answer all of the questions, and I ultimately do worse overall on that section than if, I imagine, I kept on going and maybe did not reach the last question. Same with LR; if I don't finish the first 10 in 10, then I feel pressured to rush through the next questions, and see my performance drop overall.

The takeaway seems that I need to improve on timing so I don't feel rushed (which I imagine also will improve my LSAT confidence). I've also thought about no longer using a watch.

Has anyone else been in a similar situation or have any advice?

Hope everyone had an opportunity to gain insight on JYs PT80 calls last week!

If you are still committed to taking June, join an informal group for BR on PT79 review during our final weeks of prep:) If interested, post or send a PM for details.

See you Tuesday!

With these being a bit wordier than your average LR question (especially with the AC's), what is an appropriate time to shoot for?

Hi All,

I could use some help with this necessary assumption question. I definitely see why C is a necessary assumption, but I'm having a hard time figuring out why E is not also an equally necessary assumption. I have yet to find an explanation online that addresses my thought process.

The argument is as follows:

P1: Nuclear reactors are sometimes built in “geologically quiet” regions.

P2: Geologists call these regions “geologically quiet” because such regions are distant from plate boundaries and contain only minor faults.

P3: No minor fault in a geologically quiet region produces an earthquake more often than once in any given 100,000- year period.

C: Out of all the potential nuclear reactor sites in such a region, the ones that are least likely to be struck by an earthquake are ones located near a fault that has produced an earthquake within living memory.

I had chosen E, but the correct answer is C. I see why C is a necessary assumption, but my current issue is seeing why E is not.

C is correct because we cannot assume the relative location of the nuclear reactors to the minor faults. It could be that some nuclear reactors are on one end of the "geologically quiet" region and that the minor faults are miles away. C addresses the assumption necessary to position all the nuclear reactors on the same playing field (proximity wise), which renders the conclusion's validity possible.

When I chose E, it was based on a similar thought process that I believe C requires...I chose E because the stimulus never said that the faults had to produce earthquakes. The stimulus says that the maximum is one earthquake every 100,000 years, but what if there are some faults (or entire regions...) that produce NO earthquakes? In that case, it is not the faults that have had an earthquake in living memory that are the least likely to be struck by an earthquake-- the least likely would be the faults that are "dormant" or "inactive." E fixes this by establishing that there will be at least 1 every 100,000 years (in conjunction with the stimulus, that means there will be exactly 1 every 100,000 years).

Can someone help me out here? I see two equally necessary assumptions and I know I'm most likely misinterpreting the stimulus? Or E?

Thanks in advance!

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-17-section-2-question-21/

For logic games, if the question is asking for a CBT could a MBT be correct? For example, if R has to go into the 9th spot and R being in the 9th spot is one of the answer choices, could that be correct? TYA!