Presuppose defined as "require as a precondition of possibility or coherence. synonyms: require, necessitate, imply, entail, mean, involve, assume"

Does anyone remember how many questions were on the exam?

I had 3 LR, 1 RC, 1LG and 100 total question...

Very anxious that I made a bubbling error and might need to cancel...

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?

*Because there are too many September study groups in GTM and I don't want to mix them up, this group will now be known as the That's So Ravenclaw SG. I know a lot of us are fans of the Harry Potter series. In our LSAT prep (and our career aspirations in general) it would help to aspire to obtain the qualities of this house, such as cultivating a lifelong love of learning.

Regarding the "That's so Raven" part. Generally, it could also help to take some risks (calculated risks haha) and be bold like:

PT 63 w/experimental LR fr PT40 (1st LR section) Sunday, July 9th 12PM ET

Click here to join this conversation: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/992713853

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 (571) 317-3122

Access Code: 992-713-853

If the link doesn't work, google Go To Meeting and enter the meeting access code

Requirements:

The That's So Ravenclaw study group is for 12 people who are committed to studying and improving their test performance for the September 2017 LSAT. Workshops and intensives to eliminate weaknesses will also be made available to the study group. Tuesday at 7pm is our additional study time to meet to go over other questions we didn't get to on Sunday. Comment below if you would like me to tag you for our meetings. This group will be going private in 3 weeks.

Tentative Schedule: https://calendar.google.com/calendar/embed?src=00ppvvc0gp9hdvin7b0p3igdhg%40group.calendar.google.com&ctz=America/New_York

The last couple days I have been extremely busy, so I decided to do un-timed LR sections. These un-timed LR sections have been my WORST scores to date.

My normal timed LR is anywhere from -3 to -5.

My un-timed LR sections are like -7 or -8.

What does this say about my understanding of the test? Lately I sort of feel like I tackle this test with brute force and with much less technical knowledge. What I see happening with these un-timed sections is that I second guess my first answer many times, which ultimately makes me get it wrong. The last section I did 4 of the 7 I missed are ones that the right answer almost jumped off the page at the beginning and then after I read it some more fell out of love with it and changed my choice.

What does this mean!

Spent a lovely week in the mountains of Colorado and now I don't even remember what a LSAT is. Iv'e been trying to get back into my routine and nothing is working. Has anyone else experienced a break and found they can't get back on the grind? I need motivation!

I just finished reading Smarter Better Faster by Charles Duhigg and found it to be very useful for finding ways to increase focus, motivation, and productivity with my LSAT studying. It is also very readable since the gist of the book is structured around storytelling.

Full disclosure: My bachelors degree is in cognitive psychology and I love behavioral science, so I might have gotten carried away a bit with the length of this post, but I do believe that the using psychology to master the LSAT is necessary for doing well.

Here’s the stuff I found most useful for LSAT prep:

Ch.1 - Motivation:

Positive emotional reward linked to making decisions (gained through experience) AND belief in having control over our lives and surroundings AND linking mundane tasks (such as studying) to greater purpose or personal values, thus transforming them into a choice —> motivation to act

(Yes, those three conditions are sufficient for motivation, according to science.)

Motivation depends on emotionality.

Motivation is a skill that can be learned and honed, not a static personality trait.

Following a success, praise yourself for hard work, not your intelligence. (Focusing on static traits like intelligence shuts down motivation.)

Ch. 3 - Focus:

This chapter was most useful to me. The author talks about the concept of mental models (a story of what should happen in a future scenario) and how they can help combat cognitive tunneling (focusing one irrelevant or insufficient thing due to being overwhelmed by information) and reactive thinking (reacting to external stimuli randomly or as they arise instead of intentionally).

Mental modeling works in several ways. It helps us know what information to pay attention, because we already have a plan, so that we are better able to successfully complete a stressful/high-risk task. The author uses a story of a pilot successfully landing a totally wrecked plane and it was very relatable to trying to answer an LR question with a seemingly incomprehensible stimulus on a timed PT…

Mental modeling also provides us with a picture of what a situation should like, and when it doesn’t look that way, an alarm goes off in our head and we fix it, rather than proceeding with the bad strategy. To increase focus and avoid distraction or mistakes, the author hence recommends visualizing the anticipated task. For example, I have a hard time not getting distracted during LSAT studying by other tasks, and mental modeling allows me to set an intention and better catch myself when I deviate from what I intended to do, such as browsing the Discussion Forum instead of BR or forgetting to identify the premises and conclusions in an argument stimulus in LR.

Cognitive tunneling and mental shutdown (the flight or fight mentality that the CC talks about leading to inability to do higher order thinking) is exactly what happens to me when I get stuck while studying or a timed PTs, so it has been useful to try to transform material and strategies from the CC into mental models of what I should be doing instead of panicking. I think that the mental model idea works for individual small tasks, like answering specific question types on LR, as well as for whole sections, such as creating a mental model for active reading during RC (still a bit of a struggle for me). Another useful mental model might be for remaining calm, focused, and confident for the actual LSAT. You can practice mental modeling anytime - while commuting, cooking, showering… In relation to LSAT prep, it’s just another way of studying, but it can also be applied to any aspect of your life.

“Mental models help us by providing a scaffold for the torrent of information that constantly surrounds us. Models help us choose where to direct our attention, so we can make decisions, rather than just react.”

The concepts mentioned in the book definitely overlap with recommendations for studying and test taking form the CC, not that 7sage needs even more proof of being effective :).

Ch. 4 - Goal Setting:

Pairing two types of goals:

Ch. 6 - Decision Making:

Decision making is integral to the LSAT - choosing the right answer, choosing what to focus attention on, choosing when to skip questions…

ability to envision what will happen next (“forecasting”) probabilistically AND comfort with doubt (knowing what you don’t know) AND realistic assumptions —> good decision making

We have a success-bias, i.e. we tend to notice success more than failures, even though failures offer more insight on how to succeed, in other words, not fail. (focus on areas of struggle in LSAT prep instead of searching for ways to increase score)

Ch. 8 - Absorbing Data:

data must be understood and then applied to be useful (e.g. actually formulate study plans out LSAT Analytics page on 7sage; active reading)

large amounts of data can best be absorbed by asking series of questions (e.g. while digesting a complex LR stimuli ask: what are the Ps and C? what is the strength of support? are there any assumptions?…)

hand-written notes are the most effective because the disfluency of hand-writing forces us to take more time to reformulate the information. I believe that everyone should take comprehensive notes by hand while doing the CC.

If any of this spoke to, do yourself a favor and read the relevant parts of the book, I’ve tried hard to summarize it accurately here but you will get much more from the book :)

What do y’all think? Has anyone else read this?

What mental models would you make for studying for the LSAT?

So I've found myself in a bit of a pickle with regards to letters of rec. One of my own making, but still. I am nearly six years removed from college at this point, so finding professors who remember me is a bit of a stretch. Thankfully I applied to grad school a year after college and had to ask for recommendations. I was able to track down one of the professors who still had a copy. He made slight alterations and submitted. One down. The other two have ignored my emails, so I'm not counting on hearing from them. That leaves me in need of a minimum of one more.

Normally, I could ask a current or former manager / senior co-worker, but my situation makes that difficult. I worked for company A right after school for a few years before leaving for company B. At company B I did not get along with the team lead in my first position and ended up switching teams just before I decided to apply to law school. I left company B to return to company A as my position with company B was all encompassing and would have left less than no time to study for the LSAT or write essays. Needless to say, my second team lead there was not exactly thrilled with me leaving so shortly after switching, despite understanding my reasoning. She might have been willing to write one, but has also ignored my email. That would leave all the managers / leads I've had at company A, all would be more than willing to write me great letters of rec under normal circumstances, but having just returned I cannot tell them I'm going to be leaving just yet. This is due to financial considerations / the very likely scenario of them looking to get rid of me before I hit the one year mark due to provisions in my offer. I've thought this through pretty thoroughly and there is no one I could ask who would be likely to keep it to themselves (at least not a risk I'm willing to take).

So I'm running out of ideas. I don't do things like volunteer work, etc. I've thought to ask a few grad TAs I used to work for in college with no response (seriously, how difficult is it just to send a "no" email, this is worse than online dating*). Worst case I can probably find someone just to fill the quota, but it won't be a good one. Like, I might as well just write one myself and submit it at that point. Any outside the box ideas I might not be thinking of?

* Please note that this is a joke and I understand the impulse in both scenarios to say nothing and am ok with it.

7Sage shows that LR from 60s is on average easier than from the 40s - 50s. The 40s to 50s seem to be have 5 star difficulty sections, but I know that the 60s have trickier questions despite their lower difficulty. I am trying to get as close to -0 as possible.

I am missing around -5/-4 per section, and I will only be doing sections I have already taken before. So there is no worry about wasting fresh PTs.

Which should I use for drills?

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.

So I'm seeing a lot of disappointment posts lately. Maybe its just the days I sign in or something but my point still stands. For those of you having a tough time, I'm right there with you. I'm a perfectionist and I hate making silly mistakes, or finding that there's something I've missed on a test. Right now I'm trying to break to the 160's and its difficult.

I know the feeling if it detracting from your self worth and I am here to tell you a piece of advice my boss once gave me.

"Be kind to yourself." Whatever you're doing, if you're giving it your best and being honest, you will get to your goal. So please for the love of all that is good, be kind to yourself. I'm pushing myself to do this throughout the process and I really did feel the need to share this with people here.

Peace out,

Shireen.

Hello! I've read a lot of different discussions about this, but I can't find anything that specifically answers my questions.

I have taken 11 PTs and have averaged 163, but recently scored a 170, then 165. My scores are all over the place and I'm aiming to score 170 in September. Because I was originally planning to take the June exam, I already completed PT 62-71 so now I am back to using older ones. I've already purchased 42-61 and was planning to take those 20 (plus PT 71 which I saved) but now I'm reading that taking the 40s doesn't actually help because they're easier...? Should I use the 40s for drills and purchase the 70s individually? I don't want to spend more money than I have to, but I also don't want to mess myself up by using the 40s if they're not going to help.

Any advice would be appreciated!!

Here's the link to JY's explanation in the Core Curriculum: https://classic.7sage.com/lesson/budget-for-counseling-programs-flaw-question/

^^Could someone confirm whether or not my line of thinking is correct?

P: 90% of people nationwide believe that an appropriate percentage (i.e. 10%) of the school’s budget is being spent on counseling programs.

C: Thus, any significant increase in the school’s budget should NOT be spent on counseling programs.

Analysis: The premise talks about how people feel good about the 10% counseling programs receive. But, the conclusion says that any actual increase of $$$ in the budget should not be spent on counseling programs. But this conclusion doesn’t follow: for if the overall pie/quantity increases, then counseling program funding will also have to increase in order to maintain that 10% slice of the pie (the conclusion seems to imply that the “appropriate amount” should not be exceeded). So, counseling programs actually MUST receive more funding if their appropriate percentage is maintained.

So in other words, the conclusion essentially mistakes the poll results to mean that 90% of people believed that an appropriate amount of their school’s budget was being spent on counseling programs.

(A last note: I was anticipating that the flaw in the argument was that the conclusion is drawn from a belief but is treated as fact. But upon reviewing this question, I see that the the bigger issue is that a conclusion about quantity is being drawn about premises that only described percentages.)

My first take was June 2016. I got a 170, although I ended up guessing on 7 questions (timing) and got 4 of those correct. I had never scored above a 168 on my PTs (mostly in PTs 40-50). I thought I could improve on the 170, and decided to buckle down and study hard and then retake in June 2017. I didn't end up really studying hard until March/April, but felt I made some strong improvements, though I was still reliably testing in the high 160s, albeit on the most recent preptests, which seem a good deal more difficult than PTs 40-50.

I was tired of putting the test off, even though my PT scores had plateaued around 169, and decided to take the test anyway. I ended up getting a 169. This is especially frustrating because I let the pressure of timing get to me on LG and gave up 2 easy points. Also frustrating because my goals are to get into HYS or a Ruby, and with a 3.83 GPA I feel I need a score in the mid 170s. Further score improvement still seems achievable, but I'm wondering how I can improve from the high 160's to my target range, especially given I spent a year self-studying (not as devoted as I should've been), feel like I wasted a lot of PT's, and seem to really lose my shit when the clock is on.

Have any of you found yourselves in a similar situation? Any advice?

Hey everyone,

So I came across this thing in LG that got me a bit confused. Hoping someone can offer a quick clarification. Perhaps my brain just froze.

There is this one answer choice in LG that says:

If Hamadi is not appointed to the trial court than Perkins must be.

J.Y translated this as: H --> /P

but isn't it the other way around? In this case it is the "If" that is starting the conditional, not the "not". So shouldn't the translation be:

/H --> P

I don't know why I'm stumbling on this one but just can't see why he flipped it in this situation.

Which admissions cycle would the June 2017 LSATS be ideal for?

Hi all,

New to 7Sage, and was wondering...am i missing something in the best way to review questions in practice? When we are learning a new question type there are videos with sample questions from PTs, are we to find and print these out? In some of the videos I can't see all the answer choices when the video is paused. Are we not supposed to go through these on our own before we play the video? I need time to read and analyze the questions before the strategy is revealed. Is there a technique and/or easy way to print that I'm missing?

let me know thanks!

I'm about to start my first blind review and i'm a little worried. I feel like i'm going to review answers and agree with myself or change correct answers to wrong ones by over thinking. Any advice or tips? Or something you wish you knew before you started blind reviewing?

Would it be really important? How would a personal statement factor into it? What if someone has no good softs?

Hi 7Sage,

I’m writing to introduce our newest admissions editor, Chris Schlegel. Chris is a Harvard doctoral candidate, Iowa Writers’ Workshop alum, published author, Henry James aficionado, and gentleman of rare eloquence. He’s also one of the most incisive editors I’ve ever met. I think he’s a perfect fit for this amazing community!

Hey y'all! I've seen a lot about "foolproofing"--what exactly is it and how do I do it? Also, can it be done for more than just LG?

Thanks!!

So thankful for all of the Sages for their time hosting webinars sharing their experiences and wisdom with us. Please take advantage of this incredible resource!

It is remarkable that the webinar library has over 15 recordings for our viewing. As I was about to write a post referring to different webinars for someone that is in the early stages of time management, I realized that some people may not be aware of all the opportunities available - Under the “Discussion” menu is “Webinar Videos.”

Given everyone’s different stages of prep – following is a general breakdown of the webinars currently available.

LR

Necessary Assumption

Sufficient Assumption

Pseudo-Sufficient Assumption

Weaken & Strengthen

Flaw Intensive

When to diagram in LR – conditional stimulus

RC

Active Reading Strategies

Reading Comprehension Question Types

LG

Splitting the boards?

Overall Strategies

Blind Review process

Anticipating Answer Choices

Eliminating Attractor Answer Choices

Skip It! Skipping Strategies Panel

Global Strategies/Inspirational

My 18 Point Increase Story

LSAT Prep for 170+

Managing LSAT Stress and Anxiety

I am going through the prep tests chronologically and am wondering if the LSAT has changed at all over time.

Usually able to locate the correct answer, however on weaken, strengthen, and both kind of assumptions questions, I am not finding the answer by prephrasing. I usually go into the answer choices knowing what the right answer should do. Does that make any sense?

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!