I attended a community college in my hometown during the summer of my sophomore year as a transient student. Do I need to send the transcript from that college to LSAC or will that be included on my University's transcript?

Thank you.

Hello 7Sage world!

Need some advice. So, I have taken 10 PTs up to this point. Scores are all over the place, but I am definitely seeing progress. I am wondering, how does one become consistent with their scoring?

My scores are as follows:

Actual/BR

Pre-7Sage

142/No BR

148/158

Post-7Sage Curriculum

146/159

142/158

143/155

147/162

150/160

146/156

159/175

and then today's score of 148/170....

On days I score well I definitely feel like things click, but on other days when it's not going well, I feel like I am trying to transcribe Portuguese in Chinese.

I am a full time student, so I have only been studying when schedule permits, usually around 10-20 hours per week. I have been going at this for about six months. I just felt so shitty after today's result. I feel like I have a hard time staying in the LSAT "zone".

Has anyone else ever had issues similar to mine? I really need some motivation, today felt like a swift kick right where the sun doesn't shine. ='(

Hi there,

I just started studying LSAT and was wondering how does the team spots conclusions?

Do you use indicator words as from the lecture?

Or

Do you just read an question and always ask why or the assumption method? (assume X is conclusion, whether the passage supports?

I believe so?!? Or am I merely hopeful?

Does anyone have a hint, clue, inkling, feeling and/or knowledge of when grey/gray day will commence?

[Admin title edit: Don't want folks to get the wrong idea about what this thread is about. We will make an official announcement as soon as we know.]

Hi Everyone!

I've been doing a lot of work recently with memorizing valid inferences that can be made from conditional and inter-sectional statements. I find that when I have a few extra minutes during blind review, I have no issue drawing the correct inferences. Unfortunately, during my practice tests I am unable to do the same. Guessing this means I need more timed practice. I was wondering if anyone had gathered a practice set of questions similar to PT 43, Section 3, Question 9, beginning "Most lecturers"? I've noticed mapping isn't strictly limited to most strongly supported questions/inference questions. Perhaps there is a filter I didn't know about in the question bank that would help me isolate more questions like these (specifically ones that incorporate diagramming).

Would greatly appreciate any/all advice or help.

Well, so much for plan A.

Plan B: BR until we can answer them.

Saturday, June 25th at 8PM ET: PT 53

Click here to join this conversation: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/219480381

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) 317-3112

Access Code: 219-480-381

And if you’d like to see the full schedule, here it is: https://calendar.google.com/calendar/embed?src=7sage.com_ft05lsm54j4ec1s6kj1d1bbpv0%40group.calendar.google.com&ctz=America/Chicago

Note:

Hey Everyone,

Needed some help with this conditional statement.

"Deep empathy is required for full understanding of an individual's actions. Internal empathy will grant partial understanding, but only if the individual is open minded towards the process."

I have: Full Understanding ---> Deep Empathy ; (Internal Empathy --> Partial Understanding) --> Open Minded.

The question asks: Dina has acquired both deep and internal empathy of Barry, who is not open minded towards anything. Relative to Barry, Dina will gain: _________

So I know that it is unknown whether Dina will gain full understanding as she satisfies a necessary condition. But, will she also not gain partial understanding since the necessary condition is deinied (Barry is not open minded)??

How do we translate this statement and it's contrapositive: "Internal empathy will grant partial understanding, but only if the individual is open minded towards the process".

Any help would be great. Thanks for your time.

Okay am I the only one that thinks this no mechanical pencils rule is a load of bs? I literally have blisters on my hands from sharpening pencils. And how am I supposed to do logic games with these blunt things?!?! Seriously lol. Has anyone found any techniques to deal with this?

[Admin edit: please refrain from using all-caps in titles :) ]

When will law school applications be made available for us to work on?

For anyone who has experience doing the games 1-16 - are these games representative of later games on the LSAT? If I am considering ponying up the money to buy the paper versions of the tests: are these good games to practice on? I have games from PT 17 through 76 - and have done about 30 PT's worth of games now... Obviously in a world where time was an unlimited resource I wouldn't ask this question and would just do them. But there's 3 months until September and I need to do and BR 19 PT's...

Just a quick question for you veteran PT takers out there... the LG sections of my PTs (all of the older ones, at least) are not formatted as they are on the modern LSAT -- meaning, each game is on a single page with little space at the bottom.

How do you guys go about replicating the real thing? Should I just make do with the little space at the bottom, or do you guys use scrap paper on the side?

I always get confused between the NA answers that states A most B and a subtle conditional (the correct answer). During the BR, I am able to correct myself by stating A most B strengthens but isn't required. But during the actual test, I find it quite difficult to choose between the two.

Therefore, I made a rule to myself: if the answer deals with "most," skip it.

Would that be a safe rule to apply for the NA questions?

I know that other existential quantifiers, such as some, can still be a valid NA answer, because negated some statement is absolute (None).

Thank you for your help.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-34-section-3-question-20/

Hi guys, having a little bit of trouble with this weakening question. Here's my understanding of it.

(Premise) -> In authoritarian society the metaphor society as a human body governed by it's head is pervasive. (What makes something pervasive? If it has political utility as mentioned in the first sentence)

(Conclusion) -> Therefore, the society as a body metaphor, with its connection between society's proper functioning and governance by a head, promotes greater acceptance of authoritarian repression than do other metaphors, such as likening society to a family.

So-> My guess of the logical jump being made from p -> c is that since in authoritarian regime has great utility in the society as a body metaphor over society as a family metaphor for acceptance of opression/proper function it is therfore more pervasive. S

So the answer choice (A) weakens this by saying that since in an authoritarian society both are as popular, the pervasiveness is not fully determined by utility?

Basically im confused as hell.

Hey, Sagers.

Is anyone else using Windows 10 OS and having buffering problems?

Did you have any and then solved them, how so?

Hey guys,

Just a little update, most of you who know me understand why a local school was not only my target school but my first choice. I'm thankful today to be able to report that I am officially off the waitlist and will be attending UNC Law School in August. I am so excited that we do not have to move. I don't know how I could have functioned in law school not being in the same city as my college age son, let alone not in the same state.

Thank you 7Sage JY, Nicole, Allison, Cory, David Busis and everyone else. This really is a wonderfully supportive community & I'm so glad I have been part of it this past year.

Now I can keep an eye out for my June LSAT with a little less angst. :)

Hey!

I just graduated from undergrad and am now taking a gap year to prepare for the LSAT and hopefully get some legal experience too! I'm dedicating the first two months (August and September). just to studying so I was wondering if anyone has any advice as to how to self study! (Books, sites, apps, classes) I'm also not sure whether to sign up for a prep course (and if so, which one). I did Kaplan last summer and didn't feel it increased my score significantly enough but I need a lot of practice and help :/ any advice would be much appreciated!!

I just took PT 36 as the first full test after the curriculum. I haven't done the BR yet and I really don't want to speculate on my score, but I just can't do the games. I freeze. My mind goes blank. The inferences I can pull out don't seem to make a difference. Needless to say, I didn't finish the section. I thought hey, I know how to do this type of game, but then nothing falls into place and I"m just sitting there wasting time. It's just disheartening when i feel like I at least have some inherent skill at the other sections and I can apply what I've learned from watching the videos, but the games just tear me apart.

Are there any other ways to getting to at the games? I know JY says to print out multiple copies and just keep doing them over and over again, and I'll do that, but I'm apparently just not getting it.

Okay let me just start from the start. My cold diagnostic was a 145 (June 2007). Since then I've studied for about a month and a half taking a PT scoring a 149 (December 2012) and a PT today scoring a 155 (PrepTest A from SuperPrep). I've seen improvements in just about every category except assumption questions in which I've scored in order of PrepTests, 0/3 (0%), 2/3 (66% guessed correct answers), and 1/5 (20%). I've been through the Logical Reasoning Bible and my assumption question scores still just aren't there; any tips on improving them? Also a peculiar thing is that my flaw in the reasoning questions went from a 6/8 (75%) on PT2 to a 2/7 (28%) on PT3. Are these drastic fluctuations normal especially to begin with considering I'm only on my third PT?

Hi guys!

I'm looking for some feedback regarding pros and cons to delaying the law school admissions process. I'm about to be a senior in college, and initially had planned on taking the LSAT in September, in order to apply this fall. I know it's an option to take the test in December, but I also know admissions are rolling, and I want to give myself the best shot at getting into the best school I can. I've read that admissions counselors advise that you get your apps in by October at the latest.

I'm looking for some feedback as to pros and cons of delaying the process until after I graduate--as in graduate in May, take the LSAT in June and apply for law school that fall. I'm applying for an internship program in D.C. for my final undergrad semester right now, and a lot of the interns who participate are able to turn their internships into jobs post-grad. This would have the dual benefit of real work experience (not sure how valued that is by law school admissions?) and, hopefully, a killer recommendation letter from a supervisor, so both those things are worth considering.

I appreciate your help!

Hello,

For an application I was instructed to provide a reason to why I am applying to a school. I have 1000 characters to do so. How should I go about doing so? Should I just expand on my personal statement and make it specific to how their school would aid me in achieving such goals?

Thanks in advance!

Kirsten

Hey guys, I just thought i'd let you all know what's been working for me lately.

I stopped using fresh pts and decided to go back and reinforce my LR fundamentals for pts 35 and under. Now i'm forcing myself to BR on a fresh test and to write/type (I use a word document) why each answer choice is wrong/right instead of BRing on the test I took. It does take a while especially at this part of my prep because I have confidence errors and i'm still trying to master the methods and strategies, but I have nothing but time and I already see a difference in my thought process. I'm more cognizant of the small habits that are costing me points.

If you don't do this already or you want to take your br to the next level, give this a try.

Hi,

I am practicing turning the kind of colloquial English sentences on the LSAT into strict logical statements. For example, take the following sentence:

All that is needed for the forces of evil to succeed is for enough good men to remain silent.

I would translate this logically as:

enough good men to remain silent --> forces of evil to succeed

I'm reading "All that is needed is" to signify that the predicate that follows will be a sufficient condition. Here are four more examples:

- The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.

- In order for ‘evil’ to prevail, all that need happen is for ‘good’ people to do nothing.

- The surest way for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing.

- All it takes for Evil to prevail in this world is for enough good men to do nothing.

I suspect that the predicate in each case defines a sufficient condition. What do you think?

Thanks,

Stephanie

Hi guys. My question is when you guys hit the PT stage, how much review of the curriculum did it require? I understand it's an "iterative process" as JY likes to say of finding your weakness, going back reviewing, then working on it and so forth. But for you personally did it require going over everything or just a few places places that required patching up

Allo,

I'm curious to know how one might be able to retain the information gained from going through the curriculum. Please share effective methods/tools that you think are helpful.

Thanks.