I finally decided to take another yet hopefully last LSAT next year. Would you please introduce anyone who achieved the significant jump? I really need to learn from those and it will put me on the right track later.

Howdy Folks,

I'm thankfully coming to the end of this course after a long fought struggle with LG. I wanted to ask some of you veterans our there: I've been covering the LG portion of this course with a lot of patience and I haven't touched a lot on my other skills. I wanted to ask what were some of the ways many of you put the course all together for yourselves. Did you begin prep tests and pick a few days a week to go back through the old material? Did you dive right into the prep tests and only review the old material as you needed to while doing your BR? Did you take a few weeks to review old material before diving in? Thanks for any feedback folks, I appreciate it.

Hey team,

Wanted some input on the optimum time to conduct a BR session. Do you find it more beneficial to BR an hour or two after you PT, or is it more effective if you wait to BR the following day? Since I'm a re-taker I'm cutting ZERO corners this time around, at the same time, I know for BR to work you need to be very meticulous and disciplined during review. I know this process, however rewarding it may be, is still taxing. What approaches did you take to properly PT/BR in conjunction with drilling your weaknesses whilst avoiding burn out?

Thanks

Happy Saturday!

Can someone please explain question 5?

How I interpreted the question was the minimum number of salaries would be 8 not 7. The reason for this was that K would always be first, thus leading the other 8 workers being placed in the remaining spots.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-4-section-3-game-1/

Admin edit: Edited title and added link, OP listed wrong game.

Hey guys, if you're looking for a podcast, try this: https://www.wnyc.org/shows/radiolabmoreperfect/

It's new and made by one of the creators of Radio Lab.

It's all about the law.

I know I'm not the only one.

Hi! I may not be a typical LSAT student at least in terms of age. I graduated from college in 2002 (Mechanical Engineering) and received a Master’s degree in Biomedical Engineering in 2005 and Ph.D. in Bioengineering in 2010. Then I spent two years as a postdoctoral researcher in neuroscience and then I worked as an assistant professor at a state University for two years. Before it gets too late, I wanted to try something else other than academia, so I left academia and got a government job two years ago. So I am an engineer and scientist by training, and I have published more than 30 peer-reviewed scientific journal papers.

My experience in the government over the past 2 years has motivated me to go to law school. It’s been a while that I took a test since my graduate school and I was quite nervous and I think I significantly underperformed on the June LSAT last Monday than my usual PTs. Do you think if my background (PhD in engineering, research paper publications, grant funding and student teaching/mentoring history, work experiences as a university professor and in government) could be considered as a strong soft in law school applications? Also, if any of you have a similar background or have seen similar cases, I will appreciate if you could please share your stories how your work experiences or soft helped your law school admissions. Because of my current job, I'd like to go to part-time programs in the DC areas. Thanks!

Did anyone hear anything funny or unusual at the LSAT sitting? One person at mine was taking it cold and claimed her gpa was strong so the LSAT shouldn't matter much. Another person had studied for over a year and claimed she never scored over a 140 but her goal was a 145 so she could get into an unaccredited program. Another person said their logic games strategy was to spend all of their time on sequencing games (the person said games where you place things in order in a row) if they got one because they are the only ones that are even possible to do quickly. She said she would just guess on the rest of the logic games because trying didn't really change the result. Any others out there?

Like many of you, I watch Game of Thrones. While watching the latest episode, I realized the characters make many arguments. So, I thought it would be fun to use some of their dialogue as mini LSAT lessons.

If you don't watch Game of Thrones or aren't caught up, turn away for many spoilers lie ahead.

Scene 1 - Jon Snow wields a cool conditional chain

Jon Snow: "I need you with me if we're going to beat them, and we need to beat them if you're going to survive."

survive → beat them → you with me

Jon uses "need" to indicate necessity along with "if" to indicate sufficiency. Though he states only his major premise without giving the full argument, he correctly assumes that everyone wants to "survive" which would triggers the conditional chain allowing everyone to draw the conclusion that the Free Folk ought to stick with Jon Snow.

Scene 2 - Tormund's like "Hey Snow, let me see that cool conditional chain."

Quickly following Jon's argument, Tormund wants to play with the conditional chain also. Earlier in the dialogue he mentions that Jon died for the Free Folk so "do the same" is referencing that.

Tormund: "If we are not willing to do the same for him, we're cowards. And if that's what we are, we deserve to be the last of the Free Folk."

not willing to die for Jon → cowards → deserve to be last of the Free Folk

Like Jon, Tormund also states only his major premise. He also correctly assumes that none of the Free Folk wants to be the last of the Free Folk nor do they want to be labeled cowards. Hence, by failing either of the necessary conditions, we can contrapose and arrive at the conclusion that the Free Folk "are willing to die for Jon". In context, this means join Jon in war to take back Winterfell from the Boltons.

Scene 3 - Cersei is not half as bright

I find this scene really funny. Olenna says to Cersei, "If you're half as bright as you think you are, you'll find a way out of here, too." Without missing a beat, Cersei replies "Never." Like, she just accepts Olenna's insulting premise and plays along. I almost feel bad for her.

Let's look at this in lawgic.

Olenna: Cersei is 50% as smart as Cersei thinks she is → leave

Cersei: not leaving

Conclusion: Cersei's not very bright

Scene 4 - Blackfish understands the inclusive or

In this scene, one of the Frey idiots threatens Blackfish and says "Yield the castle or I cut his throat."

Blackfish, who clearly understands the inclusive or, thinks to himself:

not yield castle → nephew's throat cut

But I remember from this 7Sage lesson that if I yield the castle, that Frey idiot might cut my nephew's throat anyway. I'm gonna call him out on his shit bluff.

Scene 5 - Jamie with a strong contrapose

This was probably my favorite scene from the episode.

Right before this scene, Jamie simultaneously insults and warns the Frey idiot that "only a fool makes threats he's not prepared to carry out."

makes threats he's not prepared to carry out → fool

Since Frey threatened Blackfish earlier but didn't carry it out, Jamie effectively called him a fool. There's the insult. But Jamie is also warning Frey because we can assume that Jamie does not think himself a fool and hence conclude that Jamie makes threats he is prepared to carry out. Jamie proceeds to make the following threat: "Now let's say I threatened to hit you unless you shut your mouth, but you kept talking. What do you think I'd do?"

not shut your dirty Frey mouth → Jamie hits you

And of course, like the idiot he is, the Frey keeps talking.

Scene 6 - Jamie is fond of unless

Jamie uses "unless" again in this scene, "Have him bathed and fed. Unless you'd like to take his place."

don't want to take his place → bathe and feed him

Jamie assumes that the idiot Frey does not want to take the prisoner's place and therefore will bathe and feed him. This time they take Jamie's threat seriously.

Scene 7 - Davos also knows how to contrapose a conditional chain too

Davos strings together a conditional argument just like Jon and Tormund did at the beginning of the episode.

Davos: "As long as the Boltons hold Winterfell, the North is divided. And a divided North won't stand a chance against the Night King."

Boltons hold Winterfell → North divided → no chance against Night King

Davos correctly assumes that Lady Lyanna Mormont wants to stand a chance against the Night King and so, contraposing back, will arrive at the conclusion that she should help them kick the Boltons out of Winterfell.

I don't believe I pressed the "reset" button while the timer was still going; regardless, my 180 Watch is off about five seconds, with the long hand setting just behind the "0."

Does anyone know how to fix this? Hopefully, there's a way to do so!

I've gone through the all the logic lessons twice and have been drilling sufficient/necessary assumption and parallel reasoning and when I read through many of the stimuli my brain just goes to mush trying to figure it out. I see J.Y. intuitively know how to map things out instantly and I want to get that way but it doesn't seem to be improving. What did those of you who have mastered logic do to get to the point of mastery? Did you use any outside resources for alternate drilling, etc? Thanks for any help.

Just curious what the thoughts are on re-visiting a school you are waitlisted on? It is my 1st choice and I first visited right after I initially applied and my application had been put on hold. I have since been put on the waitlist. I am scheduled to retake the LSAT for the last time tomorrow morning. I sent a LOCI at the end of April, & called them mid May to let them know that I would be retaking the exam in June. If I test tomorrow anywhere near my recent PTs I should be 3-4 points over their 75th percentile. My adjusted LSAC GPA is below the 25th percentile, but degree GPA is above the 25th percentile. Myt current LSAT from December is at their 25th percentile.

Oh yeah & their final seat deposit for admitted students is due today. I would either go today (about a 30 minute drive) or sometime next week after my shoulder surgery.

You spent months not only putting in all the work, but also sharing your experience and wisdom and touching so many of us on 7Sage. And you spent this past week watching us go through relief and anxiety and hope and freakouts, while you had to still stand quietly on your start line and wait for your own GO! whistle to blow.

You got through that and you're still kind and funny. You felt the pressure and didn't crack - as much as it tried, the LSAT's got nothing on you!

There's a reason the Elite athletes run on their own and not with the recreational masses - so all the spectators can concentrate fully on cheering them on. Brittany, you're our Elite athlete, and we're all here, ready to cheer you on tomorrow!

This Saturday at 3pm EST, I'll be hosting a Webinar on Anticipating Answers.

Anticipating is HUGE - I strongly believe Anticipating is a necessary habit for a top score. I teach my students to anticipate in some way for EVERY question on the LSAT. That's EVERY one of the 100/101 Questions on the test.

There's a lot of misunderstanding about how to anticipate and I'm doing this webinar to address that!

I scored a 173 (99th percentile) and I love tutoring the LSAT, so please join me on Saturday at 3 PM EST!

Anticipating Answer Choices

Sat, Jun 11, 2016 2:00 PM - 3:30 PM CDT

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

https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/303354245

You can also dial in using your phone.

United States +1 (408) 650-3123

Access Code: 303-354-245

Note on all webinars: Only the live webinars are free and open to the public. No recordings will be made publicly available, but we do make webinar recordings available to 7sage's students as part of the paid course. So if you want to get some great webinar content for free, be sure to attend the live version. Furthermore, any recording or broadcasting of webinars is strictly prohibited (Periscope, screencapture, etc.) and constitutes a violation of LSAC's copyright. Copyright infringement is not a good way to start a legal career.

Last year, I applied to a law school and got rejected. (Because of personal reasons, I could only apply to one school. But this year, I will be applying to a few more schools) My lsat was average, but I thought I had a pretty strong application otherwise. (gpa, extracurricular, reference, personal statement) I got rejected pretty late in the cycle, and now I'm debating whether or not I should call the school to find out where my application was weak. I'm also rewriting the lsat in Sept to hopefully improve my score. Thoughts?

Thank you for your input! :)

I am looking for good books on applying to law school, specifically a book that discusses the whole process from writing your personal statement to getting LORs to hitting submit. Anyone have any suggestions?

So I finished undergrad in ’08, which by the way was a really shitty time to graduate, lol. Anyway. So I haven’t worked with my professors in a long long time and I’m not sure how valuable those letters would be. I also feel a little uncomfortable asking someone to vouch for me who I haven’t worked with for the better part of a decade. At best, all those letters can truthfully say is, “he was a great student ten years ago." I can get great professional letters all day long, but I’ve been doing the same work since I graduated and it’s nothing so impressive that I want multiples. So, I’m really not sure what to do.

Share the most unhelpful, naive, and downright stupid comments you have gotten so far regarding your LSAT studying and Law School admission process! I know I can't be the only one with some funny stories.

For example tonight at dinner my Dad said, "(Insert family member here) passed the LSAT in one try, so you ought to be able to too!"

UGH.

If I buy Ultimate+ now, the most recent PT included is 77. But will I also have access to future PTs as they are released and before the 18-month end date? Just want to know before I shell out the dough.

[Admin note: Ultimate+ includes 12 months now]

Hello everyone! I am writing the June LSAT in New Zealand in 16 days and wondering what else I can do besides taking Prep Tests to improve my score. I've read through countless material on the stuff and done lots of practice but I'm finding it hard to break my scores and really see any subsequent improvements. Is there anything else you can suggest to do to push past the point I'm at now?

I'm on the introduction to logic section, and I'm looking specifically at Group 1. When approached with a sentence like "Whenever it rains, it pours." I immediately, in my head restate it as "If rain, then pours." I know this is correct for Group 1, but I want to make sure thinking about it like this isn't going to hurt me in future lessons.

I'm bored at lunch so I decided to ask you guys what scores do you think you earned on the June LSAT. As usual in my threads, I will go first. I think I scored a 168 because that was the the top end of my pt range recently and the test didn't seem overly difficult compared to other tests.

hello 7sages!

I'm considering buying editing services from 7sage or somewhere else, partly because I'm too busy (working 13+ hours a day), partly because I'm not an English native speaker. Paradoxically, the fact that i'm not a native speaker also stops me from buying editing service, because i'm afraid that the polished statement from David Busis will be too good to be mine.

I browsed a few top law schools' websites, Michigan Law School makes it explicit

May a foreign applicant who does not write well in English use a professional editing service to edit for language and style?

We expect that essays are the work of the applicant. It's one thing to show them to a friend or two for input, but we definitely frown upon a professional service. This is true whether the applicant is a native speaker or not; all too often, U.S. natives will hire "admissions consultants" to actually pen their personal statements, and we view that too as a violation of our expectation that all the work is that of the applicant. You'd be surprised how easily we are able to detect these professionally polished essays. We will often compare the writing style of the LSAT essay with that of the personal statement, for example, and when there's a stark contrast, we'll know why.

Some law schools have similar warning as well.

If it's ghostwriting by editors, it's no doubt a cheating and should be forbidden. But if I have worked hard to the best PS I can produce, and then buy the services I need to compensate my disadvantages (not living in the US, nor a native speaker), it's seems a little in the grey area to me.

But of course, if I know i'm going to have a editor help me, i may rely on him or her rather than trying my best at the very beginning of my personal statement.

I really appreciate all of your help and opinions! Thank you!

I'm a mature student and haven't been to school since 2006. I can bet almost none of my professors even remember me . What is your advice for who to ask for LOR's?

I am currently working through the course and I am wondering do you typically complete the entire course lessons before taking another test? My diagnostic was test 56, so I still have the 2007 I can take. Should I take it now, that I have a more basic understanding... or take it once I am completely through the starter package course??? I guess I am semi desperate to see some improvement :)

Thx guys