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!

Ramadan Mubarak to my fellow Muslim 7sagers! Perfect time to recharge our faith and get more LSAT prep in without having to worry about eating/drinking throughout the day :D

Hi could someone help me out with the diagramming on this one? I found it absolutely confounding and I'm usually pretty decent at conditional phrasing.

So what I took away from this after looking at this thoroughly was that the original logic chain is something to the effect of:

P1: EW (Weak Economy) -> PRC (Prices Remain Constant) and UR (Unemployment Rises)

P2: UR -> ID (Investment Decreases)

P3: /ID

What I got from this was: EW-> PRC

-> UR -> ID

Arrow in the second line after the blank is supposed to symbolize the "and." (And is split after, Or is split before)

From there: /ID ->/UR ->/EW

PRC seems irrelevant now since you've already failed part of the "and". Sufficient (EW) is already failed by /UR, therefore PRC floats. It can do whatever.

How do we get from /ID ->/UR ->/EW

to /EW -> ID must be false

Not sure how this is correct. Obviously, since we know ID is stated in the stimulus, this must be true. Then it says EW, which we know not to be true.

Similarly, with D, we know that the economy is not weak, must be true, but prices remaining constant, I have no idea how this figures in.

Same thing with E. Either unemployment is rising, and we know that it isn't, or the economy is not weak, which also must be true. We know both of these must be true. Still not sure how this translates into an either...or statement.

What am I missing here? Is it something to with the either...or statements?

Hey, anybody out there scoring 170 on their practice LSATs? I'm beginning my studying, and I want to make sure I kill it and do it right. How are you going about it? Do you make sure that you're only studying in absolute silence or something? Always in a library/ in your favourite chair at home? Have some sort of night ritual that helps it all sink in? My GPA is 3.9, so I think I have a real chance at bringing in a high score. Much appreciated.

Principle or PSA question?

In LR, I try to identify the question type as quickly as possible, but sometimes I cannot identify immediately. I have hard time differentiating PSA and Principle questions under timed conditions.

Typical PSA questions are like:

"Which one of the following principles, if valid, most helps to justify the reasoning above?"

and I can identify it as PSA immediately.

But for example, PT57.S2.Q1. says:

"The reasoning above most closely conforms to which one of the following principles?"

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-57-section-2-question-01/

This is a fairly easy question, but I didn't know that this is a PSA question until after I read the stimulus and ACs.

Do you have any tips in differentiating PSAs from Principles quickly?

=============================================

Is Q39.S2.Q11 a PSA question?

Also, 7Sage labeled Q39.S2.Q11 as PSA, but I feel like this is a Principle question since we're given a conditional statement in the stimulus, and answers give us a premise and a conclusion.

"Which one of the following judgements most closely conforms to the principle above?"

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-39-section-2-question-11/

Is this a PSA question? If so, can someone elaborate on the difference between PSA and Principle questions?

Thank you :)

I'm adding my explanation to this question since it doesn't currently exist on 7sage. Feel free to critique my reasoning.

This is a necessary assumption question. We know this because the question stem says the argument above makes which one of the following assumptions? The correct AC must be an assumption we know the argument makes. Therefore, it is a necessary assumption.

P: R bacteria provide nitrogen to bean plants and other legumes. Nitrogen is an essential plant nutrient. Wheat must normally be supplied nitrogen by nitrogen fertilizer.

C: If technology produces wheat strains that will host R bacteria, the need for fertilizers will be reduced.

Flaw: I originally thought but what if nitrogen is not the only essential plant nutrient for plants to grow? Might the need for fertilizer remain? B plays on this erroneous understanding. This isn't the actual flaw.

A. 'should' is irrelevant. This is not about what should happen it's about what is/will happen.

B. This was temping and it the trap answer choice. The conclusion says the need for artificial fertilizers will be reduced if biotech succeeds in producing wheat strains who host R bacteria. What about other reasons growers need to add fertilizer? Can we conclude from no longer needing nitrogen that fertilizer demand in general will be reduced? Even if nitrogen only comprises a small subset of all fertilizer use, if we eliminate the nitrogen need, then yes, the fertilizer demand will be reduced. This is true even if nitrogen is not the only soil nutrient that must be supplied. The key word to not falling for this trap answer choice is "reduced." Perhaps I was temped because I was thinking "eliminated." If the conclusion said the demand would be eliminated then yes nitrogen would have to be the only reason growers use fertilizer.

C. This is not necessary. It talks about other grasses but even if it didn't, even if there are strains of wheat that do have R naturally, we know there are some that aren't. That's what the whole argument is about so this is irrelevant.

D. Similar reasoning to C. We don't need legumes to be the only crops that produce nitrogen. We know some wheats don't and we know there is an existing need for nitrogen based fertilizer. The argument is simply saying the need will go down if wheat is modified to host R bacteria.

E. This is absolutely necessary. If the R bacteria did not produce nitrogen in the wheat roots then it wouldn't reduce the need for artificial fertilizer. This is the true flaw. Just because the plant will host the bacteria doesn't mean that it will necessarily have the desired effect.

So i am planning on taking the September LSAT. I am almost done my bachelors, all i have left is a 6 week online capstone. My question is, can i apply to school without having finished my bachelors yet? I dont want to take the capstone during my LSAT prep. So i was considering taking it at some point next year but i want to be considered for early decision for fall 2018. Was wondering if schools will extend an offer when i have not completed my bachelors yet. As of right now i have 3.9 gpa and i dont think this capstone will change that. Thanks for your help!!

Happy Sunday, everyone!

I'm currently working through the Core Curriculum, and for the harder problem sets in the Logical Reasoning modules (mostly Sufficient and Pseudo-Sufficient Assumption questions sets) I'm able to eliminate 3/5 answer choices without any problem. Of the remaining two answer choices (which is always the correct answer choice and one incorrect one) I end up eliminating the correct answer choice and choosing the incorrect one, even after carefully considering both options and writing down explanations for why I eliminated or chose each AC.

Has this ever happened to any of you, and what did you do to correct it?

Thank you for all your help ~ it has been invaluable in my study prep! =)