Hi all,

I have a question about correlations, as related to the LSAT. For example, PT77.S2.Q25 "The longer an animal can stay submerged in a dive, the deeper an animal can dive."

Do this statement go both ways, i.e. You can validly conclude that:

Feel free to just answer my question above, but delving even deeper into theory here, correct me if I'm wrong:

*I'm assuming that causality GENERALLY goes one way, but can go both ways. I.e., The Alliance system caused the war (it wouldn't be correct to say the war caused the Alliance system.) However, I can also think of some examples where an effect could be a cause and a cause could be an effect.

*What about correlation?

I don't know if there is a technical definition on the matter, but I'm curious what scores/GPAs make you a splitter. Is it overall, or specific to school?

For ex: a below 3 GPA and an above 170 LSAT is clearly a splitter.

But say you have a 3.5 or 3.6 GPA and an above 170 score. Is that STILL a splitter at the top schools? Or does the 170+ score override your good (but not great) GPA?

I feel like it becomes even more complicated when you parse out the scores above 170. At what point above 170 do the returns on another point stop increasing?

I realize this is a multi-layered question with a lot of hypothetical situations, so it may not be a worthwhile exercise for many. But then again maybe it is, since I know a lot of people probably have similar thoughts.

Here to vent a little bit.

I've been having horrible headaches this week and put in couple bad PT's.

Last week, I PT'd 65 and got a 167/173. Highest BR score and second highest real score ever.

The last 2 PT's this week have been 161 and 162 (both high BR scores).

I have been rock steady in LG for some time now but this week I missed -7 and -9. The new RC is difficult, but I have improved from not being able to even finish to becoming better. One silver lining is my LR, which I scored as good as -2 on.

I feel like I have a good grasp on the fundamentals but it's just been tough. Hope you guys have had a better week then me.

Edit: Any advice/encouragements/venting is welcome :):):)

I really enjoyed these sessions. Essentially, we answered questions live and rotated BRing them 1-on-1 with JY. We learned a whole lot about ways to approach question analysis and to gauge how well we really understand a question -- whether or not we answered it correctly.

My notes from these sessions are shared below. I see now that most of what I wrote for any given QT is actually applicable across the section, so I've gone ahead and reorganized my notes to reflect that. So if you are wondering why there are only few a lines under each QT but a whole lot under Best Practices, that's why : )

Best Practices

AC Strategy

-Narrowed down to 2 AC: circle key words and ID the main points to differentiate the two. Weigh them against one another again and skip/answer.

-Skipping is powerful because we usually interpret better on the second read. Don't even feel obligated to read the AC. Collect your coconuts.

-Don't latch onto AC. We may find ourselves spending 30+ seconds with a single AC just trying to make sense of it but that is stupid because it may not even make any sense to begin with. If you don't have a strong pre-phrase in your head, skim the AC ruthlessly. One of them may jump out as correct. Some may jump out as incorrect.

-Sometimes test writers place the correct answer for highly difficult questions as A or B hoping that when we read these AC, we are still processing the stimulus.

BR Strategy

-Get used to thinking in terms of Domains of Discourse. That will help you generally understand, ID flaws, and de-clutter your diagrams

-Match up corresponding ideas within analogies between the stimulus and AC. Think up additional analogies.

-Cookie Cutters are your friends. Study them so that you can identify them in whatever form they take. Test writers can dress them up in all sorts of creative ways. But if I gifted you a hockey stick, would it matter what color wrapping paper I used?

-There are also Cookie Cutter stimuli. Study these too.

-Sometimes the stimuli and the scenarios they describe or totally unrelatable. When this happens, think of your own real world substitute that matches and is easier to deal with.

Misc

-Once you start seeing the "Matrix" in LR, you won't know where you are until you attempt being 100% aggressive. Do confidence drills starting at 100% aggression (no diagramming, select what you think is right without looking at other AC, etc) and scale back accordingly. Calibrate you confidence level to your ability.

MSS

3 Major Cookie Cutter Types:

-(1) The stimulus is missing a main conclusion which the correct AC provides -- code name: "Extended MP Question"

-(2) The correct AC restates a premise (super premise) or pushes out an inference from 2 premises -- code name: "Mega MSS"

-(3) The correct AC summarizes the stimulus

SA

If you are reading carefully and your intuition is good, the stimulus probably won't flow smoothly. That is because you've detected the gap which we need to plug. Learn to enjoy that discomfort and focus on IDing exactly where that gap is.

Try to get comfortable visualizing aspects of the stimulus and AC in abstract form. If you can see ideas in terms of shapes or "things", that can simplify a purposefully convoluted and wordy stimulus. It can also help us decipher AC by IDing the structure of a given AC: "No [thing]" vs "Any [thing]. Think about what effect those conditional indicators have on their proceeding terms.

PSA

"Pseudo" is not usually that "pseudo" -- don't use the marginal wiggle room allowed on these questions to justify bad and incorrect AC.

PSA vs Principle: Understanding your task

-The QS can be easy to confuse, but the activities they require of us are completely different.

-Principle doesn't show up much, but if we understand PSA/SA, then it shouldn't trip us up because this questions all contain the same puzzle pieces it's just a matter of which one are provided and which we need to ID in the AC.

-To be honest, I still am having trouble differentiating these but I am not missing them either.

PR(F)

-Explicitly line up analogies in BR. Which ideas in the correct AC correspond with ideas from the stimulus? Do this for incorrect AC as well.

-In BR, alter wrong AC so that they would be correct. That will help strengthen your intuition for what was actually wrong. I think this exercise is also good for that thing we do where we read and AC and it sounds good about halfway through but then what we needed (and expected) to be said next wasn't -- and it's wrong because of it.

-Triage. Experiment which prioritizing AC. For example, reading the conclusions first to see if they match.

Flaw

-Learn and lean on the Cookie Cutter flaws. Not every question is Cookie Cutter, but if you know them, then when you face a misc. question, you'll be able quickly eliminate Cookie Cutter AC.

-AC will use tons of abstract language to confuse you and eat up time. Attempt to bring these AC down to the level of the stimulus. Replace the abstract language with corresponding ideas from the stimulus. This process will be much more rigorous in the BR but if you are choosing between 2 AC, deploy this method.

-Correct AC must (1) Be descriptively accurate and (2) Be the flaw

-"Fails to consider..." are almost always accurate because the avg stimulus is only like 4 sentences long. But is it the flaw?

NA

-An NA is an extremely powerful idea, though it looks and sounds weak. That is because without that assumption, the whole argument fall to bits.

Hi,

I was wondering if someone could help clarify something for me. When you see this particular question stem, "reasoning is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that it presumes," do you think of trying to find an assumption or just to identify the flaw. Any suggestions for eliminating answer choices for these flaw questions that are more subtle?

Thank you!

Hi 7Sagers,

This is a question mainly directed at those who have already taken the LSAT. It says on the bubble sheet to "not leave any stray marks", etc.

However, I've gotten into the habit of circling the numbers on my bubble sheet to come back to for blind reviewing. Has anyone else done this on the actual test? Does it impact scoring?

If it does, what do y'all do to notate questions you want to come back to without writing on the bubble sheet?

Thanks in advance!

I can access my syllabus but when I click on anything it will not load.

Admin edit: We're aware of the issue and are looking into it. Sorry about this, guys.

Admin edit 2: Fixed. Sorry for the trouble!

Hey, guys! A lot of the stuff available now was not available when I first enrolled so I'm not sure what's free and what's not. Will the analytics info still be available? Will all test scores be wiped? What about the e-docs purchased from 7Sage? TIA

I can access PF problem sets 4/5 and view the questions and printable versions of the questions, but when I open up the answer key and click explanation, there is a lock. That lock takes me to the LSAT Ultimate+ upgrade page. Are sets 4/5 Ultimate+ problem sets? Usually an Ultimate+ problem set is locked from the syllabus page. For instance, once I click into the PF Problem Set 4 page, I can click on the "Lesson12 of 13" link underneath the "Parallel Flaw Questions Problem Set 4" title which shows me that PF Problem Sets 6/7 are locked for me and that they require Ultimate+. So are 4/5/6/7 all Ultimate+ sets and for some reason I'm getting partial access to 4/5 or am I given access to 4/5 as a regular Ultimate member but for some reason getting locked out of the explanations because of a technical error?

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-18-section-4-question-16/

Strengthen Question

I was able to get this one correct by eliminating wrong choices, but I have a question regarding the answer choice (C).

(C) says when two methods provide the same type of information, the more intrusive one shouldn't be used.

From Dr. K's argument, we know that electronic fetal monitors (EFM) "do no more" to increase the chances that a baby will be born in good health than ordinary stethoscopes, but does this mean EFM and ordinary stethoscopes provide the same kind of info?

From Dr. A's argument, we know that Dr. K does acknowledge that both methods provide the same information, but can we use our knowledge we get from Dr. A's argument to strengthen Dr. K's argument?

I just got an email with 2 pdfs from LSAC and in one they stated: "You will receive an analysis of your personal performance on the

pilot test approximately 6 weeks after the administration. This analysis will include the number of correct and incorrect answers in each section and for groups of questions involving certain types of skills."

Im taking the pilot test to get jitters out of the way but I was hoping to know my score before the June LSAT. Doesn't it seem weird that it takes 6 weeks instead of the normal 4, even though its a pilot? Isn't the point to know your score right after or maybe a little after the test.

Thoughts?

Relative v. absolute

A is faster than B, therefore A is fast. Well, not necessarily. A is faster than B in relative terms. It doesn’t imply that A is fast in absolute terms. For example, we know that the conclusion in this statement is not true: “Hippopotamuses are smaller than an elephants. Therefore, hippopotamuses are small.” Or take this statement: “Turtles are faster than ants. Therefore, turtles are fast.”

Can someone please explain this?

Hey All,

Just called LSAC about changing my test date to September, I am told the new dates will be posted on Friday. May the odds be ever in your favor.

Any ETA on the LG drill packets? I really wanna get started on them. Sorry, meant to say ETA on their organization.

Hello, I know this seems like a weird question, but I can't find much anywhere else. I'm planning on attending a local Law School, and their median scores they take are around 150-155. I know I'm not shooting for the stars here, and these are dismal scores to most of you. I'm about 3 months into studying, my latest score was a 144. I'm getting about --13 on LR, -15 on LG, -12.5 on RC. What would those scores need to be at to achieve a 150 and a 155? Meaning does it need to be -10 LR, -13 LG, and -10 on RC, or however that figures out to? I'm just trying to decide if it's realistic to hit that mark before June, or if I'm needing to do September as well

Thank you

Hello!

So I forgot to reply to the email to confirm my registration within 48 hours for the digital test next weekend (dumb, I know). I called them yesterday and they mentioned that my name was on the roster. But when I called back today (because the person I talked to yesterday was kinda rude), they said that there is no way for them to check whether I am signed up or not...

I emailed them to confirm and they did not specify whether I am signed up or not in their reply. I did elaborate and ask them directly to confirm my registration, but I am not sure what to do where admission tickets should be going out between today and Friday.

I am not sure where to go from here...

I registered for the June exam long time ago and was planning on postponing till September, but it seems like I'd be 90% ready by June. I'm scoring about 3 points below my target score. I know that ideally speaking, I should be pt-ing 3 scores above my target score to be "ready." Realistically speaking,

I don't think I will arrive there by June, because the last bit of the improvement usually takes the longest. ( like being on a diet; it is always the last 5 pounds that's the hardest to shed...and takes equally much time as shedding 20 pounds in the beginning... Lol)

But I am kinda worried about the Sept exam because I have a chronic insomnia and I feel nervous taking the morning exam. I know for a fact that I won't fall asleep. No amount of exercise, sleeping cycle correction will help me. I just know that much about myself. Nyquil is out of option, because I feel dizzy and foggy the day after.

Should I take the June exam just in case, since it is in the afternoon and I'd likely to have slept better? And maybe taking it in June will give me some perspective/insight for Sept?

First off, thank you 7 sage for having these awesome e-docs we get to print from! I just recently noticed that now the dates are appearing when I print and its making the content actually a little more blurry and smaller. Is there anyway to have them switch back to how they used to be? Or is there a special setting that I am unaware of?

Thank you!

Which type of questions in the logical reasoning section require the use of Suf/Nec and their negation? I have a good idea of how this works, I understand when/where it applies in LG, but I have no clue when to use this in LR. Sometimes I'll see an indicator and it doesn't seem to affect the question at all. Other time's I feel I miss them completely. What are the common question types that require us to map these out in the x_ ---> y fashion? What do the question stems look like?

Seriously it is getting down to the wire for the June exam and I am STILL struggling with the misc lg! Sometimes I can figure them out but for the most part I am not getting the entire game of that problem type! Please.....if anyone has suggestions could you leave a comment?!

Thanks in Advance

-M

What are some of your strategies to get excited for this section?

I enjoy the process of studying for LR and RC, but not LG.

I think I naturally enjoy anything that has to do with literary comprehension, but LG reminds me too much of algebra and math, which I've hated all throughout my life.. haha

I also think a part of it is my pride: I've excelled in humanities but not really in math, relatively speaking. So I would work extra hard, if need be, to maintain my self identity that I am good at critical reading. With LG, I have no such existential motivation.

any way to change this preconceived notion?

When I open up the page to fool-proof for LG, I think ... "Uh....it's that time again..."

Any tips?

Hey all,

My circumstances allow me to take two months of the summer (July & August) off to focus solely on LSAT studying. My goal is to take the September test. This isn't my first time studying for the LSAT so the fundamental concepts are familiar to me - it's a matter of really pushing myself to refine my understanding and application.

I'm currently working through the core curriculum with a full time job. I don't know how to structure my studying currently knowing that I'll be studying full time in July & August. I'm not being consistent with studying right now b/c my work can be intense and exhausting. Any advise would be appreciated!

Hey 7Sagers!

I just got my acceptance letters from both University of Melbourne (JD) and University of Sydney in Australia! These are the only two applications I have submitted so far, as North American ones do not open until August-November. I am planning to apply to North American ones as well once they open, but I was just wondering what your thoughts are on some of the pros and cons when deciding between a JD in Australia and one in Canada.

I am originally from Europe, so the "remote" location is not an issue for me and furthermore I am not sure whether I'd want to come back to Canada to practice once I'm done (I'm somewhat of a go-everywhere and explore everything type of person) but I am wondering if any of you have heard of grad-employment rates and whether they are better in Canada v. Australia, or other things such as harshness of grading scales, etc. Just anything that would help me with my choice really...

Thank you in advance everyone :)

Hi everyone!

The June LSAT is about a month away, and I was wondering if you guys had any advice.

To give you a little context, based off of my time PTs, I am still about 2-3 points away from my target score. When I do BR, I generally hit my target score or somewhat exceed it. I'm a little afraid that I have hit my LSAT score "wall." My score hasn't changed much over the past few weeks. Do you guys think it's possible to boost up my score those 2-3 points, and, do you guys have any advice on how to best study to gain a better and more confident grasp on this test? Recently, I've been a little lost as to how to best utilize my remaining time.

Thanks ahead of time!

I guess it's best to start with a little bit of history. I started my LSAT in June of 2016, I took a course with one of the testing companies and sat down for the September 2016 test. I scored a 157, which for me personally simply was not good enough. The course I took over the summer felt cluttered, and I certainly did not apply myself the way I should.

After the results, I turned to 7sage. I have the Ultimate package and I can tell this is much more my style for learning and comprehension. The question I can't answer now is "where do I begin".

I feel most confident with LG, I enjoy them, look forward to them and over all like doing them. I am still not perfect here (-2 to -4).

The other two sections are iffy. I took two practice tests through 7sage, one as a diagnostic and one more just to get a more accurate reading of where I am. The scores on those two tests were 161 and 159 respectively.

I have accepted that I don't know how to "LSAT" and I have accepted that I need to blind review in order to understand what I am doing both wrong and right. What I don't know is as follows;

Would it be most wise for me to follow the course lesson by lesson?

Should I sit down, look at the analytics, and focus on the question types that reoccurred during those two tests?

Should I relearn the way I approach Logic Games and use the methods 7sage suggests?