When should I make my Credential Assembly Service account? I am taking the September LSAT but may retake in December if I don't get a good LSAT.

No formal announcement, they just wanted to stick it to us. Glad someone caught it before. EVERYONE needs to adjust.. savage.

Here is the email since others were afraid of sharing.. Im at a loss of words.

Beginning with the September 2016 test, all administrations of the test include five sections and a writing sample. Please see a description of the test at

http://www.lsac.org/jd/lsat/about-the-lsat

and

http://www.lsac.org/docs/default-source/jd-docs/statement-of-need.pdf.

Your accommodations for the June and September test are identical. The only thing that has changed is the format of the test. You were not previously granted a waiver of the non-scored section as an accommodation nor are you entitled to one now.

Admin edit: A user posted a screenshot of their email from LSAC as well.

@hope.brinn

http://imgur.com/a/iL4bP

I'm just curious as to if getting a high school physics professor to write a LOR for me would hurt my application.. He's been a close mentor throughout my years in Undergrad and through my professional career and knows me much better than my college professors. He's a very respected and knowledgeable individual, but I fear that because he works at a HS instead of University it might not hold as much weight. I couldn't find anything on TLS after searching so I thought I would ask here before starting a post over there.

For what it's worth I also plan on including 2 of my University professor's as LOR's as well.. just stuck between my HS Physics teacher and a supervisor at my engineering company as number 3.

Update: Event delayed by 45 mins. New start time 9:45pm EST.

7Sagers,

This Monday, August 29, at 9:45 pm EST, I’ll do another round of live lightning consultations.

What’s a lightning consultation? Basically, I’ll try to be as helpful as I can in five minutes. We might brainstorm personal statement topics, strategize about addenda, or discuss LORs.

If you want a free five-minute consultation about your law school application, I’ll need you to post a few things in the comments section:

I’ll get through as many people as I can in one hour, working in a mostly random order. Please don’t post to this thread if you can’t show up for the consultation. If you do show up, test your microphone beforehand. Make sure you have a strong connection to the internet, and that you can speak and be heard on GoToMeeting. If your microphone isn’t working, I’ll have to skip you.

To join, just follow this link: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/935486253

We’ll use Citrix GoToMeeting. The meeting ID is 935-486-253

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-b-section-2-game-2/

I have some questions about the proper diagram and meaning of a rule in this in/out game.

Rule 3: "If Yews are not in the park, then either L or O, but not both, are in the park."

- Could someone explain about how to properly diagram this rule (ideally in notation that does NOT involve biconditionals)? I diagrammed it as 2 separate rules (shown below), but I think it only confused me more...

/Y --> L or O (representing 'either/or')

/Y --> /L and /O (representing 'not both')

- If I'm understanding the meaning of this rule correctly, does the contrapositive of this rule basically mean/state that "if both L & O are in the park, then Y is in the park." ? Does the contrapositive of this rule also include "if both L & O are OUT, then Y is IN"?

TIA!

Man, I got my first sub-170 PT score in months and I'm feeling really defeated. Did anyone else find the first LR section to be extremely difficult? I haven't missed more than 3 questions in an LR section since I started studying again in June. Am I going crazy? BLEGHHHHHHHHH

Is anyone else having an issue with loading video's with the volume? I will be in the middle of J.Y. speaking and then the volume just cuts completely off. I refresh the page in hopes that it will work again, but nothing. I tried playing around with the settings, but nothing seems to work. I use Chrome as my browser is that a bad option for this website?

I just recently exhausted all of the games from the LG bundle and went back through the one's that gave me issues up to 5 to 6X over, re-doing them again and again/referring to the video breakdown, until I felt I had the hang of it. All of this has taken a couple months of LG-exclusive focus. I've improved and although not perfect, I think I'm at a point where I can move into the next phase. The plan is to take a few days to revisit my notes on LR/RC from the CC in an effort to refresh myself after time spent essentially in LG boot camp.

I feel the next step should be to either take LR sections from the older PTs or begin full PTs from 36 and up. I'm aware that opinions vary regarding drilling LR by complete sections or by specific question types. For those who have done both, has one helped your improvement more?

Also, is drilling LR sections and question types before or after beginning full PT phase more a preference or are there strong reasons to do one before/after?

It is my intention to take my 180Watch with me on test day, since I find it very useful when doing PTs. Can I be a 100% certain about being allowed to have it in the test room with me (I know there are some restrictions on the type of watch one can have)?

Thanks,

Piotr

This is a principle question.

I got this wrong in both drilling and blind review.

So I thought I am looking for something that will do the following:

connect the premise to the conclusion

SO, say something about how something that is a health hazard should be banned

My reasoning:

A) This is the one I picked in BR. I thought the phrase "should not be allowed" could be a referent to banned. It could be taking it a bit to the extreme, i.e. making that extra assumption, but to me this seemed like the strongest answer choice.

B) The argument is not about misleading claims, but rather if something is a health hazard it should be banned. This answer choice does not do that.

C) This is stretching the argument to an extreme. This is like saying advertisements for vitamins should include all side effects etc. This answer choice says all health hazards associated with promoted products should be included. The argument says if a product has a health hazard, it should be banned.

D) This answer choice is irrelevant. Conforming to regulations and standards is information that is extraneous and the argument did not address.

E) I thought this was wrong because of the word ban while this answer choice is discussing promoting a product. I guess it could be correct because if it is not a health hazard then it would be healthful. This could be the contrapositive, "if a product does not promote smoking then it is not a health hazard" Then you would take the extra leap and say if it does not promote smoking then it is a healthful product, and you would just ignore the health hazard part since that is no longer relevant.

I'm really confused. In my reasoning, I did not address the "promote smoking" part, maybe that's where I went wrong. I still think this could be a big leap of assumptions. If someone can tell me if my reasoning is valid/reasonable and explain answer choices A and E to me, I would be most appreciative!

My professors said they need it so they get an idea of what my plans are for law school. I'm interested in commercial litigation or corporate law, not really sure yet.

From googling statement of purpose, it looks like it's something for students applying to graduate schools that pretty much says "this is why I want to apply to this program".

I don't feel comfortable giving them my personal statement as it's very...personal. I open it up briefly talking about rough sh*t that happened to me when I was young and that leads into how I'm a stronger person today etc. I'm also only halfway finished with it.

Should I just give them a more generic and less personal version of my personal statement?

I want to get it in to them by late September as I know they won't want to deal with writing a letter of rec during midterms (November) or finals (December).

I've done all the games sections from PTs 50 - 56 so far. I've gone between -0 and -3 on all of them, and I finished all of them under time, some with 5-8 minutes to spare. Are these sections easier than normal or I am just getting better at games?

I keep getting the message "video not found or access denied".

It was working fine till yesterday, I've restarted my computer, deleted cookies, and tried changing the settings to flash player.

Is it just me?

Hey guys,

I am currently focusing on LG, and I decided to try the LSAT trainer in combination with 7Sage. However, I find the Trainer to be a bit complicated and confusing thus far ( I am currently on chapter 10 of the book). Has anyone else experienced this, and is it worth completing the LG portion?

Thanks!

Anyone else find the the reading comprehension and logic games on this test were significantly easier than others but that the logical reasoning was more difficult? I scored significantly lower on this practice test and I have been scoring on others. I have been averaging around 163 but I only got 160 on this practice test

7sagers in school/working/parenting, how do you balance all of your responsibilities with your studies? I just started school again this week and I already feel like I'm drowning. With 30 days until the LSAT, I'm scoring above my goal. But, I'm still worried about having enough time to complete all four logic games. Agh! Give me some experience, strength, and hope, please.

My LSAC GPA is lower than my UG GPA. I took some classes in high school at a local college and that lowered it a bit. I am worried it will hurt my chances applying to some schools where my degree gpa is at the median but my LSAC gpa is lower than the median.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-44-section-3-game-3/

I have a question relating to conditionals in grouping games.

Although this was a relatively simple game in that L and P are together and G and H are not together, rendering a limited number of combinations, the two conditional statements upon which the more difficult questions depended made the game significantly more challenging.

In the video explanation for this game, instead of diagramming the conditionals in the typical if---> then format, J.Y. instead quickly jotted down the resulting game boards for each conditional. In this sense, the game is unique in that the two conditionals provided actually resulted in two fully solved "worlds." Because this rarely happens in grouping games, I wasn't in the habit of looking to see if the conditionals resulted in solved worlds. What J.Y. does, makes the game significantly easier.

My question is this: Whenever we have conditional statements in a grouping game that result in a solved game-board, should we jot down the solved game board? Or should we wait to see if questions require it? I suppose that doesn't make much sense...maybe what I'm getting at is, HOW do we know when use this technique.

Either way, this was a very simple game, made difficult by conditionals. I'd like to know how to avoid making the error I made in the future. Thoughts?

Can somebody explain how to use the calculator for LSDAS GPA? I went to one school my freshmen year that did plus/minus system and received 2 B's 2 B+'s and 6 A's. Then my next school does not do plus/minus but counts A's as 4 points. Does that mean I enter these in as A's or A+'s? What does 3 passing and 4 passing mean? And also do I put the total number of points I received (at the first school my A's were 3 points and at my final school the A's are 4 points) in the section that says five point? I am really confused.

The undergrad institution I am about to graduate from has the 10 point, or A/B, scale. We do not have A+/- scale. I currently have a 3.93 GPA. Will the LSAC change my GPA? It shouldn't change based on the LSAC requirements, as I have not failed or retaken any classes. How does this work? Thanks.

Hey guys,

Just wanted to give a big shout out to Alan for hosting our 7sage event last Thursday night in Toronto, Ontario. I know it's safe to say on behalf of everyone that attended that we all had a great time and appreciate your efforts to bring us all together to finally meet face to face.

To all that could not make it, there is still lots of time to exchange contact info and set up local group sessions :)

If those of you are not as email-savvy as myself, feel free to use this thread to get in contact with students in this area. You can also message me directly if interested in future studying.

Here are a couple of photos from the night (sorry to all who left before this)...

pics to come....

Hi guys i'm wondering if I could get some advice. I started casually studying for the LSAT about two months ago and i'm through 60% of the curriculum. In the fall ill be taking about 9 credit hours of classes so not too bad. In your guys opinion do I have enough time to squeeze in drilling through the cambridge packets for LR and LG then get in enough PT's for the December exam? I hear that some people just do logic games for a month..I would like to do that but it would take too much time away from scheduled PT's. Another option could be February but I will be taking 16 credit hours so I don't think ill have enough time...However the February exam is in the first week of so I could squeeze it in before the pressure of midterms. The next time I could take the test would then be December 2017 probably. I think my first diagnostic after I'm done the curriculum may give me a lot of info too..If I score around 152-152 I may just go ahead and write in December as my goal score is only 160...what do you guys think.

Thanks.

So, I've drilled LR using Tests 29-58. I BR all my work. I was getting 2-3 wrong per section, which is my target, but once I moved into the 50's I started getting 5-6 wrong per section.

I just can't seem to cut this number down. Most of my wrong answers hinge on details that are so subtle it's absolutely infuriating; answer choices that hinge on the correct interpretation of the word "susceptible" or other minutia.

I seem to have hit this plateau where nothing I'm doing is helping. How do I improve when most of my wrong answers hinge on these really small details? BR doesn't seem to be helping. I'm wondering if there are suggestions.

I want to save Tests 60 and above for full-timed tests, so I think I'm going to go back to the beginning and drill LR all over again :(

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-27-section-4-question-13/

Admin: Edited out passage because it was word for word. Please paraphrase.

I wanted to ask if this is the breakdown. because in J.Y.'s video he says that where it states "so it is no less wrong to grant this power to society" is the conclusion, but i see that as the sub conclusion.

and I thought the main conclusion would be [The ancient Greeks failed to recognize that morally, democracy is no improvement over monarchy] ..... because then you say "why should i believe this" and the rest of the argument tells you why.

The "/A->B" rule is so important for grouping games that PowerScore uses a special symbol ("A(-|-)B", or "the double-not arrow") to note it. As a person who understands how important this is for grouping games, I think the "double-not arrow" is brilliant. As a person who has tried to explain it to others, it is both frustrating and confusing. The "double not arrow" is ONLY used when the sufficient term is negative and the necessary term is positive--or is it the opposite? It makes a huge difference, but I find it almost impossible to keep it straight in my head, much less explain it to someone else. For that reason, I think JY is wise to avoid using it here at 7Sage.

But what if it were not confusing? I have come up with TWO arrows that practically write themselves and make grouping games much easier. All you have to do is look at the way we write out "/A->B" and "A->/B."

Note how the slash comes first in the "/A->B" situation, but comes second in the "A->/B" case. Let's turn those slashes into pictures. If we put the forward slash first, we can make a "/\" picture. If we put it second, we get a "\/" picture.

/A->B turns into A(-/\-)B

A->/B turns into A(-\/-)B

Pictures are helpful if they mean something, so let's call the "/\" picture an "erupting volcano." The "erupting volcano arrow" means that something is erupting, so that something must be in your slot. The "\/" looks like a "leaky funnel," which means something is leaking, which means something must be OUT.

If you can remember that "slash comes first" means "/\," and "/\" means "erupting volcano," and "erupting volcano" means something must be in, you can turn a "/A->B" rule into a full slot within seconds. And if you can remember what a "leaky funnel" does, you'll fill an out slot just as fast.

And there's no reason to ever get them mixed up!