Hi all,

I just began the RC section of the curriculum, and I'm finding it sort of pointless to study along with the videos without having the passage in front of me. I've heard legends of a time when pdfs were available, but now that that's not a thing, I was hoping some of you had suggestions on how best to get my hands on study materials. How do you ensure you're not "wasting" material from PTs while just trying to learn/perfect the study methods?

(I'm sure this has been asked before....sorry for the repetition)

THANKS!

Since I make markings on my test, and I don't want to get new blank copies to BR, is it acceptable if I just use the question bank for the BR? I was thinking since the time element does not matter, using electronic questions wouldn't really hurt anything. But, of course, if it is detrimental to my progress, I can just get new copies. What do you guys think?

haha sorry guys just found out, wife said dont tell anyone yet, so i figured.. well i'll tell my 7sage friends they wont tell anyone she knows lol. so now im doing this for me and my family !! extra motivated now !!

Anyone think 10 points can be gained in the next two months of LSAT prep? I am at 159 right now after 2nd PT and hoped to reach close to 169 by June test. I'm missing over half on Games right now & simple mistakes on LR, so I plan on drilling that a lot between now and test day. Thoughts or previous experiences with this are much appreciated!

I hope you had a good break. Now it's time to get back to work. PT 73's up!

PT 73 Review on Saturday, April 22nd at 5PM ET

Try this first---- https://www.gotomeeting.com/ and then enter the code 617-377-325

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=aWw1aWEzYTRkbWdoaDZsa3U3YjBsaDBlZDBAZ3JvdXAuY2FsZW5kYXIuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbQ

Note:

Where exactly can we print the PTs that are available to print? I'm trying to print every LG 1-40 after going through the LG CC again. I have PDFs, but they are older and have the LGs on one page...I would like to be practicing with two-page LGs.

hey all,

just wanted to share a bit of my experience... after completing the core curriculum i was eager to jump into prep-tests. at first i would focus well during my actual prep-test, but when it came time to blind review i was so excited to see my score that i quickly agreed with myself and did not spend enough time with each question. my score plateaued in the low 160's.

then, while reviewing the material in the curriculum and the webinars (shout out to the LSAT Prep for 170+ webinar) i learned three important things about the blind review:

focus on your blind review score. your actual score tends to be about 10 points lower than your blind review score. thus, if i could get my blind review close to 180, then i could get my actual score above 170. my entire focus shifted from the prep-test to the blind review. rather than getting discouraged by a low actual score i became excited by a high blind review score.

blind review on a blank copy of the test. thanks to allison for this suggestion in the LSAT Prep for 170+ webinar. without access to my answers from the timed prep-test i stopped arguing with my ego and was able to really dig into the material. my blind review score became a more accurate representation of my knowledge base.

review your blind review score thoroughly. this is discussed in the curriculum, but after finishing a prep-test and blind reviewing it i was usually eager to move on to the next test. i would check a couple of the harder questions, watch jy's explanation and be done. this was not educative. i began to dive into accumulated answers to discover the subjects i struggled with the most. 7Sage's analytics are great for this. i returned to the curriculum to review most strongly supported and parallel flaw questions. reviewing the material helped me re-learn it.

.

.

.

shifting the focus of my emotional well being from the timed prep-test to the blind review helped me get over my frustration and my plateau. i just broke 170 for the first time and it feels great!

i still can't believe kaplan doesn't teach the blind review...

Hey Everyone,

Could anyone give me an example (whether on some test or just an example you could make up) of this valid form:

A --> C

B --> C

~A some ~B

I know it abstractly, but I struggled earlier to give someone a decent example and explanation earlier. So, I feel that means there's a hole in my knowledge.

Hi everyone!

I am studying full-time (was studying part time, 10 hours a week from last Sept to Feb, and began studying full time last month). I really hope to write in June.

I feel pretty comfortable with LR and RC, but NOT LG...

I've never taken a timed diagnostic, but when I took it untimed last September, I was about 4-5 wrong/ LR section, 4-5 wrong / RC, but l didn't even measure my performance on LG because I was just so lost. Many questions I couldn't do even untimed.

Right now I am going about 0-2 on LR and RC, timed. I just need to have LG under my belt to feel ready...

I did start prepping for LG quite late; I began fool-proofing about 4 weeks ago, for about 4 hours a day.

I did the CC and foolproofed the entire CC and have moved onto the PT stage for LG for the first time today.

I missed 8 on LG for PT62, timed.

I know that I should be foolproofing from now till June. My goal is to solve one PT section a day, foolproof it, and review/foolproof the section I did the previous day. So about 8 games (4 new, 4 old) per day. Is this reasonable? Are there any more tips on this stage of the prep?

I don't mind moving taking the LSAT in September, but because I already feel pretty comfortable with RC and LR, and have 2 months full-time just for LG, I am hoping to at least take a shot at the June one.

Many thanks in advance!!!

I got this wrong because while I did see the author was appealing to authority, I thought it was reasonable to assume that if the author says what an authority figure says, then it can be said that the author would say that too.

Answer Choice E basically says that the Meteorologist did not evaluate the merit of example from the Statistician. I thought by citing experts who are saying that no single thing can cause climate the Meteorologist was evaluating the merit of the example from the Statistician. But then I thought about it some more and it occurred to me that you can't necessarily say the Meteorologist evaluated the merits of the example just because he cited experts who cite a general principle that speaks to the counterexample.

I know this is a rough evaluation of the question and answer choice, but what I wanted to get clarity on is what I concluded above:

If an author cites what someone else says without saying it themselves can that author be said to have said the same thing?

This question makes me think the answer is no, but I was hoping someone could verify that.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-21-section-2-question-25/

I started 7sage back in September 2016, with the intention to take the September 2017 LSAT (which I pushed back to December). After doing the core, and doing five prep tests, I have yet to score above 150, which I've achieved twice. My average is 147.8.

After PT 39, I have felt defeated and crushed. It's not the worst I have ever done, but it's also a dip back down to my starting point. I feel like I'm doing something wrong, but I don't know what it is. As I can only dedicate 15 to 20 hours a week to studying for this test (which is mostly done at night when I'm burned out from work), my time is precious.

My process for the last five prep tests has been as follows - take the test, blind review the test, and then do a comprehensive review of each section of the test. Why the right answers are right. Why the wrong answers are wrong. Why I picked the wrong answers when I did. Drill the games. Drill the reading comp. This has been the advice of multiple people, and I don't feel like I've gotten the gains I'm supposed to. In fact, I feel as though I haven't gained anything.

Doing what I'm doing now isn't working, so there must be something I'm missing. I feel as though my worst section is logic games, but it's only edging out slightly compared to every other section. Should I just focus on drilling? Do I need to just dedicate my hours of studying to just logical reasoning until I'm answering 20 in 20 correctly? Alternatively, is this just a problem with the older tests being a lot harder than the newer ones?

@"J.Y.Ping" or anyone who really understands this and can explain: PT20 S1 Q6 and PT23 S3 Q6

I have listened to the explanation and on the Q6 from PT 23, I understand that E is incorrect, which I knew that going into the answers, but was frustrated, because it seemed to break all of the rules we are told to go by with avoiding "absolutes". The purse with the gold coins HAD been Brought to the ancient city by a pilgrim on route between M & M". The absolute assertion that it was not just "likely" brought, or even "most likely" bothered me and therefore made me feel it couldn't be correct. On the flip side, I knew all of the others were also wrong. E looked like it could have been very close if not for the use of the word "interacted". I could hear JY in my head saying, how do we know if they actually interacted, does that mean speaking, eating together?...So I ruled it out also, but all others looked so wrong as well. Why can the absolute assertion be ok sometimes, but we should stay away from it (in MSS) in almost all other scenarios?

**The Q12 from PT 20 is my BIGGEST issue. I hated this question and I am still arguing that the LSAC people are wrong. They are supposed to provide all you need in the stimulus and I do not feel as though they do. I do not own wood ducks or know anything about building their boxes etc. The majority of the Stim discusses how a female will lay an egg in another nest if they see the other female leaving, but that is so rare in nature bc the nests are so well hidden. Then the stem completely shifts its line of thinking, it goes into the "However, when people put up nesting box to help the ducks breed, they actually undercut the ducks' reproductive efforts. The nesting boxes become so CROWDED..."

So when I am looking at the answers, C looks immediately more correct. The boxes do have less "space" for the eggs than natural nesting sites, IF by space it is understood that when something is "overcrowded" there isn't enough space, or there is reduced space. Eg: There are 30 4th graders in my 2 bedroom apartment for my daughter's birthday and it is very crowded" I clearly have less "space" than I do when the 30 kids are not there. The missing 30 kids would be "my" natural environment.

The part I so whole heartedly disagreed with was the correct answer wording. D tells that, "The nesting boxes would be more effective in helping wood ducks breed if they were less visible to other wood ducks than they CURRENTLY ARE". My main problem choosing this answer was the "Currently Are"; how do I know if they are currently being used? Maybe it was something people used to do or tried in a lab or are talking about in theory. The writers never exactly say they are still in use and not to mention, the stim spends more of the time actually leading to the opposite...that the ducks are more productive in natural nesting sites. If I knew that nesting boxes were being used, and that the issue with this being successful wasn't that they were overcrowded because of "space" but that they were being placed in nature too visibly then I would have seen what they wanted me to pick. I get it that its supposed to be hard, but this seems not accurate. This question seemed to leave far too much to inference and it seems like the CC reminds up that we may have to make some inference but not huge stretches. I just felt that I had to assume too much to make D work. I saw that many students struggled with this.

Can someone please help explain why these stim types are either exceptions, or what is the trick/wording I missed that would have given it away? I wanted to ask @"J.Y.Ping" this during one of those sessions but I didn't make the lottery. Maybe since this seemed to be a really debated question, you could do a deeper explanation for everyone.? Or how to avoid traps like this one.

Thanks in advance!

Hi everyone,

I'm applying for accommodations for the June exam and was just wondering if someone who has applied before could provide some guidance. I have the "qualified professional" statement ready to go, but is it necessary to also send my own statement ("Candidate Statement of Need") as well? If so, any tips for how to write a decent candidate statement? Many thanks!

https://media.giphy.com/media/Wz0M2HHF7EKwU/giphy.gif

Thursday, April 20th at 7PM ET: PT 73

Click here to join this conversation: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/794287189

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: 794-287-189

The Full Schedule

And if you’d like to see the full schedule for upcoming reviews, here it is:

https://calendar.google.com/calendar/embed?src=aWw1aWEzYTRkbWdoaDZsa3U3YjBsaDBlZDBAZ3JvdXAuY2FsZW5kYXIuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbQ

Note:

Query failed: connection to 172.31.3.4:9312 failed (errno=111, msg=Connection refused).

Seeing this when I search the forum. Cleared cache. Rebooted. Turned off VPN.

Anyone?

Hi, I am struggling with Inference questions in Reading Comp and was wondering if any of you had any tips or strategies on how you approach them. I have no issues with 'active reading' -- I manage to get all of the main point, detail-oriented, reasoning structure and author's view/tone questions correct during timed sections and PTs. I just have an issue with inference questions so I usually end up with a -5 or -6.

I struggle with making inferences -- either I don't go far enough or I extrapolate too far and pick one that's out of scope. Even when I BR, I can't quite see where the inference is being drawn from in the passage if I can't point to a specific line reference. Other times, I try to approach it like MBT questions in LR -- but then get stuck if I can't definitely prove an answer choice, OR I vacillate between the 'could be true' and 'this sounds like a stronger/better inference' answer choice and pick the wrong one.

If you have any tips on how to push out inferences from reading comp passages, I'd really appreciate it. Thank you in advance!

I've seen a few Sages recommend this and I'm curious how you find it helpful. I'm also curious what sort of things you write about, how often your write, and what kind of structure do you use?

Thanks for sharing : )

Hi guys,

Before my first take (February) I drilled Logic Games by type until I had a decent foundation of each type and then began drilling whole LG sections and full PTs.

I am wondering should I do the same approach the second time around? or go straight into writing whole LG sections without wasting time on drilling by type since part of the difficulty is identifying the type of game and drawing your game board immediately?

Any advice would be appreciated.

Thanks

PT 77, Section 2, #18 Answer Choices C and D. Does "fails to exclude" mean the same thing more or less as "fails to consider"?

I thought "fails to exclude" was incorrect because the author doesn't need to exclude it, he just failed to consider it.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-77-section-2-question-18/

Note I am applying to Australian Law School meaning that my application is due in September 2017.

I originally took the LSAT in Feb 2017 and was quite disappointed with my score (it was 7 points below my average). Since then I purchased the 7sage course and have been aiming for a re-take for June 2017. I'm now thinking of pushing that retake back to September 2017.

The positives are:

The drawbacks are:

What would you guys recommend?

Hey All,

The short question is: are any LG books compatible with the 7Sage LG method and/or categories?

The longer question is: I'm an imbecile at LG's. Like really, really bad. I have always tested low on any spatial reasoning stuff and I feel like LGs are kicking my butt. I can logic myself to the right answers most of the time, I've gotten straight 100% on some drill sets I've done, but one game can easily take me half an hour so I know I'm not doing it "right." I'm not seeing all the inferences I should be at the outset, or not setting up the diagram efficiently.

I'm probably going to purchase the 7Sage Starter, because I simply can't afford more than that, but since I'm likely (barring a miracle) testing in September I probably will not buy the curriculum just yet. I work as a substitute during the day, so I can read books easily, but can't easily watch videos or read explanations online, so I'm saving buying the curriculum until I leave school in late June and can use it all day everyday : )

What books can I study now that are compatible with the methods I'll eventually learn through 7Sage? I own the PowerScore LGB and am working my way through that, but every time I've watched video explanations for the questions, it seems like they make it a lot more difficult than J.Y. does, and sometimes even categorize their games differently. Are any other LG books out there closer to his methods?

Thanks!

my question is, should i keep studying as if i had 35 min per serction? or should i maybe put my clock at 45, this is the best news I could get since the test is around the corner, how can i take the best possible advantage of this as to get the best possible score considering the time extension. ? any tips?

I attended David B's webinar and he suggested we apply to schools in Oct/Nov but is it possible to apply in Sept?

For the early birds out there, come ask David @"Accounts Playable" about the LSAT!

Office Hours with Sage David

Saturday, April 15, 11:00 AM EDT

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

https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/912696957

You can also dial in using your phone.

United States: +1 (312) 757-3121

Access Code: 912-696-957

First GoToMeeting? Try a test session: http://help.citrix.com/getready

Today is pretty weird. I am usually quite positive and optimistic when studying the LSAT, but today I'm fraught with anxiety and sheer frustration. I think the reason is that when I was working on PTs in 20-30s range, I was doing very well and established all my strategies based on them. Now I started to solve PTs in 60s-70s, and I noticed a score drop and having to rearrange and rethink some of my strategies. Now I am redoing some problems in PTs in 20-30s (the ones I usually do well in) and I notice a time lag and anxiety as well. My mind is not focusing at all. LOL...

Right now when I am reading, I have this urge / anxiety to comprehend every single thing I am reading, to be in control of everything. I don't think I've been this frustrated with the LSAT before. Usually, when I am frustrated, I don't mind much and I still keep a positive attitude. Today is just a disaster.

Anyone know a way to get out of this slump?