Finishing the curriculum is an enormous accomplishment and you should be proud of yourself when you reach that milestone. But it can quickly start to feel a lot like this:

https://media4.giphy.com/media/L6EoLS78pcBag/200.gif#2

The curriculum provides step by step instruction, not only on the concepts that must be mastered to beat the LSAT, but also on knowing exactly what to be doing in order to progress through your studies. Now that you're done, you're going to have to determine that for yourself, and how well you do that is enormously consequential. It is different for everyone, so this will not be ABC instructions to what to do after the curriculum. Rather, I hope it can serve as a guide for identifying the most effective study strategies for yourself based on your individual level and performance.

So I'm Done with the Curriculum. Now What?

Tuesday, Dec 20, 8:00 PM EST

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

https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/696967357

You can also dial in using your phone.

United States: +1 (872) 240-3412

Access Code: 696-967-357

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

I had this one down to C and D and ultimately went with C. I saw C an an alternate explanation but would C have been eliminated because the increase was not specifically mentioned a well as the FM? Do both A and B both have to be specifically mentioned and not implied or assumed? Also, I get that C is incorrect because C-> A&B (Other M -> FM & Increase isn't possible due to no assumption in the stimulus that FM caused the increase but is instead the conclusion, so FM->Increase (A->B) was never a possibility. I ultimately eliminated D because I interpreted the AC as saying there was no increase in the algae population because there was no increase in the amount of shells left behind. I took that as meaning constant but didn't go further and see that it meant that we should see more shells if there was an increase, thus weakening the argument. Hopefully this all makes sense for you guys.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-19-section-2-question-04/

Good evening fellow 7Sagers,

I am someone who suffers from anxiety and depression on a daily basis. For anyone that can relate, how would you go about improving on this exam? I find that although I know exactly what career path I want to be on and what needs to be accomplished in order to do so, I still find trouble being motivated to study, and when I do study I find myself constantly zoning out. I've been studying for several months, including taking a Blueprint course in a classroom setting which ended in September. However, I cannot seem to break low 150's on my PT's. My highest score is a 154 and that was only because I did not time myself and wound up finishing at least an hour over the typical exam time constraints. Otherwise, my average timed scores do not look as pretty. I do not believe 7Sage is the issue as I find the methods of this curriculum far clearer than anything else I've done in the past. I did some research and found that LSAC has accommodated those in the past with diagnosed depression/generalized anxiety, although not everyone's requests are approved. I have not taken medication for this in about three years because I felt it was doing more harm than good. That being said, I do not think LSAC would simply take my word for my issues and at the same time I also would not want to have schools look down upon my grade because they knew I was accommodated. I am currently aiming for the June 2017 LSAT, but if my PT's do not improve by then, I do not want to wait much longer. Perhaps September.. but nothing later than that as I truly want to begin law school by 2018. I know what school I want to go to and have everything planned out. I graduated cum laude and was in the honors academy all four years at my school and even graduated a semester early. It makes no sense to me how all that was accomplished yet I am having so much trouble with this one exam, which drives my motivation even further down.

Long story short, if anyone is out there with advice on something like this, I would really appreciate some personal insight as no one seems to understand.

Thank you

Or do we have to do so one by one? Thanks!

How does one do that? Who do I email or speak to? Help?

So this is my problem. If I give myself ten extra minutes for each LG section I do, I will get 100% right. Every time. But the issue is time. Often times, I find myself struggling over a problem because there is ONE RULE that I haven't seen the full implications of. When I finally see it, I say to myself, "Oh...duh!" and wonder why I didn't see it in the first place. After about three months of studying, I went from a 161 to a 173, but I haven't practiced LG nearly as much as I have RC and LR. If I can shore up my LG, then I'll be set. Can anyone help me out? Is my problem simply due to a lack of practice? Thanks.

(to myself) - "Descriptively inaccurate. Next."

General Michaels rejects the use of outdated weaponry. All other generals do not reject the use of outdated weaponry. Therefore, General Michaels is the best war strategist.

Weaken:

A) Rejecting the use of outdated weaponry is not a factor in being a good war strategist.

B) Rejecting the use of outdated weaponry is not sufficient to be a good war strategist.

I've run into this problem a few times on NA questions, where I can't decide whether to negate by adding a not or negating the quantity. Here's an example of an answer choice from an NA question:

There are some illnesses that experienced physicians can diagnose accurately from physical examination alone.

In this instance, would you negate some to none or place a not after can to negate? Or both?

PT 49 BR June17 Study Group

Sat, Dec 17, 2016 3:00 PM EST

*****NOTE THE TIME CHANGE

I hope you are having a happy holiday and/or will be soon!

Sat, Dec 17, 2016 3:00 PM EST

Please join us from your computer, tablet or smartphone.

https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/483387821

You can also dial in using your phone.

United States: +1 (571) 317-3122

Access Code: 483-387-821

Note:

* For everyone: take the PT under timed conditions; BR as you are able on your own; then join us for all or part of the call—everyone is welcome.

* Note: For the purposes of the call, we like to check our group blind review score together at the very end of the call :) So at least don't say ... "No guys, really, it's D, I checked it.” KEEP THE CORRECT ANSWER TO YOURSELF. Win the argument with your reasoning.

* These groups work best when folks from ALL stages of prep and with all different goals join in! Not just for "super-preppers" and definitely not just for the casual LSATer (does such a person exist?).

* The only expectation anyone has for these calls is for you to have fun and ask questions as you desire. We are just a bunch of LSAT lovers who gather via GoToMeeting and intellectually slaughter each test.

Tentative study schedule

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

@dml277 @BinghamtonDave @"Alex Divine" @ScooterMinion @aimhigher @leannasamson @Omed_OvO @cm214998 @nanchito @"Lauren L" @Emely.Moreta @"el chucho" @jgsisco @Sharmetz @877blessed @mnrahall @jennagould60 @Citygirl @aaronmorris222 @bswise2 @KWoulf13 @mckenzieleanne10 @hhhiser_06 @DinnerAtSix @couchifer @poohbear @SherryS1 @smartaone2 @red_ambrosia @crp9ce @DiligenFxy0628 @karen.sov @spbarry @cfield.3 @JustDoIt @lawgikal @TheMikey @justicedst @bbutler @Mitzyyyy @AlexandriaD @"Burt Macklin" @"adore-no" @twssmith @gaandrsn @RafaelBernard @CinnamonTea @TheMikey @sheridan9194 @jimmyrivera201 @meg321go @carlistics @draj0623 @jcorine26 @caitieadams @ppcoelho1 @Gladiator_2015 @sunnyvictoria0610 @yamameerzada484 @bruingirl1205 @emilyxiong315 @lawschoolstuff16 @joneselisabethpenn @gaandrsn @tsan220 @Grace... @dantlee14 @dannyshaw @"Not Ralph Nader"

Hey everyone!

This may be an odd question, but to all of those belonging to the LGBTQ community, do you mark on your applications that you identify as LGBTQ?

I am trying to figure out whether or not this is a good choice? Do school's actually care? Does this contribute positively or negatively to your application?

Since this is a safe space (thanks to all of you that are awesome 7Sagers!), I'd like to add that I identify as bisexual, but I am not super "out" about it. It is not something that defines me as a person, and if you don't know me, or have only known me for a short amount of time, you'd probably never know because I have been dating my boyfriend over the past couple of years.

Only my closest friends and family know about this, so I am debating whether or not I should bother marking what I identify as....

What do you guys think?

I found I particularly underperform in law reading regardless of difficulty. Any suggestion on improvement?

For my diversity statement I am thinking of writing about going through a both physically and emotionally abusive relationship for 4 and a half years. I ended things about 3 weeks and its by far one of the most impactful things that has happened in my life. I initially was going to write about how my father left my mother and I when I was in high school and I could also tie the two together but do you think the abusive relationship story is going to be too much? I don't want the readers to think its a sob story and I certainly will frame it in the way that it made me infinitely stronger (and it did) but I just don't know how tense/serious the topics can be for diversity statements.

I got a letter from LSAC today saying there was a discrepancy with my SSN. My master file (which, I checked, is correct) does not match what I wrote on my answer sheet on test day. So tomorrow I have to fax them my correction.

Will this delay my score?

Go see Rogue One. Seriously, go. It's great.

I am having issues watching the videos on an iPhone. Is anyone else having this issue? It has been this way for some time but I've just been using the app. None of the three options are selected in my settings. Should I change any of these? TIA

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-47-section-1-question-02/

I chose A for this and literally had to check the answer key three times because I thought I was seeing things. I cannot figure out why A is wrong and B is right.

This is a weaken question.

The stimulus says that there have been certain international efforts to protect the natural habitats of endangered species of animals. In spite of these efforts, apparently the extinction rate is still rising. The argument concludes that these efforts are wasted.

After reading the premises, I'm thinking "Oh, great! This is perfect-- What an assumption for this argument to make! I am definitely anticipating that the answer choice is going to have something to do with pointing out that, just because these efforts are aimed at protecting natural habitats, does not necessarily entail that these efforts are also aimed at preventing the extinction rate from rising!" Then I read the conclusion that claims that the efforts were wasted. At this point, I'm 100% anticipating answer choice A.

The international efforts are aimed at protecting the natural habitats of endangered species. This does not necessarily mean these efforts are also trying to prevent the extinction rate from increasing. I mean, in the real world, it is most likely the case that this is also the goal, but in LSAT world, I just don't see how we can make that assumption. What if these efforts were to satisfy the hippie/vegan population so that they think the government is prioritizing the protection of these natural habitats? Or what if their efforts were because there is some new law that requires the protection of these habitats? There could be a number of (yes, crazy yet) logically sufficient reasons for why they are protecting the natural habitats of these species that have nothing to do with the extinction rate. If the two concepts (protecting natural habitats and preventing extinction from increasing) were to be related in terms of our argument, wouldn't the first statement have to say "Despite increasing international efforts to protect the natural habitats of endangered species in order to maintain or decrease the extinction rate, the rate at which these species are becoming extinct continues to rise"?

A- Points out the assumption. Scientists are better able to preserve the habitats of endangered species. That was what their efforts were doing according to the stimulus. This answer choice points out how irrelevant the statement about the extinction rate increasing is to their efforts.

B- Animal refugees are not natural habitats. They are man-made sanctuaries that artificially mimic natural habitats. I rendered this answer choice as irrelevant because it is not even talking about the same subject matter.

I am very confused. I considered this to be an easy question that took me all of 20 seconds and even after reviewing it over and over again, I cannot for the life of me understand it.

I've been studying for about a year and my last few PTs (PTs 60s and 70s) have been 163-167. Do you guys think there's any value in the earlier PTs (other than LG, of course)? I really want to take in June, and use the Fall as my fallback just in case.

I just want to know if it's worth spending time doing the earlier PTs (other than LG), because I don't know whether the test has changed drastically since then.

After taking a month off I'm ready to get back to it, I plan to take two per week at minimum, three maximum while doing full BR. I do want to take in June and I'm afraid it may be cutting it close in terms of time.

Hello, is there anyone here who has applied to Canadian schools? Reading past forums, OLSAS has posted a mark breakdown at the end of November/beginning of December but there is no such info on my OLSAS yet. Further, logging into the schools webpages (ie windsor law) it says that they have not received any of my information from OLSAS yet other then my LSAT score.

Has this happened to anyone?

Hello,

I was wondering if anyone could take a look at my personal statement for a public interest law program. I plan on going into civil rights law and the personal essay discusses this ambition.

I've been reading about these different games that are apparently on the LSAT now? Are these really that much harder than the old games, or are people struggling with them on the test because they simply aren't expecting them? That is to say, are these new one's just as learnable if you can see them coming?

So, I was looking for advice in the TLS forums, and pretty much everyone told me to rethink my entire life plan. The plan is (or was?) to take part in OU's early entry program, which allows me to start 1L a year early. The catch is, I don't technically have my BA until after 1L. The plan all along is that my husband and I would stay in Oklahoma, but recently we've been wondering if we would really be happy here forever. So, I was planning on doing well enough (top 5%) and applying to transfer to a T14 school. If I got in, we would move. If not, we'd stay.

Everyone in the TLS forums (all current or former law students) told me that I should reconsider this path and that I cannot bank on being in the top 5% of my class. The more I thought about it, the more it seemed like a risky plan. If I'm not able to be in the top 5% of my class, then I would be stuck in Oklahoma...forever.

Anyway, now I'm rethinking my entire life plan. Since we're not sure we would be happy living here forever, I'm leaning toward finishing my BA (graduate a year from now) and retaking the LSAT in June (unless I somehow miraculously scored over a 170 in Dec) and applying to T14 schools next cycle.

Thoughts? Good plan? Or should I stick with my previous plan? I should also mention that I am a little older than your average 1L...29. (sorry I am so needy for advice on here...)

Are there technically 2 application fees? One for the LSAC, and one for each school?

I've noticed that some of my target schools don't charge an application fee. So, would the LSAC still charge me to apply to those schools?

Personally, I would go

RC: 1*

LR: 2*

LR: 2*

LG1: 2*

LG2: 2*

LG3: 4*

LG4: LOLNope*s

I have read a couple success stories with people who had issues with logic games and jumped enough to increase their overall scores to the 170's from the 150's.

My case is that I was scoring -8 in LG, -7 in RC, and -20 in LR to begin with. My improvements have come through slowly, and I do believe it is because I am working to improve on a more difficult section.

With that said, is that normally the hardest route to take in terms of improvement? Are any of you guys faced with the same situation? If so, how have you attacked jumping your LSAT to your desired range?