I am scoring somewhere between -4 to -6 on LR now (yesterday I had a -11 but I was frenzied and used the "5" setting on the 7sage proctor when I already have enough distraction). Anyway, I have noticed that what absolutely kills me, regardless of how much I try, is necessary assumption. I know that you are supposed to boil it down to the base necessity for the argument to exist, but my mind trails to the assumption that will often fix it. It's to the point where if I could just sort out NA, my LR would probably give me 2-4 extra points on the test.

Does anyone look at NA in any specific light that gives them clarity when doing these types of questions?

Feel free to delete if this is not allowed.

I was recently accepted to W&M Law with a decent scholarship after applying with a fee waiver. (Thank 7sage!!!) I have never been to VA and don't really know anything about this school, but with my acceptance and scholly, I am really considering it. I was just wondering if anyone on here has attended or knows anything about W&M that is worth sharing with me that I should consider. I know this is common to discuss on TLS, but they kinda scare me (lol.)

Thanks :)

Hi All,

Does the below statement make sense? I am trying to get a big picture view of these 3 ideas.

CAUSATION --> PERFECT CORRELATION* ( ---) CONDITIONALITY

Causation implies Perfect Positive Correlation.

Correlation (regardless of strength) does not imply causation.

Causation implies Conditionality. I.e. If A causes B, we can also say A is sufficient for B).

Conditionality does not imply Causation. Just because A is sufficient for B, does not mean that A causes B. It could be, for example, that A

Perfect Correlation (and only perfect correlation) implies conditionality

Conditionality implies perfect correlation.

*I am assuming A ALWAYS causes B. Is this the case on the LSAT? Can we say that if A causes B, A always causes B?

Hi 7sagers,

I was just wondering if "Evaluate" (as in, "Which of the following would be most helpful to know in evaluating the argument above?" or the like) questions are in the 7Sage curriculum? I was looking through the curriculum but I didn't see anything.

Which also makes me wonder if there are any other question types missing/hidden if that is the case. Any thoughts on this would be helpful.

As the title states, I am feeling very stuck in the PT phase of prepping for the Feb exam. I am consistently scoring in the high 160s from my first PT post-curriculum with some variance toward the low 170s. However, I am finding that the more PTs I take, the more consistent my score is +/-1 points, which isn't really a bad thing. At least I know ahead of time about where I'll land, but it can get a bit disheartening not seeing any consistent improvement.

I am able to see using the test analytics what areas of the LR section I need to focus on, and I have done some drilling between PTs. Admittedly, I have not kept a very consistent routine for my PT, BR, and review phases. The one thing I noticed with this is that my time management has gotten a bit worse during testing. With that being said, I do not consistently have one section that is my weak point. Some tests I am -3/4 on each section, sometimes I ace all but one section on which I get a -8. They don't seem to correlate with the difficulty scores assigned by 7Sage, either. TBH, I was expecting to see more of a consistent trend after finishing 10+ PTs.

The other thing is that I get 175+ on my BRs. When I go through for BR, I rarely change a correct answer, and the questions I am hesitant on are usually very clear. When I spend time on these, I can suss out the correct answer nearly every time, though my confidence is usually pretty low in my answer.

I'm really kicking myself for missing the most recent webinar as well, as it seemed to be a relevant topic to this issue I am having.

What do you all recommend? Here's three main questions I have:

1. Have you found any study habits that have helped you to eek out a few points here or there? How do you study between PTs?

2. Have I not taken enough PTs yet to observe clear weak points in my prep?

3. How much emphasis do you put on time management when taking a test? I try to implement the low-hanging fruit analogy from the curriculum, but I'm not leaving answers blank, so it seems more of an issue of where I allocate my time per question.

Any suggestions or feedback would be most helpful.

I'm pretty frustrated right now with my scores. When I BR I score in the 170's. But under time I score between the range of the high 140's to high 150's depending on the test specifically which logic game I get. But I'm consistently doing bad on Logical Reasoning under time. When I have all the time in the world I get around 3 wrong per section. But under timed conditions I can get up to 22 wrong both sections combined. What should I do?

I like to spend time up front by solving for all the boards. This makes me more confident for selecting the correct answer and I can get through the questions faster.

However, some games have so many possibilities that it takes a significant amount of time to solve for all the boards. So, to save time, I do not solve for all possibilities. I finish the games a lot faster, but I may miss 1 or 2 questions.

My questions are: when should one simply brute force their way through the answers to save time?

Is it better to compromise accuracy to save time?

What is a happy medium?

I like to spend time up front by solving for all the boards. This makes me more confident for selecting the correct answer and I can get through the questions faster.

However, some games have so many possibilities that it takes a significant amount of time to solve for all the boards. So, to save time, I do not solve for all possibilities. I finish the games a lot faster, but I may miss 1 or 2 questions.

My questions are: when should one simply brute force their way through the answers to save time?

Is it better to compromise accuracy to save time?

What is a happy medium?

When you don't have the will to keep going, remember all the reasons why you're pursuing that JD. First, we take on the LSAT.

Happy MLK Day!

June'17 Study Group | PT C2

Sat, Jan 21, 2017 8:00 PM EST

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

https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/468421821

You can also dial in using your phone.

United States: +1 (224) 501-3412

Access Code: 468-421-821

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" @etphonehome @"subi rami" @cetienn2 @zyahya @Connor180 @Walliums @canadalegalbiz @jeremybentham @HennaC15 @helentang02 @imekahel @sacksj18 @Mattglandry @trxdsd91 @jknauf @hernandk @far_k_hd @BenjiM123 @morganclarke @phelanj75 @d_villa @5everLSATing @mo.sheikh @zyahya @cetienn2 @"subi rami" @etphonehome @rachaels @"Michelle Juma" @rpffj1213

Hello,

So if we want to talk about interviews we had, speakers in a meeting etc, do we have to reveal their real names in PS?

In fact I forgot some of their names...

If I just say "a guest speaker" would it look weak?

Also, how gramatically strict PS should be?

I read some PS but some sound poetic like fiction novels, not like the tone of academic research paper...

Thank you!

I know (A) is correct since it points out there may be no relation between jury decision and testimony. Yet, I'm still confused about (B). Is it descriptively wrong since the stimulus only says one fact instead of two facts?

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-48-section-4-question-13/

Thanks in advance!!

So I finished the first few course introductions and then took the optional June 2007 LSAT PT. I earned a 142 on the timed portion and a 154 on the BR. But in no way am I discouraged by this number. If anything, it makes me want to work harder towards my 174 goal. If anyone can do it, I know I can.

I have since watched every single video explanation -- whether easy, hard, right or wrong -- in order to understand why each answer is right and why all the others are wrong. I have also taken the advice to nip the wrong thinking in the bud. JY is an amazing teacher and I feel as if I have already learned a considerable amount about the LSAT just by watching videos on one prep test. I have also realized how much I do not know... but I wish to change this by studying hard.

On a different note, I have already had a hard time sleeping. And with around 8 hours a day so far watching JY's videos, I heard JY's voice in my head saying "sleeping is hard, and Casey cannot sleep. Therefore, it is hard for Casey to sleep." This gave me a laugh and simultaneously frightened me that this would happen, lol.

WORK HARD TODAY, you'll never get it back!!!

Hi everyone,

At some point I will find a study buddy, but I have a question...

Has anyone studied with a partner that is not familiar with the LSAT? I going to have my husband help me to review flashcards, and I've talked to him about some of the LR concepts. It was helpful to discuss it with him even though I was still shaky on my explanations and understanding of the concepts. He's interested in helping me and it's a nice way to spend time together so that I am not ignoring him while I study every night. Has anyone else tried studying like this? Does anyone have any suggestions on how this could be useful and not a waste of precious study time?

Thanks.

Would somebody mind looking at the strategy below and letting me know if it makes sense/I've included everything?

Thanks!

On weakening questions, when the argument posits a causal relationship, answer choice does one of the following:

Conclusion States: A Causes B

1. Provides an alternative cause (no competing cause) (C also Causes B).

2. 3rd competing cause (C causes both A and B)

3. Chronology inconsistent - B happened prior to A/Reversal of Cause and Effect

4. Competing Dataset --> Competing Results

5. Proof the entire occurrence was the result of Coincidence A/B

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

6. Provides an example of the presumed cause without the presumed effect

7. Provides an example of the presumed effect without the presumed cause.

(Examples of weakening through correlation. Correlation can strengthen or weaken an argument, but is not sufficient support for an argument)

On strengthening questions, when the argument posits a causal relationship, answer choice does one of the following:

Conclusion States: A Causes B

1. Block an alternative cause/explanation (no competing cause)

2. Block 3rd competing cause NOT (C causes both A and B)

3. Chronology consistent - A happened prior to B/No reversal

4. Corroborating Dataset --> Corroborating Results

5. Block Coincidence A/B

Hey 7-sagers.

Anyway I'm back from my Central American adventure and it is time to get serious! Are there any DFW study groups out there??? I'm taking the June LSAT and I'm ready to get my 180 or at least a 165 lol I think a study group would be a fun (but serious) way to dissect the LSAT. Let me know!

Jennifer

Here are three of mine. If you're feeling it, list some of yours to help a brother out.

1. Big dreams take time - society demands that you be more impressive and they demand it now; LSAC demands that you be more impressive, but at a time convenient to you.

2. To clean your room well, it must first get dirtier. Decide how clean you want the room, and stay committed as the dirt reveals itself. Anticipate failure because if it was easy, it wouldn't be worth your ambition.

3. Your value as a human being is not determined by LSAC or by the expectations of your peers.

I just sent both my LOR's out to each respective recommender, and I warned my boss that she may be receiving one soon. Does LSAC not send them out automatically?

Hello,

I have a question about submitting essays.

So it seems most school allow to submit 1)PS and 2)Diversity Statement

What if they allow us to submit optional essay (Why X school essay) (Addendum) but no place to submit those on LSAC? I don't see there's additional space for uploading those essays.

Does it mean we cannot submit those essays if we submit 1)2)? (So what they meant was submiting only 2 from those 4 options?)

Thanks

Hi,

When we forward transcript online, it requires our LSAC account #, but I may put the number wrongly...

What would happen?

I think I skipped the first letter thinking only the number is the account ID.

Would they still proceed my transcript or would they actually transfer it to someone's account?

I cannot call them as my phone is broken now...so worried about this.

Anyone knows something about this?

Thank you

I am preparing to take LSAT in few weeks (2017, February 4); while I possess an elevated GPA for undergraduate (3.75 in political science, 3.9 in Sociology, and 3.8 in psychology), I am worried about the relevance and effect of the LSAT score. If I may, does the latter have adverse effects on the former?

For example, do you have family member working as stuff at XX law school etc...

why do they ask this?

If they do have, does this mean it affects them negatively or positively?

I'm just curious...

Thank you in advance!!

Hi guys! I am applying for the Fall 2017 cycle and I am having a bit of a hard time trying to figure out which schools to apply to so that I have about 5 for each (reach, target, and safety). My question is, what is the difference between the three... Obviously the likelihood that you will be accepted, but what about the GPA and LSAT medians? Would a reach school be considered like 5 points below the LSAT median, or 10, or 3...? Just a little confused how much reach a reach is haha!

Two years ago, when I applied to my current MBA program, I asked my history professor from undergraduate studies to write me a LOR. I had two work LOR's set up but one of them fell through. Is it weird to ask a person who wrote an older LOR to write another one for a different field?

THey asked this question during the sending of the LOR. Is this to asking how many schools this LOR will be sent out to?

I had a quick question.

I noticed that on my CRS that my actual transcripts aren't included. Do law schools not have access to the classes that I took?