Hey everyone,

I started the core curriculum about 2 weeks ago. I wanted to use the LSAT Trainer, as I know J.Y. recommends it. After some quick research on this forum, it seems that the consensus of the sages is to complete the 7Sage core curriculum first, and then complete The LSAT Trainer. Is this still the case?

Also, do you think it is best to follow The LSAT Trainer study guides? And if so, which one? (4 week, 8 week, 12 week)

I've tried using peer meet ups on 7sage but it got a little confusing for me lol.

Anyone in the Vancouver area and would like to start a study group for the Sept/Dec LSAT?

Comment below!

Hello,

After about 10 PTs and many painful self-reflections, I came to the conclusion that the reason why I am having a major problem with improving my timing is due to my inability to rule out irrelevant answers.

For some reason, especially for descriptive flaws and weakening questions, I tend to spend too much time with answer choices that JY and many other students rule out immediately.

For example, when I'm contemplating between two or three answer choices, I find myself trying to figure out some sort of relevance of the irrelevant and out of scope answer choices. During this process, not only do I end up wasting a lot of time, but I also end up getting that question wrong.

Good news is that during the BR, I can usually get that question right, but only after serious mental debates and considerations.

Nevertheless, I was hoping that I could train my mind to think about the right things, instead of wasting my time by thinking about things that don't matter.

Currently, I'm only able to finish about 22-23 questions of LR, but my BR score for both sections combined fluctuates from -5 to -7 (so, about -2 to -4 per section).

I am hoping that I can hit two birds (speed and accuracy) with one stone by training my mind to think about the right things.

Could you guys give me some tips on how I can accomplish this? I mostly have this problem with descriptive flaw, weakening, and NA questions.

Thank you very much for your help.

P.S. Also, I was wondering if it's better for me to try and complete all 25-26 questions first, or work on accuracy first. I was never able to finish the entire section without skipping questions. I did not actively try to improve my speed, because I knew that I lacked some fundamental skill. Again, your advice is much appreciated.

Hi 7Sagers,

On Thursday, July 28, at 9 p.m. EST, I’ll tell you everything I know about choosing a topic for your personal statement. I’ll give you prompts, explain some common mistakes, and show you a few examples.

The presentation will probably last about twenty minutes. After that, I’ll take questions about any aspect of the admissions process.

To join, just follow this link: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/311362085

Use your microphone and speakers (VoIP). A headset is recommended. You can also call in using your telephone:

We’ll use Citrix GoToMeeting. The meeting ID is 311-362-085.

---

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-60-section-3-question-17/

Any food that is not sterilized and sealed can contain bacteria

JY’s translation: /Sterilized or /Sealed -> can contain bacteria

Jy mentions DeMorgan’s law to reach the translation.

Could somebody explain how the translation works this way?

I initially translated the statement as: /Sterilized and Sealed -> can contain bacteria

Hey guys, this weekend is going to be a bad study weekend for me as I am going to practically be driving and working all weekend, does anyone know of any good books I can get on audio to help me study??? I figure if I am going to be driving 4.5 hours to San Antonio I might as well utilize it and listen to a book. Any suggestions? THX!

Hello,

I am getting ready to send out a few emails to ask for LORS. I know a little unprofessional, but its summer and most of my professors are out of town. Here is my question, how do I explain to them the process? Can someone give me an example of what the email should consist of?

Hey guys I have done the PT in 60's last year studying for October and December. But now studying again for September I did my first lsat in the 60's and certainly recognized the stimulus. Also when I would predict I saw my prediction was usually correct. I ended up getting like -3 in both the LR sections which is much better than before where I usually get around -6. I am kind of scared because redoing these PT's in 60's now might be a bad idea. This time around with studying I started at PT 35 and completed all the way to PT 59. Any advice would be great

Hey everyone, just signed up for 7sage.

I wanted to post and get opinions of people on this discussion board.

My concern falls into letters of recommendations, I never really connected with my professors and my last two jobs don't write letters (I've asked), luckily I had an employer from years ago that said yes but that means I'm missing one letter. My question is should I email all my professors (I moved across the country so I can't ask in person) and try to get a letter that will most likely be generic or should I delay a year, get a job and ask them for a letter?

Oh and my GPA is below 3.0 and the last 5 PTs I've taken have been 165+ (diag was around 150). Sorry my numbers are estimates I can't recall exactly and I'm not home to check haha.

Thank you!

How do you guys cope with this during prep and especially when you have a schedule and deadlines you highly prefer to abide by? :(

Saturday, July 23rd at 8PM ET: PT 44

Click here to join this conversation: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/219480381

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: 219-480-381

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=7sage.com_ft05lsm54j4ec1s6kj1d1bbpv0%40group.calendar.google.com&ctz=America/Chicago

Note:

Hi all,

Find that I'm having a very difficult time coming to terms with the right answer choice for this question. I find that B makes too large of an assumption (in assuming that the tools didn't come to the possession of prehistoric ancestors who did not stand upright by some other means) to be effective in weakening the argument. I've tried to see the fault in the other answer choices so that I could at least learn to get to the answer by process of elimination and find myself stuck on D. I've watched the video with J.Y.'s explanation, and I don't know if I'm misreading the way that answer choice is framed, but to me "first" doesn't imply they had JUST stood up. I read it as they were the first individuals who managed to do it. Been stuck on this question for a couple days now. I would love to have a discussion about this question with you guys to see it from a different perspective. I can't help but see D as a more effective answer choice than B, and I know there is no point in arguing with the test.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-49-section-2-question-14/

I am having trouble fully grasping conditional logic. I understand it to an extent but not as much as I think I should to truly master this test. Any tips?

This happened in the testing room?

Do you try to stay focused? Run? Cry?

I am able to psyche myself up for RC passages and LR stimuli and become generally interested in them. But, I'm having trouble actually having fun doing logic games. I have been drilling LG sections as well as foolproofing my problematic games but I tend to find the process really dull even if I am making progress. Has anyone gotten to the point where they enjoy games? Could you explain how you frame games in your mind to make them more fun?

I used to be great at LR getting anywhere from 3-4 questions wrong per section. Now I have actually been getting worse at it and improved drastically in logic games. Has this happened to anyone and is there any advice you can give on how to study and improve? I have been doing BR but sometimes it just ends up making me second guess my answers, is it sometimes ok to do BR by knowing which questions you go wrong but not the answers? Assumption questions are definitely the hardest questions for me.

So, last time I was here I got some really great advice from a number of people, and I made a few life decisions. To get to a 170 (I'm at a 152 diagnostic), I'm going to take a gap year, as I graduate in may, and all this year I'm going to prep with 7sage ultimate. I will take the test next June. Does this sound like a solid plan?

So I am in a very difficult position, I was just offered a position to work with a New York State Senator specifically with criminal justice policies and restorative justice. I have had 3 prior internships. One was with the Manhattan district attorney's office, another with a local county district attorney's office and one with the Bronx Defenders ( public attorneys). I am conflicted about whether or not I should accept the position because I really want to focus on the LSAT because I scored a 158 the first time and want above a 160 and already registered for the September LSAT and the internship requires 10 hours a week on top of my school work ( I am a senior in college). I was wondering would this internship help me at all during the admissions process even if I get a LOR from a New York State senator? Please help!

Hello, all!

I have a question about the negation of a particular comparative statement that I encountered in the third quiz on negation in the curriculum. Here is that statement: "Small animals can move more rapidly than large animals can." That statement is, of course, negated as others are: "It's not the case that small animals can move more rapidly than large animals can." But the implications of this negated statement confuse me. The implications of this statement are explained to be that either (1) small and large animals move with equal rapidity or (2) large animals move more rapidly than small animals. But why must the entire group of small animals either move in one of these two ways? Don't these implications only account for the negation of the quality on which the two groups are being compared, yet neglect the quantity? Isn't the original statement quantified?

I have a feeling that I'm not being clear, so let me explain further.

Because the author is talking about these animals as sets - small animals and large animals - can we infer that he or she is talking about all small animals and all large animals? Can we thus read this statement as, "All small animals can move more rapidly than large animals can"? If we can, would not the negation of this statement be, "Some small animals cannot move more rapidly than large animals"? From this statement, we would know that there is at least one small animal (yet possibly all) that cannot move more rapidly than large animals. And because we would know that at least one small animal animal (yet possibly all) cannot move more rapidly than large animals, we would also know that there is at least one small animal (yet possibly all) that moves either equally rapidly or less rapidly than larger animals can. Isn't this all that we need to negate the original statement - merely one small animal that moves equally rapidly or less rapidly as large animals? This would deny the truth of "small animals move more rapidly than large animals," wouldn't it? Wouldn't this account for both the quality on which these groups are being compared and the quantity?

Of course, my entire paragraph above relies on an assumption about which I'm unsure that I can make: I took for granted the we can read the original statement as, "All small animals can move more rapidly than large animals." Perhaps we cannot read that statement as such. If so, why? And if that's the case, are we simply to negate the statement in terms of the quality on which the two groups are being compared, as the answer reflects above? (I.e., the negation of this statement would simply mean that small animals, as a group, can either move equally rapidly or less rapidly than large animals, as a group.)

I hope this is clear. If not, I apologize. I'm confused myself.

Any help on how I am to go about negating this statement would be much appreciated. Thank you all for your time!

(I'll be leaving for work soon, so I'll respond to any posts either later this evening or tomorrow morning!)

Hey guys, third time taker here. I have seen basically every LSAT PT at least once (most of them at least twice). I hear that there are some previously undisclosed LSATs that I could get my hands on but I am pretty clueless on how to get them. Any advice?

So, I have the LSAT beginners package. I have been studying since for 2 1/2 months now. I am at the invalid arguments section. I was initially planning on taking practice test on my own once I finished all the sections on here (to be extremely familiar with everything). However, I have been told by friends that they took 2-3 practice test a week. Is that the smart thing to do? I am taking my LSAT in September. Should I start putting more focus on the actual prep tests vs the lesson plans? Any advice is greatly appreciated!!

Hey all -

Just some background info - I started my studying with 7 Sage on May 16th and I plan on writing September 24 meaning I am about halfway through my studying. I scored a diagnostic score of 151 due to an abysmal LG section (-18). I have now completed the curriculum and have taken 7 PT's. My most recent score is a 164 with a BR score of 172. My breakdowns are generally -3 RC, -11 or so in LR and -6 on LG. My main issue as of right now is timing. I find I am a tad slow on every section besides reading. By a tad slow I mean 3-4 minutes. After every test I thoroughly review every question I missed, typing out explanations for every wrong answer etc. Right now I am not skipping questions so I am going to start skipping Parallel reasoning questions and see if that speeds up my timing but besides that do you all have any tips to increase my speed on LR and LG. I think I have potential for a 170+ but this time thing is a little concerning to me. Any tips from you all are much appreciated!

Hey guys, I have seen PTs 52-77 at least once (twice and thrice in most instances) and I am wondering if it would be better to use those to gear up for the Sept LSAT or if I should rely on older PTs that I haven't seen as much/not at all. Thanks!

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-60-section-3-question-11/

I am having a hard time ruling out A. If black water comes into the bay ONLY once every two centuries, how can the conclusion be a comparative statement, saying that it did not reach the same intensity as last years?

I chose D under timed conditions, and because I couldn't really see how A related to the stimulus, but now that I have entertained the above thought, I'm having a hard time crossing off A.

Thanks!