Despite going -6 on RC, I managed to break the 170 barrier for the first time (171)! Went flawless on LG (another first). Big confidence boost going into December test.

Hello 7Sage!

I have problems for this question.

The question stem mentions the preference in Passage A:

Preference for coherence connecting variety, not too simple (pure tone) = not interesting; not too complex = bad

so i'm looking for some kind of in the middle of the spectrum

I choose Answer (A): Preference for white noice when sleeping : not totally silence (pure tone) ; not too loud (too complex)

Answer (B): not knowing why it's matching the preference analogy?

Thanks for your help!

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-58-section-2-passage-4-passage/

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-58-section-2-passage-4-questions/

Comment here if you want to be tagged for upcoming Saturday BR groups :)

Hi all, hope your studies are going well.

Just looking for some tips. I only started studying 2 weeks ago :|

I completed a 1000pg book-LG and a 1000pg book-LR that's it. Also reading The Economist out loud for exercise. I recommend it, some dense articles - different subjects tech/med/politics/economics etc. I performed my first PT 72 and got 140 last week Of course I was only able to complete 1/3 of the questons in allotted time the rest all D's.

- My plan is -

LR

Focus on the question type and practice speed

LG

Practice realizing all available deductions and realizing shortcuts to answer questions, increase speed through repetition and teach my parents different game types over and over and over and over ....

RC

Practice actual PT RC sections, untimed, however speed up constantly until can complete them near 8-9 mins each.

I have another 10 PT to complete 62-71, my plan is to do 5-10 within next two weeks.

My goal is 160.

Any tips or suggestions would really help out.

Best of luck to you. :)

Hey everyone! I just wanted some suggestions or techniques for approaching weakening q's. I'm finding that while timing myself, I take a longer time or I rush when solving weakening questions because I take too long. I average around 1 minute and half, sometimes closer to 2 mins, even on the easier questions. I think it's because I'm trying to reason it out completely (find all alternative assumptions, etc.) However, on blind review my accuracy is pretty good, as I'll usually get all or almost all of them right. Are there any techniques or strategies you guys use in order to increase speed on weakening q's, or even all LR question types? Thanks!

Hey, could someone help explain in detail why A is the correct answer choice? I am still lost. Thank you.

Hi,

I am writing in December and my goal is to get 167/8. For people who got 167/8 on the test day, what was your average score like? :)

Hi all

I've done only 2 PTs in 70s and just want to do those PTs with weird, rare logic games that threw people off before December.

I know 72 has circular..and what other PTs in 70s have weird games?

Thank you so much! :)

If someone can explain to me why B is correct and C is wrong I would be most appreciative. My thought process is below:

Although dissemination of national security and commercial information should be restricted/prohibited (based on the condition), the spread of scientific information should always be allowed.

A) Yes, this country can distinguish potential competitors or enemies based on the stimulus.

B) If technology is restricted, then the general public does not need that information on public policy issues.

C) I said this one was not a necessary assumption because we have no idea about democratic vs. non democratic countries relative proportion of advancement.

D) This has to be true as the stimulus requires a distinction of scientific information vs commercial and national security.

E) This could be true if MNC uses technology but doesn't share it internationally.

PLEASE HELP!!! I really cannot see why C is wrong and B is correct. Thank you in advance.

Wednesday, November 16 at 7PM ET: PT 68

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

http://rappersquotes.com/uploads/560bde5a4c3e2/f08cd4.png

Lots to do y'all. Let's get started.

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=h14k4idvt1lb4hp5ujds97qt7k%40group.calendar.google.com&ctz=America/New_York

Note:

A long, strange LSAT journey Top-Law-Schools.com

Postby fredfred » Fri Jul 03, 2015 2:21 pm

This is my experience with the LSAT and it should be read by anyone who is looking for LSAT motivation.

In college, I started thinking about the LSAT and law school. I went to a free kaplan session where there is a proctor (tutor) and he gives a full exam. I had not prepared at all and left with a 143. My head was spinning and I went to talk to an advisor of mine. He said if someone wants to go to law school, they should have started studying in high school. That was his serious advice. It takes 3-4 years to master the LSAT at a minimum (he went to HYS law and Princeton PHD so the dude is extremely smart himself). That did not help my confidence.

Fast forward a year. Just graduated college, I was headed to graduate school. It is June 1st, 2014. It was the first time I seriously tried to study, aiming for the September exam. I was doing okay, never really breaking 160. Games was my worst section, going -15/-20 at a time. Having access to some family support, I reached out to a tutor to teach me games. Worth every penny and started going -10, then -5, then -1. Progress! Unfortunately reasoning wasn't progressing as I would have liked, but I was getting tutored on Skype as my graduate school was far away. I was doing what my tutor told me all the way up through the September exam and was pting mid 160s. Eventually September came and I received a high 150's score. I was devastated. 4 months of work, lots of money, and still not even breaking 160. I was distraught, a failure, a waste. This was all in the mist of graduate school and it was just awful.

I take a month off of studying and decided to try again in December. I dumped my tutor (but LG was a massive improvement getting to -0) and decided instead of trying to learn everything just focus on LR. I had games down and just needed LR help. I buckled down for a few months and studied hard. December came, did great on games and not as great on LR, but a significant improvement. I had been pting from 164-174 on any given test. Come December, I went -6 on RC. Received a mid 160s score. Was devastated again, how could I possibly get into a t14? My dreams were over.

I applied everywhere and had a good cycle. Got serious scholarship money from top 20 schools and wl at a few t14. I decided on one top 20 with a nice scholarship and my parents were proud, I was proud, it actually was all okay. But something was bugging me, it was the LSAT. I felt like twice it had won, twice it beat me yet I wanted to try again. My parents said no, why even go through this again?

So I signed up for June. I threw out everything I knew about the LSAT and started at PT 1. I took EVERY SINGLE LSAT from 1-76 (or whatever it is) and then redid 60-76 again. I wasn't trying to beat the test or learn the test, rather I was just going through it systematically. If I got a RC question wrong, I spent 15 minutes breaking down every answer choice and trying to figure out where I went wrong and which one is more right. I did this for 4 months, on top of grad school.

It now brings me to this moment. I received a mid 170s score in the 99th percentile in June. Within 12 hours of the score, I had received a call from a t14 I was rejected from offering me unsolicited admission along with 2 others just outside the t14. It looks like I will be sitting out a year and reapplying.

What this is all about ultimately is I had around a 30 point increase from first pt to June 2015. It was a full year of studying with small breaks in between. You don't need a tutor. What he taught me I found the same on youtube for free. What matters is you determination to really work at it. Actually take every single PT ever given over and over. By my actual count, I have taken over 150 full pts this past year (obviously repeating each one at some point). My professor was wrong, you don't need 4 years of study. You need 1 and the determination to do it.

tl;dr I started from the bottom (143) and now I am here (mid 170s). Good luck, you can do it.

I have been under a rock for the past 3 weeks. Now I am back just in time for the sessions that start tonight.

Hey guys,

I've been pting for the last month or so for the December LSAT. I have improved immensely in LG and LR because I feel like I've been blind reviewing this sections pretty effectively. I try to blind review RC as well, but I don't feel like my level of understanding in this section has improved much since I started doing PT's.

Does anyone have any advice on how to get the most out of reviewing RC after a PT?

Took the the test 3 times. twice when I wasn't ready and the 3rd time I didn't break 170.

Those of you reading this don't take until you are ready or else you will end up like me.

Anyways is there any material about advice tips etc. I know the basic stuff (3 times 2 year period etc.) so yeah any help of information would be great! thanks fam.

http://img.huffingtonpost.com/asset/2000_1000/57bb732a1800002100bcc63a.jpeg?cache=nyl3gfncsz

obligatory Harambe pic because why not.

Hey, could someone help explain why E is the correct answer choice? I understand why others are incorrect.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-41-section-3-question-19/

I know Yale, Northwestern, UVA, Michigan ask for optional essays...are there any others among T14 schools?

should I write optional essays?

I just took PT63 and the score is around 140s, far below my target score(160). I know that it would be a hardship to move 30s in next 2 months.I registered for Feb, 2017(hopefully enroll in 2017) But I has a ambition to conquer. I still suffer at LGs(lots to improve). I want to stay in America while I finish my OPT(internship for international student) and start my law school.

Any suggestion is appreciated.

Hey Everyone,

I was thinking about starting to take PT's in 40's starting this week. Is anyone else also planning to start taking them soon? I wanted to see if maybe we could get through some of them together. We could go over even RC sections ( I kinda feel like we neglect to get each other's help on them) and it ends up costing us points.

Moreover, it would be nice to know who is in same phase <3

The mood I am in <3

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/66/e9/e3/66e9e3f14c5d0eb41c0b622ac44495ca.gif

I would appreciate if somebody could clarify this one for me..

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-72-section-2-question-14/

Here, JY equates, “Those who ate the most chocolate were the most likely to feel depressed” with “Chocolate Consumption –positively correlated with– Depression”

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-47-section-1-question-26/

Here, JY says “Ones who improved the most were the ones who learned to write the most automatically” is not establishing a correlation. (because we don't know what happened to the 2nd tier people)

What’s going on?

I have also posted a similar question on the PT 72 S2 Q14 down in the comment..

1. Those who ate the most chocolate were the most likely to feel depressed.

2. The more chocolate one consumed, the more likely he/she felt depressed.

Aren’t these two different in meaning? Because for the first statement we don’t know what happened to the middle/low range chocolate eaters..

But we still translate both of them as..

Chocolate Consumption –positively correlated with– Depression

Thoughts?

Thanks in advance!

For LR questions asking you to express the main point or the conclusion, how do you know when the answer is going to state the exact conclusion sentence in the stimulus or if the question wants you the conclusion that comes from combining the premises and expressing what the argument is saying overall? I can elaborate if this makes no sense but I feel like with some conclusion questions the answer is basically a restatement of the particular conclusion sentence in the argument but for other questions it's looking for me to combine the premises and overall conclude what the argument is getting at.

I am writing this post because I wished someone told it to me one year ago. This post is to all those 7Sagers who are considering to sign up for the course but they are not sure 7Sage worth it or not. I want to say do not hesitate, your time is the most precious asset you have in your LSAT prep and it is limited. 7Sage explains fundamentals concepts in a very understandable and simple way and do not try to make concepts more complicated than they are. I try to explain it using my personal experience.

I was watching an LG game explanation for the second time, going through the game after 11 months and it hit me why 7Sage is superior to many of other courses out there when J.Y explained not both rule in less than a minute. I remember more than one year ago when for the first time I encounter the concept of not both rule in one of Kaplan LSAT preparation books. Kaplan explanation was correct but it was so long and confusing that the one concept itself convinced me to sign up for their in person course. Fortunately for me they did not have any in-person course in my city which forced me to search for online course that lead me to compare them with 7Sage and give 7Sage a shot .

Some of the courses out their try make concepts complicated in their self study books with the primary goal of sign you up for their over priced in person courses, give 7Sage a shot before signing up for that overpriced in person course.

Please understand this is my personal opinion as someone who started below 150s and improved my prep score more than 16 points in a year thanks to 7Sage and its helpful community.

A condition stated is "Within each segment, reports are ordered by length, from longest to shortest." For purposes of my question I'd like to emphasize that this condition, like all LG rules, is an absolute rule that must be followed.

We are given no information about the length relation of T to either of W or I. Despite this:

The correct answer to Q1, the typical "acceptable configuration" question, implies T — W (where "—" is the usual notation indicating relative order). If this is a way of providing more information, i.e., another rule, it is unique in my limited experience.

The correct answers to Q5 and Q6 imply T — I.

How can T — W or T — I be required assumptions to answer correctly without our having any information that would support them?

The explanation for this game does not address my question.

Saturday, November 19 at 5PM ET: PT 71

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 

If you're feeling like Malfoy about the LSAT...

Don't worry, your BR SQUAD is here to save the day.

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=h14k4idvt1lb4hp5ujds97qt7k%40group.calendar.google.com&ctz=America/New_York

Note:

Hi,

So I was drilling RC passages, but I do not see much improvement which is really frustrating...

I thought I want to try different methods and I did find lines for each questions, tried to understand what all sentences mean, what makes wrong answers wrong but...unlike LR, would those not be helpful in improving at the section?

Doing more passages is not helpful?

Does anyone know whether if this LSAT will be released as a Practice Exam before the December Administration?