Hey all- I have an organizational question on resumes. I got a bachelor's degree in 2004, then got an associate's degree in culinary arts in 2010, and over the last few years i've also taken some graduate level courses at two different schools for credit, though not as a degree-seeking student.

Should I list all of this education on my resume? I'm getting transcripts for everything, so it will definitely be on my law school report. And if i do list it all, in what order? I know usually you would list things in reverse chronological order, but in my case it seems strange, since that would mean the highest degree I've obtained would be listed last.

Any advice?

Thanks!

Hello 7sagers,

I was wondering if anyone had any tips on how to increase your speed on the logic reasoning test portion. I have been studying this section rigorously for months and it is my favorite section . However, even though I understand and can get the correct answer each time untimed I still have yet to master getting 15 correct on the timed section . Any advice ? I'm not sure if I'm nervous or if there is something I can do to help bridge the gap between me taking forever to realize I know the steps .

I began completing actual applications this week, and had a question regarding some common questions I've seen on apps. I've seen several optional sections/questions regarding your socio-economic background: parents' educations, household income, high school, zip code you lived in during high school, etc., with Berkeley probably having the most in-depth section.

The question is this: If the section is optional, and your responses would indicate a relatively privileged upbringing (private high school, parents with professional degrees, upper-middle class household income, etc.), is it better to just not complete the section?

Does omitting responses to this section cause the adcom to just assume both your parents are MDs, and have a household income over $1m, and you went to Philips Academy?

Was this LSAT never released?

What are the types of logic games called in the 7sage syllabus...Sequence, Grouping, and what else?

Hello,

I am considering buying a 7sage prep course; the Ultimate package. I was wondering, for the drills/practice, which Prep tests are used for those drills? I was hoping to keep the more recent prep tests "fresh" for assessment purposes.

Also, I noticed that only PT's 36 and onwards have explanations in this package, what if I need explanations for the earlier prep tests?

Thanks!

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-55-section-1-question-06/

I had gone over this question during Saturday's BR call and I got some great feedback, but this isn't quite clicking with me yet. I just need help eliminating answer choice E.

So the argument is as follows:

CTX: Teaching students calc before they attend university may significantly benefit them.

P1: If students are taught calc before they are ready for the level of abstraction involved, they may abandon the study of math altogether.

C: If we are going to teach pre-university student calc, we must make sure they can handle the level of abstraction involved.

I chose A, but during my personal BR I changed it to E.

A says: "Only those who, without losing motivation, can meet the cognitive challenges that new intellectual work involves should be introduced to it."

At first, I second guessed this answer choice because I did not interpret the stimulus to say that the students need to "meet the cognitive challenges," only that they need to be able to handle calculus to a point where they don't lose motivation in mathematics. I thought it was possible for a student to take calculus, not do so well (and not meet the cognitive challenges), but still be able to "handle the level of abstraction" in the sense that they did not lose interest in math as a result of the level of abstraction. I interpreted "handle level of abstraction" to mean "not being psychologically deterred from math." I didn't take it to mean that they had to achieve a certain level of performance.

E says: "The level of abstraction involved in a topic should not be considered in determining whether that topic is appropriate for pre-university students."

I am really struggling with this answer choice. The premise says "before they are ready for the level of abstraction" and the conclusion says that we must "make sure they can handle the level of abstraction." In this entire argument, the actual level of abstraction is unchallenged. The only thing we are challenging is the student's capability of handling it. The conclusion is claiming that, if we are going to teach pre-university students calculus, we need to evaluate THEM and make sure THEY can handle it. I chose E because I don't see why the level of abstraction couldn't be what is considered before teaching them. Maybe the level of abstraction should be reduced for some students or maybe it should be reduced in general for all pre-university students. It could just be that the level of abstraction is just generally too high. Why couldn't the conclusion instead be "If we are going to teach pre-university students calculus, we must reduce the level of abstraction to meet their "handling capacity." E eliminates this alternate conclusion.

I was told that I am approaching this question like a sufficient assumption question and not a pseudo-sufficient assumption (which is why I lost faith in answer A-- I was focusing too closely on the logical structure of the argument to my detriment). That's most likely the case, but I still don't feel confident in eliminating option E. Any insight is greatly appreciated.

Hi everyone,

I need some help on a few LR questions:

52.3.7: I initially chose B for this question because I assumed moving the tongue related to motor control process, but I understand that isn't necessarily true. Why is A the correct answer?

53.3.8: I had a hard time choosing between A and C. What makes C wreck the argument?

53.3.13: I chose A because of the phrases "nearly perfectly engineered" and the other four choices had very similar reasoning to the stimuli. Why is the correct choice B?

54.4.9: I don't understand what the stimuli is arguing, but I understand that A helps support the point-reasoning relationship.

After the September LSAT and studying independently for three months I was extremely discouraged when I received my scores and knew I could not get into the schools I wanted with the performance I showed. However, I did notice after reviewing my exam that I completely tanked on Logical Reasoning (getting only 8-10 right in both sections). With Logical Reasoning counting for two of the sections on the exam I am hoping with being enrolled with 7Sage I will be ready to tackle Logical Reasoning that will significantly improve my score. Is this a pretty valid assumption or am I reaching for the stars on this one? Please help. Trying not to become too discouraged before the December exam since this is my last shot.

Should I list the year I was a Fulbright Scholar (English teaching assistant program) under employment in the LSAC applications? I wasn't employed per se, but it seems odd to leave it out, especially if I'm putting in my unpaid internships from college. (Obviously, it's on my resume--just asking about the app itself). Thanks in advance for your input!

I'm wondering if anyone can give me some advice as to what I can do, and what my chances are of success at this point. I wrote the September LSAT, and while awaiting my score I had a bad feeling that I didn't perform as well as my PTs. I emailed LSAC wondering if I registered for December in advance (to ensure a seat at the seating closest to where I live) if I could receive a full refund if I liked my September score (similar to what is happening for December/February takers). I was told no, but I can register late and request a refund for the late fee, and a refund request form was attached to the email. I got my score back and it was a 167, lower than any of my PTs and much lower than my average. Right away I registered for December LSAT, and a few days later requested a refund for the late registration fee (filled out the form, and explicitly asked in the email for a refund just for late registration portion). Just an hour ago I noticed that instead of refunding my late registration fee, they gave me a partial refund for registration and canceled my registration. I looked closer and apparently the form they sent me was only for asking for partial refunds (which I kind of already knew but since mine was an unusual refund request, I assumed they just didn't have a document for it, which is why I explicitly stated I wanted a refund for late fee). And so now I'm stuck not registered, and am wondering if I call tomorrow what my chances are that they rectify this problem. I want to apply for this admission cycle and know I can do much better than a 167, so I'd be devastated if I have to take a year off to allow me to rewrite LSAT. My dream is Harvard, so a 167 will likely not cut it in combination with my 3.85.

Hey All,

Over the past few months, since I began my LSAT journey, I've accumulated a few tips on how to quickly eliminate answer choices for Parallel Reasoning, Strengthen and basically any Assumption question. I was recently BRing with another 7Sager the other night and I was trying to explain these strategies, but I was hesitant to do so because I am not 100% confident that they work every single time. Meaning, they haven't been affirmed to me by someone who knows what they're doing, so there's definitely a chance I could be wrong in my approach. I was hoping to get a few more experienced LSATers/7Sagers to take a look at the two strategies below and let me know if these are reliable or if they can see a blind spot that I am not seeing. I can't recall exactly where these strategies derived from, but I have been using them for a while.

1) Strengthen and any Assumption Questions

-Whenever the conclusion mentions anything (whether it is a new attribute, new agent, new criteria, etc.) that is not previously mentioned the premises, the correct answer will always mention that new component. You can automatically eliminate any answer choice that does not mention this new component.

This has made it easy for me to sometimes eliminate 2 to 3 answer choices in seconds without fully reading them. This obviously helps you save time, but it also helps you avoid trap answer choices that try and play on your biases. In the spirit of giving pre- PT35 (or is it 36) examples, see below.

PT32.S1.Q5 (sufficient assumption question): The new element introduced in the conclusion is economic crises; therefore, the answer choice would have to include this element. Know this, we can immediately eliminate D (discusses good economic decisions, but does not touch economic crises) and E (is focused on the small elite. This does nothing to link our conclusion to our premises). You then only have A, B and C to consider.

PT33.S3.Q4 (strengthen question): The new element introduced in the conclusion is cost-effectiveness. Looking for this in the answer choices, we can eliminate B (has nothing to do with the cost of anything), D (which, yes, it talks about funding but we are not concerned with how much funding is currently being contributed. We are concerned with cost-effectiveness), and E (also mentions nothing about costs or their effectiveness). We are then left with only answer choices A and C.

This doesn't happen all the time, but it happens often. And it's wonderful.

2) Parallel Reasoning

I want to preface this by disclosing that I have not yet been through JY's lesson on how to approach Parallel reasoning questions. I am still working my way through, so I apologize if he already does this/advises not to do this. Also, this doesn't work for flaw questions. I approach flaw questions differently than parallel reasoning (again, someone correct me if I'm wrong here) because I am looking for something very specific with flaw questions--namely, a logical fallacy. For parallel reasoning, I am literally only looking at the structure, whether or not it is a valid argument. So this only works for parallel reasoning.

The first thing I do with parallel reasoning is examine the conclusion. I translate that into logic and I scan the answer choices for any answer choice that does not have a conclusion that matches the stimulus. I immediately eliminate those answer choices. My theory is that, if we are looking for a parallel structure, the conclusion absolutely has to be parallel. If the stimulus' conclusion is something like "All X's are Ys" and there are answer choices that say "Some A's are B's" or "All A's are some B's," then I just cross them out before I go any further. This usually eliminates 2 or 3 and it cuts down on a lot of reading. Once I'm left with 2 or 3 options, I then examine the remaining answer choices. See below for some examples.

PT33.S1.Q.23 The conclusion is "Any traveler who flies from B to L cannot avoid flying to X." The first thing I note is that this is a universal statement. I would write: "TBL --> X." I would then quickly scan the answer choices for their conclusions and automatically eliminate A (this conclusion is not universal because it says that the inference is likely, not necessary. Our conclusion is absolute), D (this doesn't even give us a conditional at all), and E (again, this is an existential conclusion. Our conclusion is universal). We are then left with B and C, which each have universal conclusions:

B-- Y --> PW

C-- IMP --> PM

I would then further evaluate the premises of the remaining 2.

PT34.S2.Q6. The conclusion is "The notion that one might be justified in behaving irrationally in the service of a sufficiently worthy end is incoherent." So, I would write that out as "N is I" (I wrote it this way because there was no obvious logic indicators, but you could also write "N --> I") and I would scan the answer choices for conclusions not matching this. I can eliminate A (because it is prescriptive. The conclusion is "RL ought not to CC." Our definition is making a universally descriptive claim) and E (also prescriptive. Our conclusion is saying nothing about what someone ought to do.) So we are left with B, C, and D which all have conclusions that can be translated "A is B."

B-- Spilling a glass of water is not accidental.

C-- Living the good life is happy (not unhappy).

D-- Self diagnoses are not performed by doctors.

I would then further evaluate the premises of each of the remaining 3.

Again, I am looking for thoughts, corrections, affirmations...whatever you more experienced LSATers can give me on these strategies. Thanks in advance.

As it is disclosed to the Sept. test takers, would anyone be interested in BRing the September 2016 LSAT with me this week?

Hey yall,

I've been consistently drilling,practice examining and blind reviewing. My latest scores have been 160,161, 158, and 159. On the actual exam that I will be taking I would like to score 165, but realistically not sure if I can reach that score by December fourth. I would at least like to score "160" and not in the 150's range. Any tips from now to December to achieve that goal? I also plan on taking the exam on February.

Hi,

I just received "final notice" about the photo...

Does this happen to you?

Is there some problem in my photo?

Why do I keep receiving the emails?

I deleted the background using the Photoshop, would this be bad?

Hey everyone! I was curious to know if any of you guys used goal setting techniques or methods that help you stay accountable and track your LSAT progress. I was thinking of writing my own goals to see if that helped me stay on top of my studying since I've fallen behind a little bit. Also, I feel it would also help with setting smaller target scores that you can work your way up to which also indicates progress. @"Alex Divine" I know you've mentioned setting goals here before. Any suggestions from anyone would be greatly appreciated! Thanks!

Wednesday, November 9 at 7PM ET: PT 60

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

https://media.giphy.com/media/iAl01sVoHek4U/giphy.gif

Please join us for a very special BYOC BR Group! Taking the LSAT never tasted so sweet!

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:

I was wondering if anyone could go over my resume before I send out my applications. I had issues putting everything together mainly because I don't have any law experience. I worked as a bartender and server for years to pay off debt as well as saving up for law school. I tried my best to list functions and responsibilities of my jobs that could relate to the characteristics needed to become a lawyer.

So I have been doing a lot of timed problem sets and I noticed that I do better if I take longer than 1 min 20 seconds per question. At the same time, I want to be doing these questions as fast as possible. When doing these problem sets, should I sacrifice the speed in which I answer these questions in order to answer the questions more accurately?

i was wondering if you guys know how the testing will differ from normal testing. i received an email yesterday from lsac with the following:

"We have determined that you are currently eligible for the following accommodations on the December 3, 2016 LSAT:

50% Additional Test time on all sections of the test as follows:

Section 1 53 minutes total

Section 2 53 minutes total

Section 3 53 minutes total

Section 4 53 minutes total

Section 5 53 minutes total

Writing Sample 35 minutes total

Break time as follows:

After Section 1 10 minutes total

After Section 2 10 minutes total

After Section 3 15 minutes total standard break

After Section 4 10 minutes total

After Section 5 10 minutes total

....."

-----------

i replied back to their email saying that i accept the accommodations i am eligible for and hope to hear back with knowledge that i have been fully approved. hopefully i hear back from them this week with a full confirmation.

How does it go on from here though. i would assume that the test will start on the same day and time like everyone else but would i be placed in a different room from everyone else and/or given a different test? the lsac website isnt really clear on this. if i was to finish my section before the time limit for each section (after reviewing and checking my answers of course) would i be allowed to tell the proctor that i finished and be able to move on to the next section?

Also for those who are writing theirs under accommodated conditions or have done it in the past, how did you change/adjust your study approach to the lsat. seeing how i am just finding out now i have only a month left to work under the new timed conditions for myself so any advice/tips/tricks on how to approach the lsat during test time would be gladly appreciated :)

So, really I just want to pat myself on the back. It's really not that much to brag about, but after a month or so of my PT scores being stuck around 160, today my score jumped to a 166! And, that's with only finishing 3 logic games (better than I've ever done, LG is my worst section) and doing worse on the LR sections than I normally do!

All of that to say - don't give up. I had almost given up on reaching a 170, but now it doesn't seem all that unattainable. I know I have a lot of work to do, but just focus on the things that are tripping you up and be diligent with taking PTs and BR!

Anyway, I'm having a good day :)

And, thanks, 7Sage <3

The complex LG is hard to overcome. I can only understand 3 of 4 questions,generally, and only get 12-14 correct. Is someone can give me some suggestions? Thank you

I got a 164 on my first LSAT after scoring between 169-172 on scored PTs. However, the testing conditions were less than optimal and I filed a complaint. Is it possible for me to get in the 170's with a little over a month of additional studying? If yes, how can I accomplish this goal?

What are some ways you can prepare yourself for the "shock and awe" of the actual test? A lot of people do great on practice tests, routinely scoring about where they want to be... and then get into the testing center and forget everything they ever learned. What are some ways we can get ready for the pressure, hormones, and emotions of test day?

For example:

Would it help to time each questions with a stop watch?

Would it help to set some artificial consequences for failure (like, "Get 8 out 10 questions right in 10 minutes or else you have to clean the refrigerator")?

Would it help to have somebody else hover over you and time you?

Hi all,

Can I include my position with the Public Defender's Office on my resume even though it was around my senior year of high school? I like putting this position down because it shows interest in the law at a relatively early time (and affirms my narrative that I've been interested in pursuing this field for a long time) but I understand that high school-related experience is really not something we should be putting down.

Also, are resume's for law schools really only supposed to be one page in length?

Thank you all in advance!