I'm a bit confused as to when US law schools start accepting applications...a lot of websites currently list old dates. Is the earliest usually in Sept or Oct?

I have been proceeding in order of the course syllabus for the past month. However, I would really like to see if I've progressed noticeably from my diagnostic score, even though I'm not even halfway through the course curriculum. Thoughts about if it's a good idea to take a prep test now, to judge how I'm improving?

Hi,

What is the best way to study for the October LSAT and how many hours a day?

I purchased all 3 bibles from Powerscore and all the exams.

Would this be the best way to study?

Should I just keep taking practice test after practice test?

Should they be all timed?

Please help out :)

Thanks!

Someone please help, I still do not know how to do these question types. I have reviewed the curriculum many times, but it is still not sticking.

Any suggestions?

Ever since the new problem sets were released, I've been experiencing problems with this site. Problem sets that previously showed would take 15 minutes now show 1.9 hours! This is really annoying since before I was over 50% through the course and now I'm only at 42%. I know there was some new content added, but that can't account for the extra 10-12%, right?

Also, my problem sets are messed up. For example, I was working on parallel flaw questions and when I clicked on some questions it would take me to a main point or principle identify question. 7sage is usually flawless but this is really annoying!

Also, I guess it's important to note that I still am using the old problem sets. For those who have all the PDFs from recent exams, I'd suggest you use the older problem sets since they cover questions from all difficulty levels + they have video explanations. The newer ones only have the actual questions (no explanations) with only easier problems, unless you paid for the most expensive course. I used the newer problem sets for a bit and the questions were a complete joke. Working on them won't prepare you for the harder questions, and if you're looking to score 165+, this will harm you in the long run.

I'm going to look at a few schools this week and wanted to know if there are any questions that I should not be asking the admissions committee. I was accepted at a few unranked schools all of which are giving me a significant scholarship. Is it inappropriate to ask the schools why they are unranked/what their opinion of the ranking system is? I also wanted to ask them how to compare to their competitor schools. For example asking New York Law how they compare to Pace or asking New England Law how they compare to Suffolk etc. These questions wouldn't be in anyway adversarial but I'd very much like to know how the schools answer these "harder" questions. What are your opinions?

What does this mean for us? Nothing. Just put your best self forward on the LSAT and applications. That's what you'd do if the numbers were down 6.6%. You got this.

Want to pre-empt any doomsdaying.

http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2015/07/10/jump-in-lsat-takers-gives-law-schools-finally-something-to-cheer/

I'm currently studying 3 hours/day. I really need to increase my study time to 6-8 hours/day to finish the work I need to improve my logical games, LR and RC. I'm studying LSAT full time, but can only put in 3-4 hours/day before I'm mentally exhausted. If you have any suggestions about how to increase my study time and still absorb the information, would you let me know?

Spam removed by admins.

Hey everyone! My first LSAT score was a 160 (less than 2 months of part-time prep) and I had a 3.8 GPA from a very well-recognized university. I applied and got into quite a few good schools (UPenn, UVA and waitlisted at Columbia) but no scholarship money at any of the top schools. I'm considering retaking the LSAT because I know that the score was by far the weakest element in my application. I know UPenn is a great school but I'm not interested in BigLaw; I'm more interested in International Humanitarian Law. Therefore, I'm a little hesitant about UPenn.

If I retake the LSAT and can improve my score, I might have a shot at NYU or a top 3 school and/or perhaps at a scholarship. Keyword being "might." I was wondering if you guys might be able help me make a choice. Thanks everyone!

I know LSAT is the most important part of the admissions decision, in most cases.

For pretty much all of the schools I want to apply to, I am in the 25th or just below the 50th percentile for the LSAT. My GPA is usually at the 75th or above though. I plan to apply ASAP, most of these schools are rolling admissions.

Basically, asking if a high GPA will level off an okay LSAT score.

Thanks!

I have a friend who's reapplying to his school of choice for next cycle, but he's not sure if he needs to rewrite his PS or get new LORs. He's convinced that the only reason he didn't get in was due to his score (145), and intends to take the test again in Oct. I can't answer this question myself since my application is under reevaluation and I didn't have to "apply" a second time. I was wondering if anyone on here might know something about applicants applying to the same school 2 maybe even 3 times?

I'm getting ready to purchase a full course after completing my free trial. I would like to be able to access the hard problem sets that appear to only be accessible through the Ultimate+ package, which is not yet available. Is there a timeline for when this package will be available for purchase? Also, if I purchase the Ultimate package, can I upgrade to Ultimate+ when it becomes available without having to pay for an entire new course?

Where are the answers and explanations of all the old problem sets? I can't find them and really need them. Please help and give me a link or something. Thanks.

Hi everyone,

I'm looking for a way to change up my study strategies for the October test, which will be a retake for the June test. I've been trying out tutors and the BR group, and I think it would be most effective to work with one or two peers who are are also around the same stage of studying. Currently, I'm alternating between the 50s and 60s, and working my way back to the 70s by September.

If anyone is interested and wants to talk, just send along a personal message!

I'm currently enrolled in the premium course and just finished the "Hard Reading Comprehension" section. Before some problem sets were taken down a few days ago there was a problem set entitled ""Hard Reading Comprehension Problem Set"" that was at the end of the section, but with the new changes it's no longer there and I can't view the answers videos. These questions look like they came from PrepTest35 which is not an option I can get from the addons page.

I did a search for these problem sets and can see that there's a "Hard Reading Comprehension Problem Set Series that's locked.....does that mean I can't view these anymore unless I upgrade my course? Anybody know where I can find the video answers to these questions?

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-68-section-4-game-4/

I'm having some serious trouble with this game. Any thoughts/suggestions? I've done other sequencing games with conditional rules, of course, but nothing as open ended as this one. Can anyone think of any similar games?

I've taken a pretty substantial LSAT break and it could just be that I'm a bit rusty but I'm having trouble nailing this one down even after a few repetitions (not typical for me).

Thanks in advance!

I've found that sometimes it really matters what order you apply the rules when going thru individual questions in the LG sections. Apply the right rule fist and an inference pops up that causes you to be able to trigger or make irrelevant another rule. However, if you go thru the rules in a suboptimal order, then you sometimes have incomplete inferences that don't let you fully "spend" a rule, and you have to come back to that rule a second time...

Does anyone have any guidance for the best order to begin applying rules in rule driven games? Usually in the games, JY always seems to apply rules in the perfect order but during a pressured exam, it's not always clear to me which rules I should be going thru first.

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-18-section-4-question-14/

At first, I thought the answer might be (D) since before I saw the answer choices I noticed that there is a problem in assuming that atmospheric ozone levels are equal in every global region. So I expected that the answer must be something like the ozone levels are getting higher in polar region and lower in other regions so that global ozone levels are remaining constant.

However, the answer choice (D) is exactly opposite to my expectation, saying that ozone levels are increasing in other regions and decreasing in polar region. But can this undermine the government official's dismiss on the concern that "polar" marine life is damaged? If ozone level in polar region is decreasing since quantity of ozone is shifting away from the polar cap (as (D) says), there would be no harm to polar marine life.

Or did I wrongly catch the argument of the government officials? Is the argument of the gov't official simply that protective ozone layer over the Antarctic is not decreasing?

Hi everyone!

So RC is my strength and I usually only miss 8-9 questions on the whole section and that is mostly because I run out of time! If I have time I am pretty sure I would get them all right! Any tips on improving reading speed? Or will it just come with practice as i do PTs over and over again??

thank you!

This is so old, but IMO it's one of top five web animations...ever.

Hello everybody,

I was wondering if anybody could help clarify something for me.

I am currently reading chapter 18 on the trainer re: SA and P questions, and there are some exercises and lessons on the conditional indicators covered early on in the 7sage curriculum. Mike Kim states that "unless" is used as a necessary indicator (vs. J.Y negate - sufficient method) and that "no" is a sufficient indicator (vs. J.Y negate - necessary method).

Example: "No duck likes water". My translation using 7sage method would be:

"No"= negate necessary category

2 idea's: Ducks; (liking) water

translation: pick and idea, negate it, make it your necessary condition

=> W --> /D

Mike Kim's answer is = D --> W.

Am I butchering the simple translation rules? Translating and "seeing" the logic, is something I feel that holds me back from progressing through the logical reasoning section/question types.

Thanks everyone.

As I've been doing more and more practice sets and going through problems showcased in the tutorial videos, I've started to not just read things like answer options in the order that they're listed when going about answering a question. For instance, when doing some practice RC questions this morning, I would read a question and then skip down to, e.g. answer E and work my way up to A rather than to read starting from A and go down to E. I don't think I started doing this for any particular reason other than sometimes I would get frustrated by the first few options and would want to see if I could find something better lower, but then I started to think that possibly this could insulate you from the tricks that the test occasionally throws at you such as putting really tempting answer options at the beginning or right before the actual answer at the end.

I'm just wondering if this is a viable strategy (or worst case just neutral) that could be useful to do when taking the test. I can't really think of any downside seeing and the upside would be that (I assume) LSAC assumes most people read from top to bottom and would thus try to design tricks that way. I also wonder (but haven't actually tried) if this kind of strategy would apply to doing individual questions too. Problem I see with that is that it could get cumbersome time-wise to be skipping around so much or starting from the end and coming forward (especially if the questions increase in difficulty towards the end, causing you to waste time on less questions).

Anywho, just wanted some thoughts on this. It seemed kinda helpful initially but just wondering if it could be a problematic strategy or what you think.

Surprisingly I am very strong in LR sections and I almost always get these right. The problem is I don't know why. Lol. Intuitively I guess I understand the question stem well but I feel as if I do not even after getting it right. I think I am confused about how I am using the flaw to derive at the correct answer.

When answering these questions I read the stem first, identify conclusion and support and then the flaw. But I don't think I actually use the flaw to get the right answer unless I am doing so sub-consciously. Is a strengthening question simply a matter of making the flaw "work" in the argument so that the conclusion of that argument is valid or more likely to be valid?

In weakening, it is the reverse so is it a matter of exposing the flaw and using it to make the "holes" in argument more noticeable so that the conclusion is invalid or less valid?

I guess I shouldn't freak out since I only get one or two wrong. But I am using the trainer and trying my best to incorporate Mike's train of thought to avoid loopholes in my fundamentals later.

http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-24-section-2-question-17/

This question was very confusing to me because I couldn't understand what assumption they could possibly be making.

I originally chose E. On BR, I chose E again. I chose E because of the statement "no nation should be required to assume the burden of enforcing a decision it found repugnant", so I thought the Council must have assumed E, "decisions reached by a majority of nations in response to threats to world peace would be biased in favor of one or more major powers." Because then there would always be a world power who didn't find some particular decision repugnant to enforce that decision.

But the correct answer is B. Of course, after learning the answer, I could make an explanation for why it worked: if there's a newcomer in the world powers club, then the burden of maintaining world peace would no longer rest on the world's major powers (only some of them), which goes against the intentions of the Council.

I'm still unsteady on this question.