266 posts in the last 30 days
My android tablet doesn't let the videos speed up and it's been pretty annoying because one of the best things about 7sage is bring able to speed up the videos! It's a new tablet so I'm not sure if it's a tablet specific issue, but does anyone have any troubleshooting tips? I've tried the 7sage app, on chrome, and the preloaded browser. Thanks in advance!
Update Feb 2017: printable e-docs for the LSAT questions are now included in 7Sage materials.
There is also a list here:
http://classic.7sage.com/preptests/
Q: Why do I need to buy PTs? Why don't you have them?
A: As of April 21st, 2015, all PDFs containing LSAC licensed content have been removed to comply with LSAC's new policy. To be clear, all PDFs containing any LSAT questions - LSAT PrepTests and Problem Sets - have been removed. Any PDFs without LSAT questions are still available.
The removal of PDFs from 7Sage was not our decision, it was the LSAC's decision to ban PDFs. 7Sage is not the only LSAT course to be hit with this. Other LSAT courses also had to remove their PDFs.
To compensate, we have all of the questions listed as silent videos, which are short one-minute videos that show only the question and answer choices. It is much better to study with paper PTs, so pick those up if you can.
Q: What PrepTests do I need?
A: Depends on what course you have!
If you have Starter, you will need PTS 36-44.
If you have Premium, you will need PTs 36-58.
If you have Ultimate, you will need PTs 36-72.
If you have Ultimate+, you will need PTs 36-77. Future PTs will also be added to the course.
(Ultimate+ also has access to the question bank, which has some questions from PTs 1-16 and all from 17-35)
Q: I can't find the PTs included in my course! Can you swap explanations for me?
A: Sorry, we do not swap PT explanations. Please make sure you can find the PTs before you purchase the course, or upgrade to a higher package that includes more explanations.
All courses use some of the questions from PTs 1-35, so it would be a good idea to pick up those as well.
If you've purchased individual PT explanations that are not included in those packages, you will have to get those as well.
From Amazon.com (USA/Canada)
(SuperPrep 1) A, B, C:
(SuperPrep II) 62, 63, C2:
Games for PTs1-20:
Games for PTs 21-40:
Also, if you're looking for PTs 41-50 and don't want to spend hundreds of dollars, try this:
The book I ordered was used, but came in good condition with minimal markups/notes.
(Thanks, @alex.kirby, for this link!)
1-6, 8, 17, 39 & 40 (EXPENSIVE):
4-18 (Might actually be 4-14 - book says 1992-1995, but is not specific as to what PT #s)
7-16, 18:
19-28:
29-38:
37:
36-44 (price fluctuates, try to find a used copy):
https://www.amazon.com/dp/1937707369/ref=cm_sw_r_other_apa_Vo8FxbPCYZQ66
42-51 ($30!!)
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0986086290/ref=od_aui_detailpages00?ie=UTF8&psc=1
43-45:
(Thanks, @VALKIRIA, for this link!)
41-50 (separated by question type, easy to remove and re-arrange):
51:
52-61:
62-71:
73:
74:
75:
76:
77:
78:
From Amazon.ca (Canada)
7-18:
http://www.amazon.ca/gp/product/0979305047?psc=1&redirect=true&ref_=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s00
19-28:
http://www.amazon.ca/gp/product/0979305039?psc=1&redirect=true&ref_=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s00
29-38:
http://www.amazon.ca/gp/product/0979305055?psc=1&redirect=true&ref_=oh_aui_detailpage_o01_s02
I cannot find 39-51 for a low price on Amazon, sorry!
52-61:
http://www.amazon.ca/gp/product/0984636005?psc=1&redirect=true&ref_=oh_aui_detailpage_o01_s02
62-71:
http://www.amazon.ca/gp/product/0986045519?psc=1&redirect=true&ref_=oh_aui_detailpage_o01_s02
72:
http://www.amazon.ca/gp/product/0986045527?psc=1&redirect=true&ref_=oh_aui_detailpage_o01_s00
73:
http://www.amazon.ca/gp/product/0986045535?psc=1&redirect=true&ref_=oh_aui_detailpage_o01_s00
74:
http://www.amazon.ca/gp/product/0986045543?psc=1&redirect=true&ref_=oh_aui_detailpage_o01_s01
75:
76:
77:
78:
From Ebay:
These change often, so I only included a link to a search
Analytical Reasoning Problem Sets ONLY From Amazon:
1-20
21-40
41-60
No longer selling PTs:
From EveryLSAT
Their license has ran out and they are no longer selling PDFs or PTs.
From Cambridge LSAT
Their license has ran out and they are no longer selling PDFs.
Still selling hard copies: https://www.cambridgelsat.com/preptests/4-section/
If you have any to add, please do!
"Sooner or later, you’ll realize that our lessons are just better and you could have spent those thousands of tutoring or in-person class dollars on a boat."
http://www.getbusymedia.com/my-conversation-with-j-y-ping-founder-of-7sage-com/
Hello you beautiful, beautiful people. So, I've had a wonderful month or so of consistently okay scores. Not where I want to be by June but 3-5 points shy.
I'm now experiencing a dramatic decline across all sections in accuracy and I am FUHREAKING out (e.g., missing 5 per LR section when I had up until last week been averaging minus 4 total for LR). Needless to say I've been pacing like a mad woman who has something to hide because JUNE is now less than 5 weeks away.
Any kind words and/or suggestions would be much appreciated. Kind of at a loss for what to do because my blind review score is still the same, just not in my PTs or drills of timed sections. Merp. Knope out.
Hi All...
Looking at the syllabus, I'm wondering if all the different types of logic games are covered by the course? I bought the lowest level primarily for LG coverage (although I intend to use all of it). I see that all the LGs are explained on the free section of the site but I'm wondering if the course covered how to break down all the different types?
I ask because in one of the videos the instructor said that there are about six types, and I see the Kaplan books I have (on loan from a friend) seems to talk about a bunch of types... Linear, in-out, whatever...
I love music and sharing music, so I want to know what your HAPPY song is!
This is (currently) mine:
Obvious title is obvious. It's catchy and I'm a sucker for catchy songs. (ADHD forces catchy songs to repeat over and over in my head... Sigh.)
To post yours, just paste the YouTube link here!
Basic question: How many PT's should I be doing every week when I'm about 4 weeks out from the test?
Background: I am taking the in class Nathan Fox LSAT class, which goes from May 12th to June 3rd. The class advocates blind reviewing as well as the fundamentals of 7Sage, so I know there most likely won't be a problem there. His class, however, has us taking 1 PT a week. Should I add more into the mix or just review?
***I love to write, and I also happen to have a little knowledge about the LSAT and law school admissions generally. With JY’s blessing, I have decided that I will scratch my writing itch on a semi-regular basis by posting long-form blog-style pieces on the forums. If you have a topic that you’d like to see me write about, feel free to PM me. And please, discuss the piece freely in the comments below, especially if you disagree – I love to hear other viewpoints and am happy to engage in respectful and reasoned discourse.
My personal philosophy has always been that fundamentals are paramount because they set the groundwork for true understanding, and true understanding is a foolproof way to do well on anything. Some methods out there eschew a deep discussion of formal logic in favor of more ‘holistic’ approaches, relying on the student to supply their experience with the English language instead. I don’t buy it, and here’s why.
First - if the LSAT gave us everything in “if…then” terms, then I would absolutely agree that formal logic would be mostly unnecessary because everyone understands the “if…then” construction on a very basic level. There would still be some purely logical issues that would need to be addressed (for example, thinking that “if A then B” is equivalent to “if not A then not B”), but those could at least theoretically be addressed without resorting to formal logic mapping. Unfortunately, the LSAC is not so accommodating. Semantics plays a huge role on the LSAT, so we can’t just ignore it as if we lived in some idealized world where “if…then” is the only game in town.
Next - if people were naturally proficient at identifying equivalence between statements, I would also agree that learning formal logic would be mostly unnecessary. But unfortunately, that’s not the case either. The number of students who complain that certain arrangements of conditional statement are ‘convoluted’ or ‘complicated’ speaks to the sheer difficulty of that level of translational proficiency for even the most clued-in students, to say nothing of the average person. Sometimes, even a simple reordering of words can be enough to throw the most astute of students. If you’ve ever missed a conditional indicator because it was in the middle of a sentence, then you know exactly what I’m talking about.
Finally – if there were an easier way to give the required background than what currently exists, then I’d embrace that wholeheartedly. Unfortunately, when we’ve got a conditional (if-then) statement, we need an “if” side (sufficient), a “then” side (necessary), and a way to express the relationship between the two (the arrow). I’m really not seeing how this can be made any simpler.
I take a lot of pride in my ability to teach formal logic, but believe me – I would not teach formal logic at all if I could help it. It is one of the least fun parts of the curriculum for the student, and is very difficult to teach well. It took me years to get even reasonably proficient at conveying the concepts. In addition, once learned, most students go through a phase where they try to translate literally every statement into conditional logic, which I then need to scale back, causing more suffering for everyone. I teach it not because I want to, but because I have to.
Formal logic is not an end unto itself. It is not something where as soon as you learn it, you can go crush the LSAT by mapping everything out. Rather, it is the means – the fundamental first step toward actual comprehension of what’s going on. That comprehension facilitates the application of logic to the facts at hand, because now we’re clear about what the facts actually are. This critically important piece is often overlooked – it doesn’t matter how good your logical skills are if you don’t understand the facts correctly, and screwing up the relationship between two elements is one of the surest ways to screw up the facts.
This is why it always amuses me when people ask whether they have to use formal logic in a question if they can ‘just see it’ (or whatever variation of that metaphor they prefer). That’s actually the entire point. Being able to ‘just see it’ means that you’ve already unconsciously used and understood the formal logic – you just don’t perceive it because the translation is already automatic for you. It’s akin to ‘seeing’ the answer to 2+2: it may be automatic for you now, but there was a time where you had to count it out. That you don’t have to count it out now doesn’t mean that you don’t need to know how it works – in fact, it is precisely because you’ve learned how it works that allows you to avoid counting it out. And if you've ever misinterpreted something even though you thought you could "just see it", that's not just some minor mistake - that's a gaping hole in your logical reasoning instincts because that suggests you've internalized faulty fundamentals. It's the equivalent of going through life thinking 2+2 is 5; what you "just see" winds up being confusing at best, and flat-out wrong at worst. How do you fix that? By going back and learning how it actually works.
When you learn formal logic, it’s important to understand why it works the way it does. A lot of methods just teach formal logic as a series of trigger words and rules to memorize, and in that light it’s entirely understandable why there’s so much animosity toward it. In addition to it being remarkably difficult to apply rules we don’t understand, it also just feels arbitrary – like it’s something the LSAC is forcing you to learn just because. Who wouldn’t get frustrated in that situation?
Conversely, when you understand WHY it works the way it does, several things happen. First, you can ‘prove’ to yourself that the theory itself is sound, which (although it sounds dumb) is an important part of internalizing it. Second, you start to synthesize your existing intuition with the explicit underlying mechanics, allowing you to have principled bases for adjusting your intuition. And finally, because you understand the theory and aren’t just memorizing rules, it becomes much easier to apply the rules appropriately in a wide variety of situations. If you don’t understand why things work the way they do, then you’re forever bound to memorizing lists of words and hoping that no variations show up (though even if you do understand the theory, you’ll still have to memorize some words – sadly, there’s no avoiding that).
So, don’t think about formal logic as just sufficients and necessaries, arrows and slashes, contrapositives and other seemingly-arbitrary rules to follow. That approach misses the mark entirely. The only way you’ll ever be able to consistently parse out complicated sentences is if you have a firm grasp on the underlying mechanics, and you can only have a firm grasp on a set of mechanics if you understand the theory behind it. Formal logic is one of the most important elements of the LSAT, so prioritize accordingly.
Bonus points for those of you who unconsciously translated that last bit into formal logic.
I am wildly inconsistent in reading comp. Some days I am -2 and others -10. I am thinking about reading the questions before I start reading the passage, similar to my approach with LR questions. Does anyone have personal feedback on this approach?
So I just missed being able to get the PDF files without DRM by a few days! I want to be able to practice them over and over, as recommended, but photocopying out of the book is just a major pain in the rear (yes I realize I only need to do it once for each test - still a pain). Is there a source for the PDFs, even if they have DRM? If I can print it once I'm golden.
Hello fellow 7Sagers,
Whelp… unfortunately, after doing so well with studying, I fell off HORRIBLY. At least a month or two has gone by, and I have not even attempted to study. In my defense, I think my mind was not in the right place. I just completed my undergrad studies, and I got a full-time job at a law firm. Now that I have things a little more managed in my life, I think I am ready to really dedicate myself to tackling this LSAT. I guess I am looking for tips, advice, and encouragement. How do you manage your time? Also, what is a healthy amount of time to dedicate to studying a week? Lastly, what are some additonally things I should be doing as a suppliment to 7Sage?
Thanks in advance for your help!
Hi everyone,
I was wondering if anyone could provide some information on how schools take multiple LSAT scores into consideration. Say I take 2 tests: what I've heard in the past is that most schools will take the higher of the 2, but that the top 14 schools will average the 2, unless there is a +/- 6 point difference between the 2 (in which case they will take the higher). Does anyone know if there is any truth to that? Thanks in advance!
Hi All...
New here, and hoping to take the LSAT in June, with just 5 weeks t prepare. Crazy, if I don;t PT with an acceptable score I'll delay until October, which of course means no law school this year.
Anyhow, to give myself the most study time possible I need to make these videos run on my Android tablet. When I try I just get a big black square and nothing resembling video. Does anyone else having it running on an Android tablet? The tabled is a B&N Nook running Cyonagenmod.
Thanks!
Hi All,
This is my first post here. I have a master's degree and have worked in a professional position for about six years (I'm freshly 31). I haven't taken a university course since 2008, and so I have a big span of time where I've no longer been a student. However, I have kept in contact with a few profs from undergrad and grad school.
My question is - how does someone like me handle letters of recommendation? I currently have the best boss that I've ever had, but I'm hesitant to a) reveal to this person that I'm working on exiting my current career path in 2016 and b) ask for a LOR, in light of the person losing me as an employee.
Is it better to just request LORs from previous professors? I have a few who would be willing, but it just seems odd to request a letter from a prof who oversaw my student work in 2006...Unfortunately, I have a history of "challenging" bosses, and so my current boss is the only one I feel would be relatively appropriate for a LOR.
Worst case...would a LOR from a colleague or direct report suffice? Kind of sounds odd...but I'm throwing it out there.
Please help!
Thank you
Hi everyone,
I just wanted some input from the group. I have been studying for months now and I am still not improving nor reaching my PT goal. Should I take my June test for the experience even though I'm sure I'll end up with a low score or just delay it to October? I've been delaying my LSAT several times so I feel like rather than pushing it behind yet again, taking it at least once now would be better. But by reading other forums lots of people say if one is not Pt-tng around their goal, then delay it. I'm aiming for a Canadian law school so many law schools just look at the highest LSAT score. Not sure it they will take into consideration of my other LSAT scores, for example I get a 141 on the June LSAT but for the October one I get a 167. Would love some feedback, thank you!
I just finished the invalid/valid argument form lessons. I just trying to put the pieces together but it is not working for me. How does this tie to the Logical Reasoning and Logic Games? is it only for MBT questions? I have all the cheat sheets next to me for reference but I still don't see how is going to help me. If you guys don't help me, I won't get a 165. /H -------> /165. Thank you family.
I started out my prep with the LSAT Trainer, and have done two timed prep tests (one diagnostic and one after a few weeks of study). I just signed up for the 7Sage course, and I am wondering if anyone has any advice on whether I should focus on finishing the 7Sage course entirely before taking any more PTs?
Folks—
Updating the schedule (5/26). PM me to be added to the Saturday group (send Skype handle).
Saturday groups (7pm EST):
Sat 5/30: PT64
Sat 6/6: PT36
Weekdays (PM @pseudonymous or @amanda_kw to join the weekday BR's)
(All at 7pm EST)
Tuesday: PT 72
Wednesday: PT 71
Thursday: PT 68
Friday PT 69
I seem to be getting these wrong the most are these misc logic indicator questions or just random questions? Any tips for these?
Where you at, where do you wanna be, and what are you going to do get it?
Hi Everyone,
I'm just beginning to study for the LSAT. I'm a long ways away from actually taking the exam and suspect my actual date would be no sooner than 2016. However, I wanted to get started by aligning myself with some strategies/technique before I even begin to touch the prep tests. (Because of you, I understand not to go near them yet!!)
I am going to pick up some books but wanted to gain some feedback from you guys first. I would like to follow a schedule similar to PowerScore's 4 month program. I may add a month or two to the program in order to spread out the time and avoid burn out. I would like to use PowerScore's LG Bible and PowerScore's LR Bible. Based on your reviews, I would like to use Manhattan's RC Prep to fill that piece.
What are your thoughts about this combination? Are there any supplements I should add to this list of material? Once I finish this self-study program, I anticipate increasing my intensity through the three-phase cycle recommended by 7Sage. (Accuracy, Time, Endurance) Please let me know your thoughts! And thank you for all the feedback.
Best,
TM
How many copies of pt's do you recommend I copy?
Hi everyone!
What material would you recommend to supplement 7sage and in what order would you complete it relative to the 7sage curriculum and the practice tests!
So I've got three weeks left in the Army before I start terminal leave and I've finally reached the end of the learning curriculum and the only thing that stands in between me and 4-5 months of PTs is the LG Bundle. As I finished up the last few LG sections in the curriculum I saw a lot of people were having the same questions, concerns and other issues with how to approach their LG studies and utilizing the Fool Proof Method and since I don't really have a job or much to do at work anymore I thought I'd offer up my solution and strategy to address some of these problems. I think the Fool Proof Method is awesome, but I tweaked it very slightly for my purposes and I think it could help some people out to employ a similar strategy. If this helps you in any way, please pass it along to anyone else who may be struggling.
Top concerns I have seen from other people:
1) I think 10 copies of every LG is wasting paper.
2) I don't have enough time to do all the LGs.
3) I want to know the categories for every LG I'm doing.
4) When do I do which games and how often do I do them again?
Before I answer these questions directly, here is what I've actually done to set myself up for success. If you were fortunate enough to get the LG Bundle before LSAC made it vanish, then you have all the games from PTs 1-35 which is 140 games. If you have anything less than that, just scale down what I'm prescribing, but everything should still go along as I outline here. I got a few 2" 3-ring binders and filled them with document protectors. I then began with PT 1 and printed out 4 copies of the first game (more on this later), which if you have the LG Bundle is 8 pieces of paper since 7Sage was kind enough to format the old LGs like the new ones with 2 pages and plenty of room to work. If you don't have this I'd say add a piece of scratch paper in with each game to give yourself extra space to simulate what you'll have on the LSAT. I then placed all 4 copies of the first game in a document protector and put a sticky note on the front denoting the following: PT#, LG#, and then a chart with 1st-4th attempts on the vertical axis and Date/Time/Score on the horizontal axis (more on this later as well). I then repeated this process for each subsequent game so that now I have a binder full of 4 copies of each LG, although due to the volume of paper you'll need at least 2 or 3 binders like I mentioned above.
All the information I collect on the sticky notes I will put into a very simple Excel spreadsheet I have designed to track my progress. If you've read this far and are still interested, feel free to message me your email and I will send you a blank copy of the spreadsheet I designed so you can use it and tweak it how you see fit. In a nutshell it has space to log the date/time/score for every attempt for every LG in the bundle.
The first attempt is simply that, just my first shot at a new LG. I time everything with a stopwatch so I know how I'm doing, but I don't set a timer because that doesn't really make sense to me since I'm working to standard and not to time. If you time yourself and stop then you won't know how long the game is actually taking you, so always use a stopwatch (I hope this is common sense at this point). So once I finish I record the date and the time it took me and I blind review and then check my score. I then record only the score I got while timing myself since this is LG and there is no way you should get LG questions wrong during BR since you can just brute force the answers if need be if you really don't understand something. If you're missing LG questions on BR then in my opinion there is something seriously wrong in your methodologies and you need to perhaps relearn the basics unless you just misread a question or something like that.
After recording the data on the sticky note and transferring it to my spreadsheet I watch JY's video explanation and go over the game and then I put that LG in the back of the document protector it came from behind the clean LGs and take out the second copy. I then make my second attempt, timing myself, doing my BR, recording all data, and then rewatching the video if necessary. I then make my third attempt the next day, and my fourth attempt I make a week later, always following the same methodologies as I did on the first attempt.
My thinking is that if I'm really serious about this, I should be able to conquer any given LG in four tries. Two in a row should see a huge time and accuracy improvement since it's so fresh in my mind, then the third and fourth attempts simply reinforce this improvement and the retention of the strategy. This also makes you more efficient since you know that each LG is simply a 7-8 day practice exercise. Trying to schedule out an additional 6 attempts to do all 10 copies just seemed ridiculous to me given that there are 140 LGs to do in the bundle. In my mind it's better to be able to develop mastery more quickly and then encounter a wider variety of games in order to make sure you're ready for everything. Of course, if there is an incredibly hard LG then obviously that may require additional attempts, but this should be a rare exception to the rule.
So to revisit the concerns I noted above, here are my solutions:
1) Obviously you're going to have to get over using some paper, so cutting that down by 60% should be a good tradeoff to help get you into law school in my opinion. And once you get your 170+ you can go recycle all that paper!
2) If you don't have time to do all the LGs, just scale down the above and do what you have time for. If you know it will take a week turnaround per LG and you can do 5 per day, then you know you can get at least 30-35 done in a two week period depending on if you take a day off or not. At this rate you could do more than 100 LGs before the June LSAT if need be (but you should probably be focusing on PTs). If you have to scale way down I'd recommend randomly picking PTs from 1-35 and doing all the games in that PT so you shouldn't end up doing all of the same kind of question and will get a better feel for the variability within a given test.
3) In my opinion you absolutely should never record the category of any game you attempt. If you do, it will negatively influence your work since you will know going in to use a chart or to sequence and group rather than just deducing what needs to be done. When you take the LSAT it doesn't say GROUPING GAME in bold type at the top of the page, so you should practice like its the real thing, which means no knowledge of categories.
4) I think I addressed this well in my strategy above, but it bears repeating: Make 4 attempts: 1st - Today, 2nd - Immediately afterwards, 3rd - Tomorrow, 4th - In a week (either a week from attempts 1&2 or a week from your 3rd attempt, that's your call schedule wise).
Anyways, I know this is a bit long but I hope it helps at least one person because as a longtime lurker I have gotten a lot of help from the community here and I wanted to try to do my part to give at least a little bit back. If anyone is still reading this and wants more details or wants photos of my binders or that Excel spreadsheet, feel free to hit me up anytime. Best of luck to all the June LSAT takers and to everyone else in your studies!
~Pacifico
P.S.- Though I am more than happy to help anyone here with any issues they may have, I will not send you the LG Bundle as that would violate both 7Sage and LSAC regulations. Please don't put me or anyone else in that position because I am trying to help people here and won't break the law to do so. Thanks for your cooperation!
P.P.S. - I don't check my inbox on here anymore, but if you have any questions you can DM me on Twitter @pacificosoldati and I'll do my best to help you however I can.
Hey 7Sagers! May is right around the corner and with that, we're looking for new photos for both the front page and specific lessons. Here's an example of the existing pictures we have up, submitted in the past by users like you:
We're not looking for the exact same type of pictures shown above, those are just examples of what we've had in the past. Think outside the box! We love that stuff.
Need some examples of what we're looking for?
* Photos of you studying outside in the great outdoors
* Photos of you studying on the bus or metro
* Photos that show your beautiful-and-handsome-self studying (3rd person instead of 1st person perspective)
Pictures can be taken from any video capture device and include yourself, your PC/Mac, Smart Phone, Tablet and/or notes.
Did you take a photo that would be perfect for one of the lessons? Send us your photo and a link to the lesson you think it's best suited for. For example:
A photo of a camera for:
http://classic.7sage.com/lesson/camera-lens-resolution-mp-question/
Or herbs for:
http://classic.7sage.com/lesson/herbs-as-drugs-method-question
Multiple submissions are welcome! The prize is a $100 Amazon gift certificate per accepted entry!
Deadline is June 5th.
Send all submissions to dillon@7sage.com with the title "PHOTO CONTEST".
