I feel like I know what everyone is going to say but please help me. I was scoring in the low 170s. I had worked my way up there, finally breaking the 160s. My last two tests have shows serious drops. This last test I took saw me at a 167. Now I recognize that this is a good score, I know that, but it is not my target. I am shooting for 170+. This was the worst reading comp section I have ever had. Normally I do extremely well there. I am not sure what I have done differently or what I can do differently. Should I take the week off? Should I double down on studying? Has anyone had the same thing happen to them and can recommend a course of action because I seem to have fallen back into the high 160 range and I desperately want to pull up from that.

Hey 7Sagers,

Received an email today from a user asking which PT this is from and I can't really identify it! Anyone recognize which PT this question is from? Thanks! Here's the full email:

I'm currently a 7Sage student - any way you could tell me what PT this RC section belongs to? I printed out some supplementary RC practice when I took a princeton review course and have been unable to find out which test this is. See attached.

Thank you for your help!

[image removed to prevent copyright issues]

Hello all,

I am getting between 4-8 wrong on LR each section, yet am not really exhibiting any pattern of getting certain questions wrong. I always have a mix of which ones I get wrong. Do I just keep drilling sections do improve this? Because so far it hasn't helped all that much. Anyone who has good input is appreciated!

Hi all, trying to improve on the games section here and I've just purchased the Games from Preptests 1-35 -- does it say anywhere how these are sorted? Also, do you know if the additional games in Preptests 35-50 are available for purchase?? Thanks so much!

This may be a very general question but I hope someone can help summarize or advise on the process of applying through LSAC and to clear some confusion i'm having - Are there any schools that don't need or necessitate applying through LSAC...or do all schools accept/require you to apply through there?

Is my personal statement meant to be a general one that is sent to multiple schools through the LSAC process or one that can be tailored to each school? Because I am refining my school list and having my transcripts sent, I don't know what the next step looks like.

Any tips in general on the LSAC process from those who have already begun would be appreciated. Thanks for your time.

Hi All -

Is there any book/course with a really solid strategy for question types on Reading Comp?

Not just main point and inference questions, but more complex ones like Analogy and Prove/Disprove.

As an SAT tutor, I emphasize these question types and specific strategies for them to my students. It makes a BIG difference. But there seems to be limited info on them in other courses (ie power score's RC bible focuses on mp and inference but there's little on the more advanced types)....

I tried using what I teach my SAT students but it just doesn't translate as well to the complexities of the LSAT RC material.

So, Anyone know of where I can a really solid strategy for advanced question types on Reading Comp?

with the December LSAT just around the corner and and a 21+ improvement on my PT's, i'm anxiously awaiting test day. one problem left to tackle: improve on flawed reasoning questions.

i've drilled these questions like no other, and i'm still no better at them. what helped you guys solve this question type? what suggestions for improvement are you guys willing to share? anyone willing to help?!?!?!

Main Conclusion question.

Chose A, however the OA is B. Confused. Here is my reasoning...

A. Labeled this as the main conclusion. It is verbatim the opening sentence in the passage.

B. Labeled this as a premise. I read like it supported the first sentence and is introduced by the phrase "The reason for this is". To me this always signals a premise

C. Another premise and not the main conclusion

D. Labeled this as the Major Premise/Intermediate conclusion. Starts with the word "Thus" and is the last sentence of the passage (characteristic trap on the LSAT). Also this sentence I thought supported the main conclusion.

E. A twist on a stated premise that brings in outside information.

I am confused and need help deciphering between A and B. Thanks.

I'm not a morning person, but I know I'll need to be up at 630 for the December LSAT.

I was on a good schedule for a while, and I thought switching the clocks back would help. But the past few days I've been having trouble sleeping and got off track.

Any advice for how to get back on track?

ie How to get sleepy at earlier bed times? How to stay on track?

Hi

I noticed some students write their selected answer choices in the test book next to the Q. number.

I thought this might be a waste of time, but I'm wondering if it's worth it for ensuring accuracy...

Thoughts?

It's mentioned in the video that many people missunderstand rule number 3 (I was one of them), but upon reading over it like 5 times it seems to me like it actually doesn't make sense. "Each crew member does at least at least one task during the installation, but no more than one task a day", according to the explanation it means not all 7 need to be chosen but the people chosen must do a one task minimum, however, if someone is chosen then obviously they do a task!( otherwise what els would "chosen" mean?) So how could the "Each crew member does at least one task" be saying: of the members you chose they will at least be doing one??

Hey All!

I'm sitting the December 7th LSAT after a brutal attempt on October 5th (I wrote it in Tokyo, hence the weird date). After a nightmarish 24 hours leading up to the exam (logistical issues, panic attacks, sleeping pills), I wrote the exam in a daze and scored 152. I was averaging 162 on my practice tests so I was pretty devastated.

Anyhow, regardless of the aforementioned horrors, I realize there are holes in my prep, so I decided to sign up for 7sage. I've been studying regularly and diligently since May using a combination of Mike Kim's LSAT Trainer, many real LSAT exams/practice sets as well as other free resources available online including JY's logic games video explanations - which I really loved. I completed the free trail in May, and am kicking myself for not signing up in the first place. But, here I am now, and I'm hoping that the right approach will help me consolidate my knowledge and solidify my skills. After just a few of JY's lessons and drills, I can confidently say: this shit's AWESOME!

I think I have a pretty good fundamental understanding, but timing is my biggest enemy in all 3 sections (duh) and especially in LG and RC. Only having about a month left to prepare, I'm not sure it's possible - nor advisable - to try to work through ALL of the material in the starter course, so I'm hoping for advice on how to structure a study schedule that would be most effective for my situation.

I understand that this is highly subjective depending on numerous factors, but any help determining a course of action would be greatly appreciated.

Domo arrigato!

a silly question. I just realized not many LR videos on prior 35? coz they are too easy? It would be great if JY can post those videos.

I know you guys are deep in LSAT study mode. I just want to provide some perspective of why you are studying the things we're teaching you like argumentation and logic.

Here's a video I made summarizing what likely will be the very first case you read in law school. I hope this video will give you some perspective of why we teach you the skills that we do in our Core Curriculum.

I have been prepping for the LSAT for approximately 3 months now. I have been able to improve a bit from my baseline score but I am still struggling with logic games. I usually finish 3 games. I can never complete all 4 games, and end up having to guess.

Do you have any strategies on how to improve my timing in order to be able to finish the 4 games? I will be taking the exam in December and if I'm able to improve this area, my score would be much better.

Thank you in advance!

Hi guys I am a LSAT retaker. I scored 162 in the Sept LSAT. As the score is way lower then my PTs (around 172), and after asking several high scorers (over 175) they strongly suggested me to find a study partner, because having a partner will urge one to compete and avoid cutting-corners while reviewing LSAT.

As I current located in a place hard to find a LSAT buddy, I am writing this discussion to see if any one want to be my partner and discuss once per 3 day on skype (about 1 hr per time ) to go through the PTs each period.

Thanks!

Hi guys! So I just purchased the Cambridge drill packets for NA/strengthen/weaken questions and I wanted to know where in the pdfs you can find the difficulty level. Thanks!

I had read about this strategy before on various forums, but never decided to take the plunge. Then I finally decided to force myself to do the following... and it was surprisingly rewarding & fun. Yes, fun.

THE STRATEGY

--not trying to step on anyone else's copyright toes, but I've read about this same general idea from various posts

--I've written down exactly what I did

Stage 1.

1. Read each LR stimulus in real time (i.e. don't go too slowly & try mimicking your timed test speed).

2. Bracket the Conclusion. Place a C next to the bracketed portion.

3. Read the Question. Label the Question type, writing this label next to the question.

4. In the space below or next to the Question, write 1AC =........ 4AC =.........

Write down your thoughts for what the 1AC should include. All pre-phases are welcome. Write down your thoughts for what the 4 incorrect ACs might include.

5. Tailor the approach to specific Q types. For example, if it is a Strengthen Q, then the 1AC =... might be more general guesses of support, and you cannot specifically guess what the right AC will be. However, you can write that the 4 ACs will be either weaken or neutral. As another example, if it is an EXCEPT Q, then write 4ACs =.... 1AC=.....

6. Do this for every Question in the section.

Stage 2.

1. Return to every Q and for the first time, look at the ACs. You should try to select the correct AC based only on your written notes. DO NOT compare the ACs to each other -- compare them to your notes, and if necessary, to the stimulus which you may have forgotten & need to skim again.

2. Eliminate the four incorrect ACs & choose your correct AC.

Stage 3.

1. Continue this process with more LR sections.

2. When you are tired of writing so much, continue the process with only writing the 1AC notes & no longer writing the 4 AC notes.

Stage 4.

With practice of this process, you will start to build the habit of knowing what to expect in the correct AC & 4 incorrect ACs. You will stop writing down the brackets, the C, the Q type, and the 1AC & 4AC ideas, but you will have internalized the habit of noting them all.

HOW COULD THIS BE FUN?

This is fun firstly because the time pressure is off for this strategy.

This is also fun because you get to be creative. What are the possible answers for the paradox? How would you describe the flaw? For some Qs, it will be fun to take the seriousness out of the equation and come up with your own funny answers or exceptions.

IS IT ACTUALLY REWARDING?

Yes, you will see improvements. If anything, you will have a better understanding of the pattern of incorrect ACs for questions. You will also see your problem Q types.

What is so rewarding is when your pre-phrases or guesses actually match the right ACs. Of course, this cannot always happen because there can be infinite ways to strengthen/weaken or a very large number of necessary assumptions, but you are dipping into the realm of possibilities and that's what is important.

Indeed, the impetus is on you -- you get to control what YOU think should be the best AC. Don't let the ACs trick you. Too often we pair the ACs against each other in mini-battles-- and this is the wrong way of attacking the question. We need to GET IN, GET OUT. Know what we are looking for & move on.

We waste time comparing attractive AC 1 and attractive AC 2 directly against each other --- in reality, we should be comparing AC 1 to what we wanted & the stimulus and AC2 to what we wanted & the stimulus.

I *strongly* encourage you to try this strategy or a similar one!!

When is the last day someone should take a prep test leading up to the exam? I know I want to spend the day before the actual test relaxing but I want keep a steady rhythm leading up to the test.

I seem to be having a hard time remembering all the rules and pulling out the points to map when answering the LR questions..any suggestions on what lessons to go back to or study ideas to help reinforce all this!?

Hi guys. I've been focusing on Logic Game bundle for almost 2 months and I am about to start real prep test. Since I did not focus on LR too much recently. Do you guys think I need to review for previous class first then do prep test? I do not want to waste these precious prep test in 7sage. I will appreciate any suggestions. Thank you.

Which prep test has J.Y. doing a real time reading comp in it? I feel like I read that somewhere...

By far this is my worst section.

In total I can range from 10-24 wrong per test.

I do great on both Reading Comp and Logic Games.

Is there anything anyone specifically did to nail these question? Maybe another book I should look into? I do Blind Review, but even then I find I only catch 2-5 of the wrong answers per section.

I wasn't able to find anything by searching on here but I was wondering what program J.Y. was using to explain the problems. I think that it would be very helpful for going over the pdf question sets and save me from having to print out multiple copies. Thanks!

I am planning on taking PT's 40-73 in sequential order before December and I am now at PT 50. I have been averaging 167-168 on the 10 I have taken so far, but the LG sections have seemed way too easy and I'm dominating the LR sections consistently, so I am wondering, has anyone noticed that the LR/LG sections for older tests are vastly different (less or more difficult) than more recent PT's? I have the impression that reading stays somewhat consistent across all of the tests except for the switch to the comparative reading passage, but other than that, if I am doing well on these early PT's, am I giving myself false confidence for the more recent ones?