Trying to make this as short as possible:

In July I probably did about 40~ish hours of LSAT work in total.

In August, I did easily over 100+ hours.

In September, I easily did over 110+ hours again.

October, I was doing 30+ hours a week for the first two weeks or so. Usually, that's no problem for me. (5/6 hours a day Mon-Sat) Then I did two weeks of 4 days, about 6-7 hours each day because I needed three days rest. (I was only breaking on Sundays, prior.) I ended up still feeling hella burnt out with 3 days rest I think, and so I breaked from Last Friday to this current Wednesday (about 5 days, longest break I ever took)

I did a PT today and by the time I was on my third section, I felt disconnected from the test, mentally exhausted, etc. Is my studying too excessive and should I take a break (and if so, how long?) I'm tryna do whats best for the long haul. Usually I wake up and have no problem heading to the library and studying all day, now I DREAD IT!!

Can someone help me diagram the stimulus and find the sufficient assumption?

What I have is:

P: art criticism most /satisfy

----

C: art criticism most /greatest works of art

SA answer: /satisfy most or some /greatest works of art

I was wondering, I thought we can't make contrapositives for most statements but the answer E does? Let me know if I am understanding this incorrectly, thanks!

Hi Everyone,

Brand new here but needed advice from this community.

I suffer from a chronic illness due to which I have been granted 50% extra time in each section of the Feb 2016 LSAT. So I will get 53 minutes per section rather than the usual 35 minutes.

I recently got really sick which forced me to drop everything and just focus on getting better. Now that I am a little better, I am just beginning to start studying for the LSAT. I know 3 months isn't that much time to prepare for the exam, however, I was wondering what the best way to prepare would be in these 3 months. Should I just dive into the PTs and do as many as I can or should I purchase and go through the 7Sage material and then do a few PTs at the end? I also work so it will be difficult to devote all of my time to studying.

Any advice would be great. Thanks for reading.

Do you think it is possible to see five points increase in 30 days we have left for December LSAT?

What is the best way to acquire the paper versions of the question sets provided in each section?

Hello,

I don't understand why, in the setup, the last row has to be occupied by only supervisors. It's 4 free spots and I only have 3 supervisors left, then why must I chose the last two spots in the last row opposed to another spot where they are dispersed wherever. Can someone please help me understand why those last 2 spots are reserved for supervisors, could F, for example, be repeated and thus placed in both a supervisory and officer spot?

Also, in number 2, why does K have to be the one that repeats rather than M, for example?

I really didn’t like any of the answer choices, so I pretty much guessed on this one.

These psychologists surveyed 100 entrepreneurs and 100 business managers. The questions asked about different topics and the level of certainty was also recorded. Each groups were overconfident, but the E were more so than the BMs. Thus, people who are overconfident are more likely to start a business than those less confident.

What I am looking for: A lot wrong with this argument. First, all of the survey stuff. Was the sample representative of Es and BMs? Second, do the BMs accurately reflect people that are less confident? The conclusion makes too broad a claim; it should have limited it to more likely than than BMs, not less confident people in general. Lastly, the argument assumes that overconfidence and gauging success are the same thing. Are they? Not so sure.

Answer A: So what? Were these questions unbiased? You have to assume they were. Skip.

Answer B: This, if anything, might weaken the argument. We want to strengthen the argument. This suggests that some people can start businesses with accurate levels of confidence. Skip.

Answer C: This is irrelevant. Was the other survey good? Also, how would a correlation between confidence and success be relevant? We need a correlation between confidence and likelihood of starting a business.

Answer D: I guess it strengthens the argument, but I am still not that sure why. Does it show that there might be some support for there being a correlation between overconfidence (the ones that are the “most”) and odds of starting a business. I am still pretty wishy washy on this one.

Answer E: This is what I chose, but like I said before, I really didn’t like it. This is saying that the degree of overconfidence in the answered questions corresponded with the degree of overconfidence in business acumen. I think this would have been a pretty decent strengthener if “business acumen” were substituted for “likelihood of successfully starting a business.” Maybe not, though. If the phrase “confidence in his or her business acumen” were substituted for “likelihood for starting a business,” that would most assuredly strengthen the argument. Nevertheless, we don’t know if business acumen has anything to do with starting a business.

Skype is not doing well. I have a pet theory that might work; it involves clicking a link for each individual conversation we’d like to join rather than having a regular group of 25 people in the conversation. It might reduce the needed bandwidth. But if that plan doesn’t work, we may need to change from Skype to Google Hangout. Please PM your Google Hangout email (a gmail account will do) to me. We’re working on trying to make this transition as painless as possible, but there may be snags here and there. Thanks for your patience.

Oh yeah, our little BR Group Family has grown:

Monday, Oct 26th at 11AM ET: PT50

Click here to join this conversation: https://join.skype.com/tLgIUSlQDEPg

Wednesday, Oct 28th at 8PM ET: PT66

Click here to join this conversation: https://join.skype.com/wGTZaVjudu5m

Friday, Oct 30th at 8PM ET: PT75

Click here to join this conversation: https://join.skype.com/qzGIJoSAyLJT

LSATurday, Oct 31st at 3PM ET: PT67

Click here to join this conversation: https://join.skype.com/tA67DTS6xgqW

Be sure to announce in the comments which group(s) you’re planning on attending.

Note:

This might be one of the more frustrating questions I have come across! Can someone breakdown the answer choices (specifically why A is better than B)?

R (is Rifka a common name? I looked it up; it's apparently a variant of Rebecca: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rebecca): Anyway, Stop or Ask for directions--->Lost. Therefore, Not stop.

C: We are lost. Therefore, we must stop.

What I am looking for: Craig is denying R's conclusion by contradicting R's conditional statement. In other words, Craig thinks being lost is sufficient for stopping while R thinks it is necessary.

Answer A: I confidently chose this one during the exam, and I can't figure out what's wrong with it. Doesn't C contradict R's conclusion (he says we should stop while R disagrees) and doesn't he give no reason to reject R's implicit premise. The implicit premise referred to is R's assumption that they are Not lost. C simply flat out denies that, but he doesn't give any evidence/ reason why R's assumption is wrong. I don't really see how this doesn't perfectly capture C's rebuttal.

Answer B: This is really good as well, but what makes this better than A? C does deny the implicit premise that they are not lost and he does arrive at a different conclusion (that they should stop). I chose A over this since A captured the idea that C didn't give any evidence/reason why R's implicit premise was incorrect. Thus, I though A better captured the essence of the argument.

Answer C: This is a pretty popular choice according to the statistics, but it is way wrong. C doesn't call R's argument invalid and C doesn't accept the truth of the premise.

Answer D: What counterexample?

Answer E: Noncommittal? Way wrong. C contradicts R's conclusion explicitly.

I'm curious to know why do certain test takers miss certain questions but get that same question type right on another question? Of course there are level of difficulties of all question types but how does LSAC know which questions students will get wrong vs what they will get right? How does LSAC know that students scores will be the same regardless to which test they take, even though the questions are different?

Would "purely", "merely", and "solely" function the same way "only" functions in the conditional logic or reasoning with "only" being necessary condition indicator?

So I was averaging 174 in PTs and ended up scoring a 169 on the October test. The only other 169 I scored in the three months leading up to the test was while sitting in the middle seat on a flight. I am confident I can score better but how worth it is waiting an extra year (I would retake in June and apply in the following cycle) to hopefully score higher? Should I apply this cycle and see what happens or wait? Also my GPA is 3.68. Any advice is appreciated. Thanks!

LSAT Prep Test 9 (October 1993) - S3 - Logic Game 2

Can someone please help me how to split this game into 4 boards?

Hi, I'm hoping someone can offer me some ideas. I have been really pleased with the improvements I've made using 7sage which I've been using since June. I took the October LSAT and got a 161 but I am hoping for a 165+. My main issue was, and continues to be, logic games. While I have improved significantly since when I first started, I am still averaging around 7-10 wrong on this section, while my other sections are much stronger.

At this point in my prep, I am pretty much exclusively PTing and doing review. However I feel as though I should be concentrating more heavily on LG. I don't want to just do the LG sections and burn through the Prep Tests I have left (I have only taken up to PT 60). Any advice? I have the Cambridge LG packets with the older LGs grouped by type that I have been doing but I just feel that I need a more concrete plan to shore up this section before December because doing so could pretty much get me to where I need to be. Thanks folks!

hi, just a quick question:

it looks like the superprep 2 book contains pt 62 and 63, which i happen to have. the book also has another preptest that isn't numbered? I'm feeling like I'm running out of tests so it'd be great if that was the case. Is it? A little confused by what I'm reading online, and would appreciate some clarification, esp. since BR group is going to be going over "super prep 2" next week and I'm not sure if I need to buy the book. or can just get that other preptest somehow.

happy almost-halloween!

Hey guys,

In this weakening situation I heard JY say that answer choice D is a rare one that attacks the premise (5:04). Just wanted to know when is it ok or acceptable in a weakening situation to attack the premise.

Thanks

Hypothetically, if an appeal is won contesting a problematic question within a past afministration (which we all know is a rare occurence), are all scores for that administration adjusted accordingly? Also, what is the general time frame of this process, if it should happen?

Note: l'm not predicting this outcome in any shape or form from this most recent administration. Im just curious how 'concrete' one's final score is given the mere existance of this possibility.

I was at a 173~ average for the 50s and 60s, and PT 71 and 69 were 169, PT 70 was 170. I am wondering at what point I should be concerned if my scores don't go back up to 170+. I am mostly concerned because I am only about 5 weeks out and am hoping thats enough time to feel confident for a 170 again...

I understand that C is true and is a flaw in the argument, but I still don't understand how you can eliminate A. Here is my breakdown:

Generally, professors grew up in economically advantaged homes (MP). Evidence of this is the fact that professors grew up in communities with average household incomes that were higher than the national average.

What I am looking for: The argument makes a whole to part flaw. Did the professors actually live in the higher income households in the community? What if they only lived in the low income households? This could be true since we are only given an average of the income in the communities. Also, does household income being higher than the national average mean economically advantaged? I am not so sure. High household income is just one part of "economic advantage;" there could be other economic things such as government policies towards rich people that can nullify the high income advantage. In other words, there are a ton of factors that go into defining "economic advantage," not just income.

Answer A: I don't see how this is incorrect. Isn't this pointing out the flaw that "high household income" might not actually mean "economic advantage?"

Answer B: This is consistent with the argument due to the word "generally" in the passage.

Answer C: This is definitely a flaw in the argument since it points out the assumption that the professors actually lived in the "good" households in the community.

Answer D: Who cares about the private sector?

Answer E: Who cares about where they live now. We only care about where/how they grew up.

Not looking for a pity party, just some advice from others who have shared similar experiences. I was doing well, scoring in the low160's for the majority of PT's in the 50's... But as I got to PT 58, 59 and 60 I noticed a considerable drop... especially in LR. With 5 weeks left, I'm starting to panic a little.. Should I go back and review some weaknesses or should I just keep trucking through with practice tests/ BR ? My logic games and RC seem to be OK, but now I'm second guessing myself left and right with LR -- I get the answer down to two possible choices and, what it seems like, that I always manage to choose the wrong one. I know I need to tweak the skills of my weak question types, but I feel like nerves are starting to play a factor... I'm much quicker to get flustered and throw my hands up in there ready to say fuck the whole thing. It's been three tests in a row now where I haven't been able to crack 160.. and now I'm about to take another (161). Ugh, the psychological mind fucks on this exam are unparalleled to anything I've ever come across in my life. Any advice is appreciated, cheers!

TL;DR : Looking for some insights with issues I apparently have with test day performance - PT'ing much higher than my score.

First, a little background. I self-studied with both Manhattan/Powerscore/7Sage Spring-Fall 2014, with most PT's between 168-175. I probably took about 20 tests under exact conditions. A few weeks before the Dec. 2014 exam, I was PT'ing high 170's, when I started to notice some severe burnout. On my last three PT's before the December test, I was suddenly dropping 15-20 questions, so I took a break for a week and hoped for the best.

I was super nervous -- almost manic -- on test day, and I ended up with a 163, with most of the damage from LG. This was upsetting at the time, but I figured that with practice, my nerves wouldn't be so bad the second time around. So I took a break for three months and started back studying in March for the June 2015 exam.

This time, I drilled game sections during the week and took two tests every weekend. My scores were much more consistent, clustered tightly around 176/177, and I was making strides in LG. I simulated test conditions exactly in terms of timing and sections, and would sometimes take tests in crowded coffee shops or book stores for practice with distractions. I made it a point to do every released PT LG section multiple times, and I stopped practicing a week or two before the test to prevent burnout.

I was incredibly calm and relaxed on test day, and walked out of the center thinking I had it in the bag. I was shocked to find out I had only increased my score by 3 points, to a 166. Admittedly, the June curve (-10) was rough compared to December, but I never expected to do any less than 3-4 points below my average. My LG section was fine, but I ended up dropping 5 or 6 on each LR section, where I've never had trouble before.

So, here I am again prepping for my third test, worrying that no matter how much I practice or how high I PT, I might just end up well below my average for the third time. The only thing I think I did wrong in prepping the second time around was not reviewing the LR questions I missed. Most of the time, I would see my score, think "good enough" and walk away. I'm being careful not to do that this time around.

Does anyone have any experience with this? Can you suffer from test anxiety without knowing it? Am I prepping wrong?

I really hope I can get some answers, and I appreciate any advice you guys can offer.

Thanks,

Hello!

I am having some trouble making a schedule for the coming months. I am shooting for the Feb exam but I am still struggling with timing and certain question types. Since there isn’t much time left, do you recommend drilling entire sections, specific question types, or both?

If I should drill sections, should I be utilizing PTs 17 – 34? If so, how should I Incorporate the question bank? Wondering what use that is if I decide to drill sections.

Also, what is the significance of the question bank? How should PTs 1 - 16 be used? I know there was a post somewhere giving details but I can't find it.

Any insight would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks!

So I just finally reviewed PT 76 and discovered I missbubbled 4 answers in LR1 and had 2 other questions I didn't erase well enough. My score was well below my median, so I am not worring about hand scoring but if you can tell ever so slightly which one was suppose to be the answer vs the one erased is that something you would use handscoring for?

I know it would not impact the 4 misbubbles, but the 2 that weren't registered by the scantron. Would that be something hand scoring would correct?

If I scored high enough (or heck even not had the missbubbles) those 2 points could have made some serious impact on scholarship opportunities.

I guess I am mainly looking for answers as to if a hand score would be a good move in that case, If I were to make such a disasterous error again.

.