What's more important? The LSAT raw score or percentile?

So. I told my boss yesterday that I would be sitting out this application cycle as my LSAT mark was a 159. My cGPA is a 3.34, L2 is a 3.66.

But… he told me not to. He said I could likely get into a school.

To be specific, I live in Canada. I was going to sit out this cycle, but I’m been perusing some threads and I see people with similar stats who have gotten into USask, Lakehead, Western, Queens, Windsor, and Thompson Rivers. Sometimes with even lower stats.

I am both a competitive bodybuilder and soccer player, I have quite a bit of volunteer experience, I am sponsored by two different companies, and I have worked for a criminal/employment law firm for over 2 years now. My boss is the managing partner and would likely agree to submit a reference on my behalf for Thompson Rivers.

I guess my question is…. should I apply?

I was originally going to retake in June and give myself a lot of cushion room for improvement because my PT scores ranged from low 160s to as high as a 170. I know I have potential to increase my LSAT mark, so I’m also wondering… should I re-write in December?

The worst case scenario, I get the same mark or worse (all schools I’m applying take only your best mark).

The best case scenario, I am able to raise my LSAT by a few points and make myself even more competitive. The drawback of that is not getting accepted and having to wait to re-write the LSAT until December 2015 instead of in June because it would be my third take.

I have been working with @nicole.hopkins on RC and there is still slightly over a month until the December LSAT.

SORRY. So long winded. I’m just on the fence.

Mapping Out Logic In Stimulus

It is taking me too long to map out logic presented in the stimulus. This is very important for MBT, MBF, Principle, Parallel and SA, etc.

Can someone please guide me to where I can practice doing this because I have not seen any quizzes that has long English passages that need to be mapped out into logic.

I need to practice this immediately!!!!!

Hi,

I started studying for my December LSAT in early October. That is when i also wrote my diagnostic test and had 75% in LR, and much worse in LG and RC. I got a tutor for LG and now I consistently score ~90% in LG, BUT... I am pretty much getting 13 questions wrong in each LR section... My score is barely any different than my diagnostic test. I practiced from Pt 41-50 and I did timed sections from pt 51,52,53 and im just doing HORRIBLE! I have one month left and I have no idea what to do. I have all the tests up to PT 70, but I dont even see the point of doing more practice. It's like my brain doesnt comprehend common sense anymore. What should I do :(

When will video explanations of the Oct. 2015 test be available on 7sage?

I had a very hard time differentiating D and C, I chose C since I thought D was descriptively inaccurate.

Parents who want to give their kids a good foundation in music should give them a good musical education. Formal instruction is sometimes apart of a good musical education. Therefore, a strong foundation needs to have formal instruction.

What I am looking for: Just because formal instruction sometimes works, it doesn't mean that it is necessary.

Answer A: So what?

Answer B: Who cares about if the kid is interested.

Answer C: This is what I chose after I eliminated D. This says, some people who have formal instruction don't have good musical ability. Knowing that D is correct, I think this would have worked if "ability" were substituted with "education." This would have made this answer choice exactly like D, but my problem with D is stated below.

Answer D: I don't see how this is the answer since it is descriptively inaccurate. The question stem asks us to point out something that the argument "fails to consider." Doesn't the argument consider the fact that formal education isn't sufficient for a good musical education? Isn't this what sentence 2 (the premise) explicitly states? How does the argument fail to consider this? I understand that the conclusion is way too strong given the premise (the premise is a SOME statement and the conclusion is conditional), but that to me is a totally separate flaw than simply "failing to consider" what answer D states.

Answer E: Good musicians is a totally irrelevant idea.

I did not have a good sense of how much time I was spending on individual LR questions until I started completing some of the silent videos on here. I understand this may just have been a tool 7sage came up with in response to the recent ban of PDF files. This exercise has actually helped me up my speed on individual LR questions and better gauge when I am spending too much time on any given question.

Would it be useful to have a timer on the 7Sage Up which can be set up for 1-2min geared toward LR questions only? A timer that will send a beep signal at the end of the alloyed time e.g.1:20s and automatically restart? I understand some questions take longer to solve than others but the silent timer was very helpful, unfortunately cumbersome to replicate with iphone or watch.

Any input?

I've taken about 10 PTs + intense BRs (made an imaginary friend and explained my reasoning to that guy for all of my circled questions out loud) and I've analyzed that I am performing horribly on MSS and MBT, well below other 7sagers' average. When I review my wrong answers, I realize why I got the question wrong, but I end up making the same mistakes over and over again... Common mistakes being: not closely reading the stimulus, falsely equating words, and choosing out of scope answers.

It's rather perplexing because I seem to be performing confidently and proficiently on questions like Para and PF, questions which most 7sagers find relatively difficult.

Needless to say, I've finished the MSS, MBT + Validity lessons. However, I think that finding the "conclusion" on the answer choices is something that I am having major difficulty with at a fundamental level. With MBT, I find relativity extremely difficult to understand, such as Magic Shoes -> Faster also means /Magic Shoes -> /Faster. I feel like that interpretation directly goes against everything I learned in JY's logic lessons and invalid statements. So having that idea, the possibility that negated relativity answers can be correct, really throws me off when I see similar answer choices when I'm PTing.

Could you guys please help me master MSS and MBT? If you guys can guide me to the lessons that could improve my understanding of above topics, it would me really helpful.

Thank you very much... You guys are tremendously helpful...

P.S. Thanks again to those who helped me fight the urge to pick up smoking.

If anyone has Practice exam 1 and can help me with a question that I am having trouble grasping I would greatly appreciate it. Its from Section 4 number 21 and its a must be true question. I can't wrap my mind around D being the correct answer because to me it is logically equivalent to answer choice E so I automatically eliminated both. How is "some" different from "many"?

Hello,

I don't understand why E is correct. I chose B. Could someone please explain why the right answer is right and the wrong answers are wrong? Thank you in advance.

Hello,

I don't understand why D is correct. I chose B. Could someone please explain why the right answer is right and the wrong answers are wrong? Thank you in advance.

I had some questions in regards to mental exhaustion and loss of focus.

During the test, I sometimes experience mind wandering off, especially during the difficult LR questions and Law and Science reading passages. The loss of focus forces me to read again and re-evaluate the argument, which has a detrimental snowball effect on my time management.

What are some of the methods that I can utilize to improve my concentration and reduce mental fatigue?

I have read some posts on 7Sage in regards to caffeine. So before taking a PT, I usually take 2-3 shots of espresso and eat some dark chocolate. I do some meditation as well. During the 15 minute break, I snack on almonds and walnuts (and other common brain foods).

I’ve also read that nicotine aids in memory retention and focus, so I may consider applying nicotine patches or start smoking, haha. (I wish I was joking…)

Most of my friends, who attend Law School now, tells me that my mental exhaustion during the test will get better as I get used to taking more full PTs.

In the case that I am not completely acclimated to the intensity of the test within couple of weeks, what are some methods that I can impose during my PT sessions which can improve my mental strength?

Best,

Today is the day. I am going to sit down and .... start..... my personal statements. I've applied to a program before, but I'm just not sure what to write or if I'm on track.

I know this may be weird, but does anyone have a PS they'd be okay with letting me read? I just want a general sense of one, to make sure I'm even kind of on track. Or... does anyone know of a place I could go for a reference/help?

Thanks a bunch :D

I had a really hard time understanding the answer choices, which is why I missed this one. I don't understand how D is the flaw.

Determinism is the belief that everything has a preceding cause sufficient for its occurrence. This belief is wrong since we cannot know the complete state at any given time since we cannot accurately measure both the position and velocity of a subatomic particle at the same time.

What I am looking for: Is knowing the complete state relevant? Why can't a complete understanding of the state of the universe be beyond our understating and determinism still be correct? Next, is not accurately measuring position/velocity of subatomic particles evidence for not knowing the complete state of the universe?

Answer A: This isn't the flaw in the reasoning. Just because we can't know at the same time doesn't mean we can't know them independently.

Answer B: This is what I chose, and I chose it because I couldn't figure out what D actually said. I guess this isn't the flaw since the argument isn't saying "since we can't know the complete state of the universe we can't know the states of the particles." I think this statement is backwards since the lack of knowing the states of the particles is used to support the idea that we don't know the state of the universe.

Answer C: Isn't this exactly the same idea as A? Skip.

Answer D: I don't understand how this is the flaw. Where does the argument claim that there is "no complete state of the universe?" The argument only says "it's impossible to know the complete state of the universe" because we don't know the complete state of the subatomic particles. The point of the argument is that determinism is incorrect, but I don't see how saying determinism is false means that there is no complete state of the universe. Why can't determinism be wrong since the preceding cause isn't sufficient for the occurrence, or for some type of negation of the necessary conditions provided in the first 2 sentences?

Answer E: I don't really know why this is wrong other than it just "feels" wrong.

I'm looking at PT44-S2-Q20 and the explanation for why A) and D) are wrong raised a question for me. In the explanation, it sounds to me that just because A causes B, A can happen sometimes without B happening.

JY gives the example that smoking causes lung cancer. But just because you smoke doesn't mean that you get lung cancer. Normally if B is a necessary condition of A, then A always guarantees B. But from what he's saying it sounds like for a causal relationship, B does not always have to happen when A happens? Is it because there is a distinction between "tends to cause" and "cause" ?

Thanks!

Julia

Hi I was hoping someone could answer a question that i have been struggling with. In the question stem what is the difference between "reasoning" and "argument"? Such as Flaw questions 1. "A major flaw in the argument is that the argument".... 2. "The reasoning in the argument is flawed because the argument"...

Im having trouble finding definitive definitions for the following aspects of the LSAT

1. Reasoning

2. Structure

3. Logical- such as "logically follows" or "logical features"

Hi,

On this question I narrowed it down to C and D. But even though I've read a couple explanations on it, I don't see why D is glaringly wrong. I feel like C isn't fair enough because it has words like "chance" and "try to identify" which means that either way, some people will probably be left out and it still won't be fair. But in D, if everyone gets denied the rebate, then no one gets it, which means no one has an unfair opportunity.

I just couldn't find a helpful explanation because everyone just rules D off as "obviously unfair," and I guess I'm feeling kind of blind right now!!!!

Hello,

I'm having a hard time understanding why B is incorrect but A is. I chose B because it though it was implying that the children's preexisting condition made them more vulnerable to OPV than kids who don't have that. And I eliminated A because of the phrase "at least a few" because that sounds like a weak defense given they're only taking about "some"

So can someone please explain why B is wrong but A is right? Thank you

I took a few PT tests prior to starting the 7Sage course videos. I am not all but done with the course videos and ready to hit the PT tests heavily. After the first test I did not see my score go up. My question is... after watching the videos, is it typical to see one's score increase only after BR of the PTs? I guess I am just worried that the videos didnt have a redounding affect, and am looking to confirm my thought that it will take many reviews of tests to implement what I have learned...

Thanks for anyone's thoughts ;-)

Hello,

I chose E and can't really understand why it is wrong whereas C is correct. Can someone please break down the logic or reasoning behind this argument? Thanks in advance

*

Plan on re-taking in December. At this point the only relevant fresh PT's I have left are PT's 50-54 and 67-69.

I have about 5 weeks left before the December LSAT and can't decide if it would be better to take these fresh PT's or just re-take 70-75 while using the fresh PT's for drilling? I can really only manage to take one full timed PT with a thorough BR per week right now since I'm taking a full semester and graduating in December. I've never re-taken any PT's yet and don't know if it's at all useful or not. Any advice is much appreciated.

Hi, this is the first time writing anything on the board, so I'm a bit nervous, so bear with me.

I am preparing for December LSAT.

Last week, I have finished going through PTs until 70. And I would say I was averaging some bumps up and down occasionally from 163 to 166. I planned to go through from 51-73 twice until December LSAT ( a bit more than a month left).

I am taking two PTs every two days (of course BR afterward), and for the last 10 days, I am planning on taking two PTs everyday.

Yesterday, I've taken 59 and 60. So far, I am averaging about 170-ish, a couple 167+ and a couple 173+.

I am planning on taking fresh set of 71, 72, and 73 at the end of each cycle.

My question is:

How important is it to repeatedly practice already-taken-PTs?

I know that taking already-taken-PTs is useful in general and it's pretty much the only thing I can do right now, but when I get a good score on my second round, instead of being happy about it, I'm more skeptical of the score (but of course, I am happy). And when I get a poorer score, I'm just really distressed. From reading lots of posts, I know my schedule is probably something nobody would recommend, but since I am not attacking any new PTs, I get constantly nervous on whether my logic foundation is improving or not through these second round PTs. Although I do try going through every single question as thoroughly as possible as if I'm doing the new test, I constantly doubt if I was solving it out of my logic ability or from a bit of memory left in me. Consequently, I just decided to keep myself busy by keep doing PTs non-stop, so that at least I wouldn't have any regret afterward as to "I could have done A and B and blah blah~"

I know about the burn-out as well. I recently got out of it about a month ago, but I still feel like I would have some regret if I don't really try my 200%. If you ask me whether this plan has been exhausting for me or not, I would say there is exhaustion after going through 8 sections every two days, but it's pretty manageable until now. Add to that, I would say mental exhaustion from doing 8 sections every two days would feel more manageable than anxiety from not studying (although I haven't experienced it yet).

So, I just need a bit of advice on how effective it would be for me to keep following this plan. Or, any advice.

I am preparing my application (to start LS next year). My question is concerning the addendum: Should I write one? In Peru, I did two years of medical school (1997-1998). Didn't graduate. Students, in Peru, enter medical school directly after high school graduation. Those two years had the equivalent of 22.50 credits of pre-med. My university, here, accepted my credits so I didn't have to take all the credits required for my bachelor degree.

Here comes my issue: First, should I write an addendum about why I chose medical school 18 years ago: I was young and stupid; didn't know what I wanted. Second, during those two years I got most Cs, one A, and one B (GPA 2.5 according my school in the US). I graduated from a FL university with a GPA 4. Do I need to write about why those grades differ so much even though it happened 18 years ago.

My school in FL has the grades and courses from Peru in its transcripts. LSAC also has the transcripts from my Peruvian university (LSAC wanted to do their own evaluation).

Thank you so much for your help

The February Test. The Undisclosed Test. The Sloth of LSAT family.

If you have no idea what I’m talking about, you need to drop that logic game in your hand and go watch The Goonies. It’s a classic, and you’ve no right being a lawyer if you’ve never seen it! Go watch it. :)

Wednesday, October 28th at 8PM ET: PT48

DON’T FORGET TO CLICK THIS LINK: https://join.skype.com/w7McAagFN3pf

IF YOU DON’T CLICK THIS LINK YOU WON’T BE ABLE TO ACCESS THE BR GROUP

Note: