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 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?

Where is the best place to obtain paper copies of prep tests? It looks like through my course here with 7Sage that I am going to need PT 36 - 58.

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'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?

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?

I think it would be fun/funny to list the types of people you see/listen to when you're at your LSAT testing site on test day.

I'll list a couple of people to start it off.

Ditcher: This guy has no idea why he's there or if he's even ready. As soon as his name is called during attendance he gets up and says "I'm not ready for this, I shouldn't be here, good luck everyone." Making other students a bit more anxious than they were already.

That Guy: This is the guy (I say guy because I've never seen a girl do this, and I took the test twice) during break, who talks about the LSAT like it's no big deal. He barely studied for it because it's just so simple or he doesn't take it seriously. He says this while laughing and shrugs it off like it isn't a big deal. After the exam is finished he walks away with a look of defeat on his face.

Freaked Out: These are the people who are obsessing over the test during their break (they are usually a bit vocal). They feel defeated and want to cancel their score. Some do and some don't, but it doesn't make others any less anxious.

Pencil Person: This is the person who taps their pencil every so often and it's a bit distracting. They also tend to cross out answers like an angry 5 year old scribbling in a coloring book. Out of all the people, these may be the worst.

The Nail Biter (this is me): I bite my nails to keep the rest of my nerves under control. It may be distracting, but I'm not sure if it is because I never noticed anyone else doing it.

I'm sure there are plenty of others. Feel free to post some if you've experienced similar/other possibilities!

Spam removed by admins.

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 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!

Hi All,

While I'm trying to get pumped (in the mood?) for the October LSAT, I keep ruminating about part-time versus full-time enrollment. I'd love to hear your thoughts regarding the difference and any feedback regarding my thought process:

Full-time Pros

*Full immersion in the classroom & ancillary activities

*Perhaps better scholarships

*Perhaps better connections & experiences

*Perhaps better job prospects

*Perhaps a faster track to the JD (e.g. NU has an accelerated JD)

Full-time Cons

*Little-to-no income (therefore, much reliance on my partner, assuming that he still likes me by then)

*Less time for personal/work/study balance

*Sticker price (aka potential for massive student debt)

*Blow to confidence if I attempt admission with a lower LSAT score (think under 170), even with solid uGPA

Part-time Pros

*Balance life/work/study potentially better

*Continue to work on-call/contractor to help with tuition (to provide an idea, I make roughly $50/hr on-call and $85-100/home visit as a healthcare provider)

*Perhaps feel less rushed in school

*Perhaps easier chance of enrollment with lower LSAT score (think: under 170, including solid uGPA)

*Perhaps easier to make & feed/water a baby, if that's what we want to do (I'm 32 next year. Dude will be 35)

Part-time Cons

*Perhaps less/no scholarships

*Perhaps poor-to-no job prospects

*Perhaps poor connections & experiences

*Perhaps less recognition/respect

*4ish years to get to the JD

Side note on why I'm even considering part-time app/enrollment:

I spent nearly $100k (including scholarships/loans) on my master's from NU in allied health. My bachelor's cost me much less, as I earned an associate's first and then took advantage of transfer scholarships. Mommy & Daddy didn't pay for college, unless you count my birthday & Xmas cash as student loan payback.

Although I currently make six figs, one of the reasons why I'm pursuing law school is that I've concluded that I no longer find my career path fulfilling, for multiple reasons. I've attempted a few times making changes to my path, but I always come to the same conclusion...I'm bored, incredibly unhappy, and miss using my brain in ways that I feel that the legal field will fulfill.

If I can continue to work as a clinician while going to law school part-time, I feel that I may have more stability in reducing income stress & tuition payments, rather than going into more massive debt. However, my biggest fear is that enrolling part-time will absolutely crush career prospects.

These are just my initial thoughts that keep swimming around in my head (tormenting me as I twist my mind around LR). Thoughts, ruminations, and arguments welcome.

Thanks!

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 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?

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.

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-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?

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.

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?

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

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.

Logic games are 2 pages per game now, with the first page being occupied by the game rules, etc and the first question. The second page contains the vast majority of questions per game (usually at around 6 questions). Now, before starting those questions, one has to draw the game board. But on which page? Drawing it on page 1 not only gives you ample space but would allow your diagramming to be very close to the written rules themselves, perhaps ensuring more accuracy in diagramming. Drawing it on page 2 however, allows the game board to be near the bulk of the questions with less page-flipping and eye-scanning, ensuring greater accuracy in the questions.

So on which page do you draw your game board? Personally, (and this is going to sound somewhat ridiculous) I've begun folding the first page in half vertically and drawing on page 2. This allows me to be near the written game rules and draw on page 2 at the same time. Do you think my technique is stupid? Is there a more efficient (and accurate) way to do this?

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.

Sorry for all of my recent posts. If 7Sage charged $10 a post JY would be able to take an extra vacation this year on me.

I was going to shoot for the October LSAT. I did a few PTs last week and didn't improve from my 148 diagnostic. Safe to say, more work was needed.

My solace was deciding to shoot for the December test instead of October. The extra two months alone lifted a huge weight off me.

However, if I can improve my skills by August 1st, I may still shoot for October. My questions is, is 2 months enough for the PT stage? I own a business so am slightly blessed with the luxury of being able to wrap my work up my Noon and devote the rest of the day to LSAT work. So 7/8 hours a day is no problem.

Any thoughts? Should I stick with December or is October still a possibility?

Thanks,

Jim @ the point of confusion

Reusing Lsats from 2-3 months ago has really helped me to consolidate all of patterns of the LSAT and trick answers that we commonly see. I can honestly say I don't remember too many questions but it feels as if blinders have been taken off my face and I am able to really understand the depths of the LSAT. Blind reviews help a lot but this process allows me to see the extent of my potential. There are a couple questions I would never get right under test conditions but it has helped me solidify my strengths.

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.