Proctors:

Friendly, but didn't give 5 minute warning

Facilities:

Fine

What kind of room:

Small Classroom

How many in the room:

20 something

Desks:

small individual desks with attached chairs

Left-handed accommodation:

N/A

Noise levels:

Fairly quiet

Parking:

N/A

Time elapsed from arrival to test:

A little over half an hour

Other Comments:

I was placed in one room and after I got settled I was moved to another

Would you take the test here again?

Only if I knew I'd have better desks

Date of Exam: 06/8/2015

studying since may, hovering around 170-72 with blind review and 165-69 before. can comfortably finish a section in about 38-42 minutes and i am taking the september lsat.

I don't really know what's wrong with me, but after finishing my final exam for my summer class today, I decided to do a section of RC, lol. Yesterday, I took a section of LR from PT 55, so I figured it made sense that if I were to do another section, it should also be from PT 55 (I've decided to sacrificed this one long ago).

Here are some thoughts and reflection from multiple attempts at RC to get a perfect score from an English major ... (take it with a grain of salt, maybe the terrible heat finally triggered something in me, IDK.)

0) it might be possible

TRUST YOURSELF!! This is something I so deeply struggle with on the LSAT. But if there are any fellow English majors out there, or any avid/good readers, trust yourself! I can't tell you how many times I've second-guessed myself and went with a very attractive and popular wrong answer instead. This has happened to me on BR, too (overthinking is definitely a thing on the LSAT), and on the real thing, where I change an originally correct answer to a wrong one. If you're a good reader (and you know if you are, so keep telling yourself that), I want to say your intuition is likely going to be correct. For me, like the metaphor JY uses, there was a "little spark" in my understanding that was correct, and that led me to choose the right answer, but my self-doubt and extraneous (to passage) anxious thoughts extinguishes those little blooming sparks under timed conditions.

Sometimes, you don't even have to waste time thinking through a lot of the answer choices to get to the right one. I think this especially applies to method and purpose questions (but definitely NOT parallel/analogy questions). This kind of goes with #1 and especially applies if you have a prephrase. This saves a LOT of time. You can always go through the wrong answer choices on BR and critique them and find what's wrong with them, but you probably won't have time on the real thing to do this for some questions.

When I first started using JY's methods of low to high res/memory method, I struggled a bit and saw my score drop, mostly because a lot of the times I was thinking, "are you kidding? I can read. I'm an English major!" But I kept doing it (per some redditor's advice I think), started with writing out the low-reses during testing, and then eventually not having to write things down, just reviewing in my head what I read/what the author is saying after each paragraph. Another thing I found really helpful for me was to highlight the transition words, instead of sentences/things that are more related to substance. I had trouble with keeping up with both a substance- and structure-low-reses at the same time, so I found this method (highlighting transition words) to be very helpful. It eases up the amount of things you have to keep in your head, giving you visual cues just like the diagrams you draw in LG do.

Overall, the most important thing is to keep a positive mindset and keep affirming yourself with all that you are and all that you've accomplished in your LSAT journey so far! Don't let a stupid LSAT writer trick you into thinking you were wrong. I think it's a very delicate thing to know/figure out where you actually have no idea what the right answer is, versus where you do know or have an inkling. When it's the latter, go with your "intuition." (I put scare quotes around intuition because it's not really all intuition--you've read and understood the passage.)

If there are any scorers who do extremely well on RC, please give your two cents, too! I would love to hear what you think.

Watsup Team! I hope everyone is doing well.

I took the LSAT 2 years ago and did not get the score I wanted. I ended up not retaking but continued on with my commercial real estate job.

Fast forward to today, I just began studying again. I have decided to take the new form of the LSAT (sans LG) in Aug of this year in order to apply to early decisions by November. I would like to pursue my dream of becoming a deal attorney here in the Mountain West.

For the next 9 months I will be solely studying LR and RC. My reasoning behind this is that 2 subjects are easier to study for than 3. Plus I was never great at LG lol. In fact, I hate LG. However, I (oddly enough) enjoy LR.

If anyone wants to start a study group to focus on the newest format of the LSAT, I am available.

Bon Chance!

Proctors: Didn't seem to know all that much except for the main proctor who was in-charge of the tests within the whole building (3 rooms I think) other than that there wasn't a problem with them. They were nice and didn't distract us.

Facilities: Much better than expected (cant judge a school's facility based off its rank) place was super clean, very roomy and had some cool tech (has nothing to do with test but each seat had a mic on the desk to ensure the whole class can hear)

What kind of room: Stadium seating lecture hall. Very large but the back had a bunch of seats with no desks

How many in the room: 75-100

Desks: Large desks broken up into three sections per row (like a movie theater) with people spaced every other chair. All the room you need to get set up and be comfortable. No issues at all

Left-handed accommodation: desks were large along with spaced seating should have caused no extra accommodations to be needed (I'm righty so...)

Noise levels: fine, normal coughing/sneezing

Parking: NYC so you have to deal with parking buildings. I took public transit.

Note: there is NOWHERE to safely leave a bag, so if you are going here, DO NOT bring anything you are not supposed to have. There were multiple people frantically looking for a place to leave their bags (eventually left them all with a doorman, I assume they didn't have a problem getting them back but no idea)

Time elapsed from arrival to test: fairly quick, 20-30 minutes from listed start time (maybe less)

Irregularities or mishaps: again, most of the proctors clearly weren't trained so we had a couple of minutes in between sections (IIRC the proctors walked around to make sure you weren't still writing/in a different section) Threw me off at first but had plenty of time to re-coop, I enjoyed the extra time to clear my head and prep for the following section.

Other comments: Nice place, would be top choice of mine if retaking and lived closer (getting there was not a problem from LI, LIRR to Penn and a quick subway ride brought me maybe 5 blocks from school) I just registered for the test pretty late. I would definitely recommend it to those nearby or even on LI (if Hofstra is unavailable-NOTE: Touro is open to replace Hofstra for June, so it may be better than travelling to NYC but not sure how the facilities/testing conditions are there)

Would you take the test here again? Yep, as said above, if Hofstra is not available I would make the trek

feel free to post or message any questions

I can't wait to input my answers and get a detailed analysis of my performance. When will 7sage release the grader for PT 72?

🔢 I'm currently scoring: 160-165

📆 My planned test date: February 2024

📈 To study, I have been: Have been studying for several months now. My studying has consisted of different methods throughout.

🔑 My goals for this group are: Help each other out with our respective goals. Whether you are new to studying or have been studying for months such as myself, I hope that this space can be used so that we can collaboratively help one another achieve our objectives.

🔍 We'll focus on: Anything and everything!

👥 Study Group Name: TBD

📚 When we'll meet and what we'll do: All messaging and meetings are done via Discord, but time is totally up to the availability of those in the group, it is fluid.

✅ How to join: Feel free to click on the link below to join the server via Discord, and please do message me if you are having any issues either joining the group or creating a Discord account. Like I said above, this group is open to all, from beginners to long-time studiers. I just hope that this study group can help each and every person in it and that we can use this group not only to learn and improve our studying, but also where we can reliably hold each other accountable as we get closer to the test date(s).

https://discord.gg/dkVdVXqWrc

BR Group!!!! PT 50!

Talk to your heart’s content at Group BR

Saturday, Feb 27th at 8PM ET: PT50

Click here to join this conversation: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/219480381

June BR Group Schedule: http://classic.7sage.com/discussion/#/discussion/6171/june-test-takers-group-br-schedule-updated

Please click the link and comment if you plan on participating.

You can also dial in to the BR call by using your phone.

United States +1 (571) 317-3112

Access Code: 219-480-381

Note:

Proctors: 5 proctors total, with 2 in the back watching. Overall very good. Stuck to the time well, gave clear instructions, announced 5 minute warnings. Only drawback was the proctor who passed out the test forms excruciatingly slowly.

Facilities: Facilities are comfortable. Bathroom wasn't too far away, chairs are comfortable, rooms are well-lit. Bring a watch though, it's hard to see the clock from certain areas of the room.

What kind of room: Medium sized rooms divided into three sections (left, right, middle) that all face towards the front and center.

How many in the room: ~50 in my room. There weren't many people, and it was very spacious. They staggered seating so that you have empty seats on either side.

Desks: My favorite part! LOTS of room for you. They don't have individual desks, they have one long desk for an entire row. Plus, no people on either side of you so you can fan out all of your items to your heart's content.

Left-handed accommodation: Doesn't apply, the desks are for both right and left handed folk.

Noise levels: The only noise came from the other test takers (flipping paper, coughing, sneezing, yawning). But since there weren't too many people, the noise was minimal. The area itself is secluded enough that you won't hear urban noises from the classroom.

Parking: I'm not sure exactly how large the parking lot is since I personally took a cab, but AU provides parking for test takers.

Time elapsed from arrival to test: They start checking you in and putting you into rooms when you arrive. So if you arrive earlier, you will start earlier and vice versa. I would say ~20-30 minutes.

Irregularities or mishaps: None.

Would you take the test here again?: YES! This is a great test center, with ample room, good temp, no noise, and competent proctors. What more can you ask for? (Other than an easy exam, of course)

Date[s] of Exam[s]: December '15

Anyone from the area (UNT, TWU, etc.) want to get together?

I am getting ready to take the LSAT for the second time and most of my PT's have been the 40's-50's because I used the most recent ones up during my first go around of studying. Would it be beneficial to retake one of the most recent prep tests again to try and get familiar with the new trends before test day? It's been about 3-4 months since I last took them. I am just not sure if it would be beneficial to go through material and PT a test again that I had already done a few months back. Thanks for the help!

Talk to your heart’s content at Group BR

Thursday, Mar 24th at 8PM ET: PT 74

Click here to join this conversation: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/219480381

June BR Group Schedule: http://classic.7sage.com/discussion/#/discussion/6171/june-test-takers-group-br-schedule-updated

Please click the link and comment if you plan on participating.

Note:

Can someone please explain to me, when it comes to General Theory, Specific Theory, Guided Application and Problem sets. Where can I go on the CC to learned these fundamentals. Thank You!

If you have the admissions program for 7sage then you are going to recognize the name Anna Ivey, or at least the book Ivey's guide to Law School Admissions. I was curious as to how a real admissions officer took every part of our applications into consideration and if they could, what honest advice they would have. Anna Ivey is a former admissions officer for University of Chicago Law School (i believe), and when she left to create her own admissions company, she wrote a books giving advice students want when talking to councilors. She talked about everything from what to say about low gpas, and some nuances as far as supplemental statements go, what types of personal statements tend to catch admission officers eyes and talked about the nuances (like making sure you spell resume properly aka résumé). Those things she said really mattered when they make decisions between certain candidates and would matter to schools who don't do interviews like U of Chicago do to get to know the applicants. I HIGHLY suggest reading it because I found it to be incredibly helpful and made me look back over my own résumé (one my career advisor said was good) because it had mistakes in terms of set up and what I didn't use it to do which was have a 'personal section'. I didn't by the higher costing admissions programs that 7sage has because me and my family don't have a great deal of money.

So if you're looking for advice that is low costing I definitely suggest getting her ebook for kindle (you can get the app, it's free for some and my cost a bit for others) but it's totally worth it. I read through the entire thing in about a day and half, if that. I highlighted and made notes too because it was that helpful.

Hello again, fellow 7sagers.

After doing a week of Pacifico's LG drilling method, I've noticed improvements in the relatively easier/medium games regardless of their type. However, I find that I still continue to struggle diagramming the more difficult appearing games. I use "appearing" because even games that are "simple" or "easy" to solve continue to give me a problem if they consist of multiple categories or variables (for example, I got 4 incorrect on PT 3's first game which is not difficult at all). Arguably the most difficult questions, for me anyway, are those with subcategories, particularly in/out games with subcategories. I simply just struggle with creating a good diagram, which is incredibly frustrating because if I could draw these types, I would be only getting about 2 or 3 incorrect per LG section.

So, my main question is this: should I be approaching these question types differently? Perhaps is this a mentality issue? Is continued drilling and familiarity the answer? Yes to all three? Any advice would be greatly appreciated. As I mentioned, my scores would be vastly improved if I simply could diagram these seemingly complicated games more clearly.

Study buddy?

My September score wasn't what I wanted but it's good enough for most of the schools I'm looking at. I'm retaking in December but should I go ahead and apply now? If I apply now, should I write an addendum about another score coming or will they see that I'm registered?

Is it better to take the September LSAT if I want to enroll for the fall of 2015? Or would it matter if I change my test date to the December LSAT? Do schools give all of their scholarship money to their first applicants?

Hey! Anyone from CSUSM taking the LSAT on Saturday?

It can be in person or online..

:)

.

Hi all!

Just wondering if anyone has sent letters of continued interests to Canadian schools and if you formatted them the same as for American schools? Or if you found them helpful for admissions!

Thank you!

Also @"David.Busis" if you know anything about this... :)

I suppose this would take a little bit of insider information, but I have received several fee waivers recently from good schools and their site states they won't send fee waivers until they have your lsat? Probably coincidence but would be interested if anybody had any insight.

I personally find this the hardest LR question in PT 14; it is (1) bizarre on the level of content, (2) very long and overloads test takers with information, and (3) at the very end of the fourth section, thus hitting you at a point of the test where you already spent 2+ hours intensively thinking about stuff and are mentally exhausted.

In paraphrased form, the stimulus says:

(1) Phenomenon: In the Peruvian desert, there are different sets of lines in the sand. These lines occur in different layers: On the top layer, there are lines that branch out from a single point. Beneath that, there are lines that form a bird figure.

(2) Hypothesis: An investigator argues for the conclusion that both of these sets of lines were brought about by aliens, who supposedly used the Peruvian desert to land their space ships. To support this conclusion, the investigator evokes the premises that the lines in the sand would have been useless to Incas.

The first thing to do here is to figure out what the stimulus is even about: The phenomenon itself is not immediately clear – it is crucial to note that there are TWO sets of lines, not just one –, and the investigator’s hypothesis is counterintuitive to a degree that it becomes all too easy to disregard the glaring selective attention fallacy in their reasoning (Aliens or Incas, not Incas; therefore aliens). So the first hurdle here is to even figure out what is going on, and to throw out one’s common sense intuitions out of the window (How can you even identify the different layers of ancient lines in the sand? How did the lines stick around for so long? All of these questions become irrelevant).

The next hurdle then is the question stem, which again seems bizarre: Here, the test writers tell us that we seek to establish the conclusion that the lines are supposed to refer to astronomical phenomena, and that we are supposed to block an alternative hypothesis to the effect that the lines are non-astronomical. So at this point this seems to become a sort of strengthen question. The question stem is unusual to an extent that it becomes hard to pre-phrase or anticipate how a right answer might look like. Thus process of elimination seems to be the best approach:

(A) North American natives arranged stones in ways that allow for the measurement of astronomical phenomena. This seems to strengthen a little bit in that it points out a seemingly analogous case (It is not only in South America but also in North America that people used geological means to keep track of astronomical phenomena). However, it seems unclear how this answer choice would also have the blocking effect that the question stem is asking for. Thus keep around as a candidate but expect that one of the other answer choices might well be better.

(B) The straight lines indicate positions at which astronomical events could have been observed ‘at plausible dates,’ and the bird lines could represent a constellation. This gets at both sets of lines and associates both of them with astronomical phenomena. The answer thus is fairly specific. Furthermore, the answer itself postulates its own plausibility (‘plausible dates’), which seems like a massive hint, though again unusual. Like the rest of this question, (B) thus again seems wildly counterintuitive, but in the scenario we are supposed to explain, (B) arguably makes the most sense. In particular, (B) approximates the desired function more than (A). Thus far this thus is the least bad answer choice.

(C) The lines form patterns. This answer choice is worse than (B), due to its lack of specificity and its apparent disconnect from the question stem. Worst answer choice thus far.

(D) Central American Natives used rocks to measure astronomical phenomena. This answer choice seems almost identical to (A) and thus provides good grounds to dismiss both (A) and (D): There can only be one correct answer choice, two virtually identical answer choices thus are likely to both be false.

(E) The bird lines might be older than the straight lines. Again irrelevant; (B) must be right.

Takeaways: This seems to be a question where the LSAT really tries hard to make test takers focus exclusively on reasoning structures, not on common sense intuition or plausibility. In this sense, the question is similar to other early LR questions that seem weird content wise but make syntactical sense on the level of formal logic. Focus on getting a clear understanding of what is going on in the stimulus and the question stem; I spent four minutes on this and still felt overwhelmed. Get a clear grasp of what the phenomenon is, what the explanation attempt from the stimulus is trying to say, and how the two alternative explanatory directions from the question stem relate to another. Then use process of elimination to get through the answers.