yep, as expected, LG3 f-Ed me over. But it's ok because I didn't suck at the other sections. I'm also well within the median for my goal school. But yeah, Game3, how cruel a fate.

Hi everyone,

I've just completed the MP and MSS lessons and was wondering...what do you all do when you 96% understand a lesson? I did some custom problem sets from the question bank, and was getting all right except 1 or 2 of the ones designated "hard" or "hardest" every section...do I move on to the next lesson? Do I stay here on MP and MSS? What else can I do to make sure I 100% understand this before moving on?

Thanks!

I want to put all the HARD questions into a question bank I made on a word document to make them easier to study. However I cannot copy and paste any of the questions, what should I do?

Thank you in advance for any advice!

I have a weird history with the LSAT where I took the 2018 September LSAT cold because I have old school lawyers in my family that said "you don't need to study for the LSAT. If you don't do well you're not meant for law school." So I went in thinking I could do it. Obviously, I scored poorly and was very upset. I also didn't know anything about the LSAT at the time so I didn't know that cancelling a score was an option. (I apologize if y'all are eye rolling while reading this...) I graduating in May and decided to study over the summer, getting my PTs up in the 160-165 range. I went into 2019 September LSAT knowing I would perform in that range if I did well on Logic Games. Well, like most people LG killed me in the first section and I was looking for another LG the rest of the test. I cannot gauge how I did on the other sections even though I didn't feel like I struggled on Reading Comp as much as I have on PTs this summer. I cannot remember anything about the LR sections which makes me so nervous.

I was already registered for the November LSAT so I am definitely taking that now. I am just so confused reading everybody's posts about what law schools consider with multiple LSAT scores. How would it look if I have a terrible score from last year, a cancelled score for September, then retake November and score much better?

I will absolutely be submitting an addendum regarding last year's test but I just don't know what to do. I know this score will be higher than last year, but if it isn't dramatically higher I feel like law schools will look at it and say "she only improved that much after a year of studying?" and put more weight on last year's score.

Please help!!!!!

Hey guys!

I was just checking some of my application statuses for fall of 2021. One of my top schools says "Current Status: Admitted Full-time Day". I know this seems silly but i have not heard from the school yet and my decision status change was 2 days ago...would this be an official decision or what? because under decision status it does not say anything. Let me know if you can!!

Listen and subscribe:

Apple Podcasts | Spotify

In this episode, Alex sits down with 7Sage LSAT tutor Nathalie to unpack the story behind her 174, from early struggles and study breakthroughs to a test day comedy of errors from hell. Hear how she navigated setbacks, refined her reasoning skills, and ultimately turned one of the most stressful test experiences imaginable into a success story.

Hey!

I'm looking for a study partner with a flexible schedule. taking the LSAT in November, Message me if you're able to

Does anyone have advice for keeping your PT scores more consistent? Over the past two weeks I’ve fluctuated between 165 and 172, taking roughly 4-5 PTs a week. Today I took two PTs and scored a 166 on the first, 171 on the second, less than six hours apart from one another. I know this is probably a wack study method, but I’d appreciate any advice lol

Hi all!

I just hit the 160s for the first time (yay!) it was a BR score so I'm not sure how consistent it will be going forward... but exciting nonetheless! My issue is timing, I score MUCH higher on every section untimed as I'm sure many others have experienced. I am looking for ways to learn to maximize my time in order to close this gap quickly.

I scored a 147 timed and a 163 untimed on PT 52 today - granted, I would typically score 154/155 timed but did not answer nearly all the questions, as I was trying to focus on maintaining accuracy.

Now that I seemingly am maintaining accuracy (thanks to my first ever 163, as well as other untimed sections where I was averaging similarly) I figured it made sense to begin focusing on timing and test taking strategy. In LR I feel that I often have to re-read the argument in order to get its gist, which I know is a huge waste of time - if anyone has advice on this specifically it would be helpful!

I can NEVER make it to the last RC passage timed, I assume this will just come with practice?

Here is the breakdown of my BR score for context:

LR1 - 21/25

LG - 23/23

LR2 - 17/26

RC - 18/26 (Q15 was removed from scoring from exam)

Thanks in advance!

Hello,

Myself, elle.sat.woods180 and emaanc99

Are looking to add one more members to our study group. The reason you may have seen me post recently is because we are starting this study group this Sunday.

Our goal is to reach +170 scores for the 2021-2022 academic year.

The highest score I have received on the LSAT was a 167. I have scored 165 multiple times and my most recent LSAT scores have been varied from 160 to 167. I have taken approximately 80 LSAT Preptests. I only have 10 more. I took these tests in numerical order but also decided to take LSAT 89 and 88 because of their difficulty in order to prepare myself for the November/January LSAT. It did not work.

Our method of study is to pick LR/LG/RC questions/passages and blind review them. We will pick questions and passages based on their difficulty. We would spend an hour or two every weekend to meet as a group and go over the questions/passages that we selected.

The most beneficial way to use a study group in my opinion is to have the members of the study group verbally present an explanation to difficult questions they answered on either their LSAT Prep Tests or had on their general study and have the other members of the group try to question the assumptions and weakness of the explanation that was provided. The actual act of trying to explain an answer will help refine our own understating of the question and the exam overall.

This is the basis that I want to have for the study group. We will improvise and adapt when necessary but I expect us to have a rigid schedule so that we can see returns for our efforts.

Send me a direct message if you are interested in joining our group.

Thanks,

Just another thank you for JY and the 7Sage team. I didn't have the money or in person time to pay for a lot of the other courses, but signed up for 7Sage because I had heard JY had a great approach for high scorers. God, that was the best decision I ever made. I only had 8 weeks to study, but in those weeks, this site was my bible, and JY, you led me to the promised land. Can't thank you enough!

Okay I had a lot of trouble with these two strengthening questions lol so to see that they are only 2/3 star difficulty is slightly concerning. I ended up getting them both right under timed and BR without understanding fully why they correct. It did throw me off during the section but I'm trying to build confidence in eliminating to get AC's right.

I'm going to include my thoughts on each AC as I'm trying to build a habit of articulating what each answer choice actually does when it interacts with the argument to build my reasoning skills (ie: strengthens, weakens, does nothing). I will include this in my rationale below and would appreciate if someone could take a once over and let me know 1) if the way I am interpreting an AC to interact with an argument is wrong (ie: if I think it does nothing but it actually strengthens) and also 2) if there is anything else you notice in my reasoning. I am really trying to hone in on reasoning skills so don't be shy to critique mine if there is something I am missing or assuming!

PTA S4 Q3

A) Neither strengthens nor weakens; so what if both F and M pit vipers have these sensors while also exhibiting aggressive and defensive behaviour? The hypothesis we are trying to supports that the sensors serve to assist in judging the SIZE and DISTANCE of predators.

B) Strengthens; okay so if pit vipers do not differ in their predatory behaviour from the way non-pit vipers behave (ie: they both act the same way towards prey) but they do differ markedly from non-pit vipers in their strategies of defence against predators; then this would strengthen the claim that the pits assist the viper. Ie: sort of like an experiment, take one with pits and one without pits and see how they act in terms of defending themselves from predators.

C) Neither strengthens nor weakens; this seems totally irrelevant, distinguishing pit vipers based on their pits and other chemical features in no way strengthens the hypothesis about how the pit vipers use pits primarily defend themselves in specific ways.

D) Neither strengthens nor weakens; okay but this still doesn't indicate how they use the pits and if the hypothesis is correct? How can anything supplementary help us when aren't sure about the hypothesis.

E) Neither strengthens nor weakens; at first glance I thought that since this indicates they do have predators it could help, but it's just about another defence mechanism and it still doesn't strengthen, in any way, the hypothesis that the infrared sensors serve a specific purpose (which is to judge the size and distance of predators).

I thought this one was a little tricky because if you don't stay clear on what the hypothesis is, it's a little easy to get lost.

PTA S4 Q5

A) Strengthens; Okay so if official persecutions were preceded by propaganda campaigns in order to vilify the groups being persecuted - this seems to indicate that they were not taken on reluctantly and that it was not their only goal to soothe popular unrest? Because why would they have this propaganda with a distinct purpose if otherwise?

B) Does nothing; The opposing view is geared towards being reluctantly persecuted AND a single purpose of persecution for various minority groups, this seems to miss the point there in terms of the direction for the purpose of persecution and how it reluctantly/not it was carried out. I think it is trying to dispute the fact that various groups were persecuted by telling us that 'they were protected', but either way I don't know anything about protection of official institutions and it doesnt seem fair to assume that because they 'often' existed under direct protection that they couldn't still be persecuted - how strong was this protection? did it stop them from physical harm?

C) Does nothing but if anything weakens (?); okay so this says that SOME groups of people accused of witch craft were victims of mob violence (indicating the hostility) and that they were also occasionally officially persecuted (this seems to cover the soothing popular unrest). But either way I don't know how strong SOME is in terms of this group in order to strengthen the opposing claim, the conclusion is about 'various minority groups' not some or one. Either way, it definitely does not strengthen the argument that the scholar's belief is questionable, I just wanted to analyze what it was doing in terms of the whole stimulus.

D) Does nothing; this seems irrelevant, many leaders didn't authorize spread of information that misrepresented religious practices? So what? How does that tell us anything about why the first belief is questionable.

E) Does nothing; this is about convicted felons being excluded and that being a form of persecution. I don't know what kind of society this is but assuming that convicted felons count as a minority group, the conclusion we are trying to dispute is about VARIOUS minority groups, not solely being persecuted, but how the persecutions were taken on reluctantly and with only one goal in mind.

Thank you for anyone who took the time to read my analysis and I hope there are some valuable points in there! Please don't hesitate to correct me on anything if you see any errors.

Hi everyone I was looking for a little bit of advice...

I started studying for the LSAT in December with Kahn Academy (I know horrible choice) with a diagnostic of 153. I improved to a 157 after two months hired a tutor and was PT between 167-173 before the July flex. I got a 167 and was not surprised as I felt I had made some mistakes on the games.

I am switching over to using CC and was wondering if anyone had any advice on navigating through it with the hope of taking the exam again in October. For reference my splits looked like LR: -0 to - 4 RC: -0 to -6 (most inconsistent section) LG: -0 to -3.

Thank you all in advance.

!

(1) My professor asked if I wanted specific letters of recommendation written to law schools. Is it possible for a professor to write multiple letters of recommendation for me to upload to LSAC (to be assigned to different schools?)

(2) Is this a practice in law school admissions? LSAC’s guidelines indicate this is possible, but is this a practice that comes up with downsides? (like because this isn’t the norm, it might come off negatively or as collusion)

Misc:

LSAC guidelines seem to imply that a school-specific reference is done when your recommender is writing to their alma mater. But could if your professor just wants to tailor their letter to a school’s interest? And circling back to (1), can they upload both a general letter and a school-specific letter to LSAC? https://www.lsac.org/applying-law-school/jd-application-process/credential-assembly-service-cas/letters-recommendation#:~:text=LSAC%20LOR%20Service&text=If%20you%20use%20LSAC's%20LOR,in%20your%20law%20school%20reports

Hey all!

I am looking for a small group to do full PTs and BR before the Fall LSAT. I'm signed up for August but realistically will probably not take until at least the October/November exam.

I'm hoping to do a study group a few times a week and as our state is opening up/going back to work, later evenings MST (like 8 PM MST) would be ideal. I've got a great group that does LR/RC together but unfortunately the time difference makes it tricky for where I'm at, so being in PST/MST or with a flexible schedule to meet at that time/later in the evening would be ideal. I'm hoping for someone ready to take a lot more PTs, scoring around/above the mid 160s, and can be consistent.

If you're interested, send me a message!

Are there in study groups in Washington DC area for LSAT in September 2017?

Looking for a study buddy who's currently scoring either in the mid to high 160s.

My goal is to score in the 170+. Ideally, would love to BR LR & RC session, at least one each per week. Ideally EST would be great.

If interested DM me.

I get why (E) is the answer here, there's a flaw between the premise and sub-conclusion. Just because a majority are unaware doesn't necessarily mean they disprove of the attempt.

But I'm having a tough time eliminating (D). If we just isolate the sub-conlusion (premise) and main conclusion we get: Since a majority of them obviously disapprove of THE attempt, graduate students at this university should not unionize. Ok, so they disapprove of THIS attempt, but isn't there the possibility that they may want to unionize for other reasons, which is what (D) says? Or maybe I'm just reading this wrong. Any help woulf be greatly appreciated!

1.By blind reviewing every single question, LSAT students save a lot of time and get their target score faster than students who BR only flags questions, while the latter group of students reviews individual PT quicker and takes more PTs.

Which one of the following, if true, would best reconcile the statement above?

A. Few LSAT students have detailed knowledge of LSAT theories about the relationship between BR and score.

B. By BR every single question, LSAT students are getting a deeper understanding of the material, and reinforce their technic for questions they got right.

D. ... your variant

Hey! I have been studying for a few months with my test in October. Lately I have been super focused on getting the LR wrong answers down. I average at -6 with my lowest -3. I usually have 2-3 minutes left to go over my flagged questions, so I do not think timing is the issue. I only get 5 star, sometimes 4 star, questions wrong. What is the best strategy I can use this next month to get my wrong answers down?

I know that schools can now receive your scores without the writing sample, but I wonder if they won't actually make a decision until they have it. Has anyone been accepted this cycle before their LSAC writing sample was processed (since it can take up to a month)? Thanks!

Hi all, at this point I've submitted all my JD applications for entry into the class of 2024, but I just got (very delayed) feedback on my resume from a former supervisor. The comments were valuable and, when applied, I think do make my resume a bit stronger. Would you recommend that I email law schools this updated/revised resume? Or is there a chance that could reflect poorly on me?

The advice my supervisor gave me was to take out an academic experience and replace it with a professional experience (an investment banking internship at a prestigious firm) that I had originally left out. He also suggested some language and tweaks that buffed up my leadership roles a bit. So it's not fixing mistakes or updating it with new, more recent info. Rather, the edits highlight different experiences from my past that I previously left out. I would love for schools to see this new version, but obviously do not want to appear like I did not properly review my materials the first time around.

Has LSAC given any outlook whatsoever? Or restarted the conversation around administering the test in small, distanced group settings?

Hi everyone!

I'm a consistent high 170's-180 scorer that's been tutoring for around 2-3 months now. I hope everyone who's currently taking the Jan test is doing well, and congrats!

This sesh is more for people who are targeting the Feb/April test, and is generally geared towards all skill ranges, but primarily focused on beginners. If you were on the discussion forum a few months ago, you may have seen this post before - the lesson is essentially going to be the same thing, but do stop on by if you want to do any review on formal logic or LR approaches.

I'll be holding the session on Wednesday 9PM EST. It should go on for around 1.5-2hrs, or so, and I'm going to be covering, roughly, the following topics:

Afterwards, I'll be going through an LR section and talking through my approach, while also taking questions. If you want to follow along, please have PT20 S1 in hand.

Join the following zoom link @9PM EST Wed 1/20

https://middlebury.zoom.us/j/5528647080?pwd=TTJUM0lDV2ZxbEFvTXRjRWVXRVJEdz09

with password 686121

Conf Id 552 864 7080 also works with the same password. Thanks, and see you soon!

If you can't make the time, I'll try my best to schedule a second session, so please let me know.