Discussions

All posts

New post

181 posts in the last 30 days

7S
•

Tuesday, Jul 22

7Sage

Official

Getting Back on the Horse | LSAT Podcast

Listen and subscribe:

Apple Podcasts | Spotify

In this episode of the 7Sage LSAT Podcast, we tackle exactly how to turn a disappointing score into a breakthrough—so you’ll walk into test day more confident and prepared than ever. We break down how to diagnose the gaps in your first run (from timing hiccups to recurring question‑type errors), then show you how to rebuild your study plan around those insights. You’ll pick up practical tips on setting realistic weekly goals, practicing mindfulness for test day, and slotting in targeted drills to shore up weak spots.

1

Hi there, I know you all rank how hard questions or passages are on a five-point scale. I figured you do it based on what percentage of people got a certain question wrong.

I just finished a preptest (66) and I'm particularly interested now. You ranked game 1 four out of five in difficulty, but said it should take five minutes to complete. Game 2 got 10 minutes target time, but was ranked three out of four in difficulty.

Those are just examples. I'm not looking for specific feedback about preptest 66. I was just curious how you decide how hard questions are, or how long we should spend on them.

Thanks!

0

Hello,

I just wanted to post this to see how other people are learning from their missed questions. As I was looking over some missed questions and seeing why the correct answer is correct, it struck me that I don't have a very good system for learning from my missed questions and remembering my mistakes. I've been blind reviewing of course, and then I will write out my thinking in the "explanation note" box. How are others keeping in mind the mistakes they've made, and carrying it over to similar questions? This is mainly for LR.

Thanks!

0

I answered this question correct the first time around, and then when completing the blind review I changed my answer and got it incorrect. This question is very tricky when reading it for the first time. I changed my answer because I could not logically conclude why the average length of stay remaining unchanged would support the authors hypothesis. I now realize that if length of stay has no correlation, then a valid reason to there being higher restaurant revenues would be that visitors are sharing passes.

A) Other tourist attraction opening- would weaken argument bc would explain the rise in restaurant revenues and not attraction

B) Making more frequent trips than in previous years- would weaken argument bc this would mean they are not sharing passes

C) Hotel and meal prices have risen- would weaken argument bc directly correlates with increased revenues not based on sharing passes

D) Average length of stay remained unchanged- would support argument bc people most likely sharing passes

E) Each pass contains a photograph- would weaken argument bc this would causes less people to share a pass

Admin Note: Edited title. Please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of the question."

1

If you're ready to get more practice taking a full LSAT Prep Test under simulated online proctor conditions, you're in the right place. The next Proctored PT will take place on Saturday February 24 at 1:00 PM.

Thanks to all who could come last week to the PT and BR sessions. On Monday we covered your flagged LR questions from PT76 S2, focusing on the most difficult ones first. Virulent diseases, email disclaimers, and cancelling police dramas made it into the mix! On Tuesday, we covered RC (S1), which led us to into a whirlwind of positive vs. negative evidence, the discovery of Neptune, and a hot take on Schoenberg's music being actually ~good~. Who knew the LSAT was so interesting?

Here's how our Proctored PTs work:

  • Register by clicking the blue ‘Register’ button on this page.

    • Once you sign up, you'll receive an email from Zoom with the link to join the meeting.

    Select a PT that you want to take for the proctored test. This week's recommended PT is test 77; you're encouraged to attend the associated Blind Review sessions on Monday and Tuesday! (BR Series). You can take the PT through 7Sage, or- if you want to simulate real test-day conditions- you can log into LawHub and take it there.

    Show up to the Zoom meeting 10 minutes before the scheduled start time (12:50 PM ET). You will all be prompted to complete a room scan (similar to the test-day security measures) at the same time and then put into a breakout room by yourself to complete the test.

    Simulate the test! Our 7Sage Proctors will monitor the testing process for the duration of your test and even simulate a pesky interruption. The Proctor will ask if anyone would like to be interrupted at the beginning of the session, and you will have the chance to indicate your preference. If only the Prometric proctors would be so kind as to ask! If you have any approved accommodations, please let us know via private chat at the beginning of the session as well––you will be able to test with those.

    If you have any questions, please email bailey.luber@7sage.com. We hope to see you there!

    0

    Hi all! I am reviewing PT86.S1.Q21. I understand why we can get rid of answer choices a,c and e as well as the general flaw in the argument being that the spread of organic farming is only a problem for having enough food if all farmers switch to organic farming. However, I am having trouble with what differentiates answers b and d. I know it has something to do with the logical meaning of some and all, and their opposites not some and not all. The explanation video for this question leaves it up to us to think about at the end, but I'm hitting a wall so all help appreciated! Thanks!

    0

    Hey y'all!

    This week's LSAT Tips is out! This week, I wrote about discipline as it relates to the LSAT. You can read it here: https://7sage.substack.com/p/lsat-tips-developing-discipline?s=w

    If you're interested in learning more about our tutoring services, you can learn more here: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat-tutoring/

    Also, if you're interested in tutoring but would like to talk to someone before committing to a plan, schedule a free consultation with one of our tutors here: https://calendly.com/7sage-consult/7sage-tutoring-free-consult

    I hope this week's newsletter is helpful!

    0

    Hi!

    Has anybody taken the LSAT at the Boston Convention and Exhibition Center?

    Can you describe your experience there? (types of chairs, desks/tables, air conditioning, proctors, etc.)

    I took the LSAT at McGeorge Law School (Sacramento, CA) in July. I've been taking practice tests and preparing for the LSAT at the McGeorge location all year. I'm a little nervous retaking it at a place I've never been.

    0

    Hello everyone. You can never be a part of too many study groups, right? I want to make another one for people taking the LSAT between these time frames. If you are taking it sooner/later feel free to join as well, honestly. Comment if interested I will post a link later! Any scores, knowledge levels, and questions are welcome. If you just need to vent about studying for the LSAT I am here for that as well! Let me know! Comment or inbox.

    LINK IS HERE! https://groupme.com/join_group/87045624/OHRc3uwy

    0

    Hi there-- I'm ramping up my studying for the January 2022 test and I'm hoping to create a small group for consistent studying at the Martin Luther King Jr. Memorial Library. The library's open hours are below. I'm aiming for post-work evenings on the weekdays and all day on the weekends. Please PM me if you'd like to join and I'll include you on a Signal group to coordinate. Thanks! :)

    Monday:10:00 a.m.-8:00 p.m.

    Tuesday:10:00 a.m.-8:00 p.m.

    Wednesday:10:00 a.m.-8:00 p.m.

    Thursday:10:00 a.m.-8:00 p.m.

    Friday:10:00 a.m.-6:00 p.m.

    Saturday:10:00 a.m.-6:00 p.m

    Sunday:1:00 p.m.-5:00 p.m.

    1

    Hey! I’m 25 and based in Toronto, planning to write the LSAT in October. I’ve been stuck in the mid-150s and looking for a study buddy or small group to meet up in person — libraries, coffee shops, etc. Would be great to have someone to stay consistent with, go over questions together, and keep each other accountable and motivated.

    If you’re also prepping and want to team up, send me a message!

    2

    I have a question regarding LSAC’s GPA calculation. I completed a Bachelor’s degree in Communications in 2017, and later earned a Bachelor of Laws degree in 2025. I am based in Vietnam—not the United States—and I am planning to apply to U.S. law schools for a J.D. program.

    When submitting transcripts to LSAC, am I allowed to submit only the transcript for my Law degree and exclude the transcript for my Communications degree, since the GPA for that earlier degree is relatively low? Or does LSAC require that I report all undergraduate coursework completed across different degrees?

    3

    I have spent half of a year actively studying with 7Sage. I studied for a month in December last year (LR core) and have been consistently studying since May (full-time, 30 hours a week, till August and part time, 5-10 hours, since then). I scored a 144 on a diagnostic test on Khan Academy before 7Sage. My goal score is above a 170.

    I did well on my first few practice tests beginning in September. My first PT was a 160 and my second test was a 167 (1 wrong on each of LR and LG, 9 wrong on reading); Dominating LR and LG while flunking reading was the norm for a while (with an all time high score of 168), so I was confident that everything would resolve itself once I aced RC.

    Since then, my scores have consistently fallen with my last two tests being a 164 and a low of 162, despite learning the reading portion of the curriculum. The PTs I've done are from the mid 30s to 49, but I've only done about half of those, using the rest for more drilling. One possible explanation is that a few of my PTs were 3 section ones (but not my first 167) and I only recently switched back to 4 section PTs.

    I don't think I'm burned out because I feel motivated to study. However, I do think I'm stuck in a cycle of rust because I only have time to do a few hours a week of studying (5-10 hours) due to my job. I either have to choose between reviewing mistakes for a couple sections or timed practice. For example, I brought my RC score down to below 5 consistently for a few section drills, but this investment caused my LG and LR scores to slip due to lack of time to practice these.

    I have more time to study this week but long term, what do I do, besides building endurance by doing 4 section PTs? Though my RC score has improved, RC is still my worst section; but I also need work on LR and LG. And within each of these sections, I miss each question type at a similar rate, including a handful of easier questions, so it's not like all my problems are solved by drilling one question or game type.

    My initial thought is do more fool-proofing in LG and do more blind review and wrong answer journaling/reviewing in LR. No clue what to do to improve RC though: my performance in that section feels random.

    0

    Biologist's argument: DF (deforestation continues at its present pace) -> KAE (the koala will approach extinction)

    Politician's argument: /DF (stop deforestation) -> /KAE (save the koala)

    So the politician's argument is a mistaken negation of the biologist's argument.

    (A) is wrong because we do not know whether deforestation continues at its "present pace" so we do not know whether this is consistent with the biologist's claim.

    (B) is right because even though deforestation is stopped, the koala could go extinct because deforestation could have stopped as a result of complete destruction of forests.

    (C) is wrong because no one talks about reforestation.

    (D) is wrong because it is consistent with the politician's argument rather than the biologist's

    (E) is wrong because the biologist's argument says that the koala does not approach extinction only if deforestation does not continue at its present pace

    Is my explanation correct for this question? Could anyone add explanation for this question? Thanks

    Admin note: edited title; please use the format of PTx.Sx.Qx. Existing threads on PT2.S2.Q11: (1); (2)

    0

    To help with my studies, I am reading books to practice some of the things taught in the V.2 curriculum. I am reading a book called Political Tribes by Amy Chua. On page 91 it states the following " Experts today agree that merely deploying twenty thousand additional troops would not have been sufficient had American commanders not "stopped fighting Iraq's tribal structure and instead started to cooperate with it..."

    I think this sentence is similar to PT 64.1.18.

    The way I would translate to a conditional would be

    If not "stopped fighting Iraq's tribal structure and instead started to cooperate with it.." then, deploying 20k would have not been sufficient

    or

    If it was sufficient then they stopped fighting or started to cooperate with it

    Any insight on this would be great!

    0

    An old boss of mine has agreed to provide me a LOR but was asking for some guidance on the finer points like:

  • the recipient address

  • should they use the letterhead from their personal company (I didn't work with them in this company, both of us worked for another company we no longer serve now)

  • how long should the letter aim to be (page/word count)

    • Also if anyone has samples of strong LOR from an employer, I'd love to see them.

    Thanks!

    0

    Confirm action

    Are you sure?