Do you guys scan the answers or just jump right in and try out games?

I realize this is very game dependent. I usually scan the answers choices quickly, but if nothing jumps out I force myself to jump right into trying out all the answers. I found myself wasting time on open ended game boards trying to think about why an answer choice could be correct, and coming up with nothing for all my "thinking" time. So know I try to just jump right into testing the answers.

Today I came across a game, LSAT 10, Game 4 http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-10-section-2-game-4/, that has me rethinking my strategy. I didn't make the inference at the start that Y must be in, though I DID make the difference that at least one of X/Z must be out. When I got to question 23, I quickly looked at my master game board didn't come up with any that must be in, so just jumped right in to trying out the possibilities. I got through A and B, before scanning the remainder of the choices and quickly realized that Y must be in.

The game took way too long in general, not just because of this question, but still interested in how you guys handle "thinking" about correct answer choices, or just jumping in and trying possibilities.

Hey guys! Is there anyone in Toronto working full time and taking July LSAT that would want to start a study group for PTs and BR?

Hey,

Before confirming for CAS, Step 1 is to "Enter Institutions Attended," and one of the fields requires you to enter in your email address. When I start applying for schools, would that email address be shown to them?

I am going to have a more professional email (IE: First and Last name) address on my resume, but the one that I have under CAS is my gmail one. (It is nothing embarrassing, like the one that Gronk (Patriots' TE) used to have, which is chickslayer69@yahoo.com)

Thanks!

Does anyone have any reviews about this place? I just signed up to take the June LSAT there and I'm a little nervous because I have never heard of the place before. Thank you in advance!

I really don’t understand where this rule ” For conditionals, A and B negates to A → /B ” came from or how it would be applicable to the actual exam. This comes from the Negation skill builder in the Logic of Intersecting Sets module. It was never stated beforehand in neither the negating conditional statements or elsewhere, at least to my knowledge. I understand it intuitively as you’re saying that rather than both A and B being true simultaneously, you’re positing that /B is a necessary condition of A and thus can’t exist together. However, we previously learned about negation of the conjunction “and” in conditional relationships as being A and B → C negated to /C → /A or /B as specified by De Morgan’s law. I guess I’m just struggling to see, how to tell the difference or when/how to use this new rule in context with a question on the LSAT. Is the rule just referring to when you have both premises A and B as part of the argument a way to negate it, is by using that rule. Like I don't see how just A and B can exist on their own in question. I feel like there must be either A and B -> C or C -> A and B included when encountering this in a question. Greatly appreciate any comments or help someone could add!

#Help

I am currently working on writing my personal statement and I am not a great writer, at all!! I have heard many ways to go about topics to discuss, what to include, and what not to include.

Can someone offer any help or advice?!? Possible proofreading and provide unbiased feedback?

I am admitted to a law school with a scholarship. The tuition deposit is due 4/15/2020. I am considering to retake the LSAT again for a better score for a more scholarship consideration. The earliest I can re-take is the March Exam (3/30/2020) but the score will not be released until after the tuition deposit deadline. If I get a better score after making the tuition deposit, will the school still consider giving more scholarship?

Deleted

Hi,

I've noticed that 7sage doesn't have the solved paper Preptest C Feb 2000.

I also saw that a possible BR took place in one of the Study Groups.

I was wondering if someone wants to review RC from PT C together, if there is any place online with explanations, or any resources that could be helpful.

What videos in the syllabus help with learning how to approach and ultimately overcome tuff Inference Q's?

When looking at the answer choices for SA questions would it be OK to immediately eliminate those that begin with only, always, no, etc.?

Scoring in early-mid 150s, BR early 160s. Looking for study buddies and aiming to take March/April LSAT. I am able to meet online. Message if interested! Thanks.

Greetings, 7Sagers!

On Tuesday, January 14 at 8pm ET, join 7Sage admissions consultants Taj McCoy and Dr. Sam Riley for another panel discussion with law school admissions deans from across the country. For this conversation, hear from representatives of Boston College, Catholic University, Howard University, Loyola University Chicago, Loyola Los Angeles, the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, as they weigh in on the state of admissions in January, first waves of admissions offers, application rollover from early decision, and initial scholarship offers. The audience will be able to submit questions on this topic throughout the session via the Q&A widget.

*Note: The session will be recorded and will be posted to our podcast after it's edited for sound quality.

Register: https://7sage.zoom.us/meeting/register/tZEpd-6hqT0jHd3MVnlY3jKRjowne8HcEISr

Have a safe and happy winter break!

Does anyone have a good way to explain flaw/descriptive weakening questions and how to approach them? I am still confused after reviewing all the lessons and doing the practice problems. I always fail to identify the flaw made in the argument and end up getting the wrong answer. It just seems like there are many ways to point out the flaw and there are diff types of flaws, so can anyone share some tips on how you identify them/what helps you to understand the flaw in the argument?? thank you!

I listened to JY's BR call on this question ( https://classic.7sage.com/discussion/#/discussion/21699 ).

I don't get why he was so dismissive of answer choice C -- I would say it weakens the argument. An alternative explanation as to why the artist's face showed up in the painting (other than him painting it himself) serves to weaken the argument that painter of the painting has been determined. And that's what C provides -- his face may be there because the actual painter used him as a live model. I mean, he's an artist, completely reasonable that he would be in the milieu of artists in the area, and was asked by a friend to pose as a live model.

I agree that D more strongly weakens, but disagree with (what seemed to be) JY's position that C doesn't weaken at all.

Admin note: edited title mildly; please use the format of "PT#.S#.Q# - [brief description]"

I am just now attempting to lock into 7Sage, so where do I begin? I have done test prep before but the specific test prep didn't work well for me. I am a bit overwhelmed about 7Sage's study schedule it created me because I have no idea where the drilling and the full practice test come into the study schedule. For context, I am a full time college student who is heavily involved in extracurricular as well. Any help or mock study schedules would be so helpful!

So when did you all start taking the practice tests? Did you first finish the lessons then proceed onto the practice tests?

I get that it's supposed to mimic LawHub's new look for the August 2026 LSAT, but I've gotten so used to the older version and the way its tools are formatted that the sudden change has thrown me off of my study rhythm. For example, I tend to rely on crossing out answers a lot, and it was super convenient when I was able to directly click on that button for each answer I could focus more energy on closely reading my remaining answers. However, with the new format I have to press an on/off button for that option before I'm able to cross off answers, which diverts away a lot of valuable focus I could instead be using on carefully reading the question and answers. I could be overreacting though.

I really wish there was an option to toggle between the old and new versions so I could focus my energy on the questions first and then get comfortable with using the new format's tools later.

Am I the only one that took the September test and that the writing for is not available on LSAC?

Feb Test Takers (or Taking the test tomorrow and a glutton for punishment)

Don’t wait to hit the 70s in January! Be prepared!

Friday, Dec 11th at 8PM ET: PT76

Click here to join this conversation: https://join.skype.com/sdiINq0J9AwI

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

Note:

i was all the way through the old core curriculum when the new version of 7sage came out with all the new prep tests. i have been testing from pt 36 all the way up to pt 61 using the old format but now i want to take pt62-pt94 using the new preptests. however, it doesnt look like the new preptests work that way. would it be okay for me to just continue taking 3 sections of pt 62-94, while adding on an old section for each preptests myself? i like doing the prep tests sequentially, like 62, 63, 64 , 65 etc. i also like how jy ping adds commentary every 4 or 5 prep tests using students live takes and i dont want to lose that.

for someone who has been prep testing sequentially all the way since pt 36, how can i continue to do this while also adding in a 4th section in the most realistic way possible? thank you

I have written three addendums now for different things - the first is for my low undergraduate GPA, the second is for my unemployment gaps in my resume, and the third is for my 13 point fluctuation in LSAT scores. Each one is around two paragraphs long. I am feeling like my application will be overwhelming now to admissions with my multiple addendums, diversity statement, "Why school X?" essay, and personal statement. Does this seem like too much? Any input would be helpful! Thanks.

Hey Feb Peeps! I know the test is this week, but we got work to do!

Wednesday, Dec 2nd at 8PM ET: PT58

Click here to join this conversation: https://join.skype.com/w7McAagFN3pf

Friday, Dec. 4th at 8PM ET: PT75

Click here to join this conversation: https://join.skype.com/sdiINq0J9AwI

LSATurday, Dec 5th at 8PM ET: PT57

Click here to join this conversation: https://join.skype.com/C8Yeac0csm8G

I’ll be there for PT 58, after I stop by at the Pep Rally!

Be sure to click the link of the conversation you’re attending and announce in the comments which group(s) you’re planning on attending.

Note:

Does anyone know where to find more recent tablet stimulated lsats ? I’ve gone through all of 7Sage’s and want more recent test if possible! Thanks in advance

Anyone in Montréal this summer looking for a study group?