Listen and subscribe:

Apple Podcasts | Spotify

This episode dives into how to make sharper, more accurate decisions on the LSAT. Learn how to cut down on wasted time, increase your speed without sacrificing precision, and manage mental fatigue so you can perform at your best on test day.

Can someone please nudge me in the right direction with my personal statement? Mine centers around an event that had a significant impact on me in college. I included elements to give the reader a sense of who I am and how I think, but only one or two paragraphs directly address why I want to pursue law school. If you need more details feel free to message me! Thank you for any advice or feedback. :)

Out of curiosity, are any other Alaskans taking the June LSAT? I'm always seeing the DC/NY/Cali study groups, but the non-contiguous US is woefully underrepresented.

Hi guys so I review my logic games with the 7 sage videos on Youtube, but something I found I have difficulty with is determining or knowing when to use sub game boards. I have found that sometimes I have made them and they dnt require which confuses me. I try to think that of there is a variable that is limited to 2 or 3 positions to create sub game boards, but this has backfired on me a couple times.I appreciate any help or advice! Thank you

I'm having so much trouble identifying necessary and sufficient flaw types in weaken and strengthen questions. I have watched lectures, attempted to go over my notes, and even tried flash cards. If you also had trouble with this, please give me some tips on what worked for you!

I am looking to have a virtual study group for at least 2 hours tomorrow. Game plan is to work on a set of questions slowly and thoroughly, and then test what we learned with a drill set. Focus will be flaw and weaken questions!

Looking for a small group of 2-3 people, 2-4pm EST.

Happy Labour Day yall.

Especially regarding RC, but in general as well! Please post a link if possible!

Thanks.

Can someone please explain?

I’m currently studying inference and must-be-true questions, but I’m encountering a problem that’s making me spend more time on questions than I should. I’m getting the questions right most of the time, but I feel like I confuse myself when I try to diagram the internal lawgic of the stimulus. Has anyone else encountered this issue while studying?

Currently looking for any study groups already existing or else to form one. Message me if interested!

I need a tutor to improve my LSAT.Thanks !

When we violate a principle, are we essentially negating that principle?

PRINCIPLE: If you intentionally misrepresent someone's beliefs, then you do so in the interest of another person.

VIOLATION: If you intentionally misrepresent someone's beliefs, then you DO NOT do so in the interest of another person.

I am basing my example off of LSAT PT 140 S1Q19.

BR Groups for LSAT in February are so fetch!! Thank goodness we all found 7Sage instead of... Kaplan!

Wednesday, Nov 11th at 8PM ET: PT52

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

Friday, Nov 13th at 8PM ET: PT72

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

LSATurday, Nov 14th at 8PM ET: PT53

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

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:

I find myself getting stuck on a lot of weaken/strengthen questions in RC because I just don't know how to approach it. In LR I always tell myself to look for assumptions and overlooked possibilities, and in general think of making the premises less supportive or stronger support for the conclusion, and also staying away from trap answers that independently attack the conclusion or deny premises. However, in RC there's not really clear premises or reasoning so I find it hard to wrap my head around how we're supposed to then strengthen or weaken an author's argument, and whether we should consider ACs that seem to independently go against their position or give an independent reason to strengthen it.

Any suggestions on how to think about these questions?

Listen and subscribe:

Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Audible

As mid-May approaches, Tajira McCoy hosts her latest roundtable with law school admissions leaders from around the country. With law schools receiving the highest number of applications in over a decade, our panelists dive into all matter of questions related to last minute applications, waitlists, holds, and reapplying. If you're on a waitlist, is it advisable to visit the school in question? How many LOCIs is too many? What are admissions officers looking for if you apply in consecutive admissions cycles? All that and more is covered in this roundtable!

I genuinely did not understand the stimulus.

Hello 7 sagers!

My name is Jason. I am looking for LSAT study buddy; I've been studied LSAT more than 8 months(but not consecutively). I ran through other LSAT company's books but improved very few points. (Thank god I found 7sage!!)

I'm prepared for Jun-2015, but I also consider Oct-2015 as well.

Full-disclosure: English is not my native language(which is Mandarin), and I have never been to the U.S.

I live in Taipei, Taiwan (GMT+8).

Anyone who wanna discuss LSAT (via skype) or mentally support each other is welcome.

Or if you live in Taiwan and are fighting for the LSAT, we can fight together.

P.S. If you are likely to be distracted in the U.S. while you study, I suggest you come to Taiwan for some advantages:

1. LSAT June-2015 in Taiwan(Asia-Pacific) is at the end of June, you get two more weeks to prepared.

2. You may not be bothered(or tempted) by your friends and therefore you can focus on your study.

3. Living cost in Taiwan is relatively low, and Taiwan is visa-waived for U.S. citizens.

(3 months for Taiwanese to the U.S., I guess it's same for U.S. citizens.)

Warning: Taiwan is a great place and you may be tempted by food, people and everything you want to explore. In that case, it may cost you an arm and a leg, and then you won't have time studying the LSAT.

Look forward to my LSAT partner, just PM me.

I generally do worse on RC than on LR. The last practice test i was -3 for both LR sections individually and -6 for RC. I juse took a practice test and got -1 and -3 on LR and -11 on RC. I am hoping that this is the bump before it clicks but this is extremely demotivating considering I spend the majority of my study time between tests drilling RC. Any advice or drills are appreciated. I know a problem I have is RC is more fluid and can vary more in the rigidity of the question stimulus relationship, and I cannot deal with that and overthink every answer like crazy. I feel like I can get to -3 or -4 consistently on RC. Timing is not a huge issue but is something I am not the greatest at.

Question withdrawn.

Hi there. I received my Sept LSAT score (167) last night and scored substantially lower than my prep-tests (avg173). I knew walking out of the test that my score would be lower as I screwed up the timing on my RC section pretty substantially and ended up rushing through the last passage, barely reading and answering the questions. My top school is NYU -- I was planning on applying ED and for the RTK scholarship. I am going to retake in December, but this eliminates the opportunity to apply ED and for the RTK scholarship ( I think?).

I guess I'm wondering if there are any other options-- is there any point in applying ED with my Sept. LSAT score and allowing my December score to come in later? Or is it possible to apply to the RTK scholarship with a Dec LSAT score (the application is technically due Jan 1st. but Dec. LSAT score release date is Jan 4th).

Applying as early as possible is something that has been emphasized so much by advisors that I guess I'm feeling apprehensive about a December retake, but I am confident that I can raise my score by at least 3 pts.

Any Advice would be much appreciated.

LR “neutral expression” question

I got right through eliminating the other 4 answers, but I don’t know why answer (c) is correct. Any help would be much appreciated.

Admin note: edited title

Anyone from Surrey BC/ Vancouver who is looking for a study buddy? Online or in person.

Would one W on my transcript taint my applications - particularly for t-14 schools?

PT F97.S1.Q18 – Roseville Courthouse

We are asked to identify the point at issue / disagreement between Mayor Tyler and Councillor Simon. Tyler suggested to build a new courthouse for the city of Roseville in 1982 for a price of 26 million dollars, but ‘now’ in 1992 the price of the courthouse is 30 million. Tyler uses these premises to infer that Roseville would have saved 4 million dollars if the courthouse had been built in 1982, as suggested. Tyler also mentions in passing that the existing courthouse has been overcrowded.

Simon responds by bringing in the topic of inflation: The 26 million dollars that the courthouse would have costed in 1982 are equivalent to 37 million in 1992 dollars. Simon takes this to show that Roseville actually saved money by not building the courthouse. Simon also mentions in passing that the courthouse, had it actually been built, would have been underutilized.

There thus are at least two disagreements in this exchange, one much more overt than the other: (1) Roseville was right not to build the courthouse in 1982: Tyler disagrees, Simon agrees. (2) Had the courthouse been built, it would have been put to good use: Tyler agrees, Simon disagrees. The answer choices are tricky in that four of them purport to get at this first disagreement while not actually resolving it. Only one answer choice, the correct one, gets at the second disagreement and actually resolves it:

(A) This gets at Roseville’s actions going forward, does not directly relate to either disagreement.

(B) This gets at the issue of inflation adjusted prices, does not directly relate to either disagreement.

(C) This gets at the extent of Tyler’s responsibility, does not directly relate to either disagreement.

(D) This does get at the second disagreement and points out one issue where Tyler and Simon disagree: Would a new courthouse actually have been needed / been put to good use? Tyler agrees, as Tyler proclaims the present courthouse overcrowded, i.e. insufficient to serve Roseville’s existing population spatially. Simon disagrees; states that a hypothetical larger courthouse would have remained underutilized. The disagreement is subtle, but definitely present.

(E) This confuses the issue of inflation adjustment with financial upkeep, purports to get at the first disagreement but actually misrepresents information from the passage, in an apparent attempt to confuse test takers who did not select one of the previous answers the first time around.

Takeaway: This is a tricky question in that there are two disagreements only one of which gets resolved. The question stem arguably hints at this by speaking of ‘A point of disagreement,’ rather than of ‘The point of disagreement;’ i.e. the question stem leaves open the possibility of multiple disagreements. Nevertheless, this question demands some reflection. Read stimulus and answer choices more than once to get at the nuance of the issues at play. Do process of elimination for the wrong answer choices. If necessary, flag the question the first time around and return to it at the end of the section.