Discussions

All posts

New post

549 posts in the last 30 days

This is not really helping me to diagnose weaknesses: I got 7/7 in one 4-star Law RC and missed 2 on a much easier Law RC on the same Pt.

AND: the harder one was the final section of the RC and the final section of the test so in theory I should have been more tired. So I can rule that out as a possible explanation.

Not really a question; it's just kind of mystifying!

0
User Avatar
•

Saturday, Jul 30, 2022

bboyavb947

The PT 90+

Hi 7sage,

I have been scoring between 160-163 on most of the PTs. On all of the PTs 80s I have score above 160 and up. Average is 161. But every time I do the PTs above the 90s, the newest ones from 2020, I always score in the upper 150s.

My question is: are the PTs in the 90s unusually harder? The RC section in PT 91 is mind-blowing hard and it felt abnormally harder than any other PT I have ever taken.

Thanks!

0

This question is a little complicated to parse because their are two agents in the discussion, the nation who may attack (Potential Aggressor [PA]) and the nation who may be attacked (Target). Clarifying who is who helps set up the lawgic from the stimulus.

In the stimulus you get:

PAs having Fear of Retaliation implies that PAs will hesitate to attack (PAFR -> PAHesitate)

PAFR also implies that PAs are deterred (PAFR -> DetersPAs)

You also get this, which is very unweildy:

if PA thinks Target has great retaliatory power then PA thinks it CANNOT defend itself

(PAThinkTargetHasRetaliatoryPwr -> /PAThinkCanDefend)

an inference we can make right away is:

if /PAThinkCanDefend -> PAFR

if PAs think they CANNOT defend against retaliation then PAs have a fear of retaliation

Now we apply valid argument form 3 - Transitive:

PAThinksTargetHasGreatRetaliatoryPwr -> /PAThinkCanDefend -> PAFR -> DetersPAs & PAHesitate

Is there an answer choice that leverages the first step in order to optimize the final step? D does.

D: if you want deterrence, tell everyone about your great retaliatory power (because of the lawgic from the stimulus).

A: says "DeterPAs -> /PAThinkCanDefend" which confuses the given sufficient and necessary elements

B: says "PAThinksPA(self)HasGreatRetaliatoryPwr -> DetersPAs" and the stimulus doesn't say anything about that first part

C: assumes nations always attack unless deterred, which common sense indicates is probably false (hopefully) But aside from real world knowledge, it says "if PAHesitate -> /PAThinkCanDefend" (if PA hesitates then PA thinks it can't defend against retaliation). What we can say is that SOME PAs that hesitate were deterred. This answer choice is the same as A in its error.

E: We don’t know that retaliatory force has to be GREATER, only that it has to be “so great that a potential aggressor nation would have reason to think that it could not defend itself against such retaliation.” Also, superlatives like "maximum" give me pause and seem to appear in false answer choices often.

0

Hey y'all!

Hope everyone is having a great week. I know many of you are waiting for your June scores, and so this week I wrote about what to do while you wait-- I hope it's helpful! You can find the newsletter here: https://7sage.substack.com/p/youve-taken-the-lsat-now-what

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

If you'd like to talk to one of our tutors before getting started, you can find free consultations here: https://calendly.com/7sage-consult/7sage-tutoring-free-consult

0

Does anyone have any advice for notetaking/annotation for online LSAT? It seems so much more time consuming to use online functions than to simply underline on a paper test. Just looking for some helpful information before my test.

0

In lesson 2 of Assumption and Weakening questions, J.Y. stated, "Bear in mind that most arguments in real life and on the LSAT do not have a valid relationship." A deeper explanation at this early stage will be very helpful to me. I am particularly interested in the "real-life" side of this argument, but also what this means for the LSAT as I work through this section.

Can someone provide a deeper explanation of this statement?

Admin note: https://classic.7sage.com/lesson/good-v-bad-arguments/?ss_completed_lesson=1003

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

    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

    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

    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,

    Is anyone currently in NY preparing for the June LSAT? I wanted to see if y'all wanted to started a group chat for any last minute preparations. This will also help for anyone who has questions during the cycle this year we can all give support to one another.

    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 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

    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

    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

    Hi everyone,

    I've been studying on my own for about 5-6 months, and I am taking the June LSAT coming up. I just recently learned about 7sage and decided to subscribe in the month before my test. Obviously, I don't have nearly enough time to go through all of the material, which brings me to my question: are there are any lessons that you guys felt were the most helpful - or maybe triggered an "aha" moment in your brain - in each of LG, LR, and RC respectively?

    Currently, LG is my strongest (scoring around 17-21/23) with LR and RC both behind trailing behind (19-20/25 and 20-21/27). Would welcome any advice given the one month timeline I have right now.

    Thanks in advance!

    0

    Confirm action

    Are you sure?