I have a few scholarship essays that need hard review, but are due in a few days. Would anyone be available for last-minute reviewing? Please DM me!

All my recent practice tests have been scores in the low 60s. On average I get -1/0 LG, -8/-5 LR, and -11/-8 RC. I have a learning disability related to reading which is why my RC are so low, and I get accommodations of extra time on the exam to compensate for that. My RC used to be a lot worse but with lots of practice I've really improved. On blind review I usually go up around 3 points total (with the majority of correction on my LR).

I'm trying to get at least a 165 on the exam but preferably higher, so I figured the best way to improve was working on my LR section more. And I'm really trying to improve before the June LSAT since it will be the last time to take it with LG which is my best section. But the problem is even though I get more questions right on blind review the next day, every time I take a practice test I'm still getting the same results. My last 3 PTs have been 161. Maybe it has something to do with time pressure or overload of questions one after another I'm not really sure. I also tried taking more time to really make sure I'm getting questions right before moving on but that strategy completely fails cause I just end up not finishing all the questions before time runs out.

I'm going to keep doing timed drills and practicing but does anyone have any other tips?

hi, i am taking my lsat in june, and recently my game scores have plummeted for some reason, so i am trying to get my scores back up –– when i was doing ok on them, it was right after i did the games part of 7sage, and i guess i was doing like 2 at a time over and over again, but i am wondering if anyone who has super improved on the games noticed which strategy is better (doing the same game a thousand times in a row or like alternating 3 sections over and over again)?

Hello everyone! I took the baseline PrepTest in the beginning of the course, but haven’t yet taken another one to gauge my progress. I’m about 20% through the LR course- how often should I be taking the PrepTests?

For this one I picked E but is it because that its more of background information as opposed to a premise which the answer A is?

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

Can I reapply as first-year student if I’m already attending law school?

Why is B incorrect and E correct? I eliminated E based on the language that "even when those preferences could only be inferred" when the stimulus was really explicit.

If anyone is interested in finding a community of others to study LSAT with, check out this discord server! https://discord.gg/KsVnXeBW

How does everyone use live commentary? I just want to see if it is helpful and in which ways do others find it helpful.

Can someone please explain question 13. It's frustrating there is no explanation available. :(

Admin Note: Edited title. For RC questions, please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# (P#) - brief description of stimulus."

Really want to start seeing improvement in my score and curriculum before my October test. Best tutors?

I'm not sure if I understand the AC right regarding the video lesson, Harrold Foods Hero - Flaw Question (https://classic.7sage.com/lesson/harrold-foods-hero-flaw-question/).

Can anyone #help me understand and identify all the referential inferences in (D)?

(D) taking evidence (1) that a claim (2) is believed to be true to constitute evidence (3) that the claim (4) is in fact true.

evidence (1): ____________.

a claim (2): ____________.

evidence (3): ____________.

the claim (4): ____________.

Here is what I understand:

(D) taking evidence (Belief of most (72%) of consumers) that a claim (Harold foods dominates the market) is believed to be true to constitute evidence (product with more than 50 percent of sales in a market is dominating it) that the claim (Harold foods dominates the market) is in fact true.

evidence (1): Belief of most (72%) of consumers

a claim (2): Harold foods dominates the market

evidence (3): product with more than 50 percent of sales in a market is dominating it

the claim (4): Harold foods dominates the market

Any help is appreciated. Thanks in advance.

I have an LSAT absence on record from February of 2020 when the LSAT was in person...should I write an addendum explaining why?

If you don't get selected for an interview with Harvard, does that mean that you have been rejected?

As someone who just took their first official LSAT in June, I feel confident that 7sage works wonders. I recommend that you volunteer to answer questions as much as possible. Doing this helped the classroom instructors narrow down what I was doing well, and help me define what I needed to improve upon.

The more I showed up to classes, the more the instructors had time to help my specific issues. While the instructors did a great job working with all the students, there is value in being a repeat and active volunteer. As I grew in the courses and classes, I started asking specific questions and getting more specific feedback. Some of the advice I received was absolutely valuable to improving my overall score.

I recommend even if you are feeling hopeless and that the LSAT is a monster, that you volunteer in classes. Do your best to treat it like a part-time job and show up often and on-time. Experiment with each tutor and try out each of their individual approaches. Finally, don't skip over the courses that are Review or Study Plan focused, these specific courses usually had lower classroom attendance, and had more time to give very specific answers to my questions.

I would not have felt nearly as prepared for this test without 7sage. For anyone on the fence, go all in. It's worth it.

Hi everyone. I recently got approved for accommodations on the LSAT but I'm struggling to improve even with 53 minutes. Anyone have any tips? I plan on taking the October LSAT.

When I first look at an LR question and try to map it out with conditional logic, I get the answer wrong often and in the video explanation, JY maps it out completely different than I envisioned. Sometimes, I map out elements that are irrelevant to the argument or I'm creating too complex maps that aren't easily boiled down.

What do I need to review so I can get a better understanding?

Hi all,

I have decided to retake and reapply after being waitlisted at my top choices. My Question is: I got a 166 on the LSAT. Is there anyway to update that on my 7sage account, or would I need to take another PrepTest to get my current to get a tailored "what I need to work on".

Not sure if that makes any sense but I appreciate your insight.

https://chat.whatsapp.com/CK1vYb1s4Ic18ymvnGLyxm

i’m having difficulty with this parallel flaw question. I chose answer be as it has the same logical structure as the stimulus and reasoning. What am I missing?

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

Hello everyone!

My name is Ken. My friends and I host an LSAT study meeting at Gangnam every Sunday. We do not charge to attend this meeting but ask that each participant only pays for his or her usage of the meeting room at the study cafe. If anyone else wants to join, please read the conditions below and send me a message to my inbox! (:

Thanks!

I'm from Mongolia and I currently live in Texas.

I tried my best to find and connect with a Mongolian lawyer practicing in Texas to get some advice. But I couldn't find any. Only found two lawyers but they both live in different states.

In my diversity statement, should I emphasize where I'm from and how not a lot of us go to law school in the US (how I may be the first one in TX)?

Or would that make me a weaker candidate? (for example, the admission officer thinking I won't make it through to the finishing)

Conservative: Socialists study history, and they do so to identify trends that inevitably lead to a socialist future. However, this undertaking is certain to fail, because it is only retroactively that historical trends appear inevitable.

Socialist: Socialists do indeed study history, but the purpose of this is practical rather than theoretical: Instead of trying to identify historical trends that themselves bring about socialism, socialists try to identify trends that inform the kind of work that socialists need to do to bring socialism about. Socialism thus is not the inevitable outcome of historical trends, it instead must be worked towards and deliberately brought about.

Under timed conditions this Point at Issue / Disagreement question had me genuinely confused: The conservative and the socialist agree in maintaining that socialists study historical trends, but they disagree about the purpose that these studies are supposed to serve: According to the conservative, these studies are a purely theoretical undertaking, the socialist deems them practical. This thus would have been the issue to anticipate.

The pertinent answer choices are (A) (“[A] socialist society is the inevitable consequence of historical trends that can be identified by an analysis of history”) and (E) (“Socialists analyze history in order to support the view that socialism is inevitable”).

In the case of (E), we do get at a version of the anticipated answer; (E) gets at the conservative’s portraying socialist analyses of history as purely theoretical undertakings, which the socialist rejects.

(A) is more tricky. If (A) said “Socialists believe that a socialist society is the inevitable consequence of historical trends that can be studied,” this arguably would be a right answer choice: The conservative does ascribe this view to socialists, the socialist does not. However, (A) is a claim in itself, not only a belief that socialists may or may not endorse. In this context, the situation is more straightforward: We have no reason to think that the conservative deems the creation of socialist societies inevitable, and the socialist explicitly denies that they are inevitable. So as it stands, the speakers actually seem to agree that (A) is false. This thus can’t be the point at issue.

Takeaways: It is crucial to distinguish clearly between the two viewpoints here, as well as between facts and beliefs. Do not interpret (A) as a belief that the conservative ascribes to socialists; it is rather a claim that the speakers themselves are supposed to endorse or reject.

How does the correct answer choice interact with the comparison to pharmaceutical drugs? If anything I would think this answer supports the position of the critic #help

PT16.S3.12 – Retina Scanners

This argument deals with retina scanners, machines that scan the blood vessel patterns in people’s eyes and stores these patterns, such that the scanners can recognized previously scanned patterns. The author furthermore posits that no two eyes have identical blood pattern vessels in their retinas, which seems to suggest that any given person has at least two such patterns, one for the left eye and one for the right one. The author then infers the conclusion that “[a] retina scanner can therefore be used successfully to determine for any person whether it has ever scanned a retina of that person before.”

We are supposed to identify a necessary assumption for this argument, i.e. an assumption that must be true for the conclusion to follow from the premises. Under timed conditions, I chose (B), which posits that everyone’s left and right eyes have identical patterns. I took this to be necessary for the conclusion to follow, due to conclusion’s scope (the conclusion is about “for any PERSON who ever had a retina scanned,” not about “for any given RETINA that ever has been scanned”). However, (B) seems to be false, for at least two reasons: (1) (B) goes against the information we get in the stimulus, where we are explicitly told that no two retinas have identical patterns. (2) (B) does not seem necessary for the rest of the claim that the conclusion seeks to establish (“Retina scanners allow you to answer the question, has one of the this person’s retinas ever been scanned?”). To make (B) a necessary condition, the conclusion would have to say something like “Even if you only scanned one of this person’s two retinas beforehand but not the other, retina scanners allow you to determine whether either of this person’s retinas has ever been scanned before.” However, (B) is not necessary for the way the conclusion is actually stated; the conclusion never says that the evidence to consider for any given person is a scan of only one of their retinas, as opposed to two.

The right answer choice (A) avoids this mistake by blocking another possible objection: What if people’s retina patterns change over time? Wouldn’t this make it impossible to recognize past scans later on, contrary to the argument’s conclusion suggests? (A) blocks this possible objection by establishing: Even if people get e.g. eye sicknesses, the patterns in their retinas remain unchanged over time.