Discussions

All posts

New post

608 posts in the last 30 days

Hey all, I've heard various things about RC becoming increasingly difficult over recent tests and wondered if anyone who has recently taken an official test can attest to this? Do the 156+ (previously 90s) tests or the 148-155 (previously the 80s) mirror the current test?

0

Hello 7Sagers,

I’m going over my last PT— 65– and in section 1 Q 16, there’s a sufficient assumption question with a bi-conditional premise. I understand it now, but it was a major time sink on the PT because I froze up. Can anyone think of other questions like this one? It seems cookie-cutter, so I’d like to practice a little more, and it’s too specific to filter in the Question Bank.

Thanks!

0

Hello everyone! I am based in Los Angeles and am looking to form a study group where we can all take the same PT, and then meet once a week or once every 1.5 weeks to blind review it together over Zoom, etc. Ideal score range for members would be people currently PTing in the 160s and looking to get into the 170s as that is where I am at. I made a discord, so if anyone would like to join please feel free and we can discuss! hhttps://discord.gg/bpaD7cxV

Also please let me know if the link doesn't work.

0

Hi all-

I am hoping to negotiate for scholarships with one of the schools I am admitted to. It is equally ranked with another school that offered me a partial scholarship, so I think I have good grounds to go off of. Is it common practice to do this with a formal written request, or can I ask via email or even over the phone?

Thanks!

0

Wondering if anyone else has this issue of answering then doing blind review and your first answer is right but you then doubt it and overthink and choose a wrong one. How much does intuition play into this test

0

Hi - taking the LSAT this Sept looking to join / start a study group with people in the area. Lower Manhattan preferred! (Particularly for August since I'll be gone most of July actually)

0

Hi folks,

Im new to this whole lsat business. In fact, I've been putting off starting studying because...we'll, frankly, I'm not entirely sure what to do? I took a diagnostic and got a 163 but im not sure where to go from there. Do I just start drilling? I understand the basic logic behind the questions just fine, I think. Its just a good number tripped me up, so I dont think I need introduction to the base concepts.

0

My last 4 pt's have been on average a score of 159. The law school I want to go to has a median lsat of 159. Should I keep PT'ing over the spring and summer and take the test in September and apply in October of this year? At what point would I want to get my recommendation letters and other loose ends of my application tied up? What scores should I be seeing before I stop PT's and sign up for the real thing? Thanks

0

How will 7Sage be affected by LSAC maintenance scheduled from 7/11 - 7/13 and 7/24 - 7/28? Will we still able to practice test / drill? If not, what can we do to ensure we have study material during these outages in service?

0

I take my LSAT next week, and I am in the low 160s at the moment. The literal only things on logical reasoning that is keeping me down are the conditional and causal reasoning questions. Are there any specific lessons from the syllabus that anyone found really, really helped with these? I know I could just rewatch all of them but due to my limited time I want to make sure I'm really prioritizing what matters here. Thanks! Good luck everyone

0

If anyone wants to plan one or two nights a week for the upcoming tests of June 2025, August 2025, or beyond, I am testing in the 170s and would be willing to have people over to study, eat, and talk. Let me know if anyone is interested, I live in Linda Vista, under USD.

0

Location: Virginia and D.C area

Looking for forming a study group for the upcoming LSAT dates, comment below and I will review and reach out to everyone. I will check this discussion post at February 25th. Lets tackle this exam and build our skills together!

0

Here is my analysis of the answer choices. Grateful for commenting on my thoughts, please! Thank you!

(A): Both disagreed. Cynthia - the reason to be funded by Gov is to further theoretical knowledge not unforeseen practical applications. Luis - the "expected" to yield practical applications in the stimulus is more definite that "may have unforeseen.." in AC.

(B): Luis disagrees; Cynthia - not known because we don't know what project does she think the Gov should not fund. In the stimulus, we only know Cynthia would agree that the government should fund researches that further the theoretical knowledge, but that does not mean the Gov should not fund projects that have practical application.

(C): Luis - not known because the only thing we know from stimulus is "Gov fund projects --> research that is expected to yield practical applications" (ie. every gov funded research should have practical application), but that does not mean that every research that has practical application should be funded by Gov. As for Cynthia, I am confused because I am not sure if "research project in theoretical science" in AC is equivalent to "research project seeks to further theoretical knowledge of nature" in the stimulus. But in either way, the AC should be eliminated.

(D) Not known because we don't know if the new technologies will help further theoretical knowledge of nature or yield practical applications

(E) Cynthia agrees and Luis disagrees.

Are my interpretations correct?

Thanks!

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-50-section-2-question-14/

Admin edit: title and link

0

Confirm action

Are you sure?