I'm in the early stages of studying for the LSAT, and am planning to sit for the Aug 2024 test, to apply to schools for the F25 semester. I am struggling to understand how law schools will evaluate me, and how I'm supposed to report my GPA, because I went to an undergrad where I didn't receive grades. Instead of grades, for every course, I received a narrative evaluation detailing my class participation, the subjects I wrote papers on, my performance on those papers, and my strengths and weaknesses in the class (for better or for worse). In general, I felt my college performance was good, but it's hard to evaluate because it's qualitative data.

I took classes at other colleges in the area, and did receive 5 grades.

Are law schools going to calculate a GPA based off these 5 grades? Does anyone have experience with this topic? Does anyone have any suggestions insofar as who I could reach out to at LSAC or otherwise for answers?

For this question I picked A, and then B for final. I now know that A is the right answer, but I want to be sure that I understand why I had gotten this wrong.

For a short recap, Oscar's conclusion is "Thus a country's economic well-being will not be a function of its geographical position but just a matter of its relative success in incorporating those new technologies". Here I am thinking okay cool well-being is determined:

Geographical Position --> Incorporating those new technologies

Now for Sylvia, they counter this because they say that it is due to the poor country (the south as mentioned by Oscar), is not able to acquire the $$$ to incorporate the tech. They conclude by saying that it will only "widen the existing economic gap between north (rich) and south (poor)".

So going into the questions, I chose B because I thought that since the poor countries didn't have $$$ for implementation that it would cause the gap. However, I see that A was right because widening the gap meant that the rich prolly wouldn't know how rich they were unless the poor were some amount of poor? However, what does "natural resources" in A mean? Could it mean economic? Oil? I believe that was a part of what tripped me up, but I believe another was the assumption that I made which didn't allow for me to truly grasp Sylvia's conclusion.

Anyone have any suggestions when going into these questions? Or ways that I can improve in NA?

Hey! I am taking the January LSAT and I have been struggling with RC. When I do untimed passages, regardless of difficulty (whether its 1 or 5) I will usually miss like 2-3 questions on like 6 or 7 passages, but when I do a timed section ill miss anywhere from 6 to 9. If anyone is willing to share any tips or tricks they use for RC I would truly appreciate it. I am trying to bring down my RC to around a -4. If you're struggling with LG, I have gotten that down to a consistent -0 and I'll be able to share some tips as well. Please let me know, thank you!

Hi! I know that there are currently only LSAT tests in the beginning of 2024. But does anyone know if they will administer tests during the fall. August and etc.

🔢 I'm currently scoring: 165-170

📆 My planned test date: February 2024

📈 To study, I have been: Have been studying for several months now. My studying has consisted of different methods throughout.

🔑 My goals for this group are: Help each other out with our respective goals. Whether you are new to studying or have been studying for months such as myself, I hope that this space can be used so that we can collaboratively help one another achieve our objectives.

🔍 We'll focus on: Anything and everything!

👥 Study Group Name: TBD

📚 When we'll meet and what we'll do: All messaging and meetings are done via Discord, but time is totally up to the availability of those in the group, it is fluid.

✅ How to join: Feel free to click on the link below to join the server via Discord, and please do message me if you are having any issues either joining the group or creating a Discord account. Like I said above, this group is open to all, from beginners to long-time studiers. I just hope that this study group can help each and every person in it and that we can use this group not only to learn and improve our studying, but also where we can reliably hold each other accountable as we get closer to the test date(s).

We have nearly 50 members in the group now and a nice community forming with daily meetings centered on LSAT studying, so always feel free to join, whether you are a beginner or have been studying for awhile!

https://discord.gg/ddXuAgaF26

Hello,

I'm taking the LSAT again after a break from studying. How can I delete where it shows how many times I've taken a prep test or problem set?

I can't load the question table section under the lsat analytics page. Whenever I attempt to do so, I'm getting a Wordpress error message that says '504 Gateway Time-out'.

I had requested help under the live chat, where I was told to try deleting the cache or switching to a different browser. I have tried both options and it didn't work. I've also tried using other devices, including the 7sage app, but I'm getting the same issue.

Hey everyone,

I am planning on taking the January 2024 LSAT. I have been studying for quite a while now, and am scoring in the range of 152-155. I recently just decided to purchase 7sage due to the overall positive results it has produced for students. I have been PT'ing using 7sage as well scoring within that range, however, I have been scoring between 166-168 on my blind reviews. Here are my averages for each section:

LG: -6/-7 (-1/0 BR)

LR: -9 (-5/-6 BR)

RC: -10 (-5/-6 BR)

One of my overarching issues is pacing. I can't seem to quite get to where I want to be given the time constraint. This usually forces me to skip a LG section, and forces me to miss a fair amount of questions on both RC and LR. Sometimes, depending of difficulty, I may skip a LG section while being about 50% on each answer for another.

From all of this, I would just like to know what I should do going forward with studying. Should I go through 7sage's modules and work each section out? I work about 30 hours per week, and since my graduate classes are completed for the semester, that is really my only obligation as of now. My goal score is to get around a 160. Thank you so much!

Working a LG in the LSAT trainer (p.210), and I need further explanation on why this is the correct answer choice. Specifically Q2. I am including Q1 for context.

Seven coffees - F, G, and H from Brazil, and L, M, N, and O from Colombia - will be showcased on three different displays. One coffee will be displayed by itself on stand 1, and the other six coffees will be evenly split between stands 2 and 3. The following conditions apply:

F is displayed on stand 2

One of the displays will have exactly two Brazilian coffees

L and M must be displayed together

F and H cannot be displayed together

Q1) If O is displayed on stand 2, which of the following must be true?

(A) H goes on stand 1

(B) H goes on stand 3

(C) G goes on stand 2

(D) N goes on stand 1

(E) N goes on stand 2

ANSWER: (C) G goes on stand 2

If Oc is on stand 2, the only place Lc/Mc can go is stand 3. This forces Gb on stand 2, since there needs to be a bb combo, and Hb can't go with Fb.

1: Hb or Nc

2: Fb, Oc, Gb

3: Lc, Mc, Hb or Nc

Q2) Which of the following must be false?

(A) A Brazilian coffee is displayed by itself

(B) A Colombian coffee is displayed by itself

(C) One stand displays only Colombian coffees

(D) Two stands each display both Brazilian and Colombian coffees

(E) No stands displays only Colombian coffees

ANSWER: (E) No stands displays only Colombian coffees

For (E) to be true, each stand must have at least one Brazilian coffee. However, this cannot be true. Therefore, (E) must be false.

My thinking... If I take the diagram I used to answer Q1, which is

1: Hb or Nc

2: Fb, Oc, Gb

3: Lc, Mc, Hb or Nc

and I assume Hb is on stand 1 and Nc is on stand 3, I get

1: Hb

2: Fb, Oc, Gb

3: Lc, Mc, Nc

which follows all the rules, and has a stand that displays only Colombian coffees. So how is the answer choice, "No stands displays only Colombian coffees" - MUST BE FALSE?

I appreciate the help. I promise I am joining 7Sage after I finish the LSAT trainer. Thank you!!

I have probably taken 5 practice test up to this point after having finished the curriculum and I am starting to feel defeated. My first test I scored a 162 and BRed to get a 169, which I was very happy with. Since that test, my average has been a 156 and I don’t know what happened. I feel confident when answering and then get my score and feel like I know nothing. Is this a normal thing when beginning prep tests? I have four months left of studying, so I am trying to gain advice from others!

How many practice tests is too many to take in the span of a week? I have registered for the January LSAT and have only started studying Oct 30. Which will give me 2 months and a week of prep, which I know is not ideal. I have completed all power score bibles, so I have been doing their logic games workbook and doing random sections. Because of my limited time, would doing more than 1 practice LSAT a week hurt more than help?

For people who are preparing the LSAT and plan to take it after August 2024, that the original LG section will be replaced by an additional LR section, how is everybody utilizing the PTs? Since the PTs are past exams, they include the LG section. But LG will not exist in the exam anymore starting August next year. But if we simply skip the LG section when doing the PTs, our scoring will not be an accurate reference. What are people doing to overcome this?

Hi, please offer your advice! I have now finished LR and RC core lessons - I have no more lessons next. I have decided to take no LG August version, so still have -AMPLE- time to study. I am currently scoring in the low to mid 160's (last PT I scored a 164) and my dream score is 170+. I am extremely determined to get into a T6-T14 and have allocated the time to get my score where it needs to be.

My question is - now that I have finished all the core curriculum... what's next? Should I focus on drilling LR and then RC, work on my problem areas, then begin regularly PTing? Should I switch to books, then go back to 7sage in a few months? I have the Loophole book ready to read. Should I wait to consistently PT until the beginning of Spring to save my tests for when I'm more ready and closer to test date? Should I be focusing on drilling everday? Redo the lessons?

Really just asking what your next steps would be / what your study plan would look like. Any advice is helpful, thanks and good luck to you all!

[I am posting on behalf of a 7Sage user. Please feel free to leave your comments below. Thank you for your help!]

Hi, could someone please explain this question to me? I didn't understand the video.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-32-section-1-question-16/

I know there’s a lot of similar posts on here, but I was able to increase my score from a 155 on my initial diagnostic to a 171 on my first LSAT with 2.5 months of 7sage, so I thought I’d share which strategies helped me the most. Figure this will be most useful for anyone else out there who speeds through tests and reading, as that was my biggest Achilles heel.

History – I decided to apply to law school over the summer, in early July, so I was already very under the gun in terms of timing. I mapped out the studying and application process and decided that I would need to take the October and November tests, and could maybe take the January test to help get off a waitlist. That left me exactly 3 months until the October test. The first thing I did was order the Kaplan LSAR Prep book and then take a diagnostic test – which was a 155. Like many people, Logic Games was my kryptonite – I think I truly finished the first 9 questions before time ran out and guessed on the rest. I started studying via Kaplan, and started to pick up on the games a bit, it sort of helped, but not enough. I took a second PT via lawhub and got another 155, and was not feeling great about the progress so far. Then I spoke to someone who recommended 7Sage. I’d already been thinking something interactive and digital would be more helpful, specifically for explanation videos and being able to pay attention to what I did wrong, and so the timing lined up perfectly. With 2.5 months to go, I started on the 7sage learning paths and started triaging what of the syllabus I would be able to cover in that time frame. I was studying about 20-30 hours per week, and so I figured I could do most of LG (since that was my weak point), pick and choose my way through LR, and do the RC one if necessary (ended up being very necessary, which I’ll get to later).

I started with, and probably spent the most time on, LG. I think with LG, it really just comes down to reps. You can’t shortcut that. The more games you do, the more you start to memorize the inferences you have to make, and I could literally catch myself remembering an inference from a similar type of game mid-section. However, I definitely have a bias for speeding through things – a theme throughout my LSAT studying. I had to learn to slow down – practice doesn’t make perfect, perfect practice makes perfect. For me, that meant that I needed to stop and review each game (seems obvious but like I said I speed through things) and TRULY understand each inference, and make sure I understood each question (why the correct answer was right, and why the wrong answers were wrong). One thing I started doing towards the end was printing out 5 copies of each game I got a wrong answer on, and then completing them and reviewing each one in depth afterwards. This really helped, and if I could go back and do it again I would absolutely have done this from the beginning. I’d probably just start out printing out 1 star games early, move to 2 star games, 3 star, etc – and use this to supplement the syllabus work. This process allowed me to get to the point where I was consistently around -0, -1, 2. I truly learned to enjoy the LG section, and as weird as it sounds I think I’ll miss not doing those games every day. Sort of sad to see them go too.

Initially, I felt very solid around RC. It’s just reading right? But, like I said I have a tendency to speed through things. I eventually realized my scores were not improving, and I was anywhere from -6 to -9 on most PTs. That was when I dove into the RC syllabus, which absolutely helped change the way I looked at RC. But the biggest mindset shift for me was just slowing the hell down while I was reading. Shifting from finishing the passages in 1:30 to finishing in 3:30-5 minutes is what really helped. It felt like I was wasting valuable time that I could be spending returning to the passages to hunt for details and to rule out incorrect answers, but the scores just spoke for themselves. This way I was consistently able to get around -3, and there was just no arguing with results. I was better able to remember those details and where they could be found, and understand different perspectives and tones throughout. JY’s syllabus material about the low-res summaries helped a lot too – for me, when I first heard this, I started focusing too much on the detail of the passage in the low-res summaries, before shifting to focus on the argument format. Focusing on how the argument was structured helped me answer the questions around the main point and structure of the argument, and slowing down already helped a ton with finding the specific details. I also limited how much highlighting/underlining I was doing – I read somewhere online that sometimes we use marking up passages as a method of saying “I”ll come back to this later,” but when you’re reading a timed passage like this, you don’t have the time to do this. So I tried to focus on just reading, the only other thing I let myself do was write down the 1-2 word low-res summary. Also, RC is another area where reps matter a ton. I absolutely hated doing them everyday, but doing a few passages a day paid off. Doing entire sections at a time was too stressful to do daily for me, so I started doing one passage at a time (timed), and then 2 at a time, then 3 at a time. This got me much more comfortable with the timing (I would also time how long I spent on each passage just reading), and the volume helped me start to pick up on trends across passages. By the end, I was much more naturally acknowledging, as I read, changes in tone or who’s argument this paragraph’s is. I also think re-doing passages from PTs was a worthwhile exercise. I don’t think you can truly understand where you went wrong on an individual question unless you re-do the whole passage. Time consuming, but worth it.

LR was probably the section I spent the least amount of time on, to be frank. I used the syllabus to cover most of the question types (but didn’t really finish any of them after the first few). The biggest bump on LR for me came as a result of the changes I made in RC. Slowing down, and really engaging with each sentence of a passage made a world of a difference. Your work on RC and LR really aid with the other, so I guess the new LG-less LSAT will be at least a more focused study. I never struggled with time on LR like I did with RC and LG, and I found myself consciously forcing myself to slow down. When I realized how slow I could go, I started picking up on things I wouldn’t have otherwise picked up on, eliminating all 4 wrong answers (previously I’d speed through and eliminate 2-3 wrong answers and rush through, ending up with time remaining at the end). Reps were huge in LR for me too, just re-doing all of the PTs I did made a big difference. Like the rest of the test, there are trends in right answers and wrong answers they like to throw out. You really can’t beat just doing and re-doing hundreds and hundreds of questions.

As far as my testing methodology, I was extremely impatient and struggled with the blind review because I wanted to know my score so badly. Eventually I realized if I just looked at the score to satisfy that urge, I could then go set up each section as a drill and re-do it, and that was totally worth it. So, long way of saying blind review is great and totally works, I just needed to see the number, so I found a work around.

All in all, this is just what worked for me, I realize some of this may not provide much help to others. I think if you’re someone who naturally moves quickly through tests and has a tendency to skim while reading, this is probably more relevant to you than to anyone else. That’s the biggest moral of the story for me, forcing myself to slow down made a crazy big difference. Even if you don’t move too quick, the repetitions of the same games in LG will be helpful, that helped me speed up on some of the tougher games. So anyways, go slow, do a ton of reps, and review each wrong answer very carefully. And 7Sage is awesome. Hope that helps!

One last thing – don’t ignore the mental hurdles you go through. I bombed a PT 9 days before the October test and freaked out, felt like I was having a full blown panic attack. I realized I was studying way too much, specifically timed sections, and was just constantly stressed out. I took the next few days off, and didn’t do any more timed work before the test, and it turned out pretty well. So as much as you absolutely need to work hard and push yourself, when stress is really creeping in, take the time off. Do something fun and de-stress. I pushed myself HARD in those 2.5 months, and wouldn’t necessarily recommend it. My strategies were solid, but they would have been way better over 3-4 months instead.

Could someone please explain this to me more. Thanks!

Earlier PTs all have a skipped section. What's that about?

I am just curious about what kind of device the in person test is taken on now. Is it just a basic computer or something that I might not have much experience with.

Working my way through the CC, and right now on LG. Should I do the board setup and questions before watching the videos? It feels more active learning to me that way whereas just watching the videos would be passive, but I also don't want to take on bad habits. Any advice?

The only reason why I didn't choose D is because I thought M won't consider the renaissance era disruptive...please #help

Hey! I didn't get diagnosed with ADHD until my final semester of my undergrad. I graduated with a 3.1 GPA and was wondering if I should write an addendum explaining my diagnosis? My first semester GPA was a 3.0 (took all 100 level classes), second semester GPA 2.6, summer semester GPA 2.8, third semester GPA 2.3, fourth semester GPA 2.7, summer semester GPA 3.1, fifth semester GPA 3.0, sixth semester GPA 3.7, seventh semester GPA 3.6. I also changed my major after my second semester.

Looking for a study buddy in Korea to polish games down to -0 & get LR/RC down to consistent -2 before June.

I have a 2.0 cumulative LSAC gpa but my degree summary gpa is a 3.25. I attended previous institutions like community colleges and another four year school. I am currently a senior and I am graduating this spring 2024. I took the lsat last month and got a 140. I was hoping to get it up to at least a 150 on this upcoming January exam, but I feel like in my case a 150 wouldn't even help. I am feeling very discouraged and depressed about my overall chances of getting into any law school with this cumulative gpa. I didn't do well at all my first few years in college and I had to do some soul searching and figure out what I wanted to do with my life and these past two years I have improved my grades and overall academic trajectory. I know I could write an addendum and explain why my gpa is the way it is but I feel hopeless because its a 2.0. Can anyone offer any advice or wisdom for my situation.

I'm having a lot of trouble understanding the stimulus's support for [A] being the correct weaken answer.

I eliminated it because the skeptics never said that it was just the bottom layer that was contaminated; they just say "the samples were contaminated" so I thought that they were referring to the entire collection, which would include the upper layer. The skeptics never differentiated between the uppermost and lower samples for their hypothesis, so AC [A] doesn't seem to weaken their hypothesis at all.

How can I infer that they're excluding the uppermost samples in their hypothesis? Is it because the stimulus says that the uppermost samples are dated to the present and therefore couldn't have been contaminated by the old carbon?

Hi. I am an admission consultant specializing in college and graduate school admission for international students. I have dealt with many students from China. I think it is helpful to address a few talking points I see posted on forums on why international applicants have a disadvantage when applying to American law schools.