Similarly to how the analytics page will show you your average BR score for PTs, I was wondering if it would be possible to have your average BR per section displayed alongside your average score for each section. I feel like it would be helpful to see the average of how you're doing on BR for each timed section.

relationships

• comparative

• some intersection

• relatas: 

  • cause vs effect

  • paragraph 1 vs 2

  • phenomenon vs hypothesis

• support (relatas: premise vs conclusion)

  • aim: persuasion (subjective)

relationship 2

(clauses linked together to emphasize relationships)

• disjunction

• conditional claims (sufficient and necessary condition)

  • indicators

    • unless

• causal claims (cause and effect)

  • indicators

    • because

• analogies (one thing is like another thing)

  • source vs target clause

  • indicators

    • just as

comparatives

• two things that stand in comparison to each other w one of two coming on top

  • a vs b (what are you comparing)

  • quality/characteristic of comparison

  • identify “winner”

• negative comparatives

• when comparatives have “no” or “not” there may be no clear winner

  • ex: allison is not taller than jake

• implied comparatives

  • no than in the statement

    • ex: tom is feeling better today, cafes are busier during the morning rush

• relative vs absolute

  • comparatives are usually relative without making absolute statements but context can sometimes imply absolute qualities

    • ex: jake is not taller than allison and they play basketball

    • they are likely tall, but it is not absolute

• equivalence

  • i am older than you=you are younger than me

arguments

• an argument consists of premises and a conclusion that aims to persuade

  • support structures the argument, and support depends on assumptions

    • assumptions are a “forgotten” premise that can be subtle

    • less reasonable assumptions render an argument vulnerable to criticism

    • Valid arguments (on the LSAT) require no additional unstated assumptions for the conclusion to follow from the premises.

      • Invalid arguments require at least one necessary assumption.

wonder “what the author wants me to believe” and “why should i believe this”

conclusion indicators (words followed by a conclusion)

• consequently

• therefore

• as a result

• clearly

• it follows that

• accordingly

• we may conclude

• it entails

• hence

• thus

• we may infer that

• it must be that

• it implies that

• that is why

premise indicators (words followed by premise)

• given that

• seeing that

• for the reason that

• owing to

• as indicated by

• after all

• on the grounds that

words that are followed by a premise but also contain a conclusion

• for

• because

• since

types of questions

• Must Be True questions 

• phenomenon-hypothesis

  • causation logic

subconclusion: claim that receives and gives support

• Premise: All dogs are adorable.

• Premise: Fluffers is a dog.

• Sub-conclusion: Therefore, Fluffers is adorable.

• Premise: All adorable things are cute.

• Conclusion: Fluffers is cute.

  • sub arguments make a complex argument

context (used as referent for referential phrase)

• table setting

  • information explaining a premise

• other peoples position

  • an opposite conclusion they claim is incorrect

• concession

  • making the opposing argument before the other can

context transition indicators

• but

• however

• yet

• some people say

concession indicators

• despite

• in spite of

• although

• though

• even though

• even if

• notwithstanding

• while

clause

• subject

  • gerund or noun

• predicate

  • verb/object

subject vs predicate noun modifier indicators

• that

• who

predicate modifier indicators

• of

• by

• in

• for

(where, how, when, why )

predicate object indicator

• the

object clause

• that can be used to make a clause the subject

  • indicator

    • that

  • ex: scientists discovered that the sky is blue

referent

• stands in place of something that appeared earlier

• negative: not that (other/otherwise)

rhetorical questions

• implied declarative statement for dramatic effect (more persuasive)

logic

• formal

  • form of argument matters more than content (valid/invalid)

  • includes

    • conditional logic (sufficient/necessary conditions)

    • logic btwn sets

      • supersets, subsets, intersecting sets, and membership in those sets

  • main concern is what must be true

• informal (typical of reading comprehension

  • all other types of logic

    • causation

    • analogies

    • generalization

    • scientific reasoning

    • rule application reasoning

    • cost-benefit analysis

    • misc

  • subject to be made stronger or weaker

    • how well supported

sets

• set: abstract collection of members

• membership: something belongs to such set

• when a set is inside a set

  • superset: larger one

  • subset: smaller one

sufficiency vs necessity conditions

• subset membership is sufficient for superset membership but not necessary

• superset membership is necessary for subset membership but not sufficient 

• subset is to superset as sufficiency is to necessity

  • if dot is in cat-set, it is sufficient to know the dot is inside mammal-set

  • membership in a mammal-set is necessary for membership in cat-set

    • membership in mammal-set is not sufficient for membership in cat-set (membership in cat-set is not necessary for membership in mammal-set)

conditional argument (formal argument)

• when sufficient condition is true, the necessary condition is also true

• Membership in Set A is sufficient for membership in Set B. X is a member of Set A. Therefore, X is a member of Set B

conditional indicators (logical indicators)

• the idea immediately following the conditional indicator is the sufficient condition

  • If X, Y

  • when

  • where

  • all 

  • every

  • any

  • the only

• the idea immediately following the conditional indicator is the necessary  condition

  • only

  • only if

  • only when

  • only where

  • always

  • must

truth vs validity

• truth is property of claims (true vs false)

• validity is property of arguments (valid/invalid)

  • validity: if (or pretend that) all the premises are true, then the conclusion must also be true.

“lawgic”

• → establishes a conditional relationship

  • sufficient condition (left side) to a necessary condition (right side)

• subscripts represent membership of set

  • L^J represents Luke's membership in the set of Jedi.

• conditional argument shape:

  • categorical syllogism

A → B

x^A

____

x^B

OR

• modus ponens

sufficient → necessary

sufficient

____

necessary

Not necessarily a feature request, but I was hoping maybe we could get a LR fast track video for conditional translating, walking through some problems and talking about translating whole problems. It is possible that I missed it, as I used the study plan which does skip some lessons.

Does anybody in OC, CA want to start an in-person study group?? South OC preferably, but down to commute a bit :) LMK!

hi! ive been studying for the lsat for a several months now and am looking for a few people to study with. studying in my head would just look like watching each other do practice questions/sections and give pointers to each other.

i am looking for people who can be consistent because i am trying to see if i can be ready for a test by the 23rd (last day to sign up for feb test). so preferably someone who is studying full-time.

join the group if youre interested <3

Hi all,

I have watch all the curriculum videos. I spent hours and hours and hours since June. I still be PT'ing at 135. My goal is to get 160

I have a few questions:

1. What am I doing wrong?

2. I don't want to watch any more videos. I'm sick of them (no offense) should I just drill from now on?

I just need advice.

Listen and subscribe:

Apple Podcasts | Spotify

In this episode, Bailey and Henry walk through the three habits that transformed their own RC performance and that they now teach to students aiming for 170+. You’ll learn how to orient yourself with the main point, recognize wrong answers immediately, and spot the key ideas that drive each passage. These are habits anyone can build with the right practice. Whether you’re rebuilding your RC foundation or fine-tuning for the next test, this episode will guide you step-by-step.

Hi everyone! I'm a senior at Washington State and am taking the February, potentially postponed to April, LSAT. As a student with ADHD and dyslexia, I'd love to connect with other students sharing similar learning styles. This exam can feel quite daunting without a learning disability, so adding in that factor can really be discouraging, but I know it is not something that will hold me back from my success. Feel free to contact me on 7sage for my personal contact.

When in blind review mode, the "I" icon at the top tells you why the question was selected- changed answers multiple times, took longer than target time, answered incorrectly etc. I feel this gives information that can cause errors in the validity of your blind review score. Is there a way to hide the option of have those details available while doing the blind review? I don't want to know why the question was selected or even have the option of knowing why until after I have completed the review.

Thank you so much for taking our feedback!

Anyone from the Ottawa area? I want to start studying with people.

When blind reviewing a Preptest, it would be helpful to have the option to blind review and check answers after each section rather than having to complete all four sections before being able to see the answers. I sometimes can't get to blind reviewing the whole test in one day because of time constraints in my schedule, so by the time I've finished blind reviewing all four sections, a few days may have passed, and within those days the only type of studying I've done is redo-ing the questions without getting a chance to learn from the mistakes, and it's easier to forget why I made the decisions I did the more time has passed. For me, it's less important to see an "updated BR score" than it is to use the BR process for direct learning.

Does that make sense? Anyone else with limited time in their schedule feel like they might benefit from something like this? Also, my apologies if this functionality already exists and I don't know where to find it!

To J.Y. and team: thank you for constantly updating the platform. 7Sage has been a tremendous resource in my studying.

Hello all, my name is Kaia and I am 28. I am in California so everything would be PDT based for timing. I plan on taking the LSAT in April next year and I learn better talking through questions and reviewing with others. I was wondering if anyone would be down to set up a small study group of like 3-5 people with me to do drill practice in the evenings typically around the weekend or whenever we can make work. This would be focused on accuracy in the logical reasoning section currently as I am still getting down a lot of the fundamentals, and speed would come later. We could set up a simple discord server or whatever works. Feel free to reply and maybe we could set something up!

Is PT131 on the harder side compared to other PTs?

What’s up, I’m building a tight, high-accountability LSAT study crew focused on LR + RC improvement. I’m testing Jan 10, but open to Jan/Feb/March test-takers who are consistent, serious, and want to grow.

About Me:

Current PT: ~148 and rising (LawHub/7Sage)

Strengths: breaking down logic in real time, mapping RC passages, live feedback

Weaknesses: timing, drilling key LR types

Schedule: rotating work shifts, but can do 4 sessions/week (mix of afternoons/evenings, can coordinate)

Looking for Partners Who:

Can commit to 4x/week, 1–1.5 hr sessions

Are comfortable thinking out loud, open to pushback, and want to get better (not just “be right”)

Know the basics (argument structure, major LR types, RC flow)

Want a small, consistent group (Houston area or virtual)

Session Format:

Quick warm-up

Timed LR/RC drill

Breakdown & live feedback

“Hot seat” — everyone explains their logic and gets real-time critique

DM Me With:

1. Your test date & PT range

2. Biggest LR/RC struggles

3. What you want from the group

4. What you bring (energy, structure, humor, whatever)

We’ll do a quick intro call, lock in core times, and get to work. Let’s break plateaus and get those scores up.

You can also DM me at Founder@TheNarrativeProjectHouston.onmicrosoft.com

Hello, Im unfortunately experiencing above mentioned error. I reached out to LSAC directly and they advised to reach out to 7Sage as they see matching email addresses. Could you please look into this? I do not recall having another 7sage account.

I started with a diagnostic of 165 in May and scored a 180 on the November exam. I offer personalized coaching (45$ per hour), group lessons as well as a free 45 minute consulation. My tutoring style focuses heavily on the reasoning presented in the argument and why an answer is correct.I am currently looking to take on 3-4 students and am willing to create personalized rills, lesson plans for your custom needs. Please reach out to me on 7Sage

is this possible or is it pure luck

I've been stuck in the low 160s for months--since August actually. I kept drilling and scored a 163 on my November exam. I took a month off before getting back on the LSAT train, and I scored this after not touching the LSAT for a month. Praise God!

For those who remain in a plateau: Keep going. It will eventually click.

Hello, I just took the November 2025 LSAT and scored a 147. This was a little confusing because I was pting in the mid 150's before I took the exam. I have decided to take the January LSAT before applying this cycle and was wondering if anyone has any tips on how to improve in the next four weeks, specifically reading comprehension. Thank you in advance!

Hey y’all,

Just saw a post in the discussion section advertising a perfume brand? Almost certain the post was AI generated. Are there ways to report these posts or get rid of them?

Thank you!

Hi everyone — I’m hoping to get some advice about building stamina for the accommodated version of the LSAT.

I receive 50% extended time and stop-the-clock breaks, so my sections are 53 minutes each and the whole test ends up being about 4 hours. I’ve been taking full practice tests under realistic conditions, but I’m finding that my accuracy drops noticeably in the second half of the test. Even when I’m well-rested, I start to feel mentally drained after the second section, and my focus slips especially on LR and occasional RC passages.

I’ve been practicing with the same timing I’ll have on test day and taking the 10-minute breaks between sections, but I’m still struggling to maintain consistent performance across all four sections.

Has anyone found effective ways to build stamina specifically for an extended-time LSAT?

I’d love advice on:

• How to structure practice tests (e.g., whether to split sections or always do full-length)

• How to use the between-section breaks and stop-the-clock breaks strategically

• Whether to do “back-to-back section” stamina training on off days

• Any adjustments to study schedule that have helped others with 50% extra time

I’m seeing strong Blind Review scores (around 170 on my last PT), but my real-time performance drops by ~5–7 points, and I suspect stamina is a big part of it. Any tips or experiences would be super appreciated!

If you use "Show summary" for PT159, you'll see some highlights that are clearly incorrect.

That's because we haven't written the explanations yet! So please ignore those highlights until you start to see accompanying text explanations.

(Explanations should be up in about 1 week!)

I was just wondering if anyone else is dealing with this issue? Every time I pause a video on this platform my screen goes black. This is extremely troublesome, because when I pause the video it is to take a second to understand diagrams or answer choices. This never happened to me before on the classic 7Sage website. I'm not sure if it is because I am using safari or what?

I'd really love to just pause the video and the screen stays where I pause it at.

Hi Everyone! I know someone posted about an Atlanta study group a few months back, but I'm hoping to get some folks together in the ATL metro area to study either in-person or online or both! I am planning on taking the test either in February or April 2026. I've already taken it twice and this is gonna be my last time, so I'm not registering for it until I feel 95% confident I'll get the score I want (mid-170s). I work full time but have a flexible schedule, so I'd probably organize weekend meetups and maybe a few weekday ones too. I'm in my mid-20s and work in public interest law at the moment in case that's relevant to folks :)

I will be taking my first LSAT in January, having said that, I have not done the argumentative writing part of the LSAT (opens December 30, 2025). What would you all recommend? should I do the writing before the LSATS or can I take it after my test (2, 3 days after test).

I personally want to take it after the LSAT, but I don't know if its a good idea to take it after. Would taking it after will delay my LSAT results? I am planing to take it within 2,3 days after my LSAT (if i go this route).

I want to apply to schools, the day of the results lol. If taking it after the results would delay the results, please let me know and help me out.

I am first gen and don't know who to ask.