How does the score conversion work? Like if only 3 sections count, are they accounting for the fourth that we take, assuming we don't take it 'simulated modern'? Or do they just completely not count the experimental section as the actual LSAT would?

Hi all!

My understanding is the following:

However, when "or" means "and" in a sentence, do we follow Group 3 rules? How would we write it in Lawgic?

Example: Jane is a faster eater than either Mary or Jon.

Thanks in advance!

Why is the answer to this question C and not B?

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

I just started studying 2 weeks ago and took 2 PT so far and scored 144. Somewhat discouraged but hoping that it’s just because I’m new to studying. I’ve been mainly working on LG and feel I need help with all 3 sections but open to any if anyone wants to study together. I’m hoping to at least get a 155 by the September LSAT.

This was a toughy

Admin note: For the community to better assist you, please include PrepTest number, section number and question number in the following format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of question"

Hello! I took a look at putting things into CAS, but for some reason it doesn't have a level for community college or associates? All I see is Bachelor's, Graduate, and Law but the only thing the community colleges could give out were associates. What should I put for this?

Hey guys, I added the other LR section to my PT this week, and I came across this question. It was a complete confidence error, and I felt pretty strong about the answer I picked. In other words, I don't see how A isn't correct nor how B is correct.

Breakdown of stimulus: Since our calendar system is stupid, certain important holidays don't fall on the same day of the week each year. If the last day of the year and the extra day added at the end of the year every 4 years didn't belong to a week, some of these scheduling problems could be fixed.

What I am looking for: We need an answer choice that shows that a scheduling problem would still exist.

Answer A: What's wrong with this? If you anniversary falls on the day that doesn't have a week or on the last day of the year (12/31), doesn't that create a problem during the years with an extra day? Would the extra day be 12/32 or still considered 12/31?

Answer B: I don't see how this would be a problem. Just don't work every 7th day. How does the new schedule create a problem here?

Answer C: So what? They just have to attend a certain number of days of school.

Answer D: So what? This is completely fixed, I think since holidays will be on the same day every year.

Answer E: Why can't you plan ahead with the new schedule?

....Hi I know there is an addendum that we can explain everything what happened during gap years, but unofficially would many gap years + withdrawals from classes be frowned upon?

My GPA is around 3.6 and I am not even sure if I can dream of T10 with these on and off situations...

Just made a discord group for those interested! here is the link

https://discord.gg/FzmNZy4u

I don't get how (a) can strengthen the argument. It says "several species of shellfish and seabirds in the North Sea waters.." but how can being in the North Sea help the conclusion? Isn't it also possible that those shellfish and seabirds died because of the distemper virus, not the pollution?

Economic growth -> Increase agri (+ keep biodiversity) -> abandon conventional agri

Conclusion Econo growth -> abandon conventional agri/modify agri

SA?

A. Increase biodiversity -> /Increase agri

Increase agri -> Reduce biodiversity this is not what the stimulus is saying so non sequitur.

B. This would place biodiversity back in the loop and make it relevant by connecting the pieces of the structure

C. But this is alr listed in the stimulus

D. We dont know this

E. Modify agri -> increase agri this flips the lawgic

I did poorly in undergrad (but at a good school- Lehigh) largely because I got sick and was dealing with my illness for several years. I scraped through with a 2.1 average (though about a 1/3 of my credits were transfer credits because I had to withdrawal several times and attended other schools). I went on and decided to go to get my MBA which I did from a pretty good school (Fordham) and graduated near the top of my class with a 3.72 average. Am I screwed because of my undergrad despite having done much better and at a much higher level of academic rigor? I've heard that they largely weight undergrad because its part of ranking criteria ect.

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

Hello everyone,

I was wondering if anyone could tell me whether or not it is possible turn off the green check marks that show your progress in the syllabus? Thank you for your help!!

Hi everyone,

I am hosting a 2 month LSAT accountability sprint. What does this mean?

We will create a group and for 2 months we will: keep each other accountable with LSAT studying by coworking on a regular basis and scheduling check-ins.

Weekly Check-ins:

Time-block coworking:

I will host time-block coworking sessions every day. At the start of each time block we will do a short check-in to discuss our goals for that time block. During these time-blocks we will NOT review questions together or have test review sessions. We will simply do our own thing and co-work.

Time blocks:

9-11AM EST (daily)

1-3PM EST (daily)

7-9PM EST (daily)

Discord Community:

If interested, ping me for the discord link.

When does this start?

As soon as we get a solid and committed group going.

Hi, so I've been having trouble building a consistent timing strategy for the RC section. Sometimes, I think I'm taking too long on certain passages but after I blind review I see that I am like 3 minutes faster than the suggested time. A lot of times I could have taken longer to have a higher accuracy rate, but I didn't, unfortunately. How do I know on which passages to slow down on? I use my intuition most of the time. I find that I'm just as accurate on blind review as on the actual drill or test practice but I want to get better and finish the section on time. I hope this makes sense. I just want to improve my accuracy rate as much as possible with a good timing strategy. I would appreciate any advice.

Can anyone explain their reasoning for PT 3 Section 4 Question 20 - will never understand it for the life of me.

Does anyone know of a good way to practice dissecting the different parts of an argument in a question stem? For example, J likes to highlight, circle, label P for premise & C for conclusion, call out context & referential phrases, key words like thus, therefore, etc. I feel like I need practice with this. Does anyone have any suggestions? Do you print out a bunch of questions and practice that by hand? Is that a helpful thing to do?

Can someone help me find the conclusion in this passage? Its prep test B section 4 question 25.

So, I started using the V2 of the CC, and I absolutely love it. This is what I have been wanting and looking for.

It was a great idea to do a lesson on the question type, show a question being done, and then have us try it with a video of the explanation afterwards! This is excellent!

The transcript after the video is an amazing way to reinforce what we just watched. It is also perfect for those who can't watch the video for whatever reason and they would rather have a transcript to read of what was said in the video.

I will edit this when I have more feedback.

I do have a question, for the drilling after the lesson, when is it a good time to move on to the next lesson? How many questions should we get right? Should we do all variations of drills such as easiest, easier, med and so on?

Could someone help me understand how AC E counters the city officials response?

On another note, I have a tendency to want to set off either the sufficient condition, or contrapose the necessary for 'if' statements in order to prove that they will work, but is that even required for a weaken question or is the 'if' possibility of an idea taking place enough to weaken an argument?

Thanks!

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

PT F97.S1.Q18 – Roseville Courthouse

We are asked to identify the point at issue / disagreement between Mayor Tyler and Councillor Simon. Tyler suggested to build a new courthouse for the city of Roseville in 1982 for a price of 26 million dollars, but ‘now’ in 1992 the price of the courthouse is 30 million. Tyler uses these premises to infer that Roseville would have saved 4 million dollars if the courthouse had been built in 1982, as suggested. Tyler also mentions in passing that the existing courthouse has been overcrowded.

Simon responds by bringing in the topic of inflation: The 26 million dollars that the courthouse would have costed in 1982 are equivalent to 37 million in 1992 dollars. Simon takes this to show that Roseville actually saved money by not building the courthouse. Simon also mentions in passing that the courthouse, had it actually been built, would have been underutilized.

There thus are at least two disagreements in this exchange, one much more overt than the other: (1) Roseville was right not to build the courthouse in 1982: Tyler disagrees, Simon agrees. (2) Had the courthouse been built, it would have been put to good use: Tyler agrees, Simon disagrees. The answer choices are tricky in that four of them purport to get at this first disagreement while not actually resolving it. Only one answer choice, the correct one, gets at the second disagreement and actually resolves it:

(A) This gets at Roseville’s actions going forward, does not directly relate to either disagreement.

(B) This gets at the issue of inflation adjusted prices, does not directly relate to either disagreement.

(C) This gets at the extent of Tyler’s responsibility, does not directly relate to either disagreement.

(D) This does get at the second disagreement and points out one issue where Tyler and Simon disagree: Would a new courthouse actually have been needed / been put to good use? Tyler agrees, as Tyler proclaims the present courthouse overcrowded, i.e. insufficient to serve Roseville’s existing population spatially. Simon disagrees; states that a hypothetical larger courthouse would have remained underutilized. The disagreement is subtle, but definitely present.

(E) This confuses the issue of inflation adjustment with financial upkeep, purports to get at the first disagreement but actually misrepresents information from the passage, in an apparent attempt to confuse test takers who did not select one of the previous answers the first time around.

Takeaway: This is a tricky question in that there are two disagreements only one of which gets resolved. The question stem arguably hints at this by speaking of ‘A point of disagreement,’ rather than of ‘The point of disagreement;’ i.e. the question stem leaves open the possibility of multiple disagreements. Nevertheless, this question demands some reflection. Read stimulus and answer choices more than once to get at the nuance of the issues at play. Do process of elimination for the wrong answer choices. If necessary, flag the question the first time around and return to it at the end of the section.

Why is E the better answer when compared to answer choice D? Would really appreciate someone's insight.

I don't think the beta version 2: core curriculum is for me and would like to revert to the original core curriculum/ study schedule (without losing my progress). is this possible? thank you!

Greetings 7Sagers!

We're inviting you to join us every Wednesday, from 4:30 pm - 6:30 pm EDT for a dedicated study session!

Most study groups are a lot of socializing and not a lot of actual work. That might be good for your mental health, but not so much for your LSAT score. This study session on the other hand is about taking care of business. Join us to keep yourself accountable and improve your LSAT score! We will make a bit of space for breaks and camaraderie, but the main thing is to come together, put our heads down, and get our work done!

Whether you're studying for the LSAT or just need a dedicated time and space to focus on your work, this weekly study session is the perfect opportunity to stay on track and make progress towards your goals. Plus, by studying with a group, you'll have the benefit of accountability and support from the 7Sage community.

Joining us is simple. Just head to our events page at https://classic.7sage.com/events/, find this event, and click the blue "watch" button. This event is open to all 7Sage users, including free users. We look forward to seeing you there!

If you have any questions, please comment down below.

Study Session Rules:

The Lounge Room

The Study Room

Video should be turned on. This is the whole concept of a virtual study session. If your video isn't on, you won't feel the same degree of accountability!

Mics must be muted, and participants must be actively studying.