I got 4 out of 5 right in this drill but got this particular questions drastically wrong. I selected B and on blind review selected C. I never felt E was correct during the drill or blind review. I do not know what I am not seeing on this particular question. I do not understand why C is incorrect. If 40% in the first group reported awaking paralyzed with a strange presence in the room, wouldn't it be correct to say 60% had not? Or is C wrong, because it only mentioned "strange presence" and excluded "paralyzed" as part of the answer? #help

Would the contrapositive of "If all farmers were to practice organic farming, they would be unable to produce enough food for Earth's growing population" be different from the contrapositive of "If farmers were to practice organic farming, they would be unable to produce enough food for Earth's growing population?"

The only difference is the "all" right before "farmers."

Thanks!

Hi everyone. I am looking for a study buddy to do weekly PT blind review sessions. My average score is 166 currently (LG -0~2, LR -3~5, RC-4~7). Let me know if you are interested.

Prep Test 7 - Section 1- Question 15

I got this answer wrong and was unsure of my answer. Is the correct AC A right because it strengthens the premises to fill in a gap where the deer population increase after the hunting ban could still exist even without the hunting ban? Like for example, a change in the ecosystem in which a predator of deer migrates etc.

I choose B because the key words relating to accidents and public saftey. I felt skeptical about this choice because the AC was reiterating what was already in the stimulus

Can anyone offer any advice on how to more easily eliminate B and choose A when answering this question?

S01 Ep. 3 is here!

https://soundcloud.com/user-737824810/s01-ep-3-dr-lsat-diagnosing-problems

Subscribe to our podcast:

iTunes (Apple Podcasts) | Google Podcasts | SoundCloud

If drilling takes over the problem sets, (aside from few of the most recent PTs) I will not be able to take all 4 sections of any PT without some questions being spoiled, assuming I've done all drills. Therefore, if I took all 4 sections of PTs, my score would be inflated. On the other hand, if I took the 'simulated modern' version, PT 45 and onward would not be spoiled and my score would not be boosted, giving me a more realistic score. But I have heard it is good practice to take all 4 sections. So what should I do then?

disclaimer: this is about my personal study schedule not 7sage's.

Hi, I am retaking the exam in April after having taken it in January this year. I am not working so I can study full time, however every time i sit down to study I get extremely overwhelmed and have no idea where to start because I know the basics and can't get a solid routine down for my week. I got 153 for January and my main issues are with LR. My PTs range from 151-159.

The "but" in the first section reveals the author's position on Midville: it is not as expensive as others perceive it to be. The following sentences provide support as to why they believe this is true.

The current online LSAT obviously has four sections and one is unscored.

If I don't "simulate modern" on 7Sage PrepTests does it score my test like the modern LSAT (with one section unscored) or does it score the 4th section?

After finishing my first pass through RC, I've noticed I have a tonne of trouble when it comes to passages based on the fine arts / art history. I was wondering if anyone had any reccomendations for resources that go really in-depth into the theory/history surrounding various art styles / techniques / history?

This is mainly just something to pre-occupy my spare time and maybe learn a thing or two over the next few months.

where Can I go to see the explanation to this question ? I only see the "discuss" button but not the "explanation". I see the "explanation" for the questions that I got right.

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

I genuinely did not understand the stimulus.

Is marking up a stimulus on LR to highlight and underline the conclusion and premises considered a waste of time generally?

Hi,

New member here.

So, I applied to this 3rd tier school mid February. I received a rejection notice from them by email 2 days after I applied. Their deadline is on March 1. I applied on late Tuesday night, they sent me the rejection notice at 9am on Friday. Basically, they received my app sometime on Wed and made a decision by the end of Thursday.

Is it normal to receive the notice this quick? I'm aware I was late in the game, but I feel like they didn't even look at my app / CAS report at all. I think my stats are okay for this school: low lsat score but very high GPAs. I submitted all materials with confidence. I don't think I was missing anything critical in my application. I am an Asian immigrant, but I choose not to think that my ethnic background was the reason for immediate rejection. Or, should I?

I paid the $70 application fee in full plus CAS report fee. I am aware those fees are non-refundable, but I mean. They said in the email their admission team reviewed all my materials and reports, then made a decision. All in 2 days? I feel like I should contact LSAC for misconduct of the admission process of this school. Honestly, I am okay with their decision. I have other active applications in review. I just wished they had reviewed my app equally with others for the admission I paid more than $100 for. What you guys think? Thanks.

I've applied to four law school in the Illinois/Indiana region back in late November and still haven't heard back from any of them (despite a huge range in rankings for these schools), not even an indication on when they might make their decision or reach out to me... Nothing.

Should I be concerned?

Question Stem: Sufficient Assumption

Stimulus: Shoe factory employs more unskilled full time workers (W) than all other businesses in town combined.

If shoe factory closes, more than half of town RESIDENTS who are W will lose jobs.

See the shift between the W that are employed at the factory in the premise, and RESIDENTS in the conclusion? Look for an idea connecting these 2 ideas: workers at the factory and residency.

A. residency, no workers

B. workers, no residency

C. workers, no residency

D. everyone employed at the factory is a resident.

E. neither

D works because without it, we have no idea where the workers come from - what if they all live OUTSIDE Centerville? Then there is no way the conclusion is true. So D closes this one gap.

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

If I've fallen behind in my schedule generated by 7Sage, does it give me the option to reconfigure my weekly plan without shifting my intended test date?

I'm pretty confused on this question.

Here's how I thought of it:

Premise: Alicia and Peter had equal blameworthiness for the same "crime" (using another person's car w/o permission)

Conclusion: Alicia should be charged with the same punishment as Peter's.

AC C is the correct answer, but A is the answer I originally chose. After looking at explanations online, I now understand why C is correct. AC C negates the premise by establishing that Alicia and Peter actually had unequal blameworthiness, so it can't support the conclusion that Alicia should be treated the same as Peter.

However, I am still confused as to why A is wrong. The conclusion states that Alicia should have the same punishment as Peter which is automobile theft, not that Peter should have the same punishment as Alicia which is a warning. So, that must mean that both of them being charged with automobile theft is more "equal" punishment than them being both simply having a warning. Doesn't this only make sense if being charged with automobile theft is more just than getting a warning?

In other words, if A is true, then we would get a conclusion that Peter should be charged with the same punishment as Alicia. But that is the opposite of what the conclusion states. So wouldn't A need to be false?

hey!

the logical indicator 'until'

in this ex/ mary goes to the gym until brittany goes to the gym

-B -> M

would this be the correct translation?

[anything that follows until is the nec, modify the remaining of the sentence by negating-- which then becomes the suff condition?

I’ve always read these success stories and wished for the opportunity to one day be able to write my own. Well, over half a year of studying and preparing, my LSAT journey is officially over!

I began with a 149 diagnostic score in June 2022 and finished with a 168 on the January 2023 LSAT, three points higher than my goal score! This would not have been possible without 7Sage and my tutor @"valentina.soares-1"

I was hesitant to spend the money on a tutor, but with a busy work schedule and limited study time, I knew that I needed additional support. Valentina made all the difference when it came to studying. The personalized study plan helped me maximize my study time by providing drills and resources tailored to address my specific weaknesses. I looked forward to our weekly tutoring sessions. She took the time to get to know me which made me feel welcome and comfortable. She also made sure to fully understand my struggles. The material we covered directly correlated with problem areas from my 7Sage analytics. She was extremely patient in her approach, even when it would take me several times to truly understand an LR stimulus. I appreciated that she would ensure I understood the concepts/reasoning before moving on to the next topic. After implementing the strategies provided for each section, my PT score average jumped several points and kept climbing. Outside of our weekly sessions, she was always available to help. From answering my email questions to even providing a Quizlet with LR flashcards. It was evident that Valentina cared about my success from the beginning and she went above and beyond to help. I could go on and on, but I cannot recommend her enough!

Thank you, Valentina! I am very grateful for your support, your guidance and for always believing in me.

I scored 140 on PT 52 under the normal time pressure but I scored 157 on BR. Not sure what to make of this or how to proceed in my studying. I am almost finished with all of the LR section lessons of the core curriculum. I have done the most studying on LR, which is my strongest section, and I have done very little studying on the LG section. I have done absolutely zero studying on the RC section. The majority of my mistakes during the actual test were from running out of time on the LG and RC section. I was unable to answer about 15 questions in the LG section because I ran out of time and I was unable to answer 10 questions in RC because I ran out of time. Any advice on how I should proceed in studying?

Weakening Question

I identified 3 premises here:

Conclusion: Polls during the week leading up to an election should be banned.

Goal: Find answers that show why one of the premises isn´t true, or why we shouldn´t believe the conclusion to be true.

Answers:

A. Few people are influenced by polls in the 2 weeks leading up to elections. THIS INCLUDES 1 WEEK LEADING UP TO THE POLL!!! I completely skipped over that obvious implication originally, but see now why it makes sense.

B. Uneven - too specific. What about close elections?

C. Remove motivation actually strengthens.

D. Gains in popularity - who cares? Irrelevant.

E. Informed citizens is a stretch to unaffected citizens. Also the comparison is weak - this is ONE country, and we don´t know anything about it.

My takeaway: Don´t read over answer choices too quickly. Maybe try to visualize even abstract answers and concepts like time - in this case, picture a timelines with a dot representing election. Scribbled out right before it is the 1 week without elections. Answer A says 2 weeks right before, there is no influence. I KNEW I could be looking for an answer showing polls don´t affect citizens, so think about how a bigger line right before your election dot would overlap with the part scribbled out, and see how A is actually giving you about a strong point about the 1 week before.

I hope so, because my printer cannot print pdf files with passwords.

.

Hi, I am about halfway through the old LR CC (around Weakening Question problem sets) and I am looking to switch to the new beta CC for LR. Has anyone done this? I am looking for advice on the most efficient way to make the switch!