It’s been a couple months since I last studied and took my fourth and final LSAT in November last year. Having received my first law school acceptance to one of my top choices (UVic) yesterday, I figured it was time to shed light on my journey to encourage those who feel hardstruck/plateaued in their LSAT journey. I have been in that position many many times on and off studying over the years and have doubted whether I have what it takes to get to law school at my lowest points. For context, my first score/diagnostic was a 148 and I took the LSAT four times: 156 (June 2021)->161 (Jan 2022)->162 (June 2022)-> 166 (Nov 2022). I also want to take the time to thank 7sage as I truly credit my score improvement to the core curriculum and forum advice/guides. Good luck and all the best for applicants this cycle and for those grinding it out/prepping!

Is it recommended for me to do the drills for each type of LR question immediately after completing it in the CC?

"If you study, you will beat the LSAT." This is an example given here on 7sage, and it seems to work. Studying is a sufficient condition to beat the LSAT (apparently). S -> B

On another website, an example was given along the lines of: "If I put gas in my car, my car will run." And, here, putting gas in the car was said to be the necessary condition. The car needs gas to run. Gas is necessary for the car to run. CR -> G

But in that example, IF introduces the necessary condition, not the sufficient condition. What am I not understanding exactly? Does IF introduce sufficient conditions or necessary conditions? Huge thanks in advance!

An assumption I came up with was: "allowing eggs to decay makes it impossible to use them to analyze for pesticide-bird tests"

Would something along those lines be a viable answer for assumption questions?

Hi, leave a comment below if you'd like to proctor each other for a prep test this Saturday (2/11) over Zoom! I thought it'd be a good way to keep each other motivated and accountable while also getting in the rhythm of an actual test setting.

We can coordinate to find a time that works.

I am about 28% through the CC and I honestly cannot feel myself progressing, perhaps it will all come to fruition once I finish it and begin taking PT's but I can't lie, it becomes really discouraging to consistently get so many of the drill sets wrong :/ any advice i guess lol

Hey everyone. I wanted to gauge everyones thoughts on doing PTs with 3 sections vs 4 sections. I’ve heard a lot of people mention that doing 3-section PTs inflates your scores due to stamina being less of a factor. I usually opt for the 3-section PT as I find it more efficient and just better overall for days when I don’t have much time. However, I recently took a 4-section test and actually received the highest score I’ve ever gotten on it. This takes me back to my question on what people think is best. Is it really so bad to do 3-section PTs? I understand it doesn’t simulate real exam conditions but, again, I’d like to hear some opinions on what you guys do!

Hi everyone! I have two questions regarding the April and June tests that I'm hoping some of you know the answers to:

I've been working through the curriculum for the last few weeks and I swear that the Flaw-Descriptive Questions lesson was before Principle Questions but now it's telling me that Principle is before Flaw. Is this a new change or am I going through some weird Mandela effect?

Looking for a tutor for the near future

JY dismisses putting [I: V-Y-W-V] because you can't have two different game pieces in the middle two slots. Can someone help elaborate on this? I believe (A) could be correct, and I don't understand the reasoning here.

Thanks!

Evaluate question: can someone please explain why the correct answer choice is E? how did you arrive at this answer?

I'm very confused as to why the answer is B and not C. Looking back at it now, I'm trying to make justifications for why the answer should be B (EX: B says "the government would withhold" which is not as definitive as in C which says "the government would deny requests"). Is it not C because C is too broad and is not focusing on UFOs specifically? I figured its broad language was why it was the correct answer but maybe that was not the right way to go about it.

Will 7Sage eventually be updated to include the 2021 PT's when they're released from the LSAC? TIA

Hello everyone, what are current trends for the 2023 cycle? In November was around 14% less applicants than in 2021 and 2022. Something changed?

Is it better to craft the writing sample before or after taking the test? Does it matter? How many days/hours should usually be put into it? Thanks!

Hello everyone! I'm still going through the CC and reached the section about "Some and Most Relationships." I understand that the negation of "all" is "some not."

"All A's are B's."

Group 1 translation: A→B

Negation: A←some→/B

This might be a silly question, but does this mean that all the logical indicators in group 1 should be negated this way? For example:

"As long as there are A's, there are B's."

Group 1 translation: A→B

Negation: A←some→/B

And does this also apply to groups 2, 3, and 4? Does "all" basically represent all the universal quantifiers we learned in "Intro to Logic"?

Thank you!

Hello I scored a 169 on the January LSAT. I'm looking for 1 or 2 people who would be committed to Blind Reviewing 1 RC passage per day in the morning 8:30am Pacific time/ 11:30 Eastern Time. Where we could justify the answers we picked and hear each other thought processes. It's only one passage so it would be quick but I know it would be extremely helpful and would probably take Maximum 30 minutes to fully review it. I'm only looking for someone whos at in the 170 range or a little bit below it and is LEGITIMATLEY COMMITED to review and learning. My last Practice tests has been 169/169/174/172/170/171/169/174/172/173.

Wrong Answer (D) and Right Answer (E). I can't seem to reach the understanding on how E is relevant, e.g. doesn't contain information introduced in the passage on whether or not zebra mussels can transform hazardous waste and why they would be considered hazardous waste. I chose (D) because out of all the answers it seemed like the closest to being supported, as it mentions one of the 'redeeming qualities' of zebra mussels.

Was just curious as I was approved for a fee waiver.

Offering help to people struggling with Logical Reasoning. Reach out.

Hello!

We've got a new post on our 7Sage LSAT Newsletter, discussing the importance of isolating targets when studying. Check it out here: https://7sage.substack.com/p/isolate-your-targets

I mean to actually do the PT, blind review and then review with answers. Usually for me the first step actually takes the least time. I probably spend 2x the time on blind review and about 2x more to make sure I fully understand every single question on the test. This can easily take me like 2 weeks to process a PT since I'm working full time. I feel like this can't be right and it's super low efficient lol am I doing something wrong here? Please advise and any suggestions will be appreciated!

I'm one of the 35% people that chose (B) and still am not fully convinced that (E) is better. To compare the two ACs, I'll list all potential objections/flaws they each have for them to work:

(B) says, salt is not the only dietary factors associated with high blood pressure. It takes for granted that the people in the question actually were consuming these other foods, and the intake of such foods in combination needs to be significant enough, not only to offset the effects of their high salt intake, but also to bring their blood pressure down to very low.

(E) says, some people have abnormally low blood pressure and they have heightened cravings for salt to maintain a blood pressure that's not too low. It assumes without justification that these people are in fact the people talked about in the stimulus, and their high salt intake was in fact the result of their heightened cravings.

I'll admit that (B) makes a lot of unwarranted assumptions. But the "cravings" in (E) really trips me up because I think the assumption of "heightened cravings for salt" implying "high salt intake" is the exact kind of bad assumptions that LSAT usually punishes us for making. My only justification for choosing (E) over (B) is that it makes fewer assumptions. Can someone please help me out on this one? This question is bothering me so much and I don't know what I need to do differently to avoid similar mistakes in the future. Any help is hugely appreciated!

Hello, I took the LSAT in the fall of my Senior year in college back in 1996. I decided to venture on a professional career in law enforcement. I am planning to take the LSAT either late this year or early 2024 and planning to retire and go to law school hopefully sometime in 2024 or 2025. I faintly recall the LSAT from 27 years ago, I am just beginning my journey to reacquaint myself with the process again. Has the exam changed, are there new areas that have been introduced? Also, is the test at the testing center computer based now? Needless to say, it was not computer based back in 1996. I feel I have a lot to learn about the process again.