[TL;DR: $40 per hour for a unique kind of tutoring opportunity!]

Hello LSAT Travelers!

My name is Dr. Lars Enden. I used to be a professor of philosophy and logic. I did that for about 20 years. But now, I have taken all my experience as a professional educator in logic and critical thinking and applied it to the LSAT. LSAT tutoring is all that I do now, and I have been doing it full-time for over 3 years.

If you would like to see my many 5-star reviews from former students, check out my profile over on Wyzant (look up Lars E.).

There are 2 problems that I see with LSAT tutoring. The first problem is that it is expensive for students; the second problem is that it is repetitive for tutors; I find myself teaching the same skills to practically every student that I tutor.

I propose to solve both of these problems by introducing a hybrid style of tutoring, which will combine some group instruction with one-on-one individual tutoring at a more affordable price.

I am launching a pilot program that will use this hybrid model to cover the logical reasoning portion of the LSAT (I hope to develop a similar program for Reading Comprehension in the future). It will be a 6-week program that will meet as a group twice a week for 1.5 hours each, and that will meet individually with each student for one-on-one tutoring 1-hour per week. This will mean that each student gets 24 hours of total time divided into 18 hours of classroom-style instruction (with the whole group) and 6 hours of one-on-one tutoring. I want to try this method with a relatively small cohort (6-8 students) priced at $960 per student, which comes to $40 per hour. I expect that if this program is successful, that I will end up charging at least 3 times more than this in the future, which is still far below my usual rates for regular one-on-one tutoring.

What to expect from this program:

-24 hours of total time: 18 hours of small-group time and 6 hours of individual tutoring time.

-Current cost will be $960, which breaks down to $40 per hour [This is far, far lower than my usual rate because this is a new and somewhat experimental program]

-Classes are designed to cover all the important logical skills needed for LR success [these are the same skills that I have been teaching my individual tutoring students for years]

-Individual tutoring time will be more focused on the specific problems each student is facing with improving their LR skills

-Targeted homework will be assigned after each class to help reinforce the concepts and to give students more practice [This is the same homework that I have been giving to my individual tutoring students for years]

-For students in this cohort, I will also offer additional tutoring, if desired, both during and after the class ends at $75 per hour (more than half my usual rate)

If you are interested in being a part of this pilot program, please send me a message, comment below, or send me an email to contact@larsenden.com

Hey everyone! I'm Max, a new tutor, and I thought I'd create a free weekly study group as a more informal way to work with students than one-on-one tutoring. This decision is to some degree motivated by a desire to have a study group as a complement to my tutoring (which you can find more details about here), but honestly, I mostly just enjoy yapping about the LSAT.

I'll plan on meeting every Friday at 4pm pst for an extremely informal, office hours-style study session, but you're also more than welcome to ask questions (either in the study chat or dms) throughout the week and work with other students in the group.

When I was RSVPing for classes, I saw the save to calendar icon and got excited because it's so much easier to check my calendar than to login to 7Sage to remember what classes I want to take. But it's only Outlook. :(

Would love if this feature could be integrated with Google calendar, too!

Hi! I find that the process of elimination helps me a lot to narrow down answer choices when I am struggling with a question. However, I have been drilling flaw questions and can't seem to figure out how to decide between the last two answers I have narrowed it down to. To me, the differences between the answer choices are both so minute, and somehow I always end up choosing the wrong one. I just know I am SOOO close to getting the right answer and would love some help to get there.

Please let me know if you guys have any good strategies for breaking the ties and approaching flaw questions!!!!

You can now read the transcript of a video as you watch. Check it out:

Leave feedback in the comments. Thanks!

Hello , I am new to lsat studying . I'm am terribly struggling with to find the gap of why the premises doesn't lead to the conclusion. It's hard to come up with a bunch of reasons as to why it doesn't lead to the conclusion . If I do come up with a gap it doesn't match the answer choices.

Anybody else struggling? What are some ways I can come up with different reasons why the premises doesn't lead to the conclusion faster and more accurate?

Also , is finding the missing gap useful for only strengthen , weaken , flaw , sufficient assumptions etc?

Hi everyone. I'm taking the June LSAT and I was thinking it might be nice to virtually get together for an hour or two with a small group of 3-4 people aiming for 170+ on the June LSAT sometime this week (Monday or Tuesday around 7 or 8PM ET perhaps?) to have a last minute review session. We could go over level 4-5 questions and share how we would approach them in real time, talk about things we want to keep in mind going into the test, and overall just share positive pre-test vibes with one another. If you are interested, please comment, and I'll make a chat with the first 3-4 people who comment!

Do the difficulty ratings of questions update as more users attempt the questions?

Also, is the formula used in calculating the those ratings publicly available?

Hi!

I'm wondering if there is a cheat sheet that exists to help coin what language indicates a specific task.

For example: "properly inferred" = Must Be True

I understand that for a lot of question stems there's more obvious wording (i.e. Which ... must be true = must be true) but I'm just curious if something like this exists and can be shared for the examples that aren't so readily apparent.

I have a cheat sheet with each question type and their approaches and would LOVE to be able to add this info to each.

Thank you!

Hi everyone,

If I fail a class while abroad (direct enrollment not thru American institution, featured on home transcript as "No Credit"), will it go against my LSAC GPA? I keep seeing mixed answers from people.

When a user crosses out three answer choices during their initial pass, leaving only two options open - their selected answer and one remaining contender - the system automatically flags the question as a Split Decision.

This feature assumes the user has Blind Review set to display only incorrect answers. Within that context, if the user has "Auto Split Decision Switch" enabled in their Blind Review preferences, flagged questions will have their selected answer automatically swapped to the remaining open contender when Blind Review loads. No manual interaction required.

Possible preference toggles:

• Auto-score the swapped answer immediately and evaluate the Blind Review session score

• Hold scoring until the end so the user can work through all other flagged questions before committing

Users who prefer to manually evaluate their split decisions can leave the preference off and encounter the question normally in Blind Review - two answers open, three crossed out.

It would help me because I only use Blind Review to see if the other answer was correct. If there are other answer options open, then I accept that I didn’t evaluate that question as I needed to and need to review it more in-depth later. I still review what was wrong and what was right, but this would eliminate slogging through the section questions and accidentally mis-selecting an intended BR answer - or in the case of a full PrepTest, missing out on swapping the answers from an entire section altogether!

Faster, more accurate question logging begets faster, more accurate question logging begets faster, more accurate question logging begets faster, more accurate question logging....

Hey!

I'm looking to start or join an in-person study group in Portland, OR. I'd love to meet once or twice a week for study sessions and general accountability. I took the LSAT last fall and scored a 163. I'm taking it again in September and hope to break 170.

I've had a hard time staying motivated to study while balancing a 9 to 5, but it's seriously time to lock in! If anyone is interested in studying together or starting a group, feel free to reach out :)

Hello I’m new to 7 sage and I’ve only used the free account but I want to invest into studying. What plan do y’all have and recommend I definitely am looking for something that will keep me disciplined throughout this process :) feel free to let me know what y’all recommend

Is there a specific order y'all recommend for approaching the RC passages? Right now, I’m trying to do the passages with the highest number of questions first and save the passages with fewer questions for last. Also, is there usually an easy-to-hard order within the section, like, is the first passage generally easier than the last?

Hey y'all, hope everyone is doing well :) I'm struggling to close that gap between my timed and blind review tests. Albeit, I just started my timed phase and bombed PT 150, I'm looking for advice that I can implement as I continue to do timed tests.

I feel more relaxed during blind review and this always gives me a different (and most often correct) perspective on the material. Thus, I pick the right answer. How do I approach my timed test the same way I'm approaching my blind reviews? I'm always scoring at my target 170s in my blind reviews, it's just frustrating that I can't get this to happen on my timed runs.

Tyvm for the time nd consideration gang

Can we get the PT equivalent for the blind review in drills too? In the image below, we have the PT equivalent for both the timed results and blind review, but that's only because they were the same.

If the blind review were different, it still only shows the PT equivalent for the timed session.

Hi there,

I am preparing for the August 5th LSAT and looking for a dedicated online 1-on-1 tutor to meet via Zoom 3 days a week (1 hour per session) throughout my 9-week prep cycle. My target start date is Wednesday, June 3rd.

Current Profile:

• Baseline: My raw scores on LawHub 12-question drill sets currently swing between 5/12 and 8/12.

• Independent Study: I am highly disciplined and will be studying 21–28 hours a week on my own. I plan to use our 3 weekly sessions to review my mistakes, break down logical reasoning flaws, and master pacing.

• Materials: I have a LawHub Advantage subscription and use 7Sage analytics to track my drill data.

My Requirements:

• Must have an official LSAC score report of 170+.

• Must be available to meet reliably 3 days a week.

• Budget: $45 - $65 per hour (Pay-as-you-go).

If you have experience helping students break through scoring plateaus and can accommodate this schedule, please reach out with your official score details and availability. Thanks!

Hey 7Sagers,

Long-time lurker here. I've been studying for the LSAT and, like most of you, I kept getting wrecked by the same handful of LR traps.... necessary vs sufficient mix-ups, eliminating the right answer too early, falling for the "too strong" trap on Strengthen questions. JY's stuff has been a huge help, but I noticed my actual review process was the weak link, not the lessons. Most videos I would just blank out... my fault!

I was keeping a wrong-answer journal in a Google Doc and it was a disaster. Stuff I logged in February might as well have not existed. I never went back. So I built a little web app for myself to make the review part less painful.

What it does:

• Snap a photo of a question (or paste it in) and it parses the stimulus, stem, and choices

• You tag why you missed it — assumption swap, misread stem, eliminated the right answer, etc.

• Over time it surfaces patterns: "you've missed 9 Necessary Assumption questions this month, 7 of them because you picked an answer that was too strong"

• Drill mode re-serves your weak spots so the misses actually stick

It's not meant to replace the Core Curriculum or BR — it's the journaling layer on top of whatever prep you're already doing. Think of it as a smarter version of the wrong-answer spreadsheet a lot of people on here already keep.

It's completely free. No paywall, no premium tier, just an email so it saves to an account. I'm a current LSAT student, not a company. I built it because I needed it, and figured I'd share since a few study partners liked it.

There's a demo you can poke at without signing up if that makes you feel better lol.

If you try it, I'd genuinely love feedback... what's broken, what's missing, what would actually make it useful for how you review. There's a Feedback tab right in the sidebar. Roast it, I can take it.

Good luck to everyone sitting in the next few admin cycles 🙏 We need it!

UPDATE - I can't keep responding to everyone.... here is the link haha

https://lsatwronganswerjournal.com

Fair warning, there are a lot more people using it than expected, so if it does work at first, refresh the page, and if it still doesn't work, please DM me! I will try and fix the code.

LSAC just sent out the following updates regarding the new LawHub interface:

1. The final version of the LawHub interface-- including fully functional highlighting for stimuli, question stems, and answer choices-- will be released in June.

2. LawHub just this week added functionality that enables test takers to see questions they’ve flagged directly in the question bar, without having to open a separate review panel.

3. All Official LSAT PrepTests in LawHub are now available in an updated version of the new UI.

4. The content of the test is not changing.

5. The annual subscription price for LawHub Advantage will increase to $124 on July 1.

Curious what everyone thinks about the new interface so far.

I think this has been asked for before but I also wanted to request a feature to see how one's priorities tag correction percentage increase or decreases or stays stable over time. That way we can see if the practice we do is beneficial in incresing our success for that tag or if we need additional help with those tags to get those questions correct. It's hard to keep in mind what my previous percentages were and see if I am making any progress in my skills without a feature like this. Thanks!

I take the LSAT in approximately three months (September). I am aiming for 170s (or closest I can get in however much time). I am currently scoring anywhere from 157-162 on PTs. At the moment, I am only doing practice, but feel like I might be better served changing up my study plan/schedule. I am wondering if starting fresh and doing the core curriculum might be a better option at this stage as opposed to just doing a practice plan. I actually have not watched any of the videos yet - I used LSAT Trainer before I got on 7sage. But recently, my PrepTests have not been going so well. I am wondering if just doing the core curriculum from scratch might serve me better. It seems like there might be a gap in some things I do not know, but also do not want to sacrifice reps gained through drilling/practice

I've been taking practice tests every week for the past 6 weeks or so, and timing has been the one constant issue I've not been able to fix. This week i tried taking 2 LR sections backwards (starting with the final question and ending with the first.) my logic was that since the second half is hardest, i can dedicate more time to those questions and comfortably rush through the second half, as opposed to having to rush thru the harder second half. I scored surprisingly well using this method, and I did not struggle with time, I was able to answer each question confidently. However, I'm unsure if this method is actually helping or if I'm just getting better at time management. Anyone have any thoughts/ experience with this? pls lmk, taking the test in june!

Hi there, I have a couple questions about PT104.S2.P2 on medieval guilds. Many thanks in advance for your help!

Question 2: According to the passage, which one of the following statements about law courts in medieval England is true?

I initially leaned toward A: Some English lawyers who practiced in civil courts also practiced in church courts, but others served exclusively in one court or the other.

However, I doubted it because I thought that, on the LSAT, “some” can be inclusive of all. The portion of the passage that would support this answer choices states: 

 The alternative inference, namely, that ecclesiastical advocates were less prone to ethical lapses than their counterparts in the civil courts, seems inherently weak, especially since there was some overlap of personnel between the civil bar and the ecclesiastical bar.

By stating there was “some overlap of personnel,” I assumed that it could mean anything from one person to every person who overlapped. Therefore, I did not feel confident selecting: “Some English lawyers who practiced in civil courts also practiced in church courts, but others served exclusively in one court or the other” because I didn’t feel I could support conclusively the claim that others served exclusively in one court or the other. Am I missing something? 

Question 7: The passage suggests that which one of the following is most likely to have been true of medieval guilds?

I chose D: Medieval guilds found it difficult to enforce discipline among their members.

The explanation states: Anti-supported. We know that “other guilds” (besides canon lawyer associations) “often did [play a role in enforcing standards of conduct].

However, I am a bit confused because in the first paragraph of the passage, the author states: Advocates' professional organizations showed little fervor for disciplining their erring members. Some even attempted to hobble efforts at enforcement. The Florentine guild of lawyers, for example, forbade its members to play any role in disciplinary proceedings against other guild members.

By referencing the Florentine guild of lawyers, I thought they were providing an example of those professional associations that, as described in paragraph two, “were so inefficient that most delinquents escaped detection and punishment.” The author then goes on to argue that this hypothesis/characterization is more likely correct than the alternative posed. 

Perhaps I’m just mixing up guilds versus professional associations? 

Hey everyone :)

I’m looking for a consistent LSAT study buddy (or a very small study group — ideally 2–4 people max) for the September LSAT.

My recent PT average is around 160, with my highest being a 165. My goal is to break into the 170–175 range, and I’d love to find people in a somewhat similar score range who are serious about improving and staying accountable.

I study around 2–4 hours a day and would be down for:

• silent study sessions/accountability calls

• reviewing questions together

• occasional drills/PT breakdowns

• or honestly just suffering through RC passages together in solidarity

I’m located just outside the GTA/Toronto area, so I’d be happy to study either online or potentially in person if you’re nearby. I’m on Eastern Time and usually prefer studying earlier in the day because that’s when my brain functions most like a human being, but I’m pretty flexible overall.

My strengths are mostly Necessary Assumption/Sufficient Assumption questions. My weaker areas are flaws and RC (RC currently feels like a personal attack, but we move).

A little context: I already took the LSAT once and applied last cycle, but my score wasn’t where I needed it to be for the schools I wanted. Retaking while trying to stay motivated has honestly been harder than I expected, so I figured I’d shoot my shot here instead of studying alone and slowly losing my mind.

If anyone’s interested — or if you have tips for staying disciplined/motivated during a retake cycle — feel free to message me on here and we can connect outside the app :)

Hello LSAT Travelers!

My name is Dr. Lars Enden. I used to be a professor of philosophy and logic. I did that for about 20 years. But now, I am an LSAT tutor, and I have been doing this full-time for over 3 years.

The purpose of this group, is to offer a space where you can ask a professional logic professor (that's me!) anything you want. So, come to a session with a topic or a question that you want to discuss. It can be anything LSAT related (even RC, which is mostly logic anyway!) and I will do my best to help you with it. For Free!

The group will meet every Wednesday 2 - 3:30 pm Eastern / 11 am - 12:30 pm Pacific. I hope to see you then!

And, of course, if you are looking for a tutor, check out my post in the tutoring marketplace!

https://7sage.com/join-group/cht_033LpM61OTAwcZv9PxiK0s