I'm taking my second LSAT in June and currently the thing holding me back from a 170+ score is my RC score. This is mostly super frustrating because I took the LSAT for the first time two years ago and it was my best section on paper. Just not seeing my previous success translate to the digital test. Any tips on how you all annotate (on your computer) or take notes (on paper) would be incredibly helpful. Currently scoring -6/-7, whereas my LG is -1/-2 and LR -2/-3.

Please help!

Hi all! I've been studying for a little while now but I still think I need to get into the groove of a study schedule. Do you guys take 1 PT a week, BR, then review the test, and drill all 3 subjects in that order (and does that last you a week)? Or is there another way your weeks/ days typically look? What does a typically day/ week look like for you? Has this gotten you results/ relatively steady score increases?

I am in the low-mid 160s right now (With 2 random score of 170 and 173) trying to find a study schedule that will give me more consistent results, and help with self discipline. I'd love to year how you all are approaching this!

Hi all!

I scored a 168 on the January 2021 flex and after being waitlisted at almost all of the T14 schools I have decided to R&R. I am looking for 3-4 highly motivated individuals to meet weekly via Zoom in preparation for the August administration. My current PT scores range between 172-180. My goal is to break 174 in August. If you are interested, please direct message me the following and I will be in touch:

Thank you and I look forward to connecting with you!

I am wondering how long each one of you spends on warming up and how do you choose which questions to do before taking a test?

Hey Guys,

Just for reference, I'm currently a rising junior in college.

I just have a quick question for some advice. I took my first diagnostic maybe ~6 months ago (and scored a 160), and went through a decent amount of the 7sage curriculum, but very rushed (in under a month). I also didn't do any of the reading, just finished LG and LR quickly. I just took another PT, PT51 (flex version), and scored a 166 (-3LG, -3LR, -6RC). My ideal goal score is a ~172, so does it seem reasonable to get there for the next November test?

Also, I'm fine with taking it more than once, which is why I'm planning to take it so early, and I will be abroad in the spring so I can't take it then.

Thanks so much!

In desperate need of a tutor. Preferably a free tutor because I don’t have much money to pay for one.

Scored a 152 on Jan. Test

On average I miss around -8 in each section. Looking to gain better understanding of the test, best method of studying, and test taking strategies.

https://www.reddit.com/r/LawSchool/comments/nj1t1e/trying_to_speed_run_law_school_just_curious_what/

I dunno why but this thread has had me LOL'ing since yesterday.

https://i.imgur.com/1H8Z5qx.jpg

Hello! I am looking for a private remote tutor (one on one preferably, but open to small group settings). Preferably someone who is familiar with both 7Sage and Powerscore concepts since I've been studying primarily using the two.

If anyone has any recommendations for a good tutor please let me know!! :)

#HELP

Good Morning/Afternoon/Evening!

Hope all is well and you are enjoying your day. I am currently looking for a BR/accountability partner who is willing to use zoom or any of the other video chat apps a few times a week. Right I am now scoring around a 153 on the LSAT and and hoping for a 5-7 point swing within the next two weeks. Please contact me if you are interested. I am really looking forward to getting started on this!

Sincerely,

Bruce

….Can I take it in the middle of my preparation when I am more confident?

Looking for anyone in Calgary who would be interested in studying together for the October or August 2021 test! Likely will be doing the October one!

Anyone know when we can sign up for time slot?

I started keeping a wrong answer journal which has been helpful! But im struggling a lot with the organization. I get overwhelmed by the sheer amount of stuff on my spreadsheet. Any recommendations for format or how to keep it from getting too chaotic.

If you finished core curriculum and are currently working through the pt’s with blind review, at what point can you just interrupt that process with drilling on specific weak areas?

Lg is still my weakest, and so after already doing the foolproof method on all the lg core curriculum, I was thinking I’d look through and try to do most of the types of games I’m weakest at based on the keyword 7sage groups them in. As long as I leave fresh full time pt’s to test and br with, that’s an ok approach right? I just worry because it diverges from the lesson plan. But lg is supposed to be the easiest to improve and so I feel I would get more of a return on investment putting most of my energy into that at this point

would love some help on this! I've realized I am able to get 100% accuracy when I do LG sections untimed but when I do timed I usually miss about 5-7 (more often than not on the last game) and this especially happens when there is a misc game thrown into the loop.

I foolproof everyday but i was wondering if anyone has gone through something similar and how they improved it.

I recently took PT 83 and added time and a half and got a 160. It seems like I am starting to get the concepts down, but how can I get faster to be able to achieve that in normal time? I am getting better at LG but struggle with completing it. Same with RC.

Hello,

I'm looking for someone that might over all be in the SB county area( Rancho and/or Victorville) that would like to meet up and study in person? I'm averaging about a 145-150 right now so someone that might be around that study level or higher would be awesome.

Hi,

I have a question about how Lawgic is drawn out for LSAT 21 Section 2 Question 12 December 1996 test.

The line in the logical reasoning stimulus goes as, “Unless these techniques are implemented, erosion of productive topsoil cannot be controlled.”

JY Ping translated it into Lawgic as /I(implement) -> /C(controlled), or C -> I

However, my understanding is that the sentence should be re-written as, “Erosion of productive topsoil cannot be controlled unless these techniques are implemented.”

This line can be translated into /C -> /I since “unless” is a negate sufficient and “cannot” is negate necessary. Thus, C is negated due to “unless”, and I is negated due to “cannot.”

What am I doing wrong here?

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

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-21-section-2-question-12/

Hello Sagers,

I have been perfecting logic games but the interesting thing that I am seeing is that on certain games my timing varies on how fast or slow I finish the game but my accuracy is there with going -0. Obviously getting the correct answers is most important. However, should I focus at all on the timing?

#help

Dear all,

I have a hard time to be fully convinced of why AC B is a necessary assumption.

I'm mostly disturbed by the phrase "most commonly grown". I would have interpreted the modifier "commonly grown" as the non-new potato strains, and then B would obviously be the correct answer (since, if the non-new strains could have produced the same yields as 20 years ago, it would wreck the argument). But isn't "most commonly grown" a modifier which indicate a subset of those non-new potato strains? If so, the negation of that assumption could still be compatible with the argument (e.g. if this subset comprised 55% of the potatoes 20 years ago, that is 55 million tons, then even if it did reach the 55 million tons the argument would still hold).

Thanks!

What days and times are available to take the LSAT? All I see on the website is it says starting August 14th. I would be interested in taking it closer to August 21st in the afternoon.

Hey I'm back again with a dumb observation about one of these questions that I think is frustrating.

In this case we're talking about the fuel requirements for a space ship going to Mars (or its moon, Phobos).

The question premise states that the mission is manned, which, if you assume that all manned flights mandate return trips, leads you to the correct answer, E. This is not explicitly stated - it's a required assumption to arrive at this answer choice.

Now lets talk about answer choice D - the SHORTEST distance between Mars and is less than half the distance between Earth and Mars. There is one thing I can logically infer from this choice:

Now it's possible that the moon has a stationary orbit and is always further away from Earth than Mars, however, if I assume that orbits Mars, then it necessarily will reach a point where it is closer to Earth than Mars is. Or perhaps it does have a stationary orbit, and it is always closer to the Earth than Mars. Doesn't matter. All other considerations being equal, this would mean that reaching Phobos at it's closest point could possibly be closer than Mars at it's closest point.

This inference assumes nothing outside of what is stated in the question - it's an inference based on the fact that there is a non-zero difference between the distance of Earth-Mars and the distance from Earth-Phobos.

The correct answer requires an assumption - that the manned expedition requires a return trip. If we don't make this assumption, this answer resolves the discrepancy in no way.

I realize that answer choice D does not provide objectively solid resolution to the discrepancy in the passage. In fact, the language seems to indicate that it does NOT resolve the discrepancy because it explicitly states that the distance between Phobos and Mars is less than half the distance between Earth and Mars, but the trip to Mars requires twice as much fuel than the trip to Phobos.

My argument is this: We don't know what other considerations affect fuel consumption. We don't know if the manned mission is coming back to Earth. What I do know, is that I can logically infer that a greater distance traveled will lead to greater fuel consumption. The only way this is possible is if answer choice D is true - that there is a non-zero distance between Phobos and Mars.

It seems unlikely that this question would appear on a modern LSAT - it's possible that one-way manned missions to Mars were simply outside of the realm of possibility when this question was written. Today that is not true. In fact, it is very possible that the first manned mission to Mars is one-way, but who knows - it's irrelevant in the context of the LSAT which is what makes this question so infuriating. At the end of the day, I'm not concerned with whether or not I get this question right, but rather whether my reasoning is sound. Overall, my argument is that this is just a bad question, with unsound answer choices - I wouldn't actually argue that they should change the correct answer to D as that would seem to be an unfair question due to the sheer weakness of the inference in resolving the discrepancy in the stimulus.

I guess my question is would this question exist on an LSAT written today, and could this objection get it thrown out? I don't think E can be considered a correct answer unless they were to both eliminate choice D and replace it with an answer choice that in no way speaks to the distance between Phobos and Mars. Maybe I've been doing to much LR practice and I'm just losing my mind.

Admin note: edited title; please use the format of "PT#.S#.Q# - [brief description]"

Hi, I am looking for a study partner to meet two or three times a week (virtual or in person) to break down the material. I’ve been studying for a month averaging 140.

I got hit by a car while riding my bike. I’m good but my left arm had some severe trauma and needed two surgeries. I’m going to have some difficulties writing and I want to stick with the June test: I’ve been consistently PTing 170s and feel confident. Will LSAC accept a late accommodations request? If this even something warranting accommodations. Otherwise I might just suck it up buttercup.

I'm currently using the Modern video player and the 2.4x and 3x speed playback options that were previously available are now gone.