From what I'm reading, it appears that there's not really a mechanism for analytics within problem sets. I would find this very helpful, and would particularly love to be able to see the "Question Type Analysis" section of the Analytics page within my problem sets, since that's where the bulk of my practice has been so far. Is there a way to do this that I'm missing??

.

I received a message form 7sage user "officiallsatmadness" trying to sell a copy of his/her study notes. Not interested.

Hi,

Would anyone be able to explain why the answer here is B instead of E? I couldn't find any direct evidence showing how E is wrong

#help

Thanks!

Hi all. Sorry if this is something JY has directly spoken to in lessons, as I just have a free account here. But I was wondering: would it be safe to say that in any in/out game with a biconditional that says two elements can never be together, it’ll be worthwhile to create multiple game boards?

I just took PT 83 and missed a great opportunity to split the third game along the N/R biconditional that the rules create, and I’m wondering if I could have just automatically assumed it was worthwhile to split once I found that biconditional. Thanks!

Hi! I am about to graduate college and I have a great job lined up afterwards. I have always known I want to go to law school so I am studying for my LSAT now and hope to take it the summer before I start working. With that being said, there will likely be a 2 year gap in between my LSAT and when I apply to law schools. Will admissions care about that gap? Thanks

Hi Folks:

Some of you may not know how to properly blind review. What better way to learn than from a seasoned LSAT Sage?

Or perhaps you just want a different perspective on how to tackle LR questions, or want some constructive feedback on your LR process. Whatever the case may be, please feel free to join me as we blind review PT 65 LR Section 1 next Saturday

When:

Saturday March 7th 3PM-5PM Eastern I will be hosting a blind review session for PT 65 LR Section 1 LR

What to do to prepare:

Complete PT 65 Section 1 but DO NOT mark it. Come prepared to talk about the questions you had difficulty with and to walk through your thought process with me.

Platform: Zoom!

Link here: https://zoom.us/j/383280821

I’ve just picked up the Loophole after seeing a few people saying they thought it really helped them with LR. Before I dive into the book, does anyone have suggestions on how to effectively use it in tandem with the 7sage account? Do you use strategies from both curriculums?

Thank you!

A few weeks back I was in a blind review with the man himself, Mr. JY Ping and JY said something which I thought was rather profound. He mentioned that being aggressive on the LSAT is a self-correcting trait, meaning how aggressive you are in answer questions will often times have a direct impact on your LSAT Score. This makes sense because if say you are doing an Argument Part question and you clearly identified the part in question to be the intermediate conclusion, the aggressive response to that question is to immediately look for the answer choice which says intermediate conclusion and move on. A more conservative test taker may take extra time to consider the other answer choices and thus may still get the correct answer choice but may spend an extra 30-60 seconds on the question vs. the aggressive approach. JY mentioned that the conservative approach is harder to correct because you are likely not even to think about the argument part question because you got it correct but that extra 30-60 seconds you spent on it may have had a detrimental impact on your performance on another question. Those who get the highest scores on the LSAT tend to be those who manage their time the best and I would wager that the majority of LSAT takers fall on the conservative side of the scale under normal conditions. I think at this point it may be wise to actually define what being an aggressive LR test taker means. In my mind, being aggressive in answering choices means having the confidence and knowledge to spot the correct answer choice without the need to verify that the other answer choices are wrong. For some questions this is easy to do, for other questions it becomes much tougher and the potential gains from being an aggressive test taker increases. That begs the question, how do we actually become more aggressive during the test? I’ll discuss a number of ideas around that with the rest of this post.

10 in 10, 12 in 12, 15 in 15, 25 in 25

One way to force yourself to be more aggressive is to set time limits for yourself on how quickly you want to go through the LR section. Some set a 10 in 10, 12 in 12, or 15 in 15 target where the aim is to try to answer 10 questions in 10 minutes and so forth. This is a mechanical way of forcing yourself to be aggressive and it works! If you combine it with a good skipping strategy this will enable you to reap points quickly and save it for the more difficult question. My recommendation is that you begin to play around with this idea during PT’s, if you are not already doing so try to hit 10 in 10, 12 in 12 or 15 in 15. You may find that your score initially suffers from doing so but as you get more comfortable with this notion you should see some stabilization and then an increase. You will be uncomfortable pushing your pace at first, but eventually you will find your own equilibrium. What you want to do is to find the optimal level of aggression that is tied to your individual skill set and knowledge. I do not recommend even trying to push the pace until you are at a level of your LSAT journey that you are very comfortable with answering most question types. That being said, it’s all well and good to set goals for yourself to be faster and more aggressive, but what do we actually do to achieve that quickness? I’ve got some ideas.

1. Prephrase/CLIR

Powerscore refers to Prephrases, Loopholes calls it the “CLIR”. In reality these are just fancy names for educated guesses on what the right answer choice could be, based on a close reading of the stimulus. If you have a prephase/CLIR scan through the answer choices quickly to see if it is there, if it is pick it and move on.

2. Glance over the answer choices initially.

After reading the stimulus and formulating your prephrase. You should glance over the answer choices to see if your prephrase is there, or if an answer jumps out at you. Avoid digging deep into any one answer choice until you’ve looked at all of them and quickly assessed which are winners and losers.

3. Ignore confusing answer choices, at least initially

If you run into an answer choice that confuses you, skip over it. Try to see if another answer choice jumps out you rather than trying to dig deeper into trying to decipher what the answer choice means. If you spot another answer choice that jumps out at you as correct, go with that answer choice and move on. Do not spend any intellectual effort until you have to.

4. Aggressively skip:

It should go without saying that being aggressive with the answer choices goes hand in hand with having an aggressive question skipping strategy. You can’t be aggressive if you don’t understand the stimulus so make sure you are diligent in following your exit strategies. Read more on exit strategies here: https://classic.7sage.com/discussion/#/discussion/22449/road-to-170-exit-strategy-long-read-on-a-strategy-to-help-you-attain-a-170-score

5. Know what you are looking for.

This should go without saying but you should be at a point where as soon as you’ve read the question stem you should know what the right answer choice should look like. For example if the question stem asks you to find what COULD BE TRUE EXCEPT. Then immediately you know you are looking for something that MUST BE FALSE. Most people in this situation default to a POE and in some cases that is the only viable strategy but that does not mean you should default to it. Always know what you are looking for!

Caveat:

Note that being aggressive on the LR section is something I would reserve for the high-level test takers who have reached a plateau and want to break through it. If you are just getting started on your LSAT journey, focus on the fundamentals. If you are already reaching your target score, do not change anything. This is primarily for folks who are trying to break into the 170’s and 175’s.

Take Away:

The reason we are doing this strategy is because we want to optimize the time it takes us to answer the easier questions on the LSAT. The quicker we do that, the more time we have to throw at the more difficult questions. The downside is that because we are being aggressive in our choices, sometimes it may cost us a point. This becomes a tough optimization activity. This is why I suggest you only do this if you are a high-level LSAT taker and have plateaued, because the potential benefits may only be 1-2 extra points on each LR section but if you are trying to get to 170 or 175, those are exactly the kind of gains you are seeking! You also have to give this methodology a chance, it will force you out of your comfort zone, most people are inherently risk adverse but in life those that risk the most often gain the most. You also have to modulate how aggressive you are relative to your skill level, there is an optimal point for everyone. I recommend you keep pushing yourself until reach a happy medium. Try it out and see if it works for you!

I've been having a hard time trying to reach 160. I do blind review, but I think I probably do it wrong. I think I may need more drilling and probably focus on my basics while blind reviewing.

Hey all, need some help on some conditional logic.

31.3.18. It is a match the pattern of reasoning argument.

The stimulus:

It is impossible to do science without measuring. It is impossible to measure without having first selected units of measurement. Hence science is arbitrary, since the selection of units is always arbitrary.

Now, the argument and correct answer is easy to spot. However, there is a subtle flaw (yes, I know, it is a match question-but just analyzing the flaw for practice):

The form of argument

Therefore, Science is arbitrary

The flaw is that the author assumes a quality (arbitrary) is applied to all of science, because something necessary for science (selecting units) has that quality...

But sometimes it is not clear when a ‘quality’ like being arbitrary, is a necessary condition or not. The language “selecting units is always arbitrary” seems to imply a conditional relationship: If Selecting units, then arbitrary because of the word “always”.

How do we know that given language like always or everytime (usually a sufficient trigger) is not introducing a necessary condition? Or is it conditional, but for the fact that we say arbitrary is a necessary aspect of science we are going too far as to say that all of science is arbitrary? Or just that when we do science a part of that will be necessarily arbitrary.

It seems that sometimes a quality can be a conditional relationship:

If you’re tall then you’re good at basketball. Or tall people are always good at basketball.

**If it is conditional, then we have:

therefore,

science then arbitrary

And still have a flaw even though the conditional logic lines up? (Valid)

Is it a context issue? Is it an issue where I’m over applying the conditional language cues, but that there is not actually a conditional relationship?

Very much would appreciate any input.

Thanks!

Hi,

The answer for this question is B. I understand why B is right, but I was not able to fully eliminate why D is wrong (I understand why A, C, and E are wrong). The reason why I am still not sure why D is wrong is because D states that, "the highER costs..." thus implying that brand-name drugs are more expensive than generic drugs and thus supporting the conclusion of the passage (that generic drugs costs less but are just as good as brand-name drugs).

Any #help would be appreciated!

Thanks!

#help This question gave me trouble but I think I understand now. Here's my explanation, please let me know if it's right.

Conclusion: early detection of fire is no more likely now than it was 10 years ago

Premise1: 10 years ago 30% of houses had detectors, now 45% do

Premise2: but over half detectors are either inoperable or don't have batteries.

I chose A which says "15% of detectors were installed over the last 10 years." This isn't a trigger for the conclusion, and it doesn't connect the dots, because this premise just doesn't lead the premises any closer to the conclusion. If we said "All detectors installed in the last 10 years, which accounts for 15% total, are all defected or inoperable" this would guarantee the conclusion. This would allow us to say that indeed even though there are more detectors total, early detection is still equally likely as it was 10 years ago.

D makes sense now but I eliminated it because it doesn't need to be that the detectors are inoperable (which is 1 explanation of the 2), they could just have no batteries (the 2nd of the 2 explanations). I thought "D doesn't need to be true, there could be an alternate explanation." However, this explanation, despite the existence of other explanations, does connect the dots between the premises and the conclusion. Now we could say we have more detectors overall, but the proportion of inoperable detectors increased a lot so now the early detection rate is the exact same.

A parallel argument would be "We installed 15% more security cameras than a year ago but vandalism rates are the same. This is because the proportion of working security cameras dropped over the last year. As a result, roughly the same amount of security cameras were of use, and we weren't able to prevent more vandalism despite having more cameras."

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

By way of background, I've taken the LSAT once (January of 2020). I've finished the core curriculum and I have worked through probably 40 practice tests' worth of logic games. I've worked through these games at least twice and have watched the JY explanation videos to understand how to correctly solve any that gave me issues.

With all of that said, I'm still not scoring how I'd like to on the section (I usually hover around -4 but it can go up to -7 on a tough section). LG is also the only thing holding me back from scoring in the 170s which is what I'm aiming for in my June 2020 retake.

I definitely think a part of the issue is psychological. If I encounter a game that catches me off-guard, I freeze up. I start to feel sort of warm, like the blood is rushing to my head, and I start to make very basic mistakes, such as mislabeling a simple sequencing rule-that I otherwise would label correctly. Often, I'll blind review games in which this occurred, and I'll get every or most questions correct.

I'm sort of at a loss on what to do to improve. One thing I have not tried is working through a book such as the Powerscore Logic Games Bible.

Any advice on how to practically improve, or how to sort this this mental barrier, would be much appreciated!

I chose (E). I had thought that the discrepancy was how is it that a restaurant with worse food could be more popular. Assuming this is the discrepancy, would (E) not justify the conclusion? We are told Traintrack has a better location and this brings in customers, but there is still a gap: how is better location enough to compensate for having worse food? (E) tells how, food is irrelevant to the popularity of a restaurant. But from what I got from the explanation is that the actual discrepancy the question wants us to focus on is how is it that a more popular restaurant offers worse food? Did I just miss what the question was truly asking for?

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

Admin note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-82-section-4-question-21/

Hi all,

I'm in a phase during my LSAT journey where my BR score is consistently near-perfect, but my regular score is much lower. I understand the questions and I know how to do them, but I just can't do them correctly fast enough. I find that even during BR, very few questions give me trouble and I end up seeing the right AC with just a LITTLE bit of more time than during the original, timed run. But a combination of me not being fast enough plus getting super stuck/anxious when I have a time limit leads me to select wrong ACs.

Essentially what I'm asking is, how valuable is the BR score in terms of predicting long-term LSAT results? Does it actually indicate my potential? I would be super happy if the answer to that were a yes, but of course, I'm not really trying to make myself feel good here, so I would appreciate your brutally honest responses.

Thanks a bunch!

Hello Everyone,

This will be my second time attempting the lsat, the first time I did it on paper with pencil and eraser, classic way

Now I saw on the lsac website that they will be imposing the digital lsat to almost everyone.

This is making a bit anxious, about how I should study and practice now, since i cant use paper anymore, I have to get used to tablets and I dont do really well with these things

Has anyone taken the digital lsat, any insight to share?

Do we have the choice btw digital and paper?

Thanks!

Hi everyone,

I am just deciding when to write the LSAT again, and I do have the opportunity to study full-time from the second week of April until August 29th, but I am just concerned that this is not enough time for me and I will have to rewrite again. Having to rewrite scares me since I still have a few courses left to graduate for the 2020/2021 academic year. I can register for only one course for my first term next year to give myself enough time for applications and rewrite, but theres this fear that I will burn out and not be able to focus on school, the LSAT, and applications at the same time. For me applying next September will be ideal because the few courses remaining for me are very difficult and are likely to lower my GPA and if I apply in September, most Canadian schools will not take those remaining courses into account to give me an offer.

I wrote the July 2019 exam and got a 150 which I cancelled. I studied full-time for two and a half before the exam, mostly going through the CC and I only had the chance to complete 2 PTs before the exam. My diagnostic was a 137, so I already improved 13 points, but, I have not the chance to look at the LSAT since October 2019. Do you have a study schedule that you followed to improve at least 15 points? I need at least a165 for my top school (UBC Law).

The other option would be for me to do summer school and wrap up my courses by December 2020 and then study 6-7 months for the LSAT. However, I would have to delay a cycle and start law school at 24 instead of 23 which I am not very fond of.

I would really appreciate it if you can share some of your study strategies and opinion on when I should write the LSAT. I know that I have a long road ahead of me, but I am willing to work hard to not go to a different school. Also, I would love to talk to someone who is currently studying at Allard Hall.

Thank you in advance.

Hi.

Thank you so much for delivering 7 sage promise of successfully uploading the explanation videos regarding nov.2019 Lsat. Judging from uploading hours, I could see that JY and the the team worked until late in the date. Which I know and appreciate.the Video uploaded was a good help for my Feb 2020 Lsat

Hi all,

It’s taken a few weeks for the news to settle in, but just wanted to share this wonderful piece of news. A few weeks ago, I learned that I got accepted to Columbia on a full tuition Hamilton scholarship!!

I never imagined such a possibility before I submitted my apps and I certainly never thought I’d get into a school like Columbia when I began my journey here at 7sage but here I am with this awesome piece of news and I am so grateful for all the help I got along the way from this community

Special shoutout to @"Lucas Carter" @"Cant Get Right" Rav, Alex Divine and many more

Most importantly, I’m sharing because I know many of you are right where I was at one point in my prep: dreading the score result of your PT after your Blind Review, reading another success story and wondering when your turn will come, wondering whether this journey is going to turn out the way you hope, fearing if you’ll ever get LG, etc etc

I just want to share some encouragement here: keep going! It’s totally worth it!

For perspective:

I invested about $5000 total on LSAT prep (programs/books/tutors/travel/lodging)

With this Columbia scholarship alone ($200,000 plus) I’ve effectively made a 4000% return. I get to attend a T6 tuition free!

So if you’re deliberating about whether or not to get a tutor, whether you should spend that extra $X to stay the night in a hotel before your LSAT instead of getting up an hour earlier to drive, ultimate+ or starter? reflect on the long term returns. Treat your LSAT prep as a long term investment!

If anyone is interested in learning about my journey, I’ve shared tips and advise in the past (check my post history)

If I can sum it all here, I’d say: worry about getting good before getting fast

And:

TRUST THE PROCESS

7sage and this community is all you need!

Best of luck everyone and feel free to PM me anytime!

Hello 7Sagers,

I was wondering if anyone could help me clear up some fogginess im experiencing while drilling LR?

So i am aware i must understand what the stimulus is saying as well as be able to identify the conclusion and premises. However, im having the hardest time retaining the information when i get to the answer choices. I know what the stimulus is saying most of the time and i go to the answer choices with confidence. However, i notice i am begining to get problems wrong that have more condeluded stimuli.

How do i keep the conclusion and premises in my head clear while trying out different answer choices? I feel i get what the premises and conclusion is for the stimulus but when i try to recall it i have to say it a couple of times to remember it so i wont forget when moving to the answer choices.

What do you all do?

I am looking for a tutor - not so much to help me with specific concepts but rather to help me with planning/ designing a concrete study plan to conquer my problem areas and advance given the time I have to study. I have finished the CC and know which areas I need to work on. However, when I sit down to study, I often jump from one task to another. This makes me easily become overwhelmed, de-motivated and unsure of how to proceed.

I want to write the test in July. I have more availability since I quit full time work but unsure how to structure my days and what I should get through before the test date.

Does any one have recommendations for a tutor to help with this? or are you a tutor who can help with creating plan with me?

Also, struggling with finances so hoping for a cheaper session if possible but open to hearing rates.

Let me know!

Appreciate it all the help.

Hey guys,

Some advice would be appreciated on how to approach studying for this test. I would like to take the July LSAT 2020 although I work a very hectic schedule due to a pretty demanding job in big law. Any advice as to what works and/or worked for you is greatly appreciated.

thanks!

Hi everyone –

I've been studying for a few months and am using all the study materials I can (I'll test in August or September). I am not, however, getting much better at Logic Games. I've done them a LOT and my setups are generally correct, but I completely choke when looking at the questions, and I take too long doing them. I also don't see inferences, or I take too long to see them. Not sure how to proceed or get better. Any tips?

J

I am about to register for the April LSAT (my first one) and realized the LSAC website says I need to order a package for reporting to 6 law schools. It also says this is "special pricing" and I need to order it before I register for this discounted price ($650) wtf. Is this new or did I miss this earlier?

Update: I understand now. I thought it did not include the LSAT fee but it does. Carry on!