Can someone help diagram the question below? I'm having a lot of trouble wrapping my head around it.

Manuscripts written by the first time authors generally do not get serious attention by publishers except when these authors happen to be celebrities. My manuscript is unlikely to be taken seriously by the publishers for I am a first time author who is not a celeb.

I diagrammed "except" the same way I would diagram "unless".

not CELEB --> FIRST TIME AU OR not SERIOUS ATTN

When I looked this up, the CORRECT diagram was:

not CELEB --> not FIRST TIME AU OR not SERIOUS ATTN

My first question, Why is it: not FIRST TIME AU?

Second, I'm having trouble diagramming the parallel argument below for the same reasons:

"Fruit salad that contains bananas is ordinarily a boring dish unless it contains two or more exotic fruits. This fruit salad has bands in it, and the only exotic fruit is a guava."

I diagrammed this as follows:

not TWO OR MORE --> contains bananas OR boring

But the correct way to diagram it is:

not TWO OR MORE --> not contains bananas OR boring

Why?

I'm missing a lot of symbols on my account, including:

The symbol to mark questions for BR and the color them button. This has been happening for two days now. It's causing me to not be able to mark any questions for the BR

#Help

Not sure what the issue is but the preptests no longer have the option to cross out incorrect answers as I'm filtering through the options. I never had this issue before today. Is this change reflective of the actual lsat or is it a technical issue? If it's a technical issue how do I fix it?

For those that have taken nearly all or just quite a lot of LSATS, which were ones that were particularly difficult to you? maybe a random low score in the midst of a bunch of consistent high ones? I know differences in difficulty between exams should be balanced with the curve, but I expect even the test writers arent perfect. Which ones were ones that gave you all trouble/low scores?

I started studying for the April 25th LSAT in mid-February. My diagnostic in Feb was 149 and after a month of studying I have been scoring 157 consistently on my PT's. My goal is to score 165 in April. My biggest issue right now is timing. I am still only completing 3/4 games and passages on LG and RC. My accuracy is pretty good though. Does anyone have advice on how to improve timing? Thanks.

Also, I've used the LSAT trainer and I'm practising using the Powerscore workbooks right now.

Hello everyone!

I applied to four law schools for Fall 2020. One denied, three waitlisted.

My LSAT scores were 140, 145, 143. Two days ago I withdrew my applications for financial purpose. I'm kind of regretting it and wish I'd stuck until the end. But with my LSAT scores, I feel that I was bound to be denied anyway.

I have not been able to focus and study as much as I wish I did for the last three - life, work, etc. happened. I'd like some advice as to how to better study for the LSAT. I still work full-time (8:30a - 4:30p) and have evening an part-time job four times a week. I'd like to score in the 170s, but I'm not sure if that's any possible. Looking to re-applying in a year or two (hopefully). Any advice? How many hours a day should I be studying? How many times per week?

I'd like to get it on my fourth LSAT. Never too late, right?

I thought I understood the direction of argument lesson but I just took a timed section and found myself going back and forth when I saw MSS questions. I kept getting confused on whether or not I should look for the MP or a answer choice that strengthened the argument, can someone explain?

Hey everyone! I'm just starting to seriously study for the LSAT and I was just wondering if you guys had some advice on how to start? How many hours you'd recommend per day/per week? I have the powerscore bibles and I'm starting by reading them but yeah, any recommendations would be amazing!

I'm going to spill some tea for folks, and you may not like it.

If you want to get over 170 on the LSAT you have to be prepared to get 23/23 on the Logic Games section of the LSAT. Mathematically this is an obvious statement, after getting a perfect score on any one section of the LSAT means you get more leeway for error on the other sections of the LSAT for your target score. Assuming a -10 curve, if you perfect Logic Games that means you get to distribute 10 wrong answer choices across the three other sections. It becomes a far more manageable task! But why logic games? Why not focus on RC where there are 27 points, or the LR sections which account for 50% of the test? There's reasons for that.

#1. LG is learnable

LG is the most learnable part of the LSAT. I have seen students at all levels get to a point where they are able to consistently score perfect scores on the LG section. This is because of the nature of the section themselves. Unlike LR where you are at the mercy of the creativity of the LSAC writers and RC which can pull from an almost infinite amount of material across a wide variety of subjects the logic games have stayed fairly consistent through the history of the LSAT. The way games and rules are constructed, the approach to solving them, the patterns that are formed and the way inferences can be generated are actually fairly limited and the way we tackle games from LSATS in 1999 has not really changed from the way we tackle them today.

#2. Performance on LG is consistent (for the most part)

If you master logic games, chances are you will be able to replicate your performance repeatedly. The traits that you need to be able to master games in practice easily transfer to test day because as we discussed in point 1, the build of logic games sections is actually fairly constricted. Granted you can still get hit by the dreaded miscellaneous game but if you have prepared well you should have already encountered and conquered multiple miscellaneous games in your preparation and would be nonplussed by their appearance. Contrast that with RC which varies in difficulty not only by passage type, passage subject but also in the difficulty of the questions that are asked. And in LR where performance is dependant on juggling between being precise and being decisively quick. LG is where you should be able to easily translate your practice performance to the real thing.

#3. LG performance as a morale booster

LG is the one section in the LSAT where your own feelings about how you performed in the section tend to correlate quite nicely with your actual score. The nature of the questions allows you to be fairly confident when you hit the right answer. If you walk away from the LG section having completed every game and question you can be fairly confident that you scored 23/23. That is positive momentum you can take to the rest of the test. By contrast we all know when we under perform in the LG section, we either fail to finish all the questions or we fail to 'get' a game. If we walk away from the LG section knowing we underperformed we may feel even more pressure to do well on the other sections and the impact on performance can be negative. It is thus imperative that we excel at logic games.

So perhaps I convinced you that it may be a good idea to try and master the logic games section. How do we actually do that? Well a tried and true method, that is common across almost everyone I've tutored who has achieved logic game mastery is that they fool proofed the games. For more on that strategy click here https://classic.7sage.com/lesson/fool-proof-guide-to-perfection-on-logic-games/ . Of course I'm not just going to write a big build up for logic games success without giving you a few tips of my own. Read on for those!

Beyond Full Proofing

One of the reasons we full proof games is to improve our ability to recognize inferences. We can do that through strict memorization of how the inferences developed within the given circumstances of our game but that won't necessarily help you out in the future. What we are better off doing is recognizing how those inferences were formed. What did we do to draw them out? Did we concentrate on rules which were inherently powerful in how they affected the game board? Did we focus on spaces which by the nature of the rules was inherently restricted? Did we draw out the possible outcomes rather than focusing on prohibitive ones? If your study of the logic games focuses on patterns of inferences, and why you made them rather than on the inferences themselves your study time will pay far greater dividends down the road.

There are sometimes more than one way to tackle a logic game. Don't be constrained by your initial approach, or even JY's approach. You will learn more from a game if you try to tackle it in multiple ways. A game that may have seemed an obvious choice to split, may prove even easier if you just tackled it by approaching the questions head on and vice versa. Doing this will also help you better prepare for scenarios where perhaps you missed a key inference that would allow a split or perhaps, if you are not comfortable with splitting, would allow you to split a game you wouldn't have necessarily thought to split in the first place. Getting the right answer is not enough, you want to be able to get the right answer using multiple possible approaches.

Your performance on a logic game hinges on your setup. Lots of folks speed through this process because they never really practice it. When they start full proofing, the setups get better because of the prior knowledge one gleans from having seen the game before but the ability to actually properly perform a setup escapes them. You must allow yourself enough time in your setup to do the following:

1. Understand what the game is asking you to do

2. Understand the optimal way of diagramming the game

3. Understand the key game pieces and positions which the game hinges on

4. Understand how the rules interact with each other

5. Understand whether you should be splitting the game or attacking the questions

Ideally as you full proof you will develop your own process as to how to make sure all those things are checked off. A tutor can be really beneficial here as they can provide you their own process for doing just that!

The best test takers are intelligent in how they tackle the questions. Just like the overall approach to games can very, the approach to tackling individual questions can also vary. What you want to do, at all times is question whether your approach is efficient. Ideally you want to do the LEAST amount of work possible to get to the right answer choices. When you are full proofing always ask yourself if you are being efficient. Some things to consider in this space:

1. Why is the LSAC asking this question? Is it to test an inference? If so, have you already made it? That may be the right answer! ( Ask this if you encounter a global MUST BE TRUE QUESTION)

2. Have I done any work on previous questions that can help me answer/eliminate some of the wrong answer choices?

3. Have I properly separated the contenders and non-contenders before I start making diagrams?

4. Is there a way to distinguish contenders from non-contenders that I have overlooked? (I can write an entire separate post on how to do this, but this typically requires some thought on what the question is looking for and what the answer choices are providing in response)

Getting to -0 on Logic Games may seem like a daunting task. Lots of students have achieved it though, and not all of them were Logic Game naturals. For the longest time, Logic Games was my weakest section. I managed to overcome that weakness to score a -0 on Logic Games on my LSAT. You can do this too if you focus on the right things! The information above should help you get started on that journey!

Hey everyone, this question has probably been answered but will I still be able to upgrade my current ultimate course to the ultimate plus course after the 29th of March? Or does that option no longer become available after the 29th? Thanks!

Has anyone encountered this? My last note doesn't show. It is just a link to the section of the program. I deleted that and tried to just input words and the same thing happened.

Hi there,

I spent end of 2018 + most of 2019 going through Powerscore, Manhattan, and other LSAT books. I got into 7Sage toward the end of 2019 with the Ultimate subscription, and I recently finished the core curriculum with all of the practice sets. Previous to 7Sage, I probably took about 10 PTs untimed and timed.

A while back, I remember taking a diagnostic, which was around 158 timed (170 BR). My target score for the LSAT is 170 - 175. I just took the June 2007 LSAT to see how much I improved from my previous score, prior to 7Sage core-curriculum. Mainly just seeing if the BR score jumps up.

But I am pretty worried about my progression... I have been watching webinars and listening to 7Sage podcasts to hear that, many of the sages took 30 - 40 timed PTs prior to maxing out their scores.

If I use that as a benchmark, with 1 PT per week, I won't get there until September - November of 2020. That puts me around the October 2020 LSAT to aim for. But is that too late?

Right now, it looks like I spend about 20 - 25 hours per week, with timed PT on Saturday and Monday - Thursday dedicated for BR, MM, and FP. Friday is dedicated to look at archived problems that I had trouble with. I know it may be silly to focus on the total number of timed PTs, but should I change my current approach somehow to fit in more than 1 PT per week?

Thank you!

Hey everyone,

I was just curious if there was a way to download the explanations/ videos so that I can use/watch them while out of internet range. I will be heading to Baffin island for work and will not have any access to anything remotely close to the online-digital-sphere!!

Any advice?

Hello everyone!

I am nearing the end of my prep, I will be taking the LSAT for the first time in April. In order to both help fine-tune some of my own test-taking strategies as well as to give back to the 7sage community that has done so much for me, I would like to offer free tutoring to a few students. It will be first-come first-served and I won't be able to take too many individuals at this point due to my schedule. However, if you are interested, please send me a DM with information regarding what times work best for you and any particular issues you are having that you would like to address.

I have been working with @Sami for awhile now and she has been tremendously helpful for my prep. I started out studying for this test a little over 2 years ago with a 147 diagnostic. I tried the powerscore bibles and got nowhere with them. After coming to 7sage and going through the CC with a fine-tooth comb, I began to average in the mid/upper 160s. However, at this point I hit a wall. I spent months taking PTs and dutifully blind reviewing them but getting nowhere. It was at that point that I started working with Sami consistently on timing and she straightened me out. It took months of working on timing strategies, but I finally began to break 170 consistently.

At this point, I'm averaging scores in the lower 170s with a typical break down of -5/6 between the two LR sections, -3 in RC, and -0/-1 in LG. I am trying to really get my timing even better and begin to more comfortably average in the mid-upper 170s. In general, I am looking for students who are scoring in the mid/upper 160s and are trying to work on their timing strategies in order to break the dreaded 170 barrier. Im happy to help with work on any section. I look forward to working with you!

Regards,

James

I am currently struggling to move past the CC lessons on valid argument forms. With the use of flashcards, I have been able to memorize what the abstract form of each valid argument form looks like. For example, if I am given the premise A-->B and the conclusion B some C, I automatically know that the missing premise needed to restore this argument to validity is A --> C. However, when I see this same valid form in English as opposed to logic I compltely freeze. I have tried writing out my own English statements for each of the valid argument forms. Doing this helped me see how cookie-cutter the valid argument forms are. However, I feel like once I see these argument forms on the LSAT it will not be as cookie-cutter. For example, I recently realized that when I was writing out my own English statements I had failed to take into account that the fact that you can move around premises and still get a valid argument form. For example:

Premise 1: O→K

Premise 2: J‑m→O

Conclusion: J‑m→K

By simply looking at this argument's abstract form, I know that it's a valid argument. It embodies valid argument 5. In the example above, A‑m→B was switched into premise 2 and B→C was switched into premise 1. However, when I see this switch being applied in English, my brain turns into mush. Continuing with the example from above, the English translation would sound something like:

All octopuses are kind. Most people named James are octopuses. Most people named James are kind.

Octopuses= O

Kind=K

James=J

Right??

I am aware that on the LSAT, the topics in the stimulus questions that require your understanding of validity are going to be a lot more challenging. That's why I am looking to get some insight in terms of how to solve this issue. I really appreciate your time!

I recently bought an iPad to practice logic games on. However, when I download the PDF and try to start drawing on it on my iPad, a message pops up saying:

“Without the owner password, you do not have permission to save this document. Enter the owner password to unlock saving.”

Has anyone run into this problem? Does anyone know the password? (It’s not the password used to view the pdf on the 7sage site)

Hi all,

Wanted to say a quick hello again from 1L at Northwestern. For those of you going through the admit/decision process right now (which is already a stressful time), I know that the covid19 situation isn't helping anything. I've seen that several ASWs have been canceled. I don't have any official word on NU's yet, but I would not be surprised if ours is too.

That said, for anyone who is considering NU but unable to make the trip for any reason, I want to try to be a resource. You are welcome to PM me and I promise to be as candid as possible about my impressions of the school and answer any questions that I can. If ASW is canceled, I would guess that Admissions will also do what they can to help students make an informed decision, but throwing my hat in the ring as a resource.

This semester is a little bonkers (as is all of law school lol), so I may not get back right away but I will do my best to help! I know how stressful this decision was for me, and can only imagine how much harder it may be without being able to visit.

Good luck to you all, whether you're in the midst of LSAT studying or making a school decision!

A summary of the email we received from LSAC:

*March LSAT administrations canceled in: South Korea, Thailand, Japan, Hong Kong, and China

*March North America administrations proceeding as usual, but might cancel if situation deteriorates.

*Any test taker currently registered for the March 2020 LSAT may switch to the April 2020, June 2020, or July 2020 test by 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time, on Friday, March 20, at no additional charge.

*March test takers will be allowed to wear nose and mouth masks and to bring hand sanitizer.

Full text of email:

All of us at LSAC are saddened by the Coronavirus outbreaks affecting numerous countries around the world and numerous areas of the United States. We are working with global, national, and local officials to comply with local health directives and guidance, while striving to address the needs of test takers and schools.

We recognize that candidates may have questions about how the Coronavirus outbreak will affect upcoming LSAT administrations. We have created a Coronavirus resource page on our LSAC.org website to provide the latest information and answers to frequently asked questions. We will be updating this page whenever new information is available, and we hope that it is a helpful resource for you as you advise your students. We would welcome any feedback and any additional questions you or your students have.

The March 30 LSAT in the United States and Canada is currently scheduled to proceed as planned, although the situation could change depending on updates and guidance from local or national health authorities. Similarly, the international LSAT administrations in late March are scheduled to proceed as planned, except for South Korea, Thailand, Japan, Hong Kong, and China, where we had to cancel due to the Coronavirus situation. Should it become necessary to close or move any additional test centers, we will communicate directly with affected candidates and work to reschedule them to another date.

Given the uncertainties around the Coronavirus outbreak, we are extending the date change deadline and waiving date change fees for the March LSAT. Any test taker currently registered for the March 2020 LSAT may switch to the April 2020, June 2020, or July 2020 test by 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time, on Friday, March 20, at no additional charge. We are communicating this new date-change policy directly to all March registrants and encourage you to share it with your students you advise as well.

We also have revised our test day rules in response to the Coronavirus situation, to allow test takers to wear nose and mouth masks and to bring hand sanitizer, if they wish.

For more information about these policy changes, or any other Coronavirus issues, please refer to our Coronavirus resource page.

We will continue to monitor the Coronavirus situation closely and take appropriate actions in accordance with the guidance of public health authorities to ensure the health and well-being of test takers and to provide every opportunity for students to complete their law school admission journeys. Please let us know if you have any questions, and thank you for the invaluable support you provide to students and candidates during such a challenging time.

Hi Everyone,

I just signed up for the 3 month plan. I got a 155 on my last LSAT and want to get it up 10 points.

I am confused on how to use 7sage. Do I follow the syllabus (it shows way more drills, and examples) or do I follow the Study Guide?

HELP!

sorry for the crazy title, really need help

So I came into studying about 6 months ago with a goal of 167+

Ive been hitting that goal score now under timed conditions doing 2 sections a day for some tests and full tests for others

Scores have been (in order)

75 - 167

58 - 168

42 - 167

43 - 168

44 - 160 (gave up cause frustrated at a game)

45 - 170

46 - 166

47 - 168

48 - 168

49 - 167

50 - 168

51 - 169

77 - 170

As far as how many PTS left, i have all except one of the 80s. And from 54-80 I have all of the evens.

im doing some retakes here and there some days just to keep my mind fresh, and ingrain the logic while learning some new things because I dont remember all the questions considering Ive done em months ago.

How should I prepare for the march 30th exam? Should I take even more PTS cause I have recent ones? Ive heard that maybe I should do one-two more recent ones and end it on a GOOD note, like a score im happy with so im confident into test day.

i dont want to burn too many tests, yet i also want to make sure im fully prepared. I dont want to burn out, yet i want to make sure im doing everything i can to get a high score

For reference, march 30th will be my first take and im prepared to take it in july and september for next cycle as well. With taht in mind, im not sure how many more tests I should do. I also want to make sure i dont "forget" how to do anything until march 30th, obviously. Sorry for long post, please help!!!

Hi all... new here. Hoping to get some feedback on my plan. I don't have much in the way of peer applicants/mentors and would like to get some good eyes on this.

Applied with a cold 158 from the July '19 LSAT and didn't give it much more thought. Cycle outcomes thus far seem to indicate significantly better outcomes would be in range with a better score (acceptances up to BC and WL's at CLS, Cornell, USC, UCLA, WUSTL, etc.). Found 7sage and began the CC on 2/1. Am now doing the PTs, having completed 36-38 with the following results:

PT 36 161/BR172 LR -8/-3 RC -1/-0 LR -9/-3 LG -7/-3 Taken 2/26

PT 37 162/BR174 RC -1/-1 LR -6/-3 LG -12/-2 LR -2/-0 Taken 3/4

PT 38 170/BR178 LR -1/-0 LG -3/-1 RC -6/-3 LR -2/-0 Taken 3/9

My objective was getting off a waitlist (ideally CLS for a specific focus), but am now debating taking the test in March at all, as opposed to just looking toward a July-October retake for next cycle.

Goals: Criminal/Social Justice focus leading into CJ/government reform. Not opposed to BL for experience or if needed to service debt. Dream would be academia, but admittedly not realistic.

Other info:

3.85, non-trad career changer, 10 years WE law enforcement.

unhappy with outcomes this cycle... barring some huge negotiation success, I'm maybe 90% certain I won't deposit, though due to age and some not insignificant C&F issues, I do consider that I should just be thankful for what I got and make the best of it.

I feel like I could score higher on 3/30 but not as high as I could given more prep. I chose 3/30 because I would have significant difficulty doing a last minute acceptance due to location (Hawaii) and family considerations. Hope that doesn't sound presumptuous... I realize it is not likely.

Not crazy about debt or less than ideal scholarships off a WL, but am willing to incur reasonably proportionate debt. If I were to miracle my way into CLS, I'd pay sticker.

also, I think PT38 was a fluke. I felt like I did way worse. Looks like I just lucked into games that I was able to navigate. In general, I don't really feel confident on any section yet.

Should I:

continue to hit it hard for 3/30 for the WL with an eye on June-October for next cycle?

push back 3/30 to June/July for more prep time and just deal with it if I happen to get a last minute WL acceptance?

forget about the WLs and focus on a more reasonable intensity for June-October and do next cycle less stupid?

just negotiate scholarships and move forward with the best option this cycle?

Thank you for the feedback. Any opinion welcomed... just trying to nudge along my thought process. Been browsing the forum and wish I had discovered this place earlier!

We will be hosting a Blind Review Session for the first Logical Reasoning Section of Prep Test 66 on Sunday March 15th at 3:00 pm Pacific Coast (6:00 pm East Coast).

This will be a peer lead review and we will be going over flagged questions chosen by the group. Prior to the blind review session please complete Prep Test 66, and complete your own blind review. Do Not check your answers. We will be focusing on process, understanding and strategy.

The link to join is below:

https://join.skype.com/HW01DVXTluPk

Note: You do not need to join our study group or preparing for the June Test to join this review session, all levels are welcomed

Hi all! Just took my first PT post-curriculum and feeling down. I got a 163 on my first diagnostic in November (weakest section RC) and a 166 just now (weakest section 1 LR but the other I got 88% on...not sure what happened). I work 30 hrs/wk and am trying to find another job (10 hrs/wk), so it's hard for me to study as much as I want to.

I felt like I'd improved since November, having done the whole curriculum, and here I am. I'm taking the 4/25 test, and my goal is 172+. Is there any way I can make this happen, or should I expect to probably take the test again?

Thank you so much for your advice :)

Hi guys! This is my first post here and my first LSAT course.

My original diagnostic was a 158. I took the October 2019 LSAT and scored a 164, though my PTs were averaging in the 167s towards the end. I have decided to retake the LSAT in August 2020 in the hopes of breaking into the 170s; due to some family issues I have only now gotten back into studying for the LSAT. Is it a stretch to think I can get into the mid 170s in only 5 months? Right now, I can devote a majority of my days to studying, but I will start working within the next two months. What is a realistic schedule I can set for myself? Obviously I plan on primarily using the 7sage course, but I also bought the LSAT Trainer, Logic Games Bible from Powerscore, and LR/RC from Manhattan Prep. I'm not really sure how to incorporate these into my studying. Any help or advice is appreciated!! Thanks!

So I did a little experiment and did 3 questions from each Logical Reasoning stem and found that no matter how hard I try I keep getting Strengthening, Weakening, and Necessary Assumption questions wrong. It is probably my weakest LR family type I don't know if my brain just is not smart enough for the LSAT or it's because there is something off with my reasoning skills, but even after going over CC in this area I can't seem to get questions from the Assumption family correct no matter how hard I try.

Any tips?

Thank you 7Sage !