Hey guys,

I'm prepping to take the November LSAT and I'm starting to enter the final stretch crunch mode, so I was considering trying to find a private LSAT tutor to get in a few high intensity sessions before the test. For a bit of background, I have taken the LSAT twice now (my first score was okay and I ended up cancelling my second test score). I am planning to apply this cycle, but I also work full time so I was thinking that working with someone one on one might help me maximize my potential as best as I can before test day. Does anyone have any personal experience and/or advice on whether working with a private tutor in my position would be useful?

Also, does anyone happen to know of any private LSAT tutors in Long Island, New York that I could check out? I would really prefer someone that I would be able to work with in person and preferably in Long Island, but considering the stakes, I am not opposed to meeting in the city if need be.

Thanks!

Hi everyone,

I’m taking the test this weekend and am currently averaging 165 on my tests. I’d love to see any increase before the test this weekend, so I’m wondering what you guys think would be a better strategy for me this week:

I’m still going average -4 on LG, so I could drill the hell out of LG today and tomorrow (and lightly on Thursday) and take only one more PT on Wednesday.

Or, I could take a PT today and Wednesday and drill LG tomorrow and lightly on Thursday.

At this point I’m thinking it might be worth t to be completely solid on LG, but I’m not sure one more day will get me there, so I’m not sure if I should waste an opportunity to squeeze in one more PT.

Thanks!

So, as a military spouse, I am always at the mercy of the Air Force. We live in Japan, and are scheduled to leave here in May 2019. We had intended to move back stateside, and it would be our last base, since my husband is nearing retirement. We just found out that we will be going to Germany instead. I'm super excited - we love Germany, and lived there before. But what now? I am registered for the October LSAT in Tokyo, and I still plan to take it. It does take some pressure off, since I now have additional (like 4 years) to retake and get it right before law school applications. However, I want to make the best use of my time over the 4 years we will be in Germany. My previous education and experience has all been in English and teaching. I see this move as an opportunity to move into something else - but what? I'm even debating getting a JM or perhaps an MBA. I don't know what to do! Help, please! What do I do in these years to stay on track towards law school and continue building a strong application?

Anyone else making stupid mistakes?

I just did a logic games section and got them all right except an acceptable situation question (sigh) because for some reason I read "glass" in the rules but looked for "wood."

One instructor said, "Don't just say it's a stupid mistake and you won't make it on test day. You absolutely will make it on test day if you don't have a system."

But what system can I develop for not being an idiot? Glass is not wood, I've been telling myself helpfully.

“Breaking news! The combined volume for June, July, and September on this date is down 4.9% compared to June and September last year.”

I swear they just recently had a blog post about how there are going to be more applicants and more lsat takers this year??

Any thoughts?

Is anyone else having issues printing out practice tests? They keep coming out blurry and illegible. Haven't encountered this problem before. Problem sets are still clear when printed, which is odd.

edit***

saving as pdf prior to printing fixed the issue.

It's from like two years ago but I did read it in the future comments that it was uploaded somewhere does anyone know where I can find it?

I'm really trying to pretend that nobody is having fun on Labor Day weekend while I study. Anybody else ruining a good 3-day with logic games?

Say someone was a bad boy pothead athlete in high school and broke his high school sweethearts heart. He wasn’t doing anything seriously bad just skipping school and smoking pot and getting bad grades. He gets his act together and gets into a top law school...would that change you mind about someone? Not at all suggesting anyone go to law school to prove a point to an ex or anything but just asking if someone resolved to attend a top law school because that’s what he or she wanted then have they seriously redeemed themselves?

I am just wondering what you guys are thinking about when choosing law schools to apply to. I feel that I wanted to go to Top 14, but when I look at the possibly ED full ride at WUSTL, it does seem very compelling. Why would you apply to Top 14 or WUSTL ED? Why wouldn't you? I noticed that WUSTL did have about 76 students who went to firms with 500+ people. Would that be big law? Would you likely have the same chance at big law from WUSTL and Top 14? It appears that Top 14 means better chances at Big Law and 160-180k salaries, but is that still possibly from WUSTL? I may be wrong though, so thank you for any clarifications!

I've been studying on 7sage for the past 10 months, but I've been studying for the LSAT since July 2014, you read that right. Not until I started with 7sage, I started to improve and analyse my data better. I've average low 160 after months studying with 7sage, but before that I was in the mid-150. Today was the first time I EVER scored above 170 on a PT. I didn't take a PT since mid-June. Still studying by taking sections and BR . But since I decided to take the November. I figured I should take a PT, I was really nervous. I went to my November testing site. Took the PT, ask a friend to score it, so I can still Blind Review it. He tells me I got 172. I could not believe it. It became so real for me. I can in fact score above 170. I know it's only one test, but I actually achieve my goal. Now I got to maintain this and take it to the next level. Any advice?

I just want to point out a minor flaw in the site which I think could be easily fixed. When reviewing reading comprehension after taking a practice test, the explanation page for the first problem set you select will show which answers you got right and wrong like all explanation pages do. After you click "next", the next problem set won't show your answers, necessitating you to go back and find the link in the BR page within the list of all the questions. All other types of questions show your answers when you scroll through them, which makes it easy. Its not a big deal, but it would make reviewing the tests easier.

Just for some fun lol and a thread to help people vent. Do you think some people bluff about their pt’s when taking to classmates and friends?

Positive mojo only from this point forward.

https://memegenerator.net/img/instances/41819489/hey-girl-good-luck-on-your-lsat.jpg

I've been studying for the LSAT for a couple of months and I feel like I've run out of fuel, so I just wanted to ask how do you guys recharge? Im sorry, I'm sure this has been asked hundreds of times before but a little more motivation can't hurt.

I usually try and complete questions containing a stimulus riddled with formal logic in my mind, but sometimes that burns me because although the structure isn't too complicated (i.e. no embedded clauses or anything), the answer choices could be structured in a way that is a bit harder to decipher if you don't have a diagrammed structure written down somewhere. Refer to the example in Preptest 82 below:

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-82-section-1-question-19/

I was just wondering if there is anyone out there that avoids this issue altogether by habitually diagramming stimuli that are heavy with formal logic, or if you guys generally do what I do and try to keep things in your mind, and then diagramming after you figure out that the diagrams might be more than your working memory can handle - especially when some of the arguments require taking the contrapositive. I guess I want to see how competent I am compared to someone doing well with formal logic stimuli. If you guys generally keep the structure in your mind, then that tells me I have more work to do in understanding formal logic at first glance, or on the other hand, maybe needing to diagram out the argument isn't just common, but efficient when it comes to getting through a logical reasoning section.

Hope everyone is doing very well. Just wanted to ask if anyone has some advice for my situation.

Up until last week I was averaging between 169-171 on PTs, which is exactly the range I was hoping for.

However, I got a 168 and and 166 on the last two PTs I took.

I think this is "burnout" because most of the mistakes I am making are just careless, and my pacing is a bit more off than usual too.

My plan is to take the next few days completely off (save for maybe some light reading of the LR Powerscore Bible and maybe a couple of logic games), take PT84 on Wednesday, and pray for a good performance on Saturday.

Please let me know your thoughts/advice/if you have experiences something similar.

Thank you, take care y'all!

Can someone translate "No H is not A" for me?

Is it H -> A? (I tried to understand the sentence, rather than using the conditional rules)

Can someone explain this in detail using the conditional rule?

These are one type of question I often struggle a bit with, so I figured I would write out a bunch of common answer choice labels and define them in my own words, and was hoping others could weigh in on my definitions and possibly offer corrections, or general advice for these questions. Otherwise hopefully these definitions will help you clarify when examining the answer choices.

I find the most common labels are:

Analogy

Generalization

Example

Evidence

Premise

Sub conclusion

Principle

Support (offered as)

Premise

Main Conclusion

Destinction

Some of these are obvious, but others seem to be worth definition.

Analogy: A comparison between two things, typically for the purpose of explanation or clarification. Example: Finding an extra point on the lsat is like finding a needle in a haystack. An analogy actually functions quite similarly to a principle - while a principle makes a broad claim and applies it to a specific case, and analogy takes one specific case and applies it to another.

Generalization - A claim, drawn from a piece of evidence about a broader population. When survey results are used to make statements about the general population, that is a generalization.

Example: I asked 50 people along the beach if they liked icecream,and they all said yes. [I guess everyone on the beach likes icecream.]

Evidence: When were talking about evidence were talking about something objective. Evidence is a fact or something observable that, in and of itself, says nothing about what should or ought to be. Sometimes you might think evidence implies something, for example, the claim [gun violence has risen 25% every year for the past 6 years] might indicate gun violence is a serious problem, but that's you applying the meaning.

Premise: a premise is a claim which is subjective. [Gun violence is a problem] is a subjective statement when it's used to support the conclusion: Thus, /we should invest more money in our police force/ Premises are directed towards and support conclusions.

Sub Conlusion: These get pretty easy to identify eventually. I just look at rather evidence is directed at it. A subconlusion is a joint which connects premises and often packages them together into something easier and more compact that can then be tied into the main conclusion. If your unsure which conclusion, just look at which conclusion is directing into the other. Example: Everyone on the beach likes icecream. They also like frenzies and popsicles. [This shows that everyone on the beach likes lots of cold snacks.] Thus, we should open an icecream store on the beach.

If we cut the icecream store part from this argument, the statement about cold snacks would be the MC. But because it offers support for a final statement, that statement becomes the main conclusion.

Support: Something in the argument that makes something else stronger. This is really broad, and can have a ton of applications. Essentially, everything in an argument exempt the main conclusion is a support for something else. Generalizations, analogies, examples, principals, and premises are all supporting portions of an argument. When you encounter the word support in an answer choice, you need to focus on the direction of the support. Is it actually supporting the thing the answer claims it is? Dont worry about support indicating a specific type of statement. Dont be like, "This isnt really a support, it's a principal". Everything except the MC and possibly redundant statements or context is support of some kind. Focus on the direction.

Principle: is ‘a fundamental idea or general rule that is used as a basis for a particular theory or system of belief’. On role of statement questiond, principles are often offered without further support in an argument. They are a claim about the way things should be, perhaps based on the basis that their truth is self evident. The can also be argued for, or be a conclusion. Example: We should not hold punish John for getting someone badly injured while speeding down the highway, because he was doing so to save three people who were badly injured who he was driving to the hospital. Doing so saved their lives and saved their families from massive grief, and of course, [One should always act in a way which maxamixes net happiness].

Many of these catagorise subsume or overlap with others. When approaching the answer choices, I find it reduces stress to remind myself of this. A statement could be a sub-conlusion, a principal, and support. I made this list mostly for myself but figured I'd post on here. Hopefully others found it helpful, if anyone has any criticisms / input please let me know.

I was recently browsing a few law schools websites in anticipation of applications opening tomorrow. Interesting to note, Northwestern lowered their early decision scholarship to $120,000 from $150,000 over 3 years. Tuition is $64,102 per year and tuition will be increasing each year. The deal doesn't seem as sweet as it was a few years back. I also noticed that Berkley increased their early decision scholarship to $75,000 from $60,000 over 3 years.

Good luck to everyone taking the September LSAT

Reported by the Daily Wire:

https://www.dailywire.com/news/35303/lawsuit-student-denied-college-following-alex-amanda-prestigiacomo?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_content=062316-news&utm_campaign=benshapiro

I'm wondering to what extent something similar is possible in law school admissions?

I've been studying since January. I took a test before I jumped into the Power Score books and got a 160. I felt great! I worked through all three PS books, taking a test every week or so. My average from about 12 tests only moved to a 162, and I only got between 165-169 four times. Never hit my goal, 170. So, I reread the logic reasoning bible. And then again. Still nothing. I turn to 7Sage, and have worked through the entire syllabus in about three weeks. My score right before started 7Sage was 166. I took one a week throughout the course, and got worse and worse. 162. 161. Today, 160. I'm back where I started. I take the test on Saturday and I feel like I've done all this studying for nothing. Any advice? Ideal school is Vandy.

Also, I usually miss 0 (1-2 at most) in the games, 5-7 on each LR, and about 8-11 on reading. And don't suggest Spreeder, because it didn't help either :/

Hey everyone,

I work full-time, so my plan was to take 2 PT’s this Sunday and Monday.

My question is would it be best to just take 1 PT on Monday or go back to back PT’s Sunday and Monday? I know it may be unwise to take another PT without completing BR, but the only reason id do this is because I wouldn’t have time to take another PT during the week since I work.

My goal is a 155 on game day .

Last 5 PT’s: 150, 151, 153, 156, 152

I have been enjoying 7Sage right up until the LG section. I cannot learn these games this way. Can anyone recommend another resource that teaches the games in a different style? Not disloyal to 7Sage in any way, but this is making me a total head case and affecting my performance on all the sections. Before starting LG I was scoring -1 or -2 on LR and -3 or -4 on RC and now my scores are tanking across the board. #help

The active reading strategies preached by @TheoryandPractice are really good for anyone who is looking for that.

This is something much more specific. I am currently finding that Hardest Law passages are ones that I consistently have at least -1 in. So I decided to read and do every single one available in PTs. I found that my understanding of law in general has improved greatly, and my speed has gone from on average 12minutes down to about 10minutes per passage. It also helps just to get familiar with concept, such as common law vs civil or constitutional law, or how common law is made or changed, and develop a LSAC definition on terms, such as abjure, adduse, injunction, enact, balance, or semantic. I realized I got a handful of questions wrong simply because of my colloquial use of or lack of use of some of these words gave me misinterpretations.

This strategy, I think, is probably only effective for law, since it is more specialized and the ideas and terms can be learned fairly easily, whereas for art/history passages, the breadth is too wide for specific weakness practice to have much of an effect.

I wonder if anyone else uses this strategy, or has any feedback, and hope that someone can benefit from this.