Hi 7sagers, curious what y'alls opinion is on this - at what point is a test taker to be satisfied with where they are at and move on? I know it is in our future lawyers nature to never be satisfied with where we are at and always feel like we need a little more re-tuning. I am a sub 3.0 GPA applicant trying to gain admission to the T14 next cycle, I have a 173 LSAT on the books from December and am trying to decide if I should take another swing at this thing. I went -4LR/-3RC/-2LG, both LG's were rule substitutions..I was usually a -0/1 LG guy so that did bother me.

I'm not applying to the T6, so since I am already 3 or more points above everyone else's 75th LSAT line would a 174 or 175 really even open up more doors for me that a 173 wouldn't? The ( 3.0 / )170 data on myLSN is so scanty that it is hard to know. Also even though I know schools now say it doesn't matter, I have a hard time believing that should I score in the 170-172 range on a re-take that that wouldn't lessen the luster of my 173 at least a little.

When is the point where we have pushed the LSAT boulder as far as it's going to help us, need to accept diminishing returns, and be at peace with it? I hear some people say that 175ish is the last milestone of the test that you can consistently train up to, beyond which you need a little luck of the draw on specific q's, so is this where y'all would place the re-take ceiling?

If I would've scored a 170/171 I would've retaken just to push up a few pts above those 75th lines of the non-T6, but now at a 173 am stuck between feeling like I should just be proud and grateful for what I have achieved, and also thinking well I am only those 2 LG pts away from a 175!

Thanks for any input!

Can anyone offer any anecdotal or empirical evidence on whether adcoms consider your major against your GPA? I've heard it's all GPA and they barely consider what you studied.

I certainly don't mean to offend anyone but it seems absurd for an adcom to equate a 3.8 in chemical engineering with a 3.8 in english. Personally, I finished with a 3.7 in finance from a good Midwestern business school and I'm really hoping the difficulty of my major helps compensate for a low-ish GPA, at least by T14 standards.

Hi 7Sages,

I have a confusion in representing "if then must" conditions.

Suppose there is a sentence given as :

If N is not selected then T must be selected .

So, is the representation like this?

not N -> T

contrapositive is

not T -> N

If here, N is satisfied then does the rule drops away and does T becomes a floater ?

Since there is a 'must' keyword involved..I am confused.

Please clarify this.

Thank you.

Hey everyone!

After about 2 years studying inconsistently for the LSAT while working full-time for the past 4 years as a bilingual teacher, I ended with a lousy 148..

I was disappointed with my score because over the winter break, I was PT'ing at around 3-4 points higher since I had so much time. Then the break ended, and I was

I didn't apply to many schools considering my score and that I want to stay in Texas, so I only got accepted into South Texas College of Law, Oklahoma City University (10k scholly renewed each year), and St. Mary's College of Law in San Antonio.

I'm currently 27 (will turn 28 in July), and although I honestly think the best decision would be to retake the LSAT, I'm tempted by some of the programs/clinics and what I've heard overall about STCL from friends who have graduated from that school.

My short and long term goals are the following: short term: I'm interested in immigration/family law. long term: I've always dreamed and aspired to become a sports agent, so I'd be looking to some contract law, adr, stuff like that.

I'd love to hear everyone's honest and candid feedback. I'm tempted to start this Fall, but I have to think with my head and not my heart...

Just finished the LR portion of the CC. Prior to the CC, my average performance on LR sections was ~20-21 questions answered with a score in the high teens/low 20's. I did a single timed LR section to get a snap shot of potential progress. 25 question section, 24 out of 25 questions answered (skipped a parallel flaw question intentionally due to stimulus / AC length). -2 on the section (the skipped one and one other 4 star question). In addition to the score, while reviewing the section, the in-test notes / logic analysis look totally different than prior to the CC and seem much more methodical and focused (a positive in my opinion).

Its a single data point and could be an outlier, but I'm very pleased with the outcome and hopeful that it is indicative of continued future improvement. Good ROI from my point of view.

Qualifier: Full transparency, I did watch an episode of McMafia prior to taking the section. There may be a correlation / causation flaw with my attribution of progress to the CC. I'll leave open the possibility that watching McMafia is improving my LR skills...

Hi everyone, I've been having troubles tackling a few LR questions and I'm noticing that I tend to consistently get them wrong (necessary assumption and method of reasoning). Do any of you have unique tips on how you approach these two question types? I've reviewed CC a couple of times now for both question types!

June'18 Study Group | Blind Review PT 64 | Tuesday, March 27th | 7:30 pm EST

https://media.giphy.com/media/WrGiAHYhZZYZ2/giphy.gif

Thank You Victoria for the gif to support the SG!!- @teamteamvicster (3(/p)

I hope you're ready or gearing up to start PTing for the June 2018 LSAT. Join us this Tuesday if you are finished with the CC.

Provisional Schedule: https://calendar.google.com/calendar/embed?src=f3n8s2l60gkgm2ju8m8kk4vhn4@group.calendar.google.com&ctz=America/New_York

Note:

For everyone: take the PT under timed conditions; BR as you are able on your own; then join us for all or part of the call—everyone is welcome.

Note: For the purposes of the call, we like to check our group blind review score together at the very end of the call :) So at least don't say ... "No guys, really, it's D, I checked it.” KEEP THE CORRECT ANSWER TO YOURSELF. Win the argument with your reasoning.

These groups work best when folks from ALL stages of prep and with all different goals join in! Not just for "super-preppers" and definitely not just for the casual LSATer (does such a person exist?).

The only expectation anyone has for these calls is for you to have fun and ask questions as you desire. We are just a bunch of LSAT lovers who gather via GoToMeeting and intellectually slaughter each test.

Enter any questions you wish to go over on the spreadsheet below!

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wLCip2bbWWD_h3WqGqBY6YaGPGdGQdSsr3gnphKYdxo/edit#gid=0

Please join the meeting from your computer, tablet or smartphone.

https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/851725797

You can also dial in using your phone.

United States: +1 (786) 535-3211

Access Code: 851-725-797

Joining from a video-conferencing room or system?

Dial: 67.217.95.2##851725797

Cisco devices: 851725797@67.217.95.2

First GoToMeeting? Let's do a quick system check: https://link.gotomeeting.com/system-check

June 18' Study Group Discord Link: https://discord.gg/kpGkYx6

Join when it is best for you in your studies! Look forward to Tues BR:)

@BinghamtonDave @Freddy_D @tringo335 @achen013 @airborne1 @SiliconJedi @abernardi @TaylorAnn @Moniagui22 @Sarah_39 @"Lauren L" @kjsmith914 @Brazil020511 @attalla253 @tmickjr__ @jourdan.gardner @Gladiator_2017 @nima250 @"Adam Hawks" @"Lizzette G" @meganqliu @lizgu316 @LSATlife @"Paul Pederson" @CJF_2180 @aguirreliz92 @"Jay Lee" @canadalegalbiz @shannon_ @"Shawn Nguyen" @manan1996narula @btownsquee @"Shazia..." @lsatplaylist @Guillaume @"Marco Antonio" @"Jamie Lynn B" @smartaone2 @justicedst @Jay_Camp @Chandymen @jbodnovich @RJmazo14 @yahejazi @ziegler6 @JayClarke242 @TheSailor @Kermit750 @CoffeeBeans @lakish2010 @JURISDOCTOR35 @samantha.ashley92 @"Grace..." @greybrownblue @ohnoeshalpme @Ignatius @J.CHRIS.ALST @akriegler @lzkosman @sillllyxo @TheNotoriousRBG @necessarynaomi @"forest.dearing.2017" @alyhobbs @alafuente @vrendonvasquez @akriegler @"alexandra.marlene" @jkatz1488 @moonrider919 @missmalo @"Kings Never Die" @chisal17 @amatthews304 @"Human Becoming" @Hamaseh_S @adultish_gambino @dazedandconfused @danny_d5 @pasu1223 @alyssamcc0593 @LCMama2017 @chisal17 @estouten25 @ChaimtheGreat @rochelleb180 @ecarr_12 @Christina-5 @cynnnnnn @demiiisodaaa @jimmyrivera201 @baileybd2929 @chicaryss @Sadaf529 @saberati @"Mia Fairweather" @"Idil.Beshir" @djdjjdjd @"chang.richard.94" @LauraC829 @yuanyuan1205 @"marino.zach" @zoemichaelabrown @MarieChloe @beezmoof @"paulmv.benthem" @benhancock68 @"Do the right way" @"Creative Username" @Jernstedt @Rtwrtw8 @yuanyuan1205

Hi everyone!

I had a question about the application process. So I had to be a full-time student throughout my junior and currently my senior years of undergrad (taking 18-20 credits each semester to help recover my GPA) as I was placed on academic probation my sophomore year due to being a biochemistry major and failing my math and science classes. Because of this, I have not had any time to devote to a professional/significant job to put on my resume (aside from working part-time as a teacher's assistant for a few months before quitting to focus on school). So that being said, how important is work experience (or lack thereof) in law school applications? Is it a deal-breaker for admission officers? I plan on applying to mainly NYC schools (Fordham, Cardozo, St. John's, Brooklyn, etc.) if that helps.

Anyone else find that the best way for them to improve RC was to actually just read more?

What books are you currently reading and what do you like about it?

Currently reading Pimp by Iceberg Slim...book was featured by Dave Chappelle in case it seems like an odd choice.

Hoping to find out about more fun reads

Submitting a LOCI before a waitlist - has anyone ever done this/is this at all advisable? I feel like as I'm still waiting to hear from schools this late in the cycle, it might be good to reiterate my interest in some of the schools for those weighing me hard...

deleted

Apart from the schools that specify you have to be a URM. I know that some schools leave the prompt for a diversity statement open.

I wanted to get the concensus of what you guys think about this justifying a diversity statement.

I grew up ( and currently reside) in a home that doubles as a synagogue. For the past 14 yrs my father has been the preacher in a synogogue that is the back half of my house. I have cleaned it every week and do the general maintenance on it (painting,lights, yada yada) for the past 14 yrs ( i am only 22 so i can definitely say it has been a huge part of the majority of my life). P.s. i do this all for free. I dont get paid at all for any of this. I do it as a community service

Waking up in the morning to find congregation members traipsing through my house to use my bathroom is part of my M.O. lol

The reason i am considering writing a statement for this is that i beleive it has really affected who i am today as a person and that it has had an affect on my future career goals,( to help others) AND that I will add a different dimension of diversity to a university

P.p.s i am not writing this to gain anyones respect or to blow my own horn. I would really appreciate your honest input. Be brutal.

Thanks,

Nathaniel

I haven’t had a chance to visit my top 3 law school choices yet, so is it smart to put down multiple seat deposits? I should be able to visit two within the next few weeks.

When going through the LG portion of the CC,

should I still do LR and RC? If so, which materials should I use?

Any thoughts?

Hi everyone,

How do I interpret "All A are only B"?

The conditional is clear, "no B then no A" but when thinking of it from a categorical perspective (like syllogisms etc) I'm no sure what it would look like or how to diagram.

Example:

"All diamonds are expensive"

"All diamonds are only expensive"

The first clearly allows for diamonds to be other things too, like beautiful, sturdy, etc.

But the second seems like it's saying that yes, all diamonds are expensive, but also that they're nothing else (so they're not beautiful or sturdy, just expensive)

Thanks in advance! This has confused me...

Hey!

Just got my first acceptance last week and it was not my first choice but seeing how this cycle is going it might be my only choice.... so now I am stuck between the choice of going or wait till next cycle and would really like to get your opinion on the matter (it's a big decision!)

Option 1: Go (oh it's BYU btw)

Pros:

Cons:

Option 2: Don't go and move to California

Pros:

Cons:

I currently have a 161 and 3.74, applied to BYU (duh), UCLA, USC, Berk, UT, but I doubt I'll get into any of the other schools this cycle. Let me know what you think? I keep getting the "Top15 or don't go" vibe, is that true?

edit: Might I add that BYU is flying me out from Dublin to Utah next weekend to admitted students day so I could check out the school. They spent like $1k on the ticket and I feel like a superstar.

I am unsure where to apply. Here are my stats:

GPA: 3.65

LSAT: 165

Jobs/Internships: ACLU, 3 years at a law firm during college, congressional campaign, Los Angeles Museum of the Holocaust

College: UCLA

Have a great letter of rec from a sitting congressman and a few from professors. Where should I apply?

Admin note: edited title for clarity

.

Hi everyone!

I was wondering if someone could share their understanding of this question. I was able to eliminate B, D, and E very quickly, but got tied up between A and C and ended up picking C. I can see why A is a good answer, but I'm having a harder time seeing why C is definitively wrong.

To me, the stimulus seems like it's saying that the equipment was not available during the review period. Thus adding the equipment will have no effect. I mean, I guess the stimulus doesn't explicitly say that the absence of equipment caused the result, but it seems sort of implied?

Hi All,

(have asked some of you about this and want to crowdsource to maximize feedback)

I'm curious to hear your thoughts on whether it's a good idea to foolproof LG and drill LR/RC at the same time?

I'm a strong believer in Foolproofing. It definitely works. However, I've read that many people devote 1 - 2 months to exclusively working on Foolproofing during the process. It seems counterintuitive to me to leave LR/RC to the side, especially if one plans to take the test in June.

I'm thinking of FP-ing LG sections in the mornings and taking 1 full timed LR or RC sections plus Blind Review in the evening each day. Obviously, I could also spread out the sections and not religiously stick to 1 per day. Anyway, this is just an idea to make sure I don't lose touch with the other 2 sections while working on Foolproofing

Does anyone have any insight to offer about why I should/shouldn't do this? Or advice for study-schedule planning, methods, etc?

Thanks in advance!

Hey! So I applied to about 14 schools and am still waiting to hear from 13 of them...BUT I just got accepted to a school (not my dream school but still good) with a deposit deadline due April 10 and a scholarship acceptance deadline by April 3. What should I do? I don’t think I’ll get most of my decisions in by those dates at all, since I applied close to the deadline for most of them (took the Feb LSAT)

I know I’m gonna feel like an idiot when this is explained, however, right now I feel like an even bigger idiot because the correct AC (B), is really confusing me. If there is much less methane in Earth’s atmosphere today than there was 3billion years ago, then less greenhouse gas equals less heat trapped, and therefore, cooler climate today than 3billion years ago. This appears to strengthen rather than weaken the argument. CAN SOMEONE PLEASE HELP ME WITH MY CONFUSION?

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-59-section-2-question-25/

Admin note: edited title

So I'm posting here in part to rant, and in part in hopes that someone on the forum has had a similar situation and can offer some advice.

As you might ascertain from the title, this GoodValue™-Soduko of a section is the bane of my existence at this point. On my diagnostic, I started with a -20+. I had no clue how to solve any of the questions. After studying diagramming and using the 7sage CC, I was able to bring it down to -15 to -10, but I cannot seem to break above that plateau. I've been studying for a little longer than a year now, and I've made significant progress in both RC and LR, but LG just won't budge. This is especially frustrating because almost everyone on the forum says that LG is the easiest area to improve -- it just makes me feel stupid every time I go -15+ on a PT.

For the past month I've been foolproofing games, 6-8 hours a day, but I'm not seeing any progress. I've FP'd all the games from PTs 1-12, 35-40, and 60,61,62. When I foolproof, I do the games until I'm -0 and under time on day 1, then I do the same the next day, and then I wait a week and attempt it again. Only when I can get -0 and under time under all three scenarios do I discard the game. So far I haven't had any problems -- I'm able to remember the inferences and complete the game under timed conditions even after 1 week of not seeing the game.

The problem is, I feel that every single time I take a PT or a timed section, the test writers do something that I've never seen before, and I just don't have the intuition to handle the twist. If they give me an unfamiliar rule, I almost invariably represent it inefficiently and make false inferences, flunking the game. If it's a miscellaneous game, I'll almost invariably set the game board up incorrectly -- tanking the game. For example (Spoiler regarding PT61), on PT61 S3 G1, I didn't realize that the two groups were interchangeable (I had never seen this before) so I didn't split, tried to brute force and went way over time and flunked the game.

At this point, it seems inevitable that I'll choke when it comes to the real exam. This is especially frustrating because of how much time I've spent studying my other sections. I'm currently averaging -1.5 per LR section, -1 per RC section, and -12 per LG section. It took me hundreds of hours of study to get LR and RC to where they are, and it feels as though this damn LG section is just destroying that progress.

Has anyone else been in a similar situation and broken out of the rut? I apologize if the post sounds overly negative, but I just feel so defeated by this section. I would appreciate any advice or encouragement that ya'll could give, because I sure need it.

Is there anyway to clear my lesson history so I can completely startover? I think I would really benefit from starting all over and would prefer if my syllabus reflected that!

Totally dropped the ball on both of these. Help?

For Q4: I thought D was totally wrong and I was completely sure of it because I thought to myself, "How could we possibly know what's in the best interest for the military?" I fell for answers A, C (second choice).

For Q21: I had no idea that "some" came into the mix; totally out of left field.I picked A even though I knew it made no sense. It just made the most sense.