Hey all,

So I've been drilling RC for a few weeks. I've done all RC sections from PT's 19-47.

During my drills from PT 19-40, I was averaging around -3/4 after blind review and -6 timed.

I took the RC section from PT 47 today, and managed to get a -0 blind review (my first one ever!!!!! the closest I've ever been on my RC blind review score was a -2). My timed score for that section though was like a -7 though, and I was really struggling to finish under time.

My questions are:

I find myself often rushing at the last passage. I try to average about 3:30 for reading passages and about 5 minutes for questions.

I also try skipping strategies by skipping questions once I read through the answer choices twice and still can't choose an answer.

Any advice or suggestions is appreciated. I know there have been previous threads on this topic in general of bridging the BR/timed gap, but I'm hoping for advice tailored to RC on this topic. Thanks so much in advance - you guys rock!!

Is it any faster/slower to approach Point at Issue Q's with JY's approach (reading first person's POV and scanning the answer choices to determine whether they agree or disagree, then doing the same for the second person's) than the usual LR one (reading both POV's and attacking the answer choices)?

I am planning on taking the September LSAT. I only began studying a few weeks ago, and have been following the study schedule provided by 7sage. However, I am most concerned with working on the logic games which is the section I struggle the most with. Does anyone know if it is necessary to follow the syllabus in the order in which the study schedule provides it? Or would I be fine skipping right to logic games?

Thanks!

There is a myth out there that on Strengthen questions the LSAT will always give us four definitive non-strengtheners and only one strengthener. But this problem is arguably definitive proof that the myth is false.

(B) is not the correct answer. Yet it is a necessary assumption of this argument, because if the social impact of none of the new drugs is poorly understood, then we don't have any reason for the premises to support the claim that we should be generally slowing down introduction of the new drugs to the marketplace. The clear assumption of this argument is that we don't have a good understanding of most of the new drugs on the marketplace, and (B) is a smaller assumption contained within that larger one, which makes it necessary. (Note that there is an argument that it is not necessary because the argument just has to assume that we don't have a "good" understanding of these new drugs, not that our undestanding is "poor". That view has merit, but I don't believe it is important to deal with here.)

In other problems, a necessary assumption has been a correct answer to a Strengthen question. And that makes sense, because providing a necessary assumption does, at a minimum, help the argument.

But here, although (B) is necessary, it is not correct, because (A) is better. Clearly, either not all necessary assumptions are strengtheners or some strengthen problems will require us to pick the best of multiple strengtheners.

Admin note: edited title

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-30-section-4-question-20/

Does anyone have access to an updated list of tutors?

Do any of you guys recall what the beginning question(s) of the two real LR were or the beginning question of the experimental? I had three LR sections and Powerscore usually posts it but not for this administration. I did relatively well on 2 LR sections and did terrible on one of them. TYIA!

Admin note: edited title for clarity

I believe I lost most of my points in LR and feel really confident in LG and RC. Again, I had three LR sections so hopefully the harder one was an experimental. Anyone feel they may have managed to score above 170

I'm not able to download a copy of the Prep Tests. Any suggestions?

Admin note: edited title

Are there explanations for each LR AND RC for PTS 1 - current ?. IF not what options are available.

Admin note: edited title for clarity

... and I am so freaking motivated. If I didnt love lawyering before I sure do now. So inspirational; so mesmerizing... I may have gotten a little emotional but lets just blame it on the preggo hormones. Has anyone else watched it yet? Am I the only one having a serious Come-To-Jesus moment?

https://media0.giphy.com/media/O9BXteOI7ywJW/giphy.gif

Is it true that a Necessary Assumption answer choice can be an answer to a Strengthen question, but a Strengthen answer cannot be an answer to a NA question? It seems like NA denies a possible weakness and that can be consider a form of strengthening. Yes, no?

s

Do you guys think that if I start taking the course in September while attending university will work? Meaning that I will study the LSAT for the June test starting September will also studying at university... Do you think that will work or no?

Hi team,

A quick question about JY's reasoning on this one:

One of his sub-game boards reads:

In: C/L

Out: C/L

Floaters: M/M/L

But wouldn't the contrapositive of the first rule make this untrue?

M/M --> C/C/L

not M/not M --> not C/not C/not L

So, the correct sub-game board would be:

In: C/L/M

Out: C/L/M

Floater: L

Am I missing something?

Admin note: edited title

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-7-section-2-game-3/

Hi,

I have taken number of PTs before. I scorerd 139 on my diagnostic and then spent couple of weeks self-studying and managed to average 149 in the two PTs that I took afterwards. Now, I started my membership with 7Sage (LSAT stater) few days ago and so far it has been good. However, I noticed that I won't be able to finish all of my study schedule (core curriculum, etc) until at least a month from now. So, I was wondering about whether I should wait until then to start taking PTs again or should I just take some while studying the core curriculum?

P.S: I am planing to take the LSAT in September.

Your responses will be much appreciate it.

I have to be missing something here. Can somebody explain to me how the answer in this question is (e) and not (c)? I just don't understand how inhaling smoke in a way that non-cigarette smokers inhale somehow puts them at an equal risk?

I asked this question last night and received good feedback that should have been able to help me tackle these problems yet I am still struggling with them. I have even went back to watch the lessons all over again and I am still having trouble finding the correct answer. First I read the question stem and then I read the stimulus and then paraphrase the stimulus sentence by sentence so that I can understand exactly what each premise is saying. That works until I get to the answer choices. When I watch JY'S explanation one minute he says something about making a generalized concept then the next minutes he is making an assumption versus an inference to me. I have tried questioning each answer choice by asking "why" or "does the text support this" and then I end up with my answer and it is wrong. How can I continue to get better at these questions or what I am potentially doing wrong or missing?Did sometime just completely go over my head?

When you guys practice doing full length PT's under test taking conditions, for RC, do you guys keep track of how long it takes you read each passage and do the qusetions?

I know the aim is for 330 for reading passages and about 5 minutes for the questions per passage.

Also, do you guys keep track of how long it takes you to do each LG?

If so, how do you do that? Do you use like a stop watch with a lap function?

OR do you just ignore keeping track of how long it takes to do each individual part and just focus on the general 35 minute time limit? Thanks!

Author POV

Purpose of paragraphs

Rough structure

What else?

I am still in the process of going through these lessons so I might be ahead of myself but is there a formula for tackling most strongly support questions. I understand that the stimulus is the premise and I have to piece together statements to make an inference of the conclusion but I find myself re-reading the stimulus over and over again then staring at the screen.

hey all,

i've been drilling RC for a few weeks, and I've been facing lots of fluctuations in RC. My timed score can range from like -4 to -7. My BR scores range from like -2 to -7.

I get really happy when I see a BR score of -2, but then really sad when I see a BR score of like -7.

How long did it take ppl to get consistent with RC - where they're consistently hitting like -1/-2? It's kinda frustrating to see this kind of fluctuation. And any advice on how to get there? Thanks!

Hey guys!

Here's the official June 2018 LSAT Discussion Thread. Please keep all discussions of the June 2018 LSAT here!

We know that everyone will be excited to discuss what was on the June 2018 LSAT, but here are some ground rules:

:warning: Don't mention specifics about the test! (e.g., "I got B for question 6" or "the 3rd LG was sequencing")

It can get both us and you in a lot of trouble!

:warning: Saying that the test was hard/easy is okay, but anything more specific is not okay!

:warning: The only exception: you can say which sections were real or experimental. For example, asking questions like “Was the LG with "flowers" experimental?” is okay. You can say “The LG section with "flowers" was real!” But you cannot say “the 3rd game of the real section was In/Out game.”

TL;DR: PLEASE don't talk specifics about June 2018 LSAT!

Have fun discussing!

The trend on law school forums is that T14 into Big Law ought to be the goal for anyone who is pursuing a legal career. It is a fact that Big Law produces (generally) the least happy lawyers even when adjusting for income disparity, nonetheless Big Law seems to be the goal for an overwhelming majority of posters. Especially within top schools, there is a strong motivation to acquire a Big Law position.

For those of you who are convinced that Big Law is the career path for you, why?

If money was the same between Big Law and other paths, would you still choose Big Law?

I got into two schools and got waitlisted at two others. I had to pay the deposit for my safety school, but I retook the LSAT yesterday to see if I could get a better score. I feel like I probably got a better score, but my safety school is asking me to confirm enrollment before I get my LSAT score back. The other two schools that I got waitlisted at said a decision will be made before August 6, and the safety school's orientation starts August 7. How should I approach the safety school's enrollment confirmation question since I'm hoping my score will be good enough to go to one of the waitlisted schools?

Does anyone have an example of this type of Flaw as an actual LSAT question.

The flaw is something like ~The argument explicitly goes against what author stated previously. Not sure if I'm coming across clearly but if you know what I'm talking about can you direct me to an LSAT questions where this flaw is used.