Hi everyone,

Just thought I'd share some things I've learned in the course of studying for LR and that I'm really excited about!

I would like to say that I did go -1 on both LRs on my diagnostic and since then have only fluctuated in the -4 to 0 range. But I REALLY, REALLY want to emphasize that it didn't mean that I necessarily understood what I was doing or that I was any kind of master. I have no doubt that some of these good scores, especially on my diagnostic, had a lot more to do with luck.

I know this because I realize that my mindframe taking an LR section now is so, so different than before. 42 sections of LR later, and I can FEEL the way my brain has changed. 905 of the time now, I can already guess what the correct answer is going to be before I even start reading the multiple choice options. Whereas before, I used to run out of time, I finish with minutes to go... sometimes even 10 minutes left. Now, the only questions I get wrong are the really hard ones -- like 5-circle-difficulty scale hard. I want to emphasize that it's not because I'm any kind of genius, but because of tips, a lot of which I've learned from all of you.

Things that have helped:

Anyway, I'm making this post because I want to emphasize that I really feel like my brain has changed. I feel so much more confident in my LR skills, not like I'm blundering my way through and hoping. For those of us who aren't happy with your scores, it's completely possible to improve! And for those of us who did well at first, there's still probably room for improvement. Thanks everyone!

I'm looking at this (https://classic.7sage.com/admissions/lesson/when-to-write-a-non-required-addendum/?ss_completed_lesson=14725) lesson in the admissions course and I feel like I might be in a gray area. I think I'm pretty bad on standardized tests and, like everyone else who considers writing an addendum for a low LSAT score, I feel my score isn't representative of my intelligence or my ability to excel in law school. The lesson says the following and I think I might fall in this camp and would like your opinions on this:

If you have a history of scoring low on standardized tests but performing very well in school—for example, you scored a 14 on the ACT, but got straight As in difficult classes—you have legitimate grounds for writing an addendum.

My earlier standardized test scores have been all over the place but they have never been exceptional. While I didn't get a 14 on my ACT, I got a 24 and 25 on my first and second takes, respectively. My SATs went from as low as 1690 to as high as 1850. While an 1850 isn't horrible, there's still some room for improvement. I got into a top school and took some pretty hard classes and finished with an LSDAS GPA of 4.0+. What do you guys think about writing a low LSAT score addendum on these grounds?

Hey everyone, Across my studies, one thing that I have tried to do with LR is to look at arguments as repetitions of older forms of arguments. Trying to distill the argument in front of us down to something we are familiar with for me has been a real key to building my competence in LR. Competence leads to confidence, which shaves off time. Some of these forms are form that appear on nearly every exam: a sufficient/necessary confusion, the valid argument forms etc. Some are bit more rare.

My test dates are coming up (I’m scheduled to take both the July and the September exams) and I wanted to make a few posts about some specific (albeit rare) argument forms I have come across in my studies. This post will be dedicated to an argument form I have tentatively called the “tether” form. I am unaware of any other effort to specifically isolate and categorize this form or the others I have planned to post on in the coming weeks: although it is certainly possible that others closely studying the exam have indeed done so, maybe others have even named the form.

The basic analogy I want to build on here for the “tether” argument is this:

Imagine I have presented you with the following argument:

The New York Jets football team had an amazing record last year, after all, they finished with the same record as the Chicago Bears last year.

At bottom, I have tethered the claim in my conclusion to an unstated/unknown dock in the premise. A necessary assumption here would be that the Chicago Bears had an amazing record. Because the Jet and the Bears are both equal, if this assumption were not true, we would be tethering the Jets to a non-amazing record, which would defeat the argument. *_Note here to NFL fans, I am aware that in the real world this isn't exactly a necessary assumption because The Jets and Bears are in different divisions and the same record could be worth more in the AFC East etc, nice catch if you were thinking this, but: play along with the general gist of the argument for me please ;-) _

Going further: around this unstated assumption we can construct: weakening answer choices and strengthening answer choices. So in short, before we get into some examples: If I tell you that something is popular or great because it is similar to something else, I better have told you that that other things is popular or great, because by virtue of how a premise functions, I am “tethering” the subject of my conclusion to that in the premise.

Take a look at the structure of PT 56-3-10, where we have this very same outline slightly obscured by the usual LSAT tricks:

-Premise: because we have the same income from sales of t-shirts as these other series

-Conclusion: Our concert has popular appeal

With this knowledge in hand, we can see that what the argument has assumed is that the subject in which we have tethered the subject of our conclusion to in the premise, does indeed possess the property that we discussed in our conclusion.

Remember: because the Jets had the same record as the Bears, therefore the Jets had am amazing record.

We might also be asked to weaken this argument structure.

Pt 51-1-8

Here we conclude: sugar does not cause hyperactivity in population x

On the basis of: the behavior of sugar is tethered to the behavior of sugar substitutes.

Here, the credited response is simply a denial of the tethered assumption. In short: sugar is like a sugar substitute, therefore sugar does not do Y.

There is an infamous example that is slightly more complicated than the others on PT 37-1-19:

Here we have essentially “tethered” hatha yoga to traditional self help groups. And on the basis of that tethering, we conclude that hatha yoga is “powerful.”

There are other arguments that fit this form. These are just a few memorable examples.

In conclusion, my recommendation here would be to take the examples of this form of the argument and study them. Committing this form to memory takes only a few minutes of focused study and paid me dividends on PT 82, where I was able to spot a “tether” argument, answer it quickly and efficiently and move on to other questions that demanded more time from me. If you are able to do the same, please comment below with the question on PT 82 where the tether assumption is located: this is how you will know that you have successfully committed this form to memory. Carrying an understanding of a argument form forward is an important tool on the road to competence on LR.

David

Hi guys. I am scheduled to take the July and September test and I have been studying since January. My biggest current problem seems to be that I can't focus to save my life. Practice test are harder just cause my mind wanders consistently .I will read a question stem and then I'll have to read the premise multiple times for it to stick and I'm wasting valuable time .recently I've had the urge to just skip to the LG section just cause it's easier to focus on and work .I have like a month and a half left and I really want to pick up the pace and focus on improving.

Are there any study groups on the Charlotte and lake Norman area?

Hi all - So I've been studying my butt off since January and will be taking the test on Monday and also am registered in September.

My greatest fear, which is something I have been worried about since the beginning, is getting absolutely stuck on a logic game and thus ruining my overall score. It does occasionally happen (e.g. last night on PT 79 when I missed a quarter of the questions), and I end up with like a -8 or -9. Yet, I have gotten plenty of great scores on LR sections during PT including a -0, -1, -2, etc.

So I am seeking strategies if something like this occurs. Usually, when it does, it's because I can't figure out how to properly split a game board (or if I even should split), and/or I am just paralyzed in determining a proper approach to the questions. Furthermore the game just feels like it is beyond my ability to solve.

Overall I have probably spent more time working on Logic Games than anything else, so I would hate to crumble on this section! Especially because I am feeling more or less confident with my abilities on the other 2 sections.

Thanks all would love to hear your thoughts!

Hey everyone. I'd greatly appreciate it if I could get your advice on my situation regarding whether it's worth seeking accommodations.

I was diagnosed with clinical depression and anxiety disorder in the summer of 2015, and was put on anti-depressants; and eventually beta blockers and lorazepam (a benzo). The first time I studied for the LSAT was from Jan-May 2016 and used the LSAT trainer, with hopes of writing the exam in June. My highest PT was 156, and so I postponed the exam. I then studied from June to December, and used 7Sage. I sought a fresh start, while also focusing on my weaknesses. I just couldn't seem to break the 150's barrier. I eventually wrote the LSAT in June, and this time I tried Kaplan (which I learnt was a big mistake) from Feb to May because i felt an in-person class with homework would keep me further on my toes. However, i cancelled because i knew i bombed it. I won't blame my performance entirely on my diagnosed mental disability, but it definitely does not help. I was determined to get into the 160's, and used Powerscore from July to August, and registered for the September exam. I cancelled, because i just could not break into the 160's. At the time, I put down my failure to get a high score on the fact that i was on medication. I know that it's supposed to level the playing field, but I was having trouble connecting logical chains, and I eventually learnt that SSRI's and other anti-depressants can in fact impair or inhibit your ability to perform at your best cognitively. My doctor suggested that i taper off the medication. I did, and studied without them. Here's where it gets tricky: without the medication, i think more clearly if even just a bit, but my depressive and anxious symptoms increase a bit as well. It's a cycle. I get depressed because I can't get the score I want, and if I take anti-depressants to combat those feelings, my brain feels fuzzy and I feel mentally jaded, lethargic and foggy. The best analogy I can give is to imagine driving in your car on a clear night with the lights on full beam, but you only can only see fog everywhere. That's how I felt. I wasn't even overly stressed, maybe the same as any other student studying for the LSAT. My brain just felt heavy and my mental clarity seemed to be fading every time I studied. Perhaps other people with depression/anxiety can relate?

I tried different study methods, different courses/prep courses, and for two years I did meditation, yoga, healthy eating. and exercising. Unfortunately nothing helped, and I eventually wrote the LSAT in December while using Powerscore. During the exam, I experienced the same emotions i did while writing PT's and the September exam: trouble concentrating and retaining information, reading sentences various times to understand it, misreading words, reading words but not actually grasping what they mean. I expected the worst, and unsurprisingly, I got a 153. I feel like I've exhausted all my options now, and that it would be pointless to take another prep course or keep studying. No matter how many hours I put in, how many different methods I try, how many times I change my lifestyle/habits, nothing works. I didn't seek accommodations before because I didn't think I needed them or that anything was wrong with me. I just kept thinking that I wasn't trying my best or focusing enough. However, I learnt that mental illness and its treatments can definitely have an impact on the way you think, react to and grasp information. Another analogy I can give is to imagine a big square with a small circle placed in the center. The circle is my brain power when I'm studying/taking PT's, and the surrounding area is the fog/haziness I experience.

Now, do you think its worth seeking accommodations? I was only diagnosed in my 3rd year of university, so I don't have any prior history or proof of receiving previous accommodations. I only have notes from my psychiatrist and family doctor. I majored in History, and so I didn't really need accommodations during exams, because I was mostly assessed on essays and group work. Also, the fact that I got 153 definitely does not help. Do you guys think its worth paying $1800 for an upcoming psychoeducational assessment and seeking accommodations, or does the fact that I scored just a bit above average hinder my chances now?

My apologies for such a long read, but I do not know who else to ask.

I recently got aproval for time accommodations for the September lsat. Problem is I’m taking the July lsat with out the accommodations. Do you think if I get a good mark on the July they will relinquish my accommodations?

Hey everyone. I'm in the RC section of the CC currently and was wondering if anyone has access to the "template" that @"Accounts Playable" references in his webinar? I can't seem to locate where it is. Thanks a lot!

So if you print PTs from 7Sage, in the LG section, you have a giant margin at the bottom of at least one, usually both, pages to do all your scratch work. In the prep test books supplied by LSAC, there's hardly any room. Which one reflects how much space you get on the actual test?

What’s your schedule from today to test day on Monday? I did my last PT (84) today and scored what i typically score. No ugly or sexy surprises. Tomorrow, i have plans to go to my doctor appointment, read the economist, drill one section for confidence and meditate.

On Thursday, I’m getting a facial, meditating, watching movies. Then Friday-Saturday i will be reading the economist and meditating and doing 1-2 confidence sections as well as preparing my zip loc bag with test day stuff. Sunday night — nothing — will probably binge watch a show or something.

What are y’all doing?

I was just rewatching suits and when rachel got her rejection letter from Harvard I realized that Sheila really must have held it against loius even though she claimed she didnt. Rachel had a 172 , I'm assuming a stellar GPA from a top undergrad and she is a URM.

I'm no conspiracy theorist but.....

So slightly ridiculous question, but I’m basically half Eastern European and half Filipino. I’ve always been confused on whether I should be describing myself as Caucasian and Pacific Islander or if I should indicate I’m Caucasian and Asian. And any chance either one helps with admissions? I’m assuming not, but wondering if anyone has any thoughts about it!

Hi all,

I'm a little confused. I've been reading the forum and I don't think I fully understand how one goes about drilling timed sections or when one does so. Is this something to do after finishing the CC and in between full-length timed PTs? Also, which tests should I be using to drill? Do I use sections from practice tests I've already used? All over the forum people say to treat clean PTs as precious and only use them for timed, full-length LSAT practice so I have a feeling I shouldn't be pulling sections from my share of clean PTs.

Also: I know the CC is composed of questions from PTs but I don't know which ones they use and whether I should be pulling from tests that were used to create the CC.

Hopefully I'm making sense (?)

THANKS

Fight on!

Hi everyone,

I’ve been living off 7Sage for the past six-seven months and have lived vicariously through everyone’s amazing feedback, tips, support, and World Cup chatter. While I don’t post frequently, I wanted to offer this short post as proof that improvement is possible.

I started studying mid-January while working full-time. I planned on writing June but by the time I started taking PTs I realized I wasn’t anywhere close to ready. I kept scoring in the mid-150s (my diagnostic was 151) and after my fourth consecutive 154-156 score I felt completely dissolutioned. However, six months later, I have finally broken 160.

While I have a lot of work ahead of me, I wanted to share this tiny victory as I have been motivated by stories of people who have broken their own plateaus. I couldn’t have done it without the discussion boards and of course JY’s approach to besting the LSAT (I think a turning point in my studies was losing the lazy and fully dedicating myself to the Church of Blind Review). Good luck to everyone in their studies, and I look forward to future tiny victories that wouldn’t be possible without this community.

Logical Reasoning Help:

PT63.S1.Q1 (and Q2)

PT63.S1.Q1 - I am confused as to how this is a strengthen question. The prompt (if I’m not mistaken) is an inference type: “which one of the following most logically completes the argument?” I would appreciate any help!

PT63.S1.Q2 - Overall, this question was extremely difficult for me to understand. To weaken the argument, I would need to find an alternate cause for Jocko’s silence. The majority of the answer choices seemed to provide alternate causes (?) Again, any help would be greatly appreciated!

Admin note: edited title and added links

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-63-section-1-question-01/

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-63-section-1-question-02/

Thanks.

So I am looking for some guidance on the hard Logic Games I should practice. This section is by far my strongest section. The past couple of PTs I have scored my worst -3 and best -0. Because of this I have really backed away from working on LG so I can focus on LR and RC. I am concerned though that if I don't practice some then I will end up with a game I am not familiar with in September. Does anyone have a list of some of the hardest games that I can use to practice? I had some notes on advice someone gave on another post that said to practice PT27G2, PT29G2, PT33G3, PT79G4, and PT70G3.

I wouldn't say I have mastered them by any means but I actually genuinely enjoy doing them and have done very well after going through the CC and some fool-proofing. If only I could say the same about LR and RC.

Would anyone with the premium course be willing to take a screenshot of what the interface for drilling LR question types looks like? I'm just trying to get an idea of whether the extra investment will be worth it. Basically I just want to make sure I can drill LR within specific PT ranges so that I can preserve material for sectional practice. The course details are not incredibly helpful on this.

Thanks!

Hey everyone!

I've been struggling the last several days with these question types. I'm trying to score 175 on the exam. Right now my logic games section is good (0 or -1). My reading comprehension is my weak spot that I'm trying to compensate for. It ranges from -3 to -6. As a result, I'm trying to get as close to perfect on logical reasoning as possible. I'm at a range of 165-170 with logical reasoning varying from -10 to -6.

Difficult strengthen + required assumption questions are the ones I usually get wrong in logical reasoning, with some occasional flaw questions. I've tried negating the argument, but I don't think it works well for me and my mindset. With strengthen I usually come down to a right and wrong answer yet pick the wrong one. The flaw questions I get wrong I recognize the general source of the flaw yet I pick an answer with similar yet incorrect phrasing of the flaw. Any help/advice?

Thank you!

I studied using ONLY 7Sage from April 2017--scoring at 141--to December 2017 where I got a 161 on the Dec test (-9 RC -11LR -5LG), but I used every single PT to study with the exception of PTs 71-84. My goal is a 170+.

Background

I have recently finished the Bible Trilogy and thought they were a fantastic addition onto the 7sage course, specifically for learning little tips and tricks. My game plan at the moment is to take PTs 50-84 before the November test. I am not sure how good of a method this is, since my material will be pretty limited. Of course, I will be reviewing and BRing each test.

There were two good things that came from getting the score I actually was not happy about. One was that my highest PT score, that was also my last three PT scores before the real test, was a 161. So I performed just as well on the real deal as I did my PTs, even down to questions missed per section. The other good thing is that I now have had experience with test day in general. Both of these factors have affected the way I PT this time around.

Yesterday, I took PT 50 and got a 167 on it (-8RC -2LR -3LG). I am excited at this score but it might be inflated as I did remember some LR questions and a whole passage from RC that was just used as a drill in the RC Bible. Nevertheless, even retaking sections when I had no break the first go around, I never once went -0 on a LR section and I have done so on this PT.

Question regarding prep

My overall question feeds off this inflation dilemma and my previous run; how can I adequately prep when I have instances where I remember questions/passages/games and I also don't have a ton of "new" material to work with over the next 4 months?

Any help would be wonderful, thanks a lot.

I've found my LR scores took a hit ever since I began adopting time management strategies like skipping and doing the first 15 questions in 15 minutes. When I go back and look at the ones I missed the correct answer is typically clear but under timed conditions I'm often not even circling these questions! Am I simply moving too fast? I want to learn how to skip effectively but so far it hasn't helped.

What are the prospects of getting admitted to a law school that accepts the GRE? Is it really likely someone with only a GRE score can get admitted?

Or should I wait until I'm done with all the CC to actually start foolproofing, as in doing each game several times? If the latter, I think I'll finish up the CC and then take PT 1-35 timed and then BR each one and foolproof them at the same time.

Heya, hope everyone is doing well. I was just wondering if the course provides an option to print out 5-section PTs so we can better simulate test-day conditions?

Thanks!