Although most law schools claim not to have a preemptive cutoff score for the LSAT. Let be real, they have to draw the line somewhere. Let’s say for a school whose median is 153, and a mean of 150. Would you say that cutoff is 149?

Got 108k in scholarship to UUIC. Numbers close to median and a special shout out to @"David.Busis" for helping me prepare a stellar application! Highly recommend his services!

I am working my way through the CC currently and it's really paying off (wish I found 7sage months ago!). I'm wondering what you guys do when you get to the problem sets. Do you watch every explanation video or just the ones for the questions you struggled with?

Currently I'm watching every single explanation video regardless of how I performed on the question, but I'm wondering if I'm using my time inefficiently in doing so. I'm definitely improving but sometimes I think my time would be better used moving along more quickly. Anyone have thoughts on this?

Thanks!

Hey guys, since I didn't do a BR call for PT83, I want to open the forums up to solicit questions from PT83, preferably from LR.

If you have a question about PT83 please make a new thread with a title conforming to:

PT83.S#.Q# - first several words from the stimulus

Do not ask the question here in this thread. Make a new thread.

Try to explain your thought process in your original post. I'll try to answer / explain.

Wondering if anyone else is having this issue....

I’m noticing that some law schools ask for all your work experience (paid and unpaid) since age “x” to be on your resume but if I were to do that then my resume would exceed 1 page. Is it better to have more than 1 page or is it ok to exclude the not so important jobs/unpaid summer internships?

Thanks!

I am still waiting to hear from 4 of the schools I applied to (application submitted in November) and received a notable award at the company I work for at the end of 2017. Since I've been out of school for a few years I consider this an award worth informing schools of but I've noticed that some blatantly state to submit updated résumés while others don't. Should I submit an updated résumé if a school doesn't specifically say I should? I assume that it wouldn't hurt but could be wrong, any thoughts?

Hello,

Why is E wrong?

Is E wrong because it is an assumption that plants and animals "will" move to inhabit areas that are currently used for "agriculture"

Redacted

I am wondering if there are any methods and/or ideas you use to configure a game board within the analytical reasoning section. Thank you in advance.

Could anyone confirm that it will not show up on your record even if you withdraw more than once? I withdrew from the September LSAT, and am registered for the February LSAT, but not scoring where I need to be.

Thanks!

I really struggle with reading comprehension, and have been thinking of ways to improve. I have a few months before I write the LSAT and was wondering what some of you would recommend to get better.

I was thinking about subscribing to the economist and reading random articles that I find hard on a daily basis and using the 7sage reading comprehension method to really understand those articles. But I'd really like to hear from some of you who are killing the reading comp section. What works??

Hi everyone!

I've been studying with 7Sage since October while working full-time, going through the Core Curriculum lessons after work (spending about 3-4 hours per day). I started writing timed PTs in mid-December, and I've completed about 20 of them to date. My average score is 157, with my highest being 159. My target is 160, but of course I would love to be within the mid-160s.

After reading the discussion threads during the December exam timeframe and reading the threads now, there seems to be a general consensus that one should postpone if they're not scoring near their desired range. Does anyone have any advice for those of us that might be very close or just barely within their target?

My apologies if this has been touched on previously...

Many thanks!

Hi everyone happy friday! I figured we could all use a logic related laugh so I wanted to share something I saw this morning that I thought was hilarious! Start watching at 2:30 for the logic related humor.

Could someone be so kind to explain why AC B is correct? I went with E, quite confidently at that. Any insight is greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance!

-H

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-73-section-2-question-19/

I applied to Harvard the other day. I don't have the lsat or the GPA so I anticipate a rejection. I've only told a few people that I applied because I'm embarrassed I even bothered. I gave the personal statement my all but obviously you can't write yourself into a school without the numbers.

I was feeling super excited to just finish the application but today I just feel stupid for it. Am I alone in this?

Would anyone advise against taking 3 tests within the week? If so, what alternative practice would you recommend during my final days of studying?

Hi fellow Sagers,

I'm currently in the final stretch preparing for the February LSAT. I have a quick question re: blind review. I've been doing it for the past 4 weeks, and rarely see an improvement (or significant increase) on my BR results. Sometimes it's actually lower! I feel like I almost look to find a way to pick an alternate answer, if I've tagged a Q for BR. Like it's triggering a part of my brain to second guess my original reasoning. Sometimes my BR is one or two points above or below my timed conditioned PT. For example, just PT-ed #71. Actual score: 165. BR: 166. Am I an outlier? Is this normal? Seems like everyone else scores way higher on their BR. To be clear, I'd be more than happy with anything in the 160s as these scores will fall in and above the medians for my schools of choice (Canada), so I'm not especially bothered by the scores nor am I aiming for the 170s (of course, a score up there would be a pleasant surprise, but I don't think it's realistic). Any feedback on this would be most welcomed.

Can someone please explain this flaw? Why would it matter if the election outcome was different if the majority party had not supported the bill?

There are some situations where JY takes a different approach to a rule for no ostensible reason other than the fact that the ordinary approach would result in some difficulty that is not clear except based on hindsight. But this does not help someone facing the game for the first time!

The primary example of this is how we approach an ordering rule that has "or but not both." The usual way appears to be to split the game based on that rule, because it creates a "binary cut." This makes a lot of sense and is helpful. JY recommends this approach in PT83 Game 2, PT52 game 4, PT51 Game 2, and I might be missing some others. He occasionally solves without the split but also endorses the split and goes over it in a different video - PT78 Game 3. But what is troubling for me is that there doesn't seem to be an explanation of why one would approach this type of rule without a split rather than with the split. Obviously it's good to be able to do it both ways, but how does one know when one approach would be more effective than the other?

This problem reveals itself in PT61 Game 2, where JY does NOT do a split and does not talk about why he didn't do the split, even when one would quite naturally think about doing the split if one has been following the other videos. It turns out that the split, if done, is slightly messy and is not as easy to do as it normally is -- several students in the comments to the video note that the game was a lot harder with the split. But when asked why he didn't do the split, JY comments "Yeah, the P messes things up… It was a while ago, but I think that was why I didn’t link them up." This is definitely a good reason why the split doesn't end up being too effective, but it seems to be something that is only evident AFTER trying to split. We don't get to see the actual process of trying to do the split, seeing that it's not good, and then approaching the game without the split. Instead, it seems as if one should naturally know not to do the split. That seems like a hindsight based strategy rather than one made actionable for a student! I don't see any reason up front why we would not at least explore the split first.

Another example is the different approaches in PT73 Game 1 and PT53 Game 2. In PT73 we have 2 "or but not both" rules that create 4 possibilities. JY says it's a no brainer to sketch out those possibilities. Yet in PT53 Game 2, JY does NOT do the split and in fact mentions that he tried to the split but it wasn't helpful, so is showing how to do it without the split. But there doesn't seem to be any clear reason why a student approaching PT53 the first time after having reviewed the explanation for PT73 and similar games would proceed by not doing the split! PT53 presents 4 possibilities in almost the exact same way as PT73. It's like JY's showing the best way to do the game based on hindsight rather than showing a consistent approach that student could take to know up front which way is the best way to do the particular game!

Any thoughts?

Hi all, I'm not through the CC yet (obviously). When learning logical indicators, I'm trying to reason my way through them, because I know I will forget rote memorization. I understand why all the translation rules apply so far, except for "until."

If you tell me to "add pennies to the jar until Bob tells you to stop," my brain translates that as "when/if Bob tells you to stop, stop adding pennies to the jar." I cannot see how this is logically wrong. Bob telling me to stop is sufficient for me to stop. And yet according to the translation rules, the correct translation is the converse--"if Bob doesn't tell you to stop, add pennies to the jar." Which of course also sounds true. Any help here?

And if there's a better place to post this, let me know. Wasn't sure about using this category.

Does anybody know if there is a specific timeline for this scholarship?

Does anyone have any advice about one last PT? I'm thinking of taking one or two more before the February 10 LSAT. However, part of me is afraid that I'll score badly on my last PT---despite doing fairly well on my others---and that it'll totally demoralize or shake my up for the real thing. At the same time, I know that if I score well, it'll send me into the Feb LSAT feeling confident and in the right mindset.

Anyone else had this problem/fear before their test? Please advise!

(Also, much thanks to this community---despite my worries, I feel WAY more confident than I would be otherwise a week out because of all of you!)

Hi all,

I'm scheduled to take the Feb 10 test and my score is not near where I want it to be. I am tempted to take the Feb test anyway just so I can see what it's like to take an official test and then retake it in June if I'm not satisfied with my score. Would it be counterproductive to take the exam in Feb knowing I won't do as well I want to or would it be best to postpone and take the exam in June instead?

By the way, I have been studying for a little over two months by using another company's prep books and I just recently signed up for 7Sage. I can tell 7Sage is far more superior and I wish I signed up sooner.

Apologies if someone has asked this already.

Thanks in advance!

Are there specific schools that look down on retakes more than others?

PT2.S2.Q11 LSAT 2 PREPTEST 2 Question 11 section 2

I don't get how this answer is "B."

The question is asking "Which following statements are consistent with biologist's claim, but not with politician's."

biologist claims: deforestation --> NO Koala

Politician claims: If save Koala --> stop deforestation (did I get that translation right?)

How is "B" consistent with Biologist's claim? I see how it's not consistent with politician's claim, which is part of the answer.

Is it that the Koala could still get extinct for another reason. If that's so, how do I get in the mind set to infer an answer like that?