Has anyone done the core curriculum with 7sage among side a study schedule through LSAT trainer?

Or is it counterproductive?

Been using the powerscore bibles and it feels to stiff to me and I’m not retaining a lot. However 7sage is working better with LR.

If anyone has done both 7sage and LSAT trainer any advice would be much appreciated.

Hi. This question refers to BR-ing the cold diagnostic.

Joined 7Sage this week and used the June 2007 Prep Test as the diagnostic. I've done just a few lessons from the Core Curriculum so was wondering how do I correctly reason my way through the questions during BR?

Without having learned an approach for the various question types and not having been exposed to 7Sage's methodologies for analyzing correct and incorrect answers, wouldn't BR-ing a diagnostic before the learning process begins, be kind of like "shooting in the dark"?

Suggestions welcome! Thanks in advance

Can anyone recommend a testing center here in Miami, Florida where I can go and take practice LSAT test? I want to take the practice test in a different setting other than my home dinning room table.

I am very reluctantly considering paying for a admissions consulting company's help. I think $3000+ is insane. However, if I could get $3000 more in scholarships and/or get into a more desirable school I think it is worth it. Any thoughts? Have any of you paid for a service? And if so, what are your thoughts?

I am struggling with the idea of taking out student loans. I'm fortunate to have none for undergrad, but I'm so concerned that taking out loans of $110,000 will ruin my life and financial future.....SOS. At this point I feel like I shouldn't even go to school unless it's free :(

Any advice to get more comfortable with taking this debt on?

I feel like I've probably done a majority of LGs 1-35 almost 10x each. A handful of times back in summer 2016 and then in January 2018 I (Pacifico) FP'd 1-25. Didnt touch another logic game until April. I stupidly thought that that invested time in January would hold over while I studied the LR section of the CC. I was either very wrong and totally lost my competency in LG, or I was lulled into a false sense of confidence from having done those same games so many times.

For the past couple weeks I've been drilling one LR and one RC and then one LG section (from a random PT that I haven't seen before) in a row so I get used to having to do LG in the middle of a PT. I sporadically do really well on LG and I sporadically totally bomb like -10. I've started FP'ing LG 1-35 in reverse order and I'm doing really well...so I'm trying to figure out what exactly my problem is here and how to fix it

I'm not sure if there is a point in FPing games I havent encountered as often like 35-60, since it seems like that range doesnt have the weird LGs that PT1-35 and the most recent PTs have. I was thinking about FP'ing outside of the 1-35 range, and adding in a random 4-5star game from 1-35, so I get a lot of practice on the weird games, while also getting used to doing games that I havent seen before..

Will FPing LG1-35 be sufficient for taking on new games that I've never seen before in the middle of a PT or is there something different/additional I could/should be doing?

I saw this recent post where folks were posting photos of their study spots.

It makes me happy to see that studying, or at least the concept of it as embodied in the "study station," can make people happy - even if only in that fleeting sense of happiness you feel before embarking on a difficult yet rewarding studying session. I must say as badly as I want to get into a great law school, I have a hard time looking at my studying positively, even though I know it is helping me and I know it is like medicine for low scores (sometimes we hate to take medicine, but it helps us, and that knowledge makes it easier to take). Which, in my opinion, brings to mind a deeper question. Should we be happy while studying? Or should we accept that happiness in studying is simply a luxury we cannot all have?

If so - if at least a fleeting bit of happiness once in a while is a necessary pre-requisite for one's studying being "healthy" and "good," etc, - does my inability to find happiness in my studying, despite being someone who likes intellectual challenges, despite wanting very badly to go to law school, indicate that maybe I am not meant to be doing what I am doing?

Does anyone ever have these thoughts?

Hi,

how are you guys preparing for the writing portion?

Hi Everyone,

It seems that some students, including me, spend a lot of time on PMR or PF questions. This has made me skip them in timed tests, even sections, which I just realized is not a good strategy. I tend to get them correct like 80% of the time in BR, but I am just worried that I'd end up spending 3 minutes per question, which is like 10% of the section time on one question. I am wondering how long it typically takes students scoring 165 and higher to answer these questions? Also, if you are sure that an AC is the correct one, do you still read the remaining ACs?

Thank you and I hope others taking the June exam can use this thread, we still have more than 4 weeks to go!!

I'm applying next cycle so it's still too soon for this but I'm curious about one thing....

Do admissions consider LSAT scores taken AFTER you've been admitted??

I'm specifically curious about this scenario:

Take LSAT in June (score JUST ENOUGH to get into schools)

Get accepted to school

Take LSAT again with much higher score, ENOUGH FOR SCHOLARSHIP

Submit new LSAT to score already admitted to

---- Do they consider the new LSAT score for scholarships???? ------

So I know sometimes they put apps on hold for people who are retaking but I'm asking if schools consider scores for scholarships after they've sent a letter of acceptance

Just curious, lmk!!

I set the goal of 4 hours of content a day, which in reality takes 6+ hours to get through and truly internalize. How much is everyone else doing?

Hey 7Sagers,

We noticed that some of you delete your comments by editing out the comments you made in the past. This makes the threads disjointed.

We understand that you may be concerned about your privacy, but many users respond to your questions not only for you but also for the community. The threads are our community asset.

Our Forum is public, so if you want to ask questions containing information that you would like to delete later, please do not include such information in the first place. If you are concerned about privacy, we recommend that you chose an anonymous name and either avoid mentioning personal details such as your stats, or obfuscating them. For instance saying I have a "3.9-4.0" GPA instead of "3.94", or "I worked for BigTechCo" instead of "I worked for Google". Or alternatively, use the Direct Message function.

Thank you!

June'18 Study Group - PT 78 | PLEASE see the date change | BR on Wednesday, May 16th | 7:30 pm EST

https://media.giphy.com/media/uWnMkTfAZ8TKjvdVfq/giphy.gif

Hope everyone is joining JY's RC intensive! Also please note that May 28th scheduled PT will be on Wednesday night May 29th.

I have made a recommendation to the group to do PT 82 that week to stay on the even number PTs leading up to June. Happy to discuss reasoning :)

Provisional Schedule:

I will post a new calendar link once I hear back from everyone about decision to take 82 or 83 in the final week. Please respond to the poll especially for those that have been participating in the SG leading up to June :)

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

Hi! I finished the core curriculum about 2 weeks ago and have taken 2 PT's since (36 and 37). For 36, I took it after a full day of work at the end of the week (which was dumb, but I had a busy weekend and wanted to get the test over with!) and could feel myself taking longer to think and not having enough time for some sections. As a result I wasn't super bummed to get a score only a few points higher than my diagnostic back in Feb. However, with 37, I took it early in the morning before work and felt pretty good about it, only to find that I got a point lower than I did on 36. I know two PTs isn't much data to work with, but I'm feeling pretty discouraged and was wondering if anyone else did worse/the same before they got better. I have no idea how many PTs it takes before you see consistent improvement and would love to hear from others. FWIW I'm not taking the test until September so I have some time, but was still really hoping to see noticeable improvement after finishing the curriculum and taking my first few PTs with all that new knowledge.

Should I pause on taking more PTs and go back to the curriculum to review more? Or keep plugging along on PTs and Blind Review?

Edit--thank you all for the in-depth comments and pointers, I feel much better about where I'm at!

Okay people, this is probably one of the hardest LR questions I've ever done, but also why I like talking about it. It's also why I think learning to think in terms of "lawgic" could sometimes make things more difficult. Allow me to explain.

If you give the question a quick read and attempt, the difficulty lies in the fact that the conclusion is a conditional statement with 2 pieces to the sufficient condition - e.g. (A&B) => C. We are given a premise in the form of P => Q, and another that states Q => C. However, in the correct answer choice, the answer states A => P, which is supposed to connect the missing gap.

In the explanation, we're told that the "B" piece in the above sufficient condition is redundant, but how are we supposed to decide when elements are redundant and when they aren't? Typically, when a sufficient condition has two pieces, we NEED two pieces in order to infer the necessary condition. In this question, we don't. Is this supposed to be something we just intuit on test day?

I realize that this post might not make any sense at all so let me know if what I'm asking is hard to follow.

Edit: In short, I'm kind of an idiot. I just realized that B is, in fact, redundant because it's just a random variable tacked on in the conclusion. It's pretty worthless as long as we have that A piece linking us up with that P piece. I didn't realize this until I typed all this up and wasted everyone's time, but I thought I'd just leave this here anyway. Typing up reasoning is gold. I was confused because of where the conclusion is placed in the argument. It jumps out as a premise, hence why I thought that B piece was important.

Admin note: edited title and added link

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-69-section-4-question-21/

Or do you write the inferences down along with JY while he does it in the video, then try to recreate them on the next copie?

I'm having trouble understanding why the right answer is the correct on it's own merit. I can eliminate (a), (b), and (d) fairly easily. (e) I could use some assistance clarifying since I'm still shaky #help

Weakening question

CTX - numbers indication type/quality of plastic. Lower numbers easier to recycle and less likely to end up in landfill.

P --- Higher numbers rarely recycled

C --- Consumers can reduce waste by refusing to buy products with high coded plastics

(a) cost of recycling more expensive than using new plastics. Irrelevant to C, eliminate

(b) Consumers are unaware of codes. C seems to assume knowledge of codes, so P -- C support is unaffected. eliminate

(c) After a plastic is recycled it gets a higher number because of degradation. correct but not sure why

(d) lower codes less expensive as higher codes. again cost is irrelevant, eliminate

(e) Recycling communities only dump high coded plastics in landfill when they're sure no recycler will take them. Doesn't address the purchasing of plastics, or how communities get plastics in first place. So C is not weakened, eliminate

Admin note: edited title

I was wondering if every feels exhaustive a month or so into the studying process?

I feel as if as I learn more it gets more confusing and sometimes i miss the basic things.

Is this normal and will things settle into place as the studying goes on?

Or should I be constantly drilling concepts.

I am BRing 172-174 (my target score), but on my timed PTs, I am scoring between 159-163. There's about a month left till the June LSAT. I have registered for it, but re-considering if I should take it yet, or wait till September.

The thing stopping me from taking it in September is I have kids who will be home during the summer break, which means I will barely get quiet time to study for the next couple of months. And, I will start working in August too. However, for the next month I have no work, and kids in school, meaning about 5-6 hours of study time everyday till June 11.

I guess, my question boils down to, how long does it usually take for people to get from their actual score to their BR score? What are some strategies (feel free to suggest webinars or discussion links) that I can use to increase accuracy in timed condition?

Apparently, LSAC just instituted fee increases and they are bananas. LSAT is now $190, test center and date change fees are $125, CAS registration is $195 and the doozy - CAS reports are now $45 (up from $35).

https://www.lsac.org/jd/applying-to-law-school/lsat-cas-fees?view=1

I am a little confused about questions in which a scientist/critic/psychologist/whatever will state their opinion on something, often giving context and then their own argument. Then the question stem will ask "The scientist's argument proceeds by..."

A good example of this is Question 20 from PT 68 section 3. I missed this question in timed conditions and in BR, seemingly because I just misunderstood what it was asking me to look for. I took "proceeds by" to mean what comes before the actual argument, so the context, and I selected answer choice E, even though JY just breezes past this one in the explanation video. Now I see that my brain tricked me into thinking the question was actually "precedes by" rather than "proceeds by."

I am certain I have come across similarly worded questions before, though I don't think they are super common. When I do encounter these questions, are they just asking me about the structure of the argument ?

In the order the stimulus presents info (this may be way off):

CTX - Proposals to bring US inline with rest of the world are met with objection that it would violate US tradition

C --- The objection that curtailing US school's summer vacation would violate tradition misses the mark

P --- US schools only closed because harvests needed child labor

Extra info (? unsure) --- A policy change justified by those appeals to tradition are determined by needs of the economy

Which principle if accepted justifies the conclusion?

(a) Social needs are irrelevant. Eliminate

(b) No appeal to tradition excuses a country from getting in line with legitimate expectations of the rest of the world. If it didn't say "legitimate expectations of the rest of the world" I'd think this is good but European and Japanese expectations are never mentioned

(c) masking real issues isn't in stimulus. Eliminate

(d) traditional principles should be discarded when they no longer serve the economy. If this said 'practices' instead of 'principles' I'd think it was perfect but we are not trying to change the principles of the past just the school years practices so we can eliminate

(e) actual tradition of a practice can only be identified by original reasons that prompted the practice

I got this wrong and struggled during BR only making progress through process of elimination, now I see that answer choice (E) connects the last sentence of the stimulus to what I identified as the conclusion. But now I'm thinking that the last sentence is the main conclusion and I've muddled up my own thinking.

Can someone help me identify each part of the argument better and flush this out? #help

Admin note: edited title

Ink is so expensive. For fool proofing LG, how many copies do you print out? I heard about this method an earlier member posted about for proofing LG that saved a lot of paper, does anyone know what I am talking about?

Thanks

Just got into Davis with $10,000/year. I would LOVE to go there. But I'm so scared of taking on that much debt. Stuck between there and a much better financial offer (basically no debt at all) at a very low ranked school. Any advice would be helpful

I am just trying to get an idea, how many games should someone do a day?