Hi there,

Does anyone have any tips on how to answer an LR question that has a passage that you simply can't understand? This happens infrequently, but it is quite troubling for me when it does happen. When this happens, I will know how to attack the question (according to the question stem) using the strategies learned from the 7sage CC, but if I don't understand what the argument is, I obviously will be unable to use this strategy properly.

Should I just guess on these questions and move on?

Thanks,

Michael Elliott

I've been over 160 for over a month now (highest 164) (BR ~170 and on untimed drills I get -4 to -1 on LR/RC, -0 on LG). Working too much, trying to study part time, improvement has been slow. If I had another year I know I could reach 170, but I just don't want to put this all off. Anyway, I'm registered for the Dec. test to get apps out in January. I have important work and life experience I think will really help my application. For my target schools, I think 163 is my safe zone and anything past that will help me get financial aid (which I really need). I expect to get a boost of urgency and clarity under the final test pressure that will help, but some practice sections recently have got me uneasy.

I did an LG section today where I flipped a W upside down to an M while translating my rules, costing me that whole game and left me with no time for the fourth game. I've been finishing 3 games consistently with a little time to attempt the 4th game, but only one time have I finished all four.

I have tests 76-81, 46-51, and few 20s and 30s PTs untouched.

What should I do?

Drill games like mad and hope for my usual 18-21 on each of the other sections?

I don't want to burn out.

For those of us taking the test in December, how much of an improvement in your score are you hoping to see from now until then? I would love to consistently be scoring around 3 points higher than I am now, but that's probably pretty unrealistic.

Hi all,

Hope everyone is doing well :3

I seem to have developed this habit while I was in university where I don't really 'take in' what I read on the first try, and usually have to read something 3 or 4 times before attributing meaning to a sentence.

This method clearly isn't flying during timed questions lol. I end up spending more time reading the stimulus than the ACs. I'm stuck in the habit of reading two or three full sentences, going "wait, what did I just read?" and then re-reading it again and again. I want to be able to just read a sentence from a stimulus and immediately compartmentalize it somewhere in my brain so that I know it's there & I don't have to go back and re-read it.

Has anyone experienced this? Is it just mental burnout or is this something that you conquer with time? How do you mentally prepare yourself to take in words on the first try?

Course progresses as Logical Reasoning --> Logic Games --> Reading Comp.

Thinking of doing Logic Games --> Reading Comp --> Logical Reasoning.

Biggest reason: Taking the December 2017 LSAT, and want to achieve as best gains as possible. Think that I could make the most gains with Logic Games over these two weeks.

Disclaimer: This is but my first take, with the "real" takes (as in...I aim to be done with the materials by then) being June & September (if need be).

Would I be damaging myself by doing this? The gist I get is that the progression is intentional - Logical Reasoning introduces understanding of particular things that are then "built upon" in Logic Games and Reading Comprehension.

Hey all,

Recently saw a post in the forum about how to make sure you absorb the information from each question. Although that was more along the lines of doing so while studying, I'm wondering what everyone uses as a technique to do so on test day?

December will be my third and final write. Now that I'm used to what to expect on test day, I'm well aware of the anxiety that it brings for me (and I would assume, many other people). This usually translates into having trouble fully absorbing info for the first few questions. Once I'm a few questions in, I'm usually ok.

I personally will be warming up before the real test to make sure my brain is warmed up. That seems to help.

Was wondering if anyone had any other helpful tips?

Thanks for sharing! :)

Hi. Could anyone tell me why (c) weakens the arg? Isn't it irrelevant that it talks about errors of the data? Thank you in advance!! Happy studying everyone.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-40-section-3-question-26/

I took a look at the September LSAT and what questions I missed in the logical reasoning section. I scored a 147, and I would like to raise that score to a 155 or higher. I think that these questions are the key to that improvement.

Missed questions as follows:

Parallel Argument- 5

Flawed Reasoning- 3

SA- 4

NA- 5

Weakening- 3

MBT- 2

I was wondering if you could look at the question types that I missed and maybe help me pin point a few of the problems that are causing me to miss these questions types? Like am I not focusing on relationships or assumptions? Really, anything would help me.

I look at the questions and I think the issue falls somewhere between the SA, NA, and weakening questions. I know those questions are connected is similar style, but I am not sure how and why I am missing them. Thank you for the help.

I know that some sections of the same type are tougher than others.

Does 7Sage or anyone else publish data about the relative difficulty of different sections?

Trying to figure out if my relative difficulty with a given LR section was due to lots of questions of a question type that Im weaker in or if the overall section was more difficult.

Im sure 7sage has the capability to calculate this, but wasn't sure if they'd made it public.

On my lsat ticket I have a photo where I don’t have a beard. I have a beard now. Should I shave? (I think I should) Do you think I’m gonna have problems being let in the testing room? I’ve been studying like crazy so I would be traumatized if my beard got in the way (it’s not even that long!) (this post was comic relief. Kind of but not really) Happy Studying!

I am not really trying to start much of a discussion here. But, I have a general thought I wanted to share. Words have power. If you say something enough, you end up believing it. If you continue to say you’re stuck, you eventually really do become stuck. I’ve noticed a lot of people use the word “grinding”, which I know a lot of us are essentially doing. I want to bring up the potential that words such as “grinding” could be negatively affecting our mindset. Grinding is something that is tedious and seemingly without end. Is this truly the mindset in which we want to approach the LSAT?

I think the LSAT is a fantastic opportunity for me to prepare myself to think like a future lawyer. I am a musician, and I see many parallels. Practicing etudes, although boring at times, helps my techniques, which ultimately helps me perform my concertos much better. I think the LSAT is a very fair test, and I believe this test will help develop some of the logical thinking skills I will need as a lawyer.

~ just a friendly thought. Study on!

Redacted

Hi everyone,

I am wondering whether there are any general/broad question strategies for LR (i.e., any tricks that can help you in eliminating answers).

Thank you!

Did you know that you are capable of achieving success? I hope so, because it's true. Each day is a grind but you need to keep the end goal in mind. Stumped by a hard problem? Disappointed with a PT score? Find yourself wishing it were all over? Take a minute and step back. Picture your dream, your goals, and your future. Suddenly the obstacle that is standing in your way will start to look more like a learning opportunity than a barrier. You can motivate yourself by seeing the bigger picture, which will allow you to continue working hard. Motivation may be a fleeting feeling, but when you use it to spark determination and grit, the effects will be longer lasting.

Picture motivation as a match. You strike it, and it stays light for a short while. But what is the true purpose of a match? It is used to ignite a much larger fire. One that lasts longer and does not burn out as easily. In this sense motivation is useful because it can ignite your passion, the real source of success.

https://i.imgur.com/8imJNrB.gif

When you take that moment to step back from a challenge, it allows you to gain perspective. A small break allows the feelings of anger, frustration and agitation to subside. Once those strong emotions have passed, you can come back at your issue with a level head. Then you can ask yourself, what went wrong. You can see each hurtle as a learning opportunity.

So when you miss a problem on the LSAT - step back and think about your goals. Then realize that the problem you missed is now an opportunity to grow. It's a chance to address an issue in your understanding of the test. It's in our weaknesses and short comings that improvement can be made. So we should celebrate our failures, because they will give us the ultimate gift, a chance to improve. Use the things that trip you up as a tool to motivate your passions. If you start to approach the LSAT in this way, you'll start to enjoy the test. You will constantly be moving forward and patching up holes in your understanding.

Don't let negative emotions dominate you! Remember, you are doing this for a reason. You have dreams and goals. Will you let one bad PT or one hard problem stop you?

You got this.

On the first LR section or first section in general, I always seem to score lower than the rest of the sections.

I have tried doing some questions before starting a PT to warm up... nothing is helping.

Tips?

As most Canadian applicants have probably heard of before, Canadian GPA conversions from percentages to letter grades are quite different from LSAC's conversion standards. I was wondering if any Canadian applicants here know whether their GPA was calculated based on letter grades or percentages? Thanks! :)

I'm at PT 26 now and I am struggling when I see a new game for the first time. It usually only takes me 3 attempts to "fool proof" it but when I see a new game, I struggle to increase my speed or even be close to the target sometimes (typically range between 1-4 mins over but every once in a while am WAY over).

I get the logic behind the games. My mistakes I feel are timing issues. Examples being when a questions reads like I will have to brute force and I hesitate, not being able to see how an AC works in my head quickly/having to write it out to see it. This becomes extremely frustrating when JY does a quick strategy that makes it look like a cake walk.

I feel so close to breaking through but my speed and seeing a couple steps ahead with the rules quickly in my head is killing my speed. Thoughts?

So, I am an Army Officer and I am having trouble trying to "de-militarize" my resume so that the admissions officers will be able to understand it. Would anyone be willing to look it over and give me some feedback?

Any perspectives military/civilian are welcome!

Hi,

I'm aware that the correct answer is A, but while PTing I thought that the wording was too extreme. I do agree that the main point is to focus more on narrative than the characteristics of the novel, but what let me to confidently cross this out was due to the word "purely."

Where in the passage does it imply that the "best" approach is to focus "purely" on narrative? Why not 90% on narrative and 10% on the characteristics of the novel? Who is to say that a clear dichotomy can be drawn between the two? Any help is appreciated! Thanks in advance!

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-57-section-4-passage-3-passage/

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-57-section-4-passage-3-questions/

Guys! I just want to celebrate a bit. I'm still not where I ultimately want to be yet, but I can really tell that I'm on the road to getting there. Last night I got my first 180 BR and tied my PT score record (167). But I'm happier about the fact that I can really see the progress in my last several PTs. (Also, the 7sage analytics are almost worth the price of the course itself!) After the CC, I had improved for the most part but was wildly inconsistent. Post-CC I was scoring any where between 156 and 167 and was all over the map. Now my last 6 PTs are: 164, 165, 164, 166, 166, 167. Both the consistency and that slow but sure upward trajectory are so encouraging.

I think I'm not going to be quite where I want by December 2, but I'm feeling positive that I can even probably improve a bit before then. I'm also registered for February and think I might be closer to my goal score by then.

Dance party time? I think yes.

https://media.giphy.com/media/dIZoOighpAS7C/giphy.gif

UPDATE:

Since this post, I added a couple more 167 PTs and a 169. Official score in December: 168.

The upward trend continued as did consistency, and it really came through. Started at a 155 diagnostic, so +13 overall. I’m ecstatic with the score. I’m registered for February and will probably still sit for that to see if I can inch up at all and use it for scholarship negotiations.

But a huuuuuge thank you is owed to @"J.Y. Ping", @"Dillon A. Wright", and everyone on the boards for encouragement! I’m now more excited than ever to get apps in.

Happy holidays to all!

Should I supplement with the LR Powerscore Bible, Manhattan Prep, etc. if I'm not thoroughly understanding something? Would a tutor be a better idea? There are a few sections where I can't even get all of the 4/5 difficulty questions correct. I understand them when I listen to JY's explanations, but I can't seem to get them right on my own. Would another approach from a different angle that I might understand be a good idea?

Hi,

I am getting ready to apply to law schools. I'm working right now on my resume and I have two jobs right now I'm a Receptionist/Administrative Assistant as well as a dog walker. I'm not sure if it looks good or adds to my resume If I add that am a dog walker. I was wondering if I should include it or not?

Hey guys,

So I plan on taking the September '18 LSAT. If I see improvement earlier then I'll take a stab at the June '18 test. But as you can see I'm one of those think far into the future/meticulous planner types. By the time Sept hits I feel as though LORs from my undergrad (2016 grad) will look inadequate because of how long ago it'll be. I definitely have professors I could contact (Calculus/Africana Studies/English) but I'm not sure an admissions committee will feel confident in letters written by people who can't attest to my best qualities at present time. I do have one person (fellow Board member from a local grassroots NGO/mentor) that will definitely write one for me but that's not enough by far.

Now here's my real question: After undergrad I simply worked, but I don't see my employer as beneficial additions to my overall application. I mean don't get me wrong my employers love me to pieces but I work in a field that is completely unrelated to law or anything I'm passionate about. Funny thing is I work at a medical school, Haha the irony. What are your thoughts on getting LORs from employers? Do you think getting LORs from professors is too late at this point? Would that look bad?

I've hit a plateau in the high 160s where it seems I keep falling for dumb answer choices and when I review I don't have a hard time noticing what I did wrong. Should I make notes of things I fall for and try to correct that now? In LR the closest thing to a pattern is which of the following most weakens or which of the following is a flaw except. I'm going to review that, but honestly it's not like I miss many of those in the section or very often. I tend to get the questions wrong more for misreading the question or stimulus rather than not understanding the flaw, especially later in the test where I feel the time encroach on me. If I could correct this in the next two weeks I would be in a pretty decent position to take the December test.

In RC I notice a lot of pacing issues where I will finish but clearly make mistakes or make less mistakes but feel very pressured because I spent too much time verifying my answer choices. I don't know if slowing down helps. It doesn't seem to make much of a change and I'm not sure what to do to correct that either. I'm not even sure what BR is really like for this section. I started off doing the best here. I just take my sweet time during BR to find the answer in the text, and it isn't exactly helping me get less wrong in the next test as I usually have only circled about 2 or 3 out of the potential six I get wrong in RC. My accuracy isn't bad to overthrown my whole system either. I've changed what I do a lot on this section back and forth and I'm not sure any change is improving the consistency. I'm kind of at a loss of how you progress here into the 170s when understanding isn't your main issue. When I took the test officially once I actually did better in RC than before implementing a system although I don't attribute the extra miss or so to the system but rather to the lucky passages I got on the test and don't want to have to rely on luck on my next one. I think it is more accurate than it was before and I feel more confident going about it this way but I've improved about zero in RC. The only pattern is that humanities passages have the worst scores for me. Usually -3 in a Art history passage and -0 to -1 in Law or Science. Should I drill just a bunch of humanity passages I find and train myself to maintain focus(I find them very dull)? I'm not sure that's the way and that's exactly what is so nerve wracking about being stuck here and hoping I can take the Dec. test, not knowing how to improve.

TLDR; I don't know how to improve after this point where I'm sure my foundation and basics are solid. I tend to fall for a lot of answers or to fail to maintain focus on certain passages. Not knowing how to proceed on fixing these issues is anxiety inducing.

Do law schools receive your school's official transcripts, or just the LSAC transcript, or both?