Do you JUST use 7Sage?

Comments

• jdawg113 Alum Inactive ⭐

  February 2015 2654 karma

  any extra sources (books/drilling material) can always help understand approaches and that with different views, everyone learns differently so its hard to say what would work better for you
• arabprodigy30 Alum Member

  February 2015 243 karma

  I use Sage to learn the foundations then other books to just practice what I learned from Sage
• 2 Likes

  [Deleted User] Free Trial

  February 2015 578 karma

  I love Manhattan LR. I'm sure other Manhattan books will be great too.
  
  I shares someone's account for a while and I really didn't see how using 7sage alone would be beneficial. I think 7sage is great way to be quicker and reduce time. They are great with LG but as for LR and RC I think using other materials is a must.
• 1 Like

  emli1000 Alum Member Inactive ⭐

  February 2015 edited February 2015 3462 karma

  I believe that *most of the 165+ scorers implement other materials along with their main prep course.
• shine.on.me Alum Member

  February 2015 463 karma

  I used PowerScore the first time I was prepping for the LSAT. It didn't help too much. For this round of prep, I'm using primarily 7Sage and the Cambridge packets. I'm using The LSAT Trainer for any weak areas within 7Sage. 7Sage is an excellent tool and the community here is great. But I agree with @jdawg113 there is not one right way for everyone. Everyone learns differently.
• mpits001 Alum Member

  February 2015 938 karma

  I think I will purchase the Manhattan LR after my midterms. I have faith in 7Sage and contribute most of my understand of the LSAT to this program, but it's also hard to access at school. I need to feel the paper and it's easier for me to whip out a book, and feel like I'm prepping. At home I can print everything out. At school, I can print everything out but it takes time because so many students are print things, and by the time I print the material I may have used up 50% of my break.
  
  On the first round I made the mistake of doing everything on the computer. When I got to the test everything felt foreign even though I had studied for 4 months. I'm not making that mistake again.
• 3 Likes

  ddakjiking Inactive ⭐

  February 2015 2116 karma

  IMO, all you need is the Cambridge Packets for LR/LG/RC along with 7Sage. I have experimented with Manhattan LR and the entire Blueprint course.....but what I realized at the end is not all the different curriculums taught by these companies, but rather the drilling and PT'ing process.
• 1 Like

  Allison M Alum Member Inactive Sage

  February 2015 edited February 2015 810 karma

  I only used 7Sage (along with all 73 PTs available to me). That said, there's no harm in exploring other resources if you find that you're not making gains using 7Sage's methods.
  
  ETA: @emli1000 is incorrect re: all 165+ scorers. Some certainly do use multiple methods; some don't. It's all about getting a feel for what's working for you, recognizing what's not, and making adjustments based on that info.
• 3 Likes

  emli1000 Alum Member Inactive ⭐

  February 2015 edited February 2015 3462 karma

  @"Allison M" *sees's role as "Sage", bows head* disregard my previous comment you guys LOL
• 1 Like

  emli1000 Alum Member Inactive ⭐

  February 2015 edited February 2015 3462 karma

  There, I fixed it. *side eye* lol
• harrismegan Member

  February 2015 2074 karma

  I use 7Sage and purchased the LSAT Trainer just beucase I heard it was superior for RC. And... it is
• 1 Like

  Allison M Alum Member Inactive Sage

  February 2015 810 karma

  @emli1000 Lol!
• blah170blah Alum Inactive ⭐

  February 2015 3545 karma

  Remember, the reason you're going to get varied answers to this question is because people learn the material differently. Some people can take the Blueprint course for 3 months, only use Blueprint material, and get a 170+. I was not one of those people. For me, no one material took me where I wanted to be. Instead, I looked at almost every single prep material (Blueprint, Manhattan, LSAT Trainer, 7sage) that is available and used them to target specific weak points.
  
  I would work through the 7sage curriculum and see how far that takes you. Maybe after the end of the curriculum, all you need is additional practice. On the other hand, maybe after you're finished, you are still getting those dang necessary assumption questions wrong. That's when I would turn to other resources to see if they address tackling a specific question type a different way. Like @ddakjiking mentioned, Cambridge packets are pretty invaluable for drilling purposes so I'd definitely recommend that.
  
• 1 Like

  Jengibre Member

  February 2015 383 karma

  I used other materials (LSAT Trainer and Powerscore Bibles) before finding 7sage. I like a lot of the general ideas in the Trainer, but I would also say 7sage is sufficient. I don't plan on getting other materials at this point.
• mpits001 Alum Member

  February 2015 edited February 2015 938 karma

  I just purchased the Manhattan LR Strategy Guide, and I plan on buying the LSAT Trainer for RC. I'm still going to use 7Sage as I believe that having a video for 99% of the questions will always be helpful, and 7Sage is also the full package. I just need a new perspective. Anyway, I've read many positive things about Manhattan LR, and very little (although positive) about the LSAT Trainer's RC. Is it worth it to also purchase the LSAT Trainer's RC, or does anyone have success stories with it?
• 1 Like

  jdawg113 Alum Inactive ⭐

  February 2015 2654 karma

  The Trainer is pretty well regarded in general. For RC it can be a little tricky because of what it involves. Idk how helpful the trainer is as it has been a bit since going over it but RC is very individualistic as everyone reads differently so you really just need to find an approach that lets you read quickly while retaining as much info as possible to answer the related questions quickly. That said I do think the Trainer is a great resource in general, even if not for RC(which again, not sure)
• 1 Like

  mpits001 Alum Member

  February 2015 938 karma

  @jdawg113 thank you. I guess I'll just work on it and if I feel I've exhausted 7Sage's methods, and I still can't get a good handle on it (maybe 3-4 wrong a section), I'll get the LSAT Trainer.
• 3 Likes

  TBH.11235 Free Trial Member

  February 2015 edited February 2015 88 karma

  I think two things must be considered when thinking about how prep courses/materials are probably constructed.
  1. People learn differently, and different ways of expressing material will resonate with different people.
  2. LSAT prep companies likely create their material for the "average" LSAT taker.
  
  Let's do the math, and please accept the premise that one should teach material differently based on how advanced one's knowledge of a subject is (i.e. you'd teach english or math differently to a college student than you would a middle schooler).
  -In 2013-14, about 100,000 people took the LSAT
  -Let's assume about 50% of them take some type of course or material.
  -The 50th percentile test takers get around the low 150s. If a prep company creates material that is suitable for the average test taker +/-, say 20%, then they'd be capturing the middle 40th percentile, which is 40,000 people per year.
  -Let's say they have 5% market share and their average revenue per customer is $349 (7sage's LSAT Premium package).
  -That's about $698,000 per year. After cost of developing the program, overhead, taxes, etc., that's not a ton of profit for reinvestment/expansion.
  If we run a similar analysis except assume they only target the top 10th percentile (164+), then the relevant revenue number would be $174,500. I know this doesn't include people who take courses but don't take the test etc., but it provides an idea of the numbers.
  
  In other words, prep companies likely create their material with the goal of pushing you from a low 150 to maybe a mid 160, but don't necessarily tailor it to cause a jump from a mid 160 to a mid 170. People who want to do that are simply too expensive. The end conclusion is this: if you want to do a jump from a mid 160 to 170s+, you'll likely need to customize your learning by either coming up with methods that work best for your particular style, or mix and match course content until you figure out a combo that works for you.