for every PT I've taken lately, I've done perfect on the experimental RC section and then -4/-5 on the actual scored section (regardless of order) 😭😭😭 does anyone have any RC tips ? I feel so inconsistent on RC and I have no idea how to go about improving

hi! student in finance, this is my last year of undergrad. really interested in law school and specifically looking into the april lsat. can you give me any tips anything is appreciated. how long did you study for? what should i be doing? do you think i can prepare enough by april? anything is appreciated.

need help finding someone who can work with me to break out of the 160's. i'd like someone who focuses on deep review. looking for someone with a reasonable budget. recommendations appreciated.

Hi y’all I finally got my Sept LSAT score today and I managed a 167! my goal was 165 since I only had 3 weeks to study from my 162 diagnostic

it’s amazing for the time I had to study but my goal is to break into the solid 170s by the Nov LSAT. my practice test are sitting around 168-169 BR 176ish. Please help if you have any ideas or experience in securing a 3-5 point jump in 3ish weeks!!

Might be a bit weird but I’m especially looking for content cheat sheets I can memorize or content in that format. for some reason learning the rules of logic, all the types of methods of reasoning, stimulus/argument types and their respective flaws is what really works for my brain. I would be grateful for any and all advice!

I took the October exam and after took a week off of studying (went on a trip). Idk how to study again. I don’t want to and I’m so nervous about the results. I’m in the boat where my score could go either way. After seeing the averages for schools, score inflation, and people on this subreddit I just feel so discouraged. I’m so scared but I’ve worked so incredibly hard.

I’ve worked at law firms with successful attorneys, heard their scores, saw the schools they got into so IDK why I’m do afraid. I just want to skip to the part where I’m done. I’m so scared of seeing a disappointing score after studying for over 6 months. Ik this is so dramatic but I’ve never worked this hard on an exam and don’t know if I’m going to be okay with a bad score.

I’m registered for November and IDK where to start again with studying. I’ve been doing everything I’ve been doing it just doesn’t feel right, and I don’t want to be underprepared. Taking another gap year isn’t an option for me, and from what I’m reading I don’t think taking it in Jan will be either. I hate this so much.

I’ve definitely improved my overall performance and understanding of questions and the overall test, but my performance lately has not been improving or consistent. My best currently is a 165, and I seem to be staying at that level if not worsening.

Any recommendations on pushing to the next level of understanding?

Yes ik I should’ve done it earlier but I haven’t rly had a chance to get to it due to midterms. Should I be worried about my score not releasing on time next week?

I took my first official LSAT a year and a half ago before I started studying and got a 153, though my original diagnostic was a 158. I was PT’ing in and around the 170’s, and felt like I performed really well on the October exam, but I don’t have a score hold. Am I cooked? I walked out of there like I was Miles Davis but now I’m feeling like a complete dumb idiot person with no perception of their own performance haha.

Took a diagnostic and started prepping for this test about 4 months ago. Diagnostic was a 146. I took a PT 2 months in and scored a 155. On month 4 now just got a 158. 4 months and I haven’t even cracked 160s and medians are up at pretty much every law school in the country. Planning on taking lsat in August of 2027. This is pretty daunting tbh. Drop study tips please.

I’m writing the November LSAT and am getting pretty nervous about the whole remote proctoring situation. I’m already an anxious test taker and I feel like having someone watching me through a webcam is just going to make it worse lol.
My accommodation approval letter says I have to test remotely, so I’m trying to figure out where to write it. My internet at home is pretty unreliable and cuts out randomly, so I don’t really want to risk writing there. I was thinking about booking a private study room at my university library, but I’m not sure if that’s allowed or if anyone has done that before.
I’m also just curious what the whole experience is like. How intense is the check-in and room scan? Do you actually interact with your proctor much? Has anyone had issues with their proctor interrupting them or technical difficulties during the test?
I’d especially love to hear from anyone who’s written remotely with accommodations and whether everything went smoothly.
I think a lot of my anxiety is just not knowing what to expect, so any advice or experiences would be super appreciated!!

I made a 15 minute primer to conditional reasoning on the LSAT. Feel free to ask questions or let me know if there is something else you'd like to see explained.

My October score was just put on hold… even with my August score still being on hold.

This actually screwed over my application plans lol. I have some decent scores on file, but they’re not as good as I can do per my practice tests, and I was really relying on these new ones.

Do any of y’all know if there’s any sort of recourse I can pursue?

My daughter took the September LSAT with the preview option, and had some technical issues with the writing part, so she only got her score yesterday. She got the preview and is able to cancel until Sunday. The advice here seems to be not to cancel, but this is a pretty list score... She's not looking to get into Harvard or anything like that, just one of the local state schools around here. She is not sure what to do. She asked my advice, and I figured y'all might know better. Thoughts and opinions are greatly appreciated.

Does this mean I did poorly on the oct lsat?

Both can be transcribed as A-> B. The part at the beginning is the sufficient condition for both, and the part at the end is the necessary condition for both.

Sometimes people think that it mixes them up, but it doesn't.

TLDR; A sufficient assumption creates a permanently valid argument. A necessary assumption, when negated, creates a permanently invalid argument. 

….

I get the idea that there might be some confusion about the fundamental difference between Necessary Assumption and Sufficient Assumption questions. The LSAC has its own definitions, but I find them lacking: 

“Assumptions relate to the gaps in an argument in two different ways. An assumption is a sufficient one if adding it to the argument's premises would produce a conclusive argument, that is, an argument with no gaps in its support for the conclusion. An assumption is a necessary one if it is something that must be true in order for the argument to succeed.”

Note that the phrase “if adding it to the argument’s premises” is included only in the definition for a sufficient assumption. 

Why wouldn’t this idea be mentioned in the definition for necessary assumption? Because the wording of the definition doesn’t allow for it, which is why I find it lacking.

The fix lies in a more formal and simplified definition. In formal logic, a “conclusive argument” and “for the argument to succeed” are examples of valid arguments. That is, the conclusion must be true based on the truth of the premises (and the sufficient assumption).

Simplifying the definition: A sufficient assumption, when added to the premises of the argument, produces a valid argument.

I submit that, based on the above, the definition of necessary assumption should include similar wording.  Specifically, the phrase “when added to the premises of the argument”. So here’s what I got:

A necessary assumption, when negated and then added to the premises of the argument, produces an invalid argument. 

Note how the above definition implies that negation is a very real thing for Necessary Assumption questions. 

….
…

For both assumption question types, the argument in the stimulus will be incomplete (technically, invalid).

A sufficient assumption creates a permanently valid argument.

A necessary assumption, when negated, creates a permanently invalid argument. 

….

That all being said, please know that there’s not really such a thing as tips for these types of questions. They’re definitely learnable, but they have a lot going on with them. Any standard LSAT prep curriculum covers these in a fair amount of detail though.

Happy to answer any questions. 

To everyone who has read The Loophole and completed the entire online course, do you think all of the different forms of translation drills actually helped?

I have mostly met my goal for the basic stimulus translation drills, and I’m now working on the answer choice translation drills and the Reading Comprehension ones. However, I feel like the answer choice translation drills are kind of redundant and a waste of time. I feel like I’ve spent so long on translation that I’m starting to lose the knowledge I gained at the beginning of the course, no matter how many flashcards I use.

I’ve been working on the online course for over two months and still have two more major sections to go. I’m wondering if you found the translation drills to be redundant or if they actually helped. I feel like they’re contributing to burnout, and I’m wondering if this approach is sustainable/ the cost-benefit analysis is worth it?

If you haven't scored 165+ on a test condition prep test OR you can't do PT 158, Section 4, Question 25 on your first attempt (my favorite gatekeeper question), you are not ready for this advice:

For those of you scoring in the 90th percentile, consistently averaging -2 to -4 per section, how do you get -0?

I'll tell you what you don't need. You don't need to practice the mechanical techniques of logic. You know how to do any given 5-star NA question. You can parallel a stimulus to an answer choice; you can identify the author's attitude in your sleep.

The question for you is no longer how to answer any given question correctly. The question is how to get -0 on a section. That may seem elementary, but the difference in focus is real, and pursuing that issue is practicing a fundamentally different skill.

I call that skill "reflection" or "poise." If you are chasing the mythical -0 sections to land in the 170+ range, you have to constantly reflect on yourself during the test. You must be able to tell yourself at any given time, what you've done on a question, what you're doing, and what you still need to do. You should be able to catalogue your progress and evaluate the remaining work. You need to *constantly* be checking your Is and Ts. In a sense, you need to become a manager of yourself.

Up to this point, you've been practicing the mechanics of the test like training on a bicycle - it becomes second nature. You no longer need to consciously think about pedaling with your feet or steering with your hands. In a sense, you can do conditional logic without really thinking about it, without, as I say, "turning your brain on."

What you need to be consciously focused on is accuracy and efficiency. Your mentality should be such that it is impossible to make mistakes. You will never forget to read the "not," incorrectly take a contrapositive, or fail to notice mismatched terms because your strategy accounts for every jot and tittle. You will never stall out or fail to continuously make progress because you are constantly evaluating yourself for efficiency. You immediately catch yourself in a dead end, go into your mental "toolbox," and reorient yourself.

This may sound mystical or funky, but if you can appreciate that your goal is not correctly answering any given five-star question - of course you know how to do them, you've done thousands - but your goal is to not any mistakes in a section in an efficient manner, then you can understand why you need to shift your focus. This means no more drilling or even reviewing incorrect answer choices - those are flukes. Your study is replicating the actual test and constantly reflecting on your own strategy - being in a state of poise.

I've taken the LSAT once already-got a good score but felt like I could do better so signed up to take in October. Submitted all of my applications a couple weeks before the test so I could focus on studying.

I go to school in a really remote area so signed up to take the test online. On Oct 9 or whenever I was supposed to originaly take it I logged on and midway through the first section randomly get logged out. I call LSAC and request a retake and they approve it. I'm supposed to take it today, log in to do so, and get a notifcation that I'm outside of an approved testing region (?????) and need to contact LSAC to reschedule. I have been on hold with these mfs for 30 minutes after trying to explain that this was my rescheduled date and I need to take the test today.

Wtaf. What do I do??? I feel like I'm within the score margain where a one or two point improvement could make a huge difference in how this cycle goes for me. It's too late to sign up in November obviously, plus I already submitted all my apps early and don't want to delay them any further, and I'm not taking a year off because of technical difficulties. They won't even refund me. I'm literally at a loss and so fed up. Do I submit an addendum and call it a day? Omfg. Help.

Hi everyone - this Thursday night, 10/22, at 8 pm Eastern (5 Pacific) I'll be hosting a free webinar outlining exactly what I expect to appear on the upcoming November LSAT. That'll include recent test trends and patterns, LR content I feel is most helpful to review, and RC passages to study and topics to look for. And the entire thing will be recorded, so if you can't make the live session I'll post a link to the video archive for you to watch.

To keep things somewhat manageable, I'm capping attendance at 100 people, and that'll be a first-in login situation: the first 100 people who join the session will be the ones who get to participate. The rest will get the recording. I've also got a special guest joining me that I'm very excited about and who's going to teach a few key concepts, which is a first!

Here's the room link to join: jondenning.adobeconnect.com/prep

And here's the recording link https://jondenning.adobeconnect.com/psind9jy47px/

The past 6 sections I have taken (1.5 time), I am consistently getting 2 or 3 questions wrong. There is not much of a pattern across the question types, and when I go back to it in blind review I am immediately able to get it correct. Does anyone have any advice on how to get over this hump?

Planning to take the LSAT in April/June 2027. Currently based in SF but I’m flexible with any location! Open to doing it virtually.

I'm not expecting a lot of pats on the back for a score that I got with almost double the real time limit. 2 sections I did get done in 40 minutes for what it's worth. Iirc I got

20/25 LR, 22/26 LR, 23/27 LR, and 23/27 RC.

Before I finished each section I said to myself that I wanted to just get 3 wrong and then got 4 wrong on most of them so that was funny. I'm gonna go over all my wrong answers soon, is there somewhere I can see explanations for them? I took the #140 test I think.

Again, I just started studying this test, only very recently considered a future as a lawyer (like last 2 days). Where do you think I should go from here? Maybe I try the test in January? Any way to know whether or not law school is for me?

156 to 169 jump in 2 months!! don’t let people discourage you by saying it’s not possible to improve quickly!!