Gather ‘round, gather ‘round.  It’s time for Blueprint’s LSAT prognosticator* to once again gaze into the misty aura of her crystal orb and perceive the Truth**.  Since the introduction of the three-section Flex test—and the current three-section plus an experimental variation—your humble prognosticator has taken time to reconnect with the mystical plane and gather some data.  Let’s all take a moment to breathe in the scent of tea leaves and heavily annotated spreadsheets, clasp our hands together, and dive in. 

*Picture a hunched-over figure draped in a blue blanket with hastily sewn-on star and moon-shaped patches. There may or may not be a droopy conical hat involved. A wispy, white fake beard is definitely present.

**Note: “Truth” should be read here as “complete speculation based on a combination of statistical analysis, general vibes, and way too many hours spent trying to get into the mindset of the nerds-in-chief at LSAC headquarters.”  Predictions are not guaranteed, but rest assured that if she is right, our prognosticator will not shut up about it for months.

March 2022 LSAT Predictions

Welcome to March! This has been a busy start to the year with January, February and now the March LSAT all within a span of eight weeks. If you’ve taken a looksies at some of our predictions and reviews from the past few months, you’ll see that LSAT has been making ample use of old, non-disclosed tests for the past several months. With sections of non disclosed tests from waaay back in 2013 showing up last fall, to sections from both the January and February 2019 tests already seen this winter, we feel pretty safe in saying that not everything you’ll see on the LSAT next week will be “new and improved.”

At this point of the year, for anyone applying to law school for the 2022-2023 year, about 60% of the seats have been filled. The number of applications is down from last year at this time, but still up more than 10% from 2019. Not so surprising given the very large spike we saw in last year’s very tough cycle. Probably more interesting for you, if you are taking the March LSAT, we’re seeing fewer scores in the upper tiers of LSAT scores. Like we’ve just said, last year was a massive jump in astronomically awesome LSAT scores. This year, we’re seeing a deflation in scores from really the mid-150s through to 180. If your score is anywhere between these poles, you’re in a better position already than you would have been a year ago.

Okay, enough about law school admissions, let’s get into how I might be of help in what to study in these final, fleeting moments before March 11. In Logical Reasoning, be prepared for unusual twists and turns in asking the same tried and true questions. Yep, that’s right, be prepared for unusual language in the question prompts. Not that LSAC is really testing you on anything different, it’s just how the questions are being phrased. We’re seeing principles popping up literally everywhere … strengthen, disagree, parallel, you name it. If the LSAT can throw a principle into the machinations at all, believe you me, they’re gonna try. Mark my words. Other than that, study up on your Flaw questions, Necessary questions, and Must Be True questions. The LSAT has been showing big love to them all this winter, and I see no reason for that to change just yet.

Also in Logical Reasoning, you will always be in good company if you are a master of conditional statements and the common fallacies. Recent exams have been replete with questions involving conditional statements – the average is about ten questions per exam. Also, knowledge of the common fallacies helps you throughout the LR section, particularly causation fallacies, comparison fallacies, equivocations, and exclusivity fallacies.

Over on Reading Comprehension, I would expect to get passages structured around a few different organizational principles, like trying to prove a cause and effect relationship exists, or attempting to answer a question. With some dastardly reading passages showing up on recent tests, I’m fairly certain that the March test will make a return to dinosaurs and the Chicxulub crater buried underneath the Yucatan Peninsula in Mexico. Or maybe the overwintering versus summer generation of waterbugs. Or just some challenging and dry piece of legal philosophy content on critical theories of law. Yawn.

Finally, on Logic Games, my prediction is going to be two rule substitution questions to what are otherwise fairly standard games – one tiered ordering game, one unstable grouping game, a weird game (that becomes infinitely easier if you construct some scenarios before the first question), and a combo game involving principles of distribution. Basically, expect all the games you’ve spent the last few months practicing, and just add a little twist.

So, before I let you go, one final piece of advice: if you have the basics down, you are ready. Don’t worry about what might be on the exam, but instead, brush up on the skills you know get tested on all exams. Get some practice diagramming conditional statements, and making deductions with them. Review all the common fallacies, and practice identifying them on Flaw, Parallel Flaw, and most Operation questions. Study up on causal relationships, particularly how to strengthen and weaken them. Do some final Reading Comp passages, and really focus on recognizing the author’s viewpoint and conclusions. Go over when to make scenarios in ordering and grouping games. If you place emphasis on these concepts during this last week, then I will make one final prediction: you’re going to knock this test outta the park!

February 2022 LSAT Predictions

Another LSAT?  Already?!  Yep, it’s that time again.  Just four weeks after the January LSAT, the February LSAT will begin on Friday, February 11.  And you might be wondering, “What’s going to be on the LSAT?”  (Beyond, you know, LSAT questions.)  Luckily for you, we LSAT oracles at Blueprint are here to help.

Logical Reasoning

This section has seen the biggest change in the last 2+ years — since May 2020 (i.e. the first test of the Covid-induced at-home LSAT), there has been one scored Logical Reasoning section instead of two (which had been the case 1991–2019).  As such, the frequency of some question types have changed.  Weaken questions have increased from 2 questions per LR section to 4.  Soft Must-Be-True questions have become less frequent (from 2-3 questions to just 1) in favor of “regular” Must Be True questions (from 1 question to 2).  Main Point questions have also seen a slight uptick (before you’d get 1; now it’s 1 or 2).

But most question types have remained constant.  There are usually 3-5 Flaw and Strengthen questions each, about 4 Necessary and Sufficient questions combined, and a remarkably consistent 1 Parallel question and 1 Parallel Flaw question.  Other question types that traditionally appear once (Describe, Role, Disagree, Resolve/Explain) have continued on that pattern, while the rare question types (Must be False, Agree, Crux, Rare Implication) have not appeared since 2020.

We expect these patterns to hold true and not return to pre-2020 frequencies, since the switch to one LR section seems to have brought about these changes.  You still want to be ready for any question to appear (i.e., don’t abandon those rare question types in your practice entirely), but focus more on the more common ones to get the biggest bang of your studying buck.

Predictions: 4 Weaken, 4 Flaw, 3 Strengthen, 3 Necessary, 2 Must Be True; 1 each of Main Point, Sufficient, Soft Must Be True, Parallel, Parallel Flaw, Role, Disagree, Describe, Resolve, Explain
EXTRA BOLD Predictions: A Weaken question about accident rates; a Flaw question about entrepreneurs; a question in the Implication Family about large aquatic mammals (manatees, walruses… that sort of thing)

Reading Comprehension

Reading Comprehension didn’t change structurally in 2020 — you still get one section with four passages.  Traditionally, we’ve seen the three “normal” passages structured as 1-2 Thesis, 1-2 Antithesis, the occasional.  There has been a slight uptick of Antithesis and Synthesis passages, corresponding with a slight downtick of Thesis passages, but it still falls within that traditional range.  Seems like the test-makers might be placing a slightly greater influence on passages with multiple points of view.  (Of course, the one sure thing is that you’ll get exactly one comparative passage.

We expect this recent trend to hold true.  Be ready for one Thesis passage, along with two passages with multiple viewpoints — either one Antithesis and one Synthesis, or both Antithesis.  On the passages with multiple viewpoints, make sure you distinguish the viewpoints and how they’re supported.  On the Thesis passage (or two, if you get two), remember to identify the argument being made; it’s not just a 60-line book report.  What is the overall claim being made, and how is it supported?  Identifying secondary structures can be a huge help in preparing for questions when the structure is less-than-obvious.

As for subject matter… it’s the same as always.  There will be one passage on a legal topic, one or two on science, and the rest spread across the humanities and social sciences.  Out of the four passages, one of the topics will be out of your comfort zone; the test-makers design it this way.  But remember, it’s a test of logic, not of subject matter.  Whenever you are feeling lost on the subject matter or details, reset your focus on the structural elements of the passage, and you’ll be ready for the questions.

Predictions: 1-2 Antithesis, 0-1 Synthesis, 1 Thesis, 1 Comparative; topics will include 1 legal, 1 physical science, 1 arts/culture/history*, and 1 social science.
EXTRA BOLD Prediction: There will be a passage about dance and it will mix arts, culture, and maybe history (hence the “*” above); the comparative passage will be 4th (at least not 1st like last time… yeesh).

Logic Games

Logic Games seem to be following some different trends lately, even though we still get one section of four games.  Fewer 1:1 Ordering games, more Tiered Ordering games, fewer multi-group games (both stable and unstable), more Combo games.  Is this a sign of things to come, or just a small sample size?

Experts as we are, we believe… a little bit of both (yes, not a satisfying answer, we know).  Tiered Ordering games seem to be here to stay, so expect one of those.  There will also be a second Ordering game of some type, likely with just one variable set (i.e. not Tiered); we’re leaning forward 1:1 due to its historical frequency, but don’t be surprised to find an Underbooked Ordering game instead.  Expect a Combo game as well, likely an In & Out with an ordered “In” group.  As for the Grouping game, we’re thinking a Stable Grouping game will likely show up; if neither Ordering game is underbooked, this one will be.

Odds are at least two of these games will be more complex, but even if you feel that initial “uh oh” when starting these tougher games, don’t let that discomfort change your approach.  The weirdest setups and toughest deductions still follow the same step-by-step process as simpler games, just with, well, more steps.  Stick to the fundamentals, and remember that doing the work upfront (good setup, clear symbols for rules, deductions & scenarios before the questions) is how these games are won.

Predictions: 1 1:1 Ordering, 1 Tiered Ordering, 1 Stable Grouping, 1 Combo (In & Out w/ Ordered In Group)
EXTRA BOLD Prediction: One of the games will feature animals; one of the games will be underbooked.

Experimental Section

You’ll get an experimental section!  That’s for sure.  Where will it show up?  Anywhere.  Will it be scored?  Goodness, no.  What kind will it be?  Any kind.

What are the odds it will be a particular kind?  We actually think there is a slightly higher chance you’ll get Logic Games than the other two types.  Why?  You may have heard that Logic Games will maybe, possibly, potentially go through some sort of change starting Summer 2023.  That leads us to believe that LSAC will have a greater need to “experiment” with Logic Games than with Reading Comprehension or Logical Reasoning.

But you still want to be ready for anything, and you’ll have to give it your full effort since you won’t know for sure which one is unscored (if you did, it wouldn’t be much of an experiment, would it?).  Our advice — prepare as though you’ll get your least favorite section as your experimental.  That way, if you get anything different, it’s a pleasant surprise.

Prediction: You will get an experimental section, and it will be unscored.
EXTRA BOLD Prediction: 50% chance it will be LG, 25% chance LR, 25% chance RC

Technical Issues

Things seem to have gone smoothly in January!  Huzzah!  We are very glad the tech troubles of October and November subsided.  We sincerely hope this lack of technological issues continues into February, and we anticipate that it will.

But be ready for anything!  Look, on a proctored exam, there are just some elements that will be out of your control.  You might face a delay when checking in, and you might have your section paused by the proctor with little or no notice.  These things happen, but they don’t have to derail your testing day.  

Accept the possibility that certain unforeseen events (or foreseen, like the ones we just foresaw) may occur, and you’ll be less likely to fall into a trap door of “what-ifs.”  It may feel uncomfortable if it occurs, but feel the discomfort and do the test anyway.  As always, things don’t have to go perfectly for you to get your dream score.

Prediction: More relatively smooth sailing tech-wise.

***

There you have it!  Another LSAT thoroughly prognosticated.  Work hard, have fun, and let us know how it goes.

January 2022 LSAT Predictions

Summary: 

• • Logical Reasoning: Expect to see more Strengthen and Weaken questions than Soft Must-Be-True questions.
• • Logic Games: We’ll see a return to the normal 1:1 Ordering game, likely with a Tiered Ordering game, and maybe even an Unstable Grouping game for some razzle dazzle.  
• • Reading Comprehension: Don’t be surprised if you encounter a Synthesis resurgence. 

As you prepare for test day, you’re likely wondering: “What is going to be on the January 2022 LSAT?”  We, the certified LSAT soothsayers here at Blueprint LSAT, can assure you with the utmost certainty that you will see…official LSAT questions. Our crystal ball indicates that there will be no newfangled sections on algebra, Roman history, or how to win on Chopped.  Yes, dear readers, you will see an LSAT on test day.

At this point, you might be thinking, “You jerks, I really want to know what will be on this test!”  To that end, we can say (1) yes, that was a jerk move. My bad; and (2) we can actually predict what will be on the test (and generally be more helpful from here on out).  

In this post, we’ll take a deep dive into recent LSAT trends (including from the three recently released tests from 2020 LSAT dates), use those trends to make reasonable predictions of what you’ll see on the January LSAT, and throw in a few EXTRA BOLD predictions for good measure.  This way, you’ll have more certainty on what you will encounter, which can go a long way to reducing those test-day jitters (which can also be reduced by taking a Blueprint LSAT prep course, obviously).

The Sure Thing — Overall LSAT Structure

Just to refresh your memory, the current iteration of the LSAT (since August 2021) consists of four sections: 1 Logical Reasoning, 1 Reading Comprehension, 1 Logic Games, and 1 unscored variable section (i.e. the Experimental section).  These can appear in any order, and the Experimental will be of the same type as one of the other three sections.  

The standard length of time of each section is 35 minutes (unless you received accommodations from LSAC); there is a 10-minute break between sections 2 & 3 and a 1-minute “break” (yep, it’s that quick) between the other sections.

Sure, we are not fully utilizing our prediction skills yet, but we can predict with 100% certainty that you will receive a 4-section LSAT (with 3 scored sections).

Prediction:  On test day, you will see a 4-section LSAT.

No, no… we’re not done.  Now it’s time to get to the real prognosticatin’.

Logical Reasoning

To predict what we’ll see in the Logical Reasoning section, let’s take a look at the exams from 2013-2019 (which each had two LR sections), line them up with the three most recently released tests from 2020 (each with one LR section), and compare the two:

Two big trends jump out in the Change column of this chart: (1) Weaken questions are way up (four questions per section instead of about two), and (2) Soft Must-Be-True questions are way down (just one instead of 2-3).  

With Weaken questions, this makes sense; finding ways to weaken arguments is commonplace in law school (not to mention a lot of fun), so we can see why LSAC might have kept the number of Weaken questions high when they reduced the test from two LR sections to one.  

The reduction in Soft Must-Be-True questions is more surprising. Drawing inferences is key both in Reading Comprehension (now) and in law school (later on).  Even with more MBT questions, that’s still fewer overall questions in the Implication Family, which was already the smallest of the three families, to begin with.

Beyond that, though, there aren’t many changes compared to the last few years.  Flaw and Strengthen questions are still in the 3-4 range; Necessary questions are still 2-3, while Sufficient questions remain 1-2; the rare question types are still rare.  

Predictions: 4 Flaw, 4 Strengthen, 3 Weaken, 2 Soft Must Be True, 2 Necessary, 2 Sufficient
EXTRA BOLD Predictions: A Necessary question about dinosaurs being born (instead of dying, for once); a Strengthen Principle question about baking; a Soft MBT question about ninjas.

Reading Comprehension

OK, so the last three exams aren’t a huge sample size (12 passages), but when it comes to the structure of the passages (which is most important), Synthesis passages have made a little bit of a comeback.  Not only was there one among the “normal” passages, but also we saw what we believe to be the first instance of a Synthesis structure within a Comparative passage (Passage A criticized someone, Passage B took a middle-ground position between the two).  Could this be a sign of a Synthesis renaissance?

Doubtful. That’s still just three Synthesis passages in the last 7+ years (four, if you include the Comparative passage).  We’ve still generally seen the usual 1-2 Thesis passages and 1-2 Antithesis passages, with Antithesis holding a slightly higher frequency.  And Comparative passages don’t waver: you will get exactly one.  We anticipate that these patterns will hold in January.

As for subject matter (less important than structure, but still fun), the usual suspects still dominate.  We have generally seen one legal passage and one science passage on recent exams, with the other two passages split among the other topics. 

Predictions: 2 Antithesis, 1 Thesis, 1 Comparative. Topics will include 1 legal, 1 physical science, 1 history, and 1 social science.
EXTRA BOLD Prediction: An Antithesis passage about punishment for insider trading

Logic Games

What the heck happened to 1:1 Ordering games?  The years-long mainstay of the Logic Games section — almost a sure thing to appear on any test — only showed up once in the three most recently released exams. 

In its place has been a rise in Tiered Ordering games of the less-complex variety—think 1:1 Ordering plus an extra characteristic that can break two ways.  We’ve also seen a noticeable uptick in Combo games with multiple groups, taking the place of some of the standard Grouping games we’re used to seeing.  Unsurprisingly, Neither games are neither here nor there; they haven’t shown up for a few years.

For the January LSAT, we can expect the standard two Ordering games per test, and with the recent trend coming with a small sample size, odds are we’ll see a return to the normal one 1:1 Ordering game, likely with a Tiered Ordering game on top of that.  

We can also expect a Grouping game with multiple groups — we’re leaning toward one of the Unstable variety.  Finally, one trend we think will hold up is that of the Combo game — expect one of those as well.

Predictions: 1 1:1 Ordering, 1 Tiered Ordering, 1 Unstable Grouping, 1 Combo (In & Out w/ an Ordered “In” Group)
EXTRA BOLD Prediction: The Grouping game will be about birds who hate each other.

LSAT Experimental Section

Well, all we can really predict here is that you’ll get an unscored experimental section and you won’t know for sure which one it will be.  Each section has a 33% chance of showing up, so you’ll know which type is experimental once you’re deep into the test, but which exact section is experimental will remain unknown.  

Plus, different test takers get different experimental sections of different types, so we couldn’t predict exactly which type you would get if we tried.

Prediction: You’ll get an experimental section, and it will be unscored.
EXTRA BOLD Prediction: The correct answers will be B, C, A, C, D… just kidding, we have no idea.

Technical Issues

Yep, you might be wondering about the technological side of things, so we should address it.  If you are unfamiliar, the last couple LSAT administrations (October and November) featured outages and other technical issues on the part of LSAC and/or ProctorU, leading to delayed start times, interruptions, and rescheduling.  There seemed to be fewer of these issues in November than in November, but they were present nonetheless.  

One factor that may have compounded these issues is that, understandably, most of the technical problems occurred during the earliest time slots.  Those time slots were usually on Saturday morning — likely the most popular time slots & the time in which the LSAT was traditionally held in test centers (i.e. “The Before Times”).

LSAC may have found a way to mitigate these problems (if they occur again) by changing the days in which they offer the test. Instead of the Saturday–Sunday–Tuesday schedule we’ve generally seen in the last year or so, LSAC has gone with a Friday–Saturday–Sunday schedule for the January exam.  This means the earliest time slots — the ones with the most potential for tech troubles — would not be the most popular time slots (the weekends, especially Saturday morning).

Will this mitigate the recent tech issues, and will those issues occur at all?  We’d love to say everything will go smoothly from a technological standpoint, but it’s reasonable to predict that some delays or interruptions might occur early on.  However, we feel comfortable saying that the weekend time slots will go much more smoothly than they have the last couple of test administrations.

Prediction: There will be some tech issues on Friday, but it will likely be less than in October or November; Saturday and Sunday will go much more smoothly
EXTRA BOLD Prediction: There will be zero tech issues on LSAC’s/ProctorU’s end on Saturday and Sunday (this is more of a hope than a prediction, but we would absolutely love to see it).

***

And that’s a wrap for our January LSAT predictions. We hope our glimpses into the future give you, even more, peace of mind heading into test day, or at least a clearer picture of what you’ll encounter.  When the January LSAT rolls around, let us know how it goes (especially if our EXTRA BOLD predictions come true… fingers crossed for hateful birds).  Until then, keep working hard, and have fun in the process.

---

November 2021 LSAT Predictions

Summary: 

• • Logical Reasoning: Expect to see a lot of the Operation Family, particularly Strengthen and Weaken questions —and maybe a few more diagrammable arguments across the section than usual.
• • Logic Games: Tiered Ordering games are likely to make an appearance and perhaps, a dreaded rule substitution question.
• • Reading Comprehension: One passage each on the law, a natural science, the arts, and a social science, as usual. Watch out for a passage on a “harder” science like physics—it’s been too long since one has shown up to darken our collective doorsteps…

Logical Reasoning: 

Let’s start with what we know, based on breaking down the released three-section exams LSAC has so generously given us.

So, what does this mean?  Well, let’s compare it to what we knew about the LSATs of relatively recent yore (which is to say, data from June 2017 through November 2019 LSAT dates). For the sake of not making anyone do more math than is absolutely necessary, these numbers have been divided by two so we can make easier comparisons between the two-LR old tests and the one-LR modern version.  

So, what can we gather from this? On a larger scale, it looks like Implication family questions, particularly Soft Must Be True questions, might be getting a bit less common overall. Operation family questions seem to be swooping in to fill the gap, with a particular focus on Weaken questions.  

But, really, things generally seem to more or less line up with what we’ve always expected from the Logical Reasoning sections. Our old faithful Parallel and Parallel Flaw seem to be showing up once per section each, as they’ve always done. Necessary and Sufficient questions are as common as they’ve always been, and the distributions among the Characterization Family also seem pretty stable.  

Now, it would be something of a fallacy to use a sample size of three to draw absolute conclusions from, but what kind of prognosticator wouldn’t wildly speculate based on the scant data available?  After giving the ol’ crystal ball a good whack, I feel comfortable speculating on some things that are a bit less data-driven.  

After a run of relatively few Implication questions, expect to see some more diagrammable statements appearing throughout the section.  A diagrammable Sufficient question isn’t beyond the realm of possibility, and a diagrammable Strengthen Principle or Parallel question is a near-certainty.  

I predict that causation will continue to be a major factor in increasingly common Strengthen and Weaken questions.  I’d also bet my extremely fancy wizarding hat on an extra Resolve or Explain question showing up.  

And finally, even with Flaw question numbers holding steady, expect to see more questions that demonstrate flaws that don’t necessarily fall into one of the common fallacies.  Identifying assumptions is a vital skill, even outside of Necessary and Sufficient questions.

Hot study tips for the Logical Reasoning Section: 

• • Brush up on ways to support and attack causal arguments.
• • Make sure you feel confident in your ability to pull apart conditional statements.
• • Practice identifying assumptions in Flaw questions.
• • If you’ve got some extra time, why not try a few extra Resolve or Explain questions.

Logic Games: 

Logic Games have made their presence felt very clearly over the past few released exams, showing up twice for Experimental sections, plus their usual once-per-test appearance. That has allowed your diligent prognosticator to make some educated predictions for the upcoming exam.  

First, the once-reliable single 1:1 Ordering game per section rule may not be as steady as we used to think.  This type of game, although still common, can’t be treated as a given anymore.  If one does appear, expect some sort of twist—a circular formation, particularly complex conditional rules, or possibly an unusually large block.  

Tiered Ordering games, on the other hand, have been ascendant, showing up in each of the graded sections once and sprinkled liberally throughout the experimental sections.  Underbooked and Overbooked games have both continued to be the proverbial middle children of the Ordering Game world, but the ever-trustworthy crystal ball appears to be hinting at one of these types appearing on the November exam. 

In the realm of Grouping and Combo games, trends remain somewhat cloudy.  Unstable games have undoubtedly been on the rise, but the spirits (read: vibes) seem to indicate that a Stable grouping game is a bit overdue for an appearance.  An In & Out element also seems distinctly possible, though whether in its own game or as a feature of a Combo game is left up to the fates.  

If you’ll graciously allow this humble prognosticator to make one final Logic Game prediction: the likelihood of seeing a Rule Substitution question is high.  This type of question, though notorious for being a pain in the rear, is ultimately as learnable as any other question type.  Pay attention to your deductions, and practice, practice, practice.  

And, if worst comes to worst, remember all questions are worth one point each. If you feel yourself spending too much time on the Rule Substitution or any question, you can always move on to the next one. Just be sure to make a guess!

Hot study tips for the Logic Games Section: 

• Put some extra time into Tiered Ordering games.
• Try to find some games with Rule Substitution questions to practice, just in case.

Reading Comprehension: 

Ah, Reading Comprehension. The section that even the darkest corners of the magical world hesitate to spend time with. Luckily, on the prediction front, Reading Comp has been remarkably stable over the years, including on the most recent released exams.  We can expect to see one passage each on the law, a natural science, the arts (broadly described), and some subset of a social science. As always, one passage will be comparative and I, regretfully but confidently, predict this section will bring the most hardship to test-takers.  

The specifics about upcoming passages are unclear even to the most diligent of prognosticators, but a passage on a “hard” science topic, perhaps something under the physics umbrella, seems likely.  I’m also feeling…something in the realm of visual art for the comparative passage.  Perhaps it’s just a personal fondness for Yayoi Kusama, but contrasting, though not completely contradictory, views about the use of space and public interaction with art seems like a promising topic.  

But let’s not get too bogged down in the specifics of passage topics.  As we all know, by far the most important part of understanding a Reading Comp passage is identifying how many points of view are present, and tracking how those different viewpoints break down on the issues discussed, whatever topic those issues may be on.  Plan to spend some quality time working through passages with secondary structures — particularly those with extensive secondary structures.  

And with that, it’s time to shed my wizardly robes and cap and don my regular nerd ‘fit once more.  Your humble prognosticator and the rest of us at Most Strongly Supported will see you on the other side of the exam to celebrate, commiserate, and/or curse the very name of LSAC.