Old tests, new tests, and every test in between are merely reskins of the same faulty arguments. When you start to focus on why LSAT arguments tend to be rotten to the core, the surface level stops mattering and your scores increase.

Josh and Nathan talk a listener through why she's underperforming on test day.

Nathan and Josh discuss whether more difficult courses look better on an undergrad transcript for law school applications.

A listener asks about alleged changes to Logical Reasoning that an LSAT YouTuber has reported. Ben and Nathan push back, maintaining that the test hasn’t meaningfully changed and that the so-called “new” question types have been around for years.

Nathan and Josh go over how to navigate the non-tuition costs that come with going to law school.

Ben and Nathan explain what it means to apply “broadly.”

Nathan and Ben counsel a student looking to go to law school but not practice law.

Ben and Nathan break down how so-called “principle” questions aren't a distinct question type.

Demon student Stephen shares how internalizing that there are four wrong answers and exactly one correct answer took him from a 160 to a 178.

Josh is joined again by Abhi and Aaminah, co-hosts of Crushing 1L, to talk about how skills needed to succeed on the LSAT are the same skills needed to succeed in law school.