Briana: a live LSAT coaching session
This is what LSAT Unplugged coaching looks like. Briana came in with no score yet, aiming for break into the 160s. Steve Schwartz coached her live for about 13 minutes on both, and the whole session and transcript are below.
The numbers here are where Briana started and the goal we set together in this session. Individual results vary.
- Student: Briana
- Score when recorded: No official score yet
- Goal: break into the 160s
- Target test: about 2 weeks away (no specific date given)
- Situation: Studying full time, in Steve's boot camp with a separate coach for regular check-ins
- Focus: both
- Worked on: Necessary Assumption, Sufficient Assumption, Role in the Argument, Strengthen
What we fixed in this session
For necessary, gravitate toward more moderate language, because a moderate choice is more likely to have been required by the stimulus than an extreme one.
Steve Schwartz
This is one session, in the middle of the work. I've been coaching the LSAT since 2005, and every session runs the same way: find the real problem, fix the process, reset the plan.
Briana was picking stronger, sufficient-assumption-style language on necessary assumption questions; I told her to gravitate toward moderate language on necessary assumption questions. That matters because a moderate choice is more likely to be required by the stimulus.
Briana was running 3 practice tests a week without deep enough review and repeating the same mistakes; I cut her to 2 exams a week with deeper mistake-journal review so the lessons actually stick.
Briana's reading comprehension pre-reading, paraphrasing and highlighting every paragraph, was taking about 8 minutes and leaving her unable to finish the section; I had her cut the highlighting and drop to 3 to 4 words of notes per paragraph, aiming for a 4-minute initial read instead of 8.
Where the session landed: Briana says she's feeling much better and agrees to drop to 2 practice tests a week with deeper mistake-journal review, and to shorten her RC pre-reading to about 4 minutes with lighter note-taking instead of full highlighting.
If your prep looks like Briana's did, that's fixable in one session.
Book your free LSAT tutoring lesson
In Briana's words
There's just a gap in my understanding of certain stimuli, certain wrong answer traps I keep getting locked into.
Briana
That's a great idea. If I understood the argument, I'd probably answer questions quicker.
Briana
I don't think I've ever fully completed an RC section.
Briana
Questions people ask about LSAT Unplugged coaching
What happens in an LSAT Unplugged coaching session?
The coach finds the specific habit that's costing points, fixes the process, and sets the plan for the weeks ahead. In Briana's case: Briana was picking stronger.
Who runs the sessions?
Steve Schwartz recorded this one. Every LSAT Unplugged coach scored 170 or higher on an official LSAT, and students are matched to a coach on learning style and weak areas.
Where can I see finished results?
On the student reviews page at unpluggedprep.com/reviews, with video interviews and official scores.
Learn the fixes yourself: necessary assumption questions, sufficient assumption questions, weaken and strengthen questions.
Student reviews and finished results.
Full session transcript
Recorded December 2025.
Briana: My goal for test day would be to break the 160s, which is hard when my practice tests aren't there yet. But I have a very good understanding of the test, the question types, how to approach everything. There's just a gap in my understanding of certain stimuli, certain wrong answer traps I keep getting locked into. Timing has been my main opponent, it's been very difficult.
Steve: You're really not that far off. A five point increase in two weeks is reasonable if we can identify some weak areas to focus on. You mentioned timing. Are there certain question types you're struggling with?
Briana: Necessary assumption is the one I get wrong most. Not five wrong on a test and nothing else, more like one necessary assumption question every test, plus role in the argument or strengthen. It varies.
Steve: Necessary is a big opportunity though, it's a more common type.
Briana: Right, right.
Steve: How do you feel about negation, are you clear on how to negate choices?
Briana: Very good at negation. For necessary assumption I'm not understanding the argument well enough to fully break that link. My goal ends up being to get rid of the conclusion rather than dismantle the argument. I've been choosing more sufficient assumption answers lately.
Steve: So you're more drawn to sufficient assumption answers?
Briana: Yes.
Steve: You see a tempting sufficient assumption answer, stronger language than a moderate necessary assumption, and you pick that. So you're aware of your issue, it's a matter of building the habit, being conscious of what you're prone to falling for. How often are you taking practice tests?
Briana: Three times a week.
Steve: Good. Studying full time?
Briana: Yes, yes.
Steve: That's the one situation where three a week is okay. I also want you reviewing sufficiently in depth. For every necessary question you miss, look at what tempted you. If you're consistently drawn to stronger language, an attempted sufficient assumption answer to a necessary assumption question, hopefully you make that mistake enough now that you don't on test day. There's a classic, the rattlesnake folktale question, one of the hardest LR questions ever, Google it. They put a tempting sufficient assumption answer earlier than the more moderate necessary assumption choice. So for necessary, gravitate toward more moderate language, because a moderate choice is more likely to have been required by the stimulus than an extreme one. Is that clicking?
Briana: Yes, totally. I've watched all your videos, gone through the unplugged curriculum, I'm hearing your tips, telling myself to do it, but on the test I still make those same careless mistakes, like, how could I have picked that, that's obviously a sufficient assumption. When I'm reviewing, I really understand my issue. There's something going on during the test, nerves or timing, where I'm missing stuff. Any tips? I have two full weeks left.
Steve: My first thought is three exams a week might be too much. I know you have the time, but what if you dropped to two a week and reviewed more, and of course you're meeting with your coach consistently in the boot camp, right?
Briana: Yes, yes.
Steve: I'd do those two exams, discuss them with your coach, and spend more time on your own reviewing mistakes in more depth. You don't need the cadence of three a week, two with deeper review. If you linger on them longer, you're more likely to learn the lesson deeply enough not to repeat it.
Briana: Gotcha, so rather than drilling and drilling, go through each wrong answer. I keep a wrong answer journal, a running Google doc, that's been helpful. But my mistakes vary, a trap answer, or identifying the wrong part of the stimulus, the loophole in the argument.
Steve: Your mistakes vary, but you're still noting one consistent one, necessary assumption. I think you're learning the lesson in theory but not in practice. If you can linger a bit more on the mistakes, you'll learn it more deeply. Also, if you could slow down during your tests, do you have time to spend more on the argument itself before you go into the choices?
Briana: Yes, yes.
Steve: When you get to the end of an LR section, do you have time remaining?
Briana: Sometimes at max 3 to 5 minutes.
Steve: That's a good amount, maybe even more than you need. So if you slowed down and gave yourself an extra 10 seconds per question, out of 25 in the section, and had only 2 to 3 minutes left instead of 3 to 5, maybe that raises your accuracy.
Briana: Gotcha, for sure.
Steve: I think 5 might be too much of a buffer. Even 1 or 2 minutes remaining, if you slowed down, you'd make fewer mistakes, because you'd give yourself more time to implement what you're learning in review.
Briana: That's a great idea. If I understood the argument, I'd probably answer questions quicker.
Steve: Exactly. It comes down to understanding the argument on a deeper level. You're doing so much else right, this might just be the missing piece. Slow down, and before your exam, review your mistake journal, think through the mistakes you're most prone to. Distill it into a bulleted list of 5 or 10 takeaways and review it before each practice test and before the actual. That might be all you need for your five point increase.
Briana: That's a great idea, thank you so much.
Steve: Of course. Anything else?
Briana: A question on reading comprehension, I have the opposite problem, I'm much slower on RC. I do the tips your program specifies, the low res summaries, mapping structure. I have a good understanding of structure, I can say what's going on paragraph by paragraph, a broad understanding along with the author's opinion. But when I get to the questions, they're very specific, and for every one I have to go back into the passage and double check, wasting so much time. I don't think I've ever fully completed an RC section.
Steve: The low res summaries, the skeleton of the passage, will help with global questions like main idea, primary purpose, passage organization. But that won't necessarily help you solve the detail oriented questions after. Going back to the passage text is okay, the key is knowing where the details are so you're not scanning all 450 words, but can hone in on the key line, like the end of paragraph 2 or the beginning of paragraph 4. So when you read, can you look for where those elements appear?
Briana: Gotcha. Do you recommend highlighting? There's mixed consensus on that. I know you say the people who do best write the least, but what would you recommend? When I do nothing, I don't get a good understanding, I'm more interactive when I force myself to write and highlight.
Steve: I almost don't want to answer this, since your exam is in two weeks and this isn't the time to try anything new. Broadly, the people who do best mark very little, because it takes time and the highlighter tool is glitchy. But I hear you that doing no notes at all isn't working for you. What's your current approach right now?
Briana: I read the first paragraph, paraphrase it in plain English, for each paragraph. Then I highlight the author's opinion, important words, or different points of view if it's a debate passage. Then I paraphrase the main point and go into the questions.
Steve: How long is all that taking you?
Briana: Almost eight minutes, to read the passage and solve the questions.
Steve: No, eight minutes just for reading, highlighting, writing everything down.
Briana: So it's taking up so much time.
Steve: Do you get extra time on test day, or standard 35 minutes?
Briana: The standard.
Steve: If that whole process takes eight minutes before you've even hit the questions, and you only have an average of 8:45, you're not finishing the section, are you?
Briana: I'm not. Never.
Steve: So the status quo isn't going to work. Your test is in two weeks, we need something radically different so you can complete the section, or at least three passages. We've got to shave off the upfront work. Bringing it from eight minutes on your initial read to four would do wonders for your time to solve questions. A lot of programs give you theory or scaffolding that doesn't actually hold up under real test timing. So let's cut all the highlighting, still let you take some notes, but less. Could you jot down three or four words per paragraph, enough to feel like you're doing something tangible?
Briana: I think that's a great idea, I'm usually writing a full sentence, if not bullet points. It's totally a time waster.
Steve: I want a compromise between the ideal and what feels natural, something to process the passage and summarize it briefly. So we cut the highlighter, since it's glitchy on Law Hub and not precise, and keep your scratch paper writing very light, but still something. My ideal is two and a half to three minutes on the initial read, leaving 5:45 for the questions. That's the target, not something you have to hit in two weeks, though maybe you can since you're studying full time. Shaving from eight minutes to four gives you four more minutes for questions, closer to a minute per question. Try that out.
Briana: When I'm reading the questions, I go back into the passage looking for them, since I usually try not to look back at all.
Steve: For detail questions that's okay, as long as you go to a specific part rather than rereading everything, knowing that the end of paragraph 2 has the laundry list of details, or the beginning of paragraph 4 has a run-on sentence full of examples.
Briana: Gotcha.
Steve: Cool. How are you feeling, Briana?
Briana: Much better. Thank you so much.
Steve: Awesome. Keep me posted as things unfold in these final two weeks.
Briana: We'll do. Thank you so much, Steve.
Steve: For sure, have a good one, take care.
Briana: You too, bye.
More coaching sessions: Zabdi, 141 to 155, Abigail, 147 to 160, Leah, 153 to 170, Dominic, Alina, 157 to 170. Student results and reviews.
I've written free explanations for every question in LSAT PrepTest 159, 158, 157, 156, 155 and 154, with the right answer and why each wrong answer fails. All LSAT explanations are here.
Enough reading. Try a question. Free LSAT drills, 1 at a time, explained the second you answer. Start free drills
