Subscription pricing
Hi, can someone please tell me which PTs have five sections? I checked that PT 72 doesn't. I have only been doing PTs with four sections so far.
0
Hi, can someone please tell me which PTs have five sections? I checked that PT 72 doesn't. I have only been doing PTs with four sections so far.
15 comments
@gregoryalexanderdevine723 said:
@6400 said:
I love me some RC, but having two RC sections would be a bloodbath :scream:
Wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy. I don't mind RC at all as a section, heck, I even enjoy it somewhat. Even still, it takes far too much mental capacity that if I had 2 I'd probably be running lower than usual on mental stamina. I'm going to make sure I practice just this scenario just in case!
Same, brotha. I plan on putting 2 or 3 RC sections in my PTs. Gotta hope for the best, but prepare for the worst.
@gregoryalexanderdevine723 said:
Wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy. I don't mind RC at all as a section, heck, I even enjoy it somewhat. Even still, it takes far too much mental capacity that if I had 2 I'd probably be running lower than usual on mental stamina. I'm going to make sure I practice just this scenario just in case!
I had section 3 and 4 as RC in June 2016. It wasn't as bad since the break was between both, but still, 2 RC sections sucked ass either way.
@6400 said:
I love me some RC, but having two RC sections would be a bloodbath :scream:
Wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy. I don't mind RC at all as a section, heck, I even enjoy it somewhat. Even still, it takes far too much mental capacity that if I had 2 I'd probably be running lower than usual on mental stamina. I'm going to make sure I practice just this scenario just in case!
@71888 said:
@jkatz1488955 said:
Is there any data on the frequency/pattern of experimental sections?
I'm hoping for LG, will be content with LR, and as absolutely dreading the possibility of two RC sections. I'd be shocked if there wasn't a tangible performance drop in tests where there are two RC passages within the first three sections.
From experience two RC sucks. Badly. I was fortunate enough to have this test make up during the Sep. 2016 test....
I had back to back RC in June 2016. It was bad. But that was when I was even worse at RC, and now, I wouldn't be too mind fucked by it to be honest, even if it still is my worst section.
Overall, it sucks though lol. Well, RC in general sucks so.
@jkatz1488955 said:
Is there any data on the frequency/pattern of experimental sections?
I'm hoping for LG, will be content with LR, and as absolutely dreading the possibility of two RC sections. I'd be shocked if there wasn't a tangible performance drop in tests where there are two RC passages within the first three sections.
If I'm right, then I believe there is an experimental section of all LR, LG and RC each test administration... At least this has been my observation from the past 2 years of LSAT administrations and seeing people talk on TLS and some on here.
It's just luck and random (because of where you sit in the room, I guess) of which experimental section you will get and in what order.
I love me some RC, but having two RC sections would be a bloodbath :scream:
@jkatz1488955 said:
Is there any data on the frequency/pattern of experimental sections?
I'm hoping for LG, will be content with LR, and as absolutely dreading the possibility of two RC sections. I'd be shocked if there wasn't a tangible performance drop in tests where there are two RC passages within the first three sections.
No, unfortunately to my knowledge there is not. Everyone will get a random experimental section on test day. So while you may have LG, the person right next to you may very well end up with an extra RC (ouch!)
@jkatz1488955 said:
Is there any data on the frequency/pattern of experimental sections?
I'm hoping for LG, will be content with LR, and as absolutely dreading the possibility of two RC sections. I'd be shocked if there wasn't a tangible performance drop in tests where there are two RC passages within the first three sections.
From experience two RC sucks. Badly. I was fortunate enough to have this test make up during the Sep. 2016 test....
Is there any data on the frequency/pattern of experimental sections?
I'm hoping for LG, will be content with LR, and as absolutely dreading the possibility of two RC sections. I'd be shocked if there wasn't a tangible performance drop in tests where there are two RC passages within the first three sections.
Okay, thanks guys :)
lol
@6400 said:
Got scooped by Mikey. If you want to do a 5 section test, then you have to add a section from a different PT.
Scoooooooped :D
Got scooped by Mikey. If you want to do a 5 section test, then you have to add a section from a different PT.
No PTs have 5 sections.
If it has 5 sections, then it is not a PT.
Unless it is not a PT, it does not have 5 sections.
Some things have 5 sections but PTs do not.
If it is a PT, it does not have 5 sections.
The actual test has 5 sections because one of those sections is an experimental section which will not be scored. When PTs are released, that experimental section is excluded. What some of us do to account for the length of the real PT, is use a section from a PT we have already taken to reach 5 sections.
They all only have 4 scored sections, none will come with 5 scored sections.
On test day, you will be given 4 scored sections and 1 experimental section. The exp section is not scored, which is why when LSAC releases PTs they only have 4 sections.
If you want to do a 5 section PT, just take an additional section from another PT for the PT you are doing to add up to 5.