Subscription pricing
Is it a bad idea to use tests prior to 34 for practice? Clearly, the LSAT has evolved quite a bit. However, I venture to guess that there is still a lot to be gained from earlier tests, even outside of LG.
0
Is it a bad idea to use tests prior to 34 for practice? Clearly, the LSAT has evolved quite a bit. However, I venture to guess that there is still a lot to be gained from earlier tests, even outside of LG.
4 comments
Very helpful. Don't discount these. They're not that different. I used them as timed sections to practice my test taking processes like skipping/timing. RC was particular helpful for developing a rythm.
Logic and flaws are all the same so I say right on for extra practice/drilling.
IME, I found doing whole LR sections from the 20s and before less useful because there are many, many questions that are just written differently from modern LR questions. After doing many later PTs, going back and doing whole early LR sets was just plain weird and didn't feel helpful. I also found that 7Sage has picked out the most relevant early LR questions for the problem sets in the CC -- and what's leftover was less relevant.
It is worth doing early RC sections if you have time, but I did find them to be far easier than modern RC sections. For me, I was lulled into a false sense of confidence and had to force myself to move much more quickly through modern RC sections.
Never a bad idea to do so. Go do them all :)