I am taking my previous thread on this showing statistical performance in the top echelons, over the period in time where the LSAT became REMOTE optional. Highlighting major data inconsistencies, in the best case.

Now, as everyone saw, if you get clearance to take the test REMOTE, you will need a SECOND camera (your smart phone) pointed at your computer.

This is for everyone, but specifically for laptop users... Which means LSAC was also looking at the FISHY data and found out HOW (particularly laptop users) people were cheating on it. The SECOND CAMERA idea is not by accident, otherwise they would continue using the normal remote set up.

I am sure everyone here has access to google, and the depths of the internet, to figure out how to go about it with a laptop. Prometric isn't just used for LSAT, but also many college tests. Unfortunately, the damage is already done with a major increase in test takers over the last year alone, all with inflated LSAT scores.

***PRIOR POST***

Has anyone else looked at the recent data released on LSAT scores? There is something HIGHLY fishy going on with the increase in the top line... which happens to take place just after you are allowed to take the test remotely! cough cheating cough (didn't say it!)

Here are the facts:

The number of LSAT Applicant tests have increased by 30%

The LSAT Median (155-159) has increased similarly at 26% .. so far so good, normal distribution with added applicants.

The alarm shows up at the top end... an !!!!!! 85% !!!!! increase in (175-180) scorers. Nearly DOUBLING the top line.

My Thesis:

Any addition, or subtraction, from applicants STATISTICALLY SHOULD result in the same distribution range. We know LSAT has been very fair with creating a system for their two LRs and one RCs to keep an even playing field for all applicants. Even with the dropping of logic games, an ALMOST DOUBLING on the top line would be unheard of.

Anyone who has taken remote/online testing during college, knows about friend or two, that knows how to go around the Prometric system. Not that any of us here would do that of course. Could this also be LSAC blanket approving anyone with a doctors note for 1.5x time? Possibly. Could it be Prometric work arounds? possibly. Did we just get smarter applicants? Possibly.

But I will say one thing ... when there is smoke .. there is ...

I think I found a slight cheat code for those who fall for the "trap answers". I ran an algo on any question I found that has a "trap" answer (your typical question where you are jumping between two). I realize a tutor will come in and say "every wrong answer is a trap", BUT we all know... there is those evil questions that have the "You-miss-one-word-and-fall-for-it" answer that the question writer obviously put in there to fool you. I am talking about those questions.

Out of 100 of these questions, here at the results:

-The TRAP answer was located at B 60% of the time, A 20% of the time, and C 20% of the time (rounded)

-The Correct answer on the 100 questions with a trap was "D" 50% of the time and "E" 30% of the time (rounded)

This led me to believe that the question designers, who purposely put trap answers in, believe most people read A->E and will fall into the trap first, creating selection bias, before getting to the right answer.

To mitigate this, it logically, is better to read from E->A. You have the same skill test, but selection bias will reduce by reading over the CORRECT answer first (MOST times), then reading the trap answer AFTER.

If you find yourself falling for traps, obviously you have to study more. But in a time crunch, this method could save you.