Hi friends.
I was pretty surprised by my score yesterday. I scored somewhere between 3 and 5 points lower than I was expecting to score, very close to my first score despite beating the low 160s plateau in my recent practice tests.
I've been thinking through what could have possibly happened--I felt extremely good about LG, and I felt about normal with the rest, even with one slightly easier-than-normal LR section.
I remembered that when I logged onto the forums afterwards, I heard people talking about one real LR section with 26 questions. I didn't remember 26; I remembered 25. I figured I just misremembered. But I know I finished every section, and I'm wondering now if maybe that was an indication that I bubbled the last few ACs on the wrong lines. It almost perfectly explains the scoring discrepancy between what I expected and what I got. I was typically falling around -3 or -4 on each LR section and -6 on RC, with LG at -0 to -2 depending mostly on whether I finished. I finished LG on January's test, so a -14 or -13 seemed like a reasonable expectation. Misbubbling 22-26, for instance--which is around where I remember skipping a question--would get me from -13/-14 raw to around -18/-19 raw, which is exactly the difference between what I expected and what I got.
Is this something a handscorer would check for? Would they be willing/able to discern the difference and credit me the incorrect bubbles? Or am I screwed? Want to know before I spend the extra $100. Anyone have insight to share?
@jwilkers110 said:
@vmorrone86131 said:
@vmorrone86131 said:
@jwilkers110 said:
LR was not too bad, but I was thrown off by an early question, I remember exactly it was #2 because I could not believe I was struggling with QUESTION 2!!!! It was related to medical residents, anyone else have thoughts on this one?
I had the same problem, and it really threw me. Was the your first LR section? It was for me I think.
Yeah, it was my first section. Overall gave me bad footing for the rest of the test. Hoping it was experimental as my other two LR sections were much easier
No, this was real, I only had two LR. Still can't wait to find the answer to this one, weird for question #2.
I also had trouble with the early LR questions when I started my second LR section (the harder of the two I had). I had less trouble with #2 and more with #1. That section was harder overall--more necessary assumption, more sufficient assumption, principle, and pseudo-sufficient than the other--so it made sense in the grand scheme.