Murder the exam for us
@scottmilam205 said:
@frankbnakasako903
All three sections have become more challenging over time. I actually notice the difference in difficulty more in RC than LG - the passages are longer and more complex, and the answer choices are trickier.
Modern LG sections are a lot more ‘reliable’ than on older tests. They almost always have 1-2 easy, formulaic games at the start, followed by a more challenging 3rd game and a hard 4th. Often the 4th game doesn’t follow the typical formulas, making the test taker innovate on the fly.
The keys to success on these LG sections are:
Tackle the easy games quickly! You must finish within target time to give yourself the opportunity to do games and especially 4.
Expect the unexpected. Assume that you will a weird game you’ve never seen before. Practice how you’d handle that! Once you’ve mastered the standard Sequencing/Grouping/In-and-Out games, throw in a Misc, Mapping, Circular or other unusual game type and practice your improv skills.
One thing that can help keep you calm on that 4th game - the ‘weirder’ the game, the simpler the inferences! If you hit a brand new game type on test day, you can be confident that the actual logic is not that complicated - otherwise no one would have a chance! If your last game is one of the standard types, watch out and read carefully! There must be some tricky inferences for it to be hard enough to be a 4th game!
Hope that helps!
The fact that every game is reducible to a simpler game is great advice. I still get knots in my stomachs of thinking of potentially misreading a rule or making another minor error and having my entire section cave. That attention to detail in obviously crucial to all section of the LSAT, but has the largest potential to snowball in LG, imo. I’ve crammed the 16-35 LGs in the past week, and after recently taking PT 92, I feel that the games on that specific were quite easy in comparison. The LGs from 16-35 are so difficult that I have a hard time imagining how people taking those exams were able to get perfect scores without having access to as streamlined a studying process as we do today.
So actually, I think that the LG section represents a weird anomaly in your theory, which I otherwise agree with. It went from insanely difficult, to pointlessly easy, to the medium difficulty that it is now.
I’ve been cramming the 1-35 RCs and the lack of ambiguous questions/answers as compared to the modern LSAT is pretty pronounced—even the accuracy distribution points to this. The deviation of average scores on the modern RC questions must be like 75% higher.
LR also has gotten a bit more difficult, but it’s variation is negligible compared to the other sections IMO.
How the hell did people finish these passages in time?
Did the LSAT ramp up the difficulty of the games as LSAT studying became more systematized? I went from getting -0 90%+ of the time while doing pre-60 sets and taking PTs in the 40s to getting extremely uncomfortable in the 70+ LGs.
Taking on January and I'm extremely nervous of getting caught off guard with a LG section that is much more difficult than what I am practicing.
What a curve ball of a first passage
bruh they really got me with option A
I got a B while taking an ear training class filled with music majors while I had no musical experience at my community college before transferring, and a B in a music theory class. Is there really no way for me to avoid reporting these ridiculous, meaningless courses to LSAC?
My ear training course was a 1 unit course T_T
I think that this was the hardest LR section I've ever taken and I've done around 40 PTs worth of them, so that's saying something.
I don't really see the median scores coming down with all the high-scoring hold-overs who will be reapplying in the upcoming cycles. LSAT needs to restructure the test or something to re-establish the curve, but the caveat is that they can't do that since it'll screw over all of the previous scores.
ugh. What a fucking headache. LSAT really fucked up with the pandemic and 3-section format.
LR, arguably the most important section in regards to testing for a law skillset go reduced to 1/3 as compared to 1/2 of the exam, and the smaller number of questions creates a greater margin of error for people to guess their way to a higher score than they're used to. Scores can vary by 8~ points in the 75 section format, which I really hate.
fuck this question. cant u assume that an actor would've had a fucking copy of Hamlet? How else would they perform the play...
Yeah, yeah, when they were reproducing the play from memory, god damnit. I hate missing 1/2 star questions.
Why are they even testing for this? This is dumb. A is theoretically right, and if you're trying to save time you may just select the one which is rationally correct and move on.
I just noticed that logically follows are listed under MBT questions. I've been approaching these questions as if I'm supposed to decipher what the speaker would be most likely to say, as opposed to what must be true...
My question is: are logically follows really just MBT questions?
Damn. I went with B and forgot that ALL the people in the painting were aristocrats, so that the painter was most likely bound to follow etiquette...
That's so subtle
C isn't saying that humans are responsible for individual impact of living organisms on the weather/environment, it's saying that humans are at least partially responsible for the cumulative impact of living things on nature.
And if humans don't cause any effects, how could that argument hold up, since it claims that the weather pattern is caused by humans? I don't buy that interpretation of answer choice C...
Thought that not morally right and morally wrong were the same thing
I went with E over C because I thought that the premise didn't guarantee that there wouldn't be microbial life on Mars; there could have been life on the planet through other means.
Fuck
F
uck
Missed #26 because I overlooked the fact that they made a "commitment," rather than legally binded themselves to a larger body.
Fuck questions 15 and 19. They're practically the same question.
23 is such a shittily written question. Useful was used in like 3 different manners in the passage.
Props to everyone who got this correct. Wow
It's not the ultimate skill, it's the curve-breaking skill.
addendum deez nuts