@ said:

@ said:

If we had the same order (LR-RC-LR-LR-LG) APPARENTLY the first LR (26) and the last LR (25) are the real ones, with the second LR being experimental.

oooooooh, I hope so -- how do you know?

I've been actively following the January test thread on reddit and that seems to be the consensus

If we had the same order (LR-RC-LR-LR-LG) APPARENTLY the first LR (26) and the last LR (25) are the real ones, with the second LR being experimental.

Dave Killoran from powerscore is predicting -11, citing the difficulty of one of the games (apartment one imo). They've been bang on in their predictions historically.

Powerscore did a nice compilation of the guaranteed release date of LSAT scores (for November's exam this year its December 8th) vs. the actual release date of the scores. Based on the results of this year's LSAT I'd probably guess it'll be released no earlier than December 8th, unfortunately. Attached is the link for you to check out!

https://blog.powerscore.com/lsat/lsat-score-release-dates-scheduled-vs-actual-comparison

@ said:

I think they're going to stay in the paper form for right now. I think most of us are a little nervous about that as well.

Ah thats what i was afraid of. Thanks for the reply

I'm in the same position. I honestly am not sure if i slept at all the night before, i kept drifting in and out of sleep and getting massive waves of anxiety.

Like you, test day was sorta a blur but i'd definitely suggest not cancelling it. As you said, you don't really know how it went and you feel like nothing went horribly wrong. I don't know about you, but i was never actually tired when writing the test, i think our bodies know what is at stake and feeds us this adrenaline to keep us sharp even when tired. I'm also registered for January. I'd really suggest not cancelling it unless you think you did poorly, who knows maybe that adrenaline got you a great score despite a lack of sleep! Cheers!

I started with 144, did three months of studying and completed the CC on 7Sage and got a 147. Next test 150, then 151, then 154... You'll seen an increase don't worry, just a few weeks ago i broke into the 160s, and have been scoring around there since.(+ or minus 3 or so.) It takes time to really cement the lessons you've gone over. Literally the same position as you just a few months ago.

If your overall CGPA is 2.93, I would strongly recommend retaking. As far as I know, most Ontario schools release acceptances through till March-April. For example, Queen's doesn't even begin handing out any acceptances until mid-January. But yes, some schools look at your GPA in terms of L2 or B3 or B2, it really depends on the school. Also, Guillaume makes a good point, if you applied under access, the requirements to be competitive are much more lenient.

i chose B initially because the author really never says not to learn lessons from history, just that doing so is difficult and not feasible. So, technically it is compatible, right?

I am also interested in joining!

#help I'm confused as to why it matters if Sanderson believed the factory would indeed be closing. The Stimulus says he overheard someone saying the factory would be closing, whether he believes it seems irrelevant? Also, as for answer C: "no one ever told Sanderson's cousin about the factory closing." If we negate this, it becomes someone did tell Sanderson's cousin about the closing. Doesn't this then shift the lying off Sanderson? It was not Sanderson's failing to state something that misled his cousin, but instead, someone else's lying.

Right right, I imagine i can probably get through more volume just doing timed sections. I think i'll stick to one PT a week. And Juliana, I feel you. I had the same combo as you but got complacent by the second LR which i ended up bombing. I think 160 is definitely doable! Just gotta put the work in and BR like crazy (which i stupidly have been neglecting). Good luck to you!

@ said:

I'd recommend foolproofing whole timed sections of LG (try to do a new one and an old one every time you study LG as opposed to doing a whole section over and over until you move on. Check out the trainer for RC (but leave this for last) and do a section of LR every day you study, getting down your timing and making note of why you missed the questions you did (of course check whether you consistently miss certain question types and drill those if necessary). Good luck, I'm sure you'll be able to improve by Jan!

Really appreciate the advice and vote of confidence! As for PTs, do you think i should limit doing full PTs and focus more on sections?

@ said:

I'm in exactly the same position with score. I suggest you focus on foolproofing logic games, as a -0 entirely attainable in a short time frame. I've been going through the core curriculum for logical reasoning to improve as much as possible, practicing logical symbol conversion in a split second is helpful. Reading comprehension at this point seems like the most difficult to change, as I average about the same loss as you.

Yeah I'll probably focus on LG and just doing more PTs, hopefully by Jan we can both get our test day score to the higher end of our PT spectrum!

155, see you all after finals are over lol!

@ said:

@ said:

@ said:

Everyone say the test was hard so we can get a -15 curve

Is there precedent for this?

I wouldn't be suprised if the makers of LSAT got online and studied the comments about the test. It happens in school and judging by how rudimentry/ghetto the testing centers were it would not suprise me if they did this instead of using actual statistics about the test to find the curve.

I'm pretty sure the curve is predetermined, like they design the test as being a "-11" or "-12" test before hand during the process (aka its a -10 test regardless of how people do). Costs about a million dollars to make one test so they put A LOT of research into each curve. This is what i've heard from others so i'm not 100%