old LSAT prep tests vs. new LSAT prep tests

Syeda Jawaid

is there a difference between the old lsat preptests and the new preptests. I took my lsat in february (did quite good) and i mainly studied from preptests 1-38. i'm just curious as to what difference there is for the newer lsat 39-60. is there a difference in the logical reasoning?

Monsura Sirajee

I'm wondering the same thing. I found the older LSATs to be easier.

Mark Tenorio

Reading comp I found a little easier. What I noticed in the newer ones for RC, the answer choices got a lot trickier. I really miss RC passages like the greek tragedy one. They flowed so easily and the questions went hand in hand with the passage.

For LR, I thought it was easy in the late 20's all the way through the 30's and LR got somewhat harder after that.

J.Y. Ping

They are subtly different. It's kind of like how aging works. You at 20 are pretty much the same as you at 21. But you at 21 are very different from you at 61. That's a decent analogy for the LSAT prep tests. The difference isn't as dramatic but it's there. Some students find newer prep tests easier, some find them harder. In my experience (so this is anecdotal, not statistical) most students tend to find the later, newer prep tests harder.

kelsienagele

I need to purchase prep tests but am unclear on whether practicing with the older vs. newer tests makes a difference with regards to logic games. I have heard that the logic games are worded significantly differently after 2005 and that I should practice with the newer tests for this reason. Does anyone have any knowledge about this? I was considering purchasing the logic game bundle as well but am holding off since it covers the older tests, PTs 1-35 I believe.

vandyzach

I have used pretty much all 1-39 and 56 (random, I know). Since I was so immersed in the old tests and jumped suddenly to a new one, I think I can maybe provide some insight.

Obviously, 56 could be an unrepresentative sample, so this entire post could be crap. But this is pretty much an opinionated topic (which PTs do you think are harder?), so I don't think I'll lead anyone astray by this post

Was PT 56 harder or easier than the old ones? I don't know. But I think the difficulty shifted from old tests to this new one. I think LG got easier (yes, even considering the supposedly super hard game from June 2014). Some old games were just brutally difficult- and they were difficult because you have to make a ridiculous up-front inference or you were absolutely screwed.

Having said that, I noticed that the RC from this new test was noticeably harder. I agree with Mark that the answer choices are harder- I found myself oscillating between two answers on RC alot (which is really bad- when you get to that point, the LSAT has "got" you).

In my opinion, LR changed the least, but got slightly harder in my opinion. But like JY said, there are noticeable differences. For example, there is less formal logic on LR than there was in the older tests.

For what it's worth, I googled difference between older and newer tests and found discussions on Top-Law-Schools and LawSchoolDiscussion, and I thought that the consensus about the differences between the old ones and the new ones were overblown. Yes, RC and LR got a little harder and LG got a little easier, but ultimately, when I was taking the newer test, I felt like I was taking an older test with some slight differences.

kelsienagele

Thank you, vandyzach. That was helpful. I think to be safe I'll practice with both.