Older LSAT Language Difficulty

prelawdreamer123

I know some people argue that logical reasoning has gotten more challenging in recent practice tests, but I find that for the questions I am getting wrong on practice tests 1-10, I literally just do not understand what the stimulus or answer choices are saying at times. I find that the more recent practice tests are a lot more straightforward and use language in a way that I am more familiar with. Maybe this has to do with the fact that English is my second language and the early 90s LSATs are what my parent's generation would've taken, but they do not speak English with me at home so I may be unfamiliar with the way language has changed / is spoken differently. What are your thoughts on this?

s324g23423

my take is that practice tests as early as 1-10 are not going to be useful to you. you're unlikely to do all 87 PTs anyway, so just start with the 40s if you're worried about running out of material

MIT_2017

Unless you plan on seriously cranking out most of the PTs, I'd agree with @s324g23423 and just skip PTs 1-35. Though they can occasionally be useful for seeing some odd miscellaneous-type LGs. That leaves over 50 additional PTs, which I'd think is more than enough for most people to do drilling and full-length PTs.

cooljon525-1-1

I don't like LR in PTs 1-10 because the answers are not great. For example, they'd ask me for a sufficient assumption and the answer would be a strengthening.

prelawdreamer123

@s324g23423 @MIT_2017 Unfortunately I did most of the 40s when I started my prep with that mindset and had to complete some 80s for my prep class. Hence starting from square one.

@cooljon525 That makes a lot of sense! I feel like I can get more LR correct on the more recent exams, and thus was confused as to why everyone says it has gotten harder. Some of the LR ACs on 1-10 are legitimately so tricky because they are not straightforward at all.