Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- 33.4K All Categories
- 28K LSAT
- 17K General
- 5.2K Logical Reasoning
- 1.4K Reading Comprehension
- 1.7K Logic Games
- 70 Podcasts
- 193 Webinars
- 12 Scholarships
- 194 Test Center Reviews
- 2.1K Study Groups
- 111 Study Guides/Cheat Sheets
- 2.5K Specific LSAT Dates
- 28 November 2024 LSAT
- 18 October 2024 LSAT
- 9 September 2024 LSAT
- 38 August 2024 LSAT
- 28 June 2024 LSAT
- 4 April 2024 LSAT
- 11 February 2024 LSAT
- 22 January 2024 LSAT
- 37 November 2023 LSAT
- 43 October 2023 LSAT
- 14 September 2023 LSAT
- 38 August 2023 LSAT
- 27 June 2023 LSAT
- 30 Sage Advice
- 5K Not LSAT
- 4K Law School Admissions
- 13 Law School Explained
- 10 Forum Rules
- 636 Technical Problems
- 285 Off-topic
Related Discussions
3 Likes
Comments
MAN IDEK ANYMORE
My main question is, are we better or worse off only having three sections? Less to draining but also less room for error? What do people think?
@isaacdesanto
I'm not taking the Flex (yet... signed up for June so who knows what will happen there) but I think this is going to be a better situation for almost everyone. A shorter test, no experimental. Hopefully less test day jitters and noise from other classmates because you can take it in the comfort of your home.
You should check out Dave Killoran's Twitter. He is one of the founders of Power Score and he always has a lot of great information regarding the LSAT. He just tweeted about this, and is currently addressing a lot of people's questions as best as he can. His Twitter handle is @DaveKilloran.
I'm signed up for April and I think I'm going to do the May flex test. Also it looks like Mr. Killoran agrees with you @noonawoon and good tip on following him @miriaml7
Yup I feel like test fatigue causes me to miss a couple more questions than I would otherwise on PTs. I definitely think this is hugely beneficial. Especially for people who don't live near test centers and would have to worry about driving a long time to get to one
Just keep in mind the possibility that the curve will be tighter to account for the more favorable testing conditions.
Are you planning on taking it
I am going to sign up for June now, I would much prefer a three section test and I think June will end up remote as well.
@danielbrowning208
That's a fair point but I don't think that scores will automatically shoot up because of favorable testing conditions. Most people take PTs in their homes/under favorable conditions and don't always score as high as they want to.
I really don't like the fact that it is three sections. It makes statistical regression to the mean harder. As the test is set up now, with four scored sections, if I know that I did poorly on one section I know that it isn't the end of the world. If I do well on the other three sections, I can make up for a substandard score on one section. With only three sections it will be a lot harder to come back from one rough section. So one mistake on a logic game would be much more likely to be catastrophic.
does anyone think the annotation that it was a flex will hurt in admissions? i dipped from the april test in late march so i am not eligible but i think the june test will count for more
Powerscore CEO says it'll count the same
Wow, really wishing I had registered in April instead of June now.
How are schools going to compare scores of someone who took the remote 3 section LSAT to someone who may be more fatigued and anxious taking the 5 section LSAT at a center in June?
@lexxx745 I am like 50/50. I can see nearly as many benefits as drawbacks, which makes the decision more difficult. I won't apply until next cycle though, so I am in a different position than many.
@noonawoon Why would you voluntarily take a real LSAT at home under unfavorable conditions? People make unfavorable conditions to simulate test day. That being said, I highly suspect there will be server and internet issues throughout, so that may very well make up for the lack of unfavorable conditions.
Taking the LSAT at the comfort of your own home in less than two hours is undoubtedly a HUGE advantage. However, assuming you’ll preform exactly as you would on a regular LSAT is frankly speculation until the actual scoring data arrives. I agree with @jmarmaduke96, at least if you have 4 sections you could offset a section in which you underperformed in. Underperforming in a three section LSAT could have catastrophic consequences. But then again, big risk big reward. However, If everyone bombs one section or generally underperforms, aren’t the LSAT scores curved so would it matter anyway?
https://www.lsac.org/free-webinar-law-school-admission-time-covid-19-apr8
If anyone has questions about Flex and how admissions committees will view the Flex test, LSAC is hosting another Zoom webinar about law school admissions during covid. I went to the last one and they were pretty good about answering questions in the Q&A section during the panel.
I was going to take the June Test also but believe I will give the Flex a shot in May. The ability to have score in 2 weeks that follow makes it easier for those looking to get everything in order for a Fall Start date. I am interested on the composition of the 3 35 minute sections. Do we know how many questions or the like. I would like to streamline my study review.
I'd want to do some demos before the real thing.
In order to have a score preview and such.
Does anyone know if the LR section will still be more heavily weighted on the LSAT-flex like on normal LSATs?
@theravdiaries LSAC isn't answering this on the current webinar but they said there will be a future webinar on just the LSAT flex. Hopefully they can answer your question there (or over email)
YES. This is the critical question for me. LR is now underweighted compared to the normal LSAT, unless they are planning to weigh LR more heavily. LR is my best section by far so this is a critical question and seems unfair that LSAT Flex places a different emphasis on sections (more emphasis on RC and LG).
Does this mean you have less wiggle room to make errors, if there are just 3 sections? It makes sense that this would be the case...if there are fewer questions, 1 wrong question would cost you a lot more "points" than if there are more questions.
Who is eligible to write the lsat flex...is it only the people that were already registered for March and April?
I don't understand why they would want to cut out the second LR section in the first place? I can understand cutting out the experimental because the test would be taken under "unique" conditions so the results of an experimental won't provide advice for future tests.
@danielbrowning208 @jmarmaduke96 Y'all bring up some really good points. I am thinking that the only way this three section test could benefit someone is if they have a detrimental fear of testing centers. If it is scaled the same, there wouldn't be a benefit for someone who isn't good at LR right? Because LR would still weigh the same. And if it is scaled differently, well then the test is a whole different animal and doesn't seem comparable to the 5 section exam.
I personally would probably zone out if I took the exam from home.
I was initially eager to sign up for June hoping for Flex test but now I want to wait and see how the scoring will work out. I have worked really hard on LR and it is far and away my best section. In fact I am often getting less wrong on both LR sections and games combined than I am on Reading Comp so I need to see how this will be scored. If Reading Comp suddenly counts the same as LR it won’t be a good test for me. I am glad LSAT is offering an option for May and for March/ April testers but am surprised they didn’t have answers for a basic question like scoring break down. I think waiting for some of these answers is in the best interest of people considering June/ July tests or even moving away from the May test.
3 sections vs. 5 sections, written in your own home, at your chosen time, is a huge advantage to the May LSAT FLEX takers, and I voiced my opinions to LSAC. Just having 3 sections limiting the cognitive fatigue is an advantage. Many schools have extended their deadlines until June 1, just in time for these test results to come out. Likely May test takers will have inflated LSAT scores and will take away significant scholarships and spots in law schools that they may not have gotten with a traditional exam.
I need accommodations and am being told I have to wait to a traditional test can be written in my province (which LSAC said June) but that isn't accurate as Alberta is shut down until at least July, but likely September according to our government.
How is this FLEX promoting fairness, equality and integrity to the law school admission process!!!! I am outraged.
Let LSAC know your thoughts by email
LSACinfo@lsac.org
@rondabeselt I would urge you not to make any premature assumptions, as we haven't heard all the details about the LSAT Flex—scoring, weighing, curve/scale, etc. It may sound like an easier LSAT at first glance, but there are caveats to having only three sections, one of them is that you cannot rely on the other LR section to balance a potential bad performance. Additionally, for people for whom LR is their strength, it is a clear disadvantage. You also need to consider the fact that it seems hard for LSAC to have live proctors available to watch people taking such a long test, and this is probably one of the reasons why they have decided to remove two sections. Last but not least, I believe that it is healthier for each of us to try to do our best individually instead of focusing on the negative. We are our own worst enemy, don't waste your energy emailing LSAC—it won't move the needle—but instead make sure to murder this LSAT and go to your dream law school! Trust me; it is a much more productive mindset, my friend!
Put it this way, after delaying practice test scores, til I understood the test better (minus LG, I just need to practice more. Last ten or so days, largely consisted of time wasteage but not really. Studying wise, sure). I attempted a couple tests and didn't attempt LG (waiting till I can consistently do them). This may be poor practice, but whatever I had to kind of "reverse engineer" how to do this test, like I did in many things in life especially academic pursuits. I was getting 149-150 without attempting LG.
Say I know 0/20 or so for LG (maybe 23 pts). LG now worth 33% versus 25% and LR worth 33% rather than 50% actually greatly penalizes me. This is likely bad luck posting this. I don't really care. The test could be really easy for some, really hard for others. Obviously I'll continue studying all sections and entire tests. Nothing's that easy, keep in mind there's grade deflation in Canada (at real schools in real majors, and massive inflation in the States (not at every school). Life's not fair. Not to sound harsh, I'm just saying I'm used to it. This nonsense situation won't defeat me. Covid-19, lockdown, whatever. I've done worse. Stay strong, work hard everyday.
Weights may not be as described above. I'm just estimating as per what I read from LSAC.
If not for this test, I'd probably not use my computer 20 days if I could. Rewiring some stuff neurologically. Obviously contacting people, studying, getting work done requires it at times. But I severely limit it. Some random hard LG sections, very tough RC, and random LR questions can be had in any number of tests, I think. Also there's randomness, test day, this and that... one can write a test and get 90-99 and another day get 60 (like the first time they take it and don't study enough, or if they're inconsistent).
Note 1: Various Assumptions here.
Note 2: Ignoring entire sections is very high risk and not for test day. Likely not a good way to practice either. I just put off diagnostic for a time, till ready-ish.
@KingTChalla Let me guess, you're one of the 20 000 test takers who are writing the May LSAT FLEX?
Surely, you would want me, a traditional LSAT test taker, to silence my voice....isn't that the reason we are all going into law school in the first place? when we see discrimination, we are to take a stand to make the world a better place...at least that is why I am going into law.
I have permanent disabilities, not by choice, but LSAC didn't give me the option to write only 3 sections of a 5 section test, in my own home, at the time of day that I prefer. No matter which way you spin it, as Killoran stated, it HUGELY advantages May FLEX test takers.
I am taking a stand! So should the rest of the "traditional" LSAT test takers.
LSACinfo@lsac.org
@rondabeselt Not trying to be nosy but JY's post earlier regarding this said that people who had been granted accommodations would still get them with LSAT Flex? Did you request pencil and paper that they couldn't do or? I am asking because I was in a bad accident and need to request accommodations. I already took the test without it and scored significantly lower due to the pain.
What do y'all think about this (written courtesy of Flex-Stress and morning coffee):
(A) An unweighted three-section test would pose problems for the following types of testers: people (1) whose best section is LR, (2) whose worst section is LG, and (3) whose worst section is RC.
(B) My (spidey) sense is that LR is probably a lot of people's best section, seeing that people have been studying as if it would make up half the test.
-> INTERMEDIATE CONCLUSION: Weighting LR at 33% would disadvantage you, but it'd probably disadvantage a whole lot of other people too! In fact, maybe enough to make the curve a bit more generous...?
(C) Also, my (spidey) sense is that people's LG and RC prowess might sort of be inversely correlated? Relative, I mean, to their other strengths--I'd expect people with LG as their greatest strength to be disproportionately likely to have RC as their greatest weakness, and vice versa.
(D) If that's ^ true, then relatively few people's raw scores would stand to benefit from this unweighted format. Not only would they need to be relatively bad at LR, but they'd also have to be especially good at LG without being relatively bad at RC or vice versa. So their skill ranking would have to be LG/RC, LG/RC, LR. And for the sake of this argument, I'm [perhaps fallaciously] thinking that that's a #relatively rare breed.
-> FINAL CONCLUSION: If reducing LR's weight might in itself be enough to encourage a looser curve, AND if the proportion of people who are likely to really benefit from this kind of weighting is even lower because of the fabled LG/RC tradeoff, perhaps there's good reason to hope for a looser curve in the world of #flex.....?
I think this is clearly an advantage for some, a disadvantage for others. RC is a severely inconsistent section for me, LGs I am getting 3/4 games almost perfect, and LR is consistently pretty strong. If I bomb RC (which I have been known to do on PTs) on LSAT flex, assuming that if all sections are worth 33%, it will affect my score SIGNIFICANTLY more than on a standard 5 section LSAT with 2 LR sections to save my behind. However, there are some who struggle with severe test anxiety and with flex being an at-home test, they may find some relief from that anxiety.
Personally, I wouldn't mind flex if they made the LR section worth more than the others. Is that on the table?
Finally, do we think LSAC or maybe 7sage will create flex PTs? Or will it be too hard to illustrate the curve until after the first flex scores are released?
I am one of those that my LG and RC are the strongest. LR is always inconsistent. I think there are others like me. My hope of starting law school in 2020 is looking bleak.
@FindingSage I too struggle with chronic pain and a number of other health issues due to an accident, and my traditional test was extremely difficult because of my health. Hence I need a rewrite. Having 3 sections would be beneficial. Email me with your questions pls.
Does anyone know if this LSAT Flex will be available to those international test-takers who had originally signed up for March but cancelled?
Do any of you think it might be beneficial to start PTing with just three sections? I kind of like the idea of a three section test. I'm signed up for July, but who knows maybe they'll be back to regular testing by then.
@sarahisk My personal opinion is that everyone, including those guaranteed to take a Flex, should still be PTing with 4 (or 5) sections. Getting used to taking more sections than you have to can only be beneficial in terms of managing fatigue. Additionally, if they end up weighting LR as 50% on the Flex, it would be useful to practice with 2 LR sections to get used to more question types and figuring out your mistakes on those sections. I can't really think of any benefit that PTing with just three sections would provide!
I haven't seen anything about how they are weighing the questions, but here is my thinking: if i was aiming to get -2ish per section for a total of -8-10 and a 170ish, i can't go wrong keeping that same goal in mind for the Flex as well. That is, I'd think that missing about -2 per section on the LSAT Flex would give me about the same score.
Does this make sense or do y'all think I am way off?
-10-11 is usually 170. So i think itll be -6 to -8 for 170 not sure. I think 6 is pretty unlikely. I think itll be 7, if i had to bet money
At the webinar by LSAC regarding LSAT-flex, they mentioned that LR will not be double scored. They also stated that the questions will not be easier or harder than any other LSAT.
Interesting, I don't totally understand how that will work... did they say anything else about the scoring/weighting?
im confused about how the score can be weighted the same unless the amount of difficulty that would be in a normal test be is condensed into three sections which could be very tough to deal with causing you to miss easier questions. im not sure I have the option to take the flex program im considering sticking with the regular test.
When looking at my test scores I dont necessarily get more questions as i progress through the sections so Idk how sufficient one less section would be.
I'm gonna be honest, it doesn't seem like they're being very transparent about the weighting of the test. I don't see how they can score the test on the same 120-180 scale with three sections. The math doesn't really work out...?
I'll be trying to get in touch with them, so I'll post another update on scoring if/when they get back to me!
It could be that the level of difficulty in the rc / lg shifts & the amount of questions remain the same.