Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In Apply for Membership

Categories

Are older PTs harder?

mvallani8mvallani8 Alum Member
edited February 2014 in General 40 karma
Has anyone done the older practice tests (10-40) and compared them with the newer ones (59 +). I found that the older ones are much harder and my score is usually 4-5 points below what I score on the newer ones. Is it just me or do some of you also notice this?

Thanks!
Show Related Discussions

Comments

  • superfuntimessuperfuntimes Alum Member
    20 karma
    That's odd. I found that I did significantly better on older PTs than newer ones. I did a batch of old PTs to begin with and once I started the new ones (with comparative RC passages), my score dropped by 4-5 points.
  • iiiSpooniiiSpoon Alum Inactive ⭐
    277 karma
    Do you have a comparison with respect to specific sections? I have found that some of the older RC passages are incredibly difficult such as the one regarding Lamarck's Theory of Acquisition and the Meyerson Legal Studies. One is in 1999 and the other is in 2001. Furthermore, I believe it was mentioned in one of the lessons how the LSAT previously included very abstract questions.

    However, you might be scoring low due to unfamiliarity with ideas and such, and that the past PT's have nothing to do with it. For example, on a PT RC that included concepts I read of for the first time, I scored -10, but on another PT (actually it was right after the -10 one) I scored -2 on RC, but this was because I was very familiar with the context.

    A better question might be, am I doing worse because I am unfamiliar with it (ie context and jargon) or are the LSAT concepts more complex?
  • mvallani8mvallani8 Alum Member
    edited February 2014 40 karma
    superfuntimes,

    Hmmm yeah that is odd. I'm very strong in comparative RC passages though so perhaps for me the newer ones are easier in that respect.

    I notice this more so with the LR section though.

    I dont know, maybe it's all in my head and I've just been at this too long ha
  • mvallani8mvallani8 Alum Member
    40 karma
    TackyTrackSuit,

    That's a very good point, one I did not consider. I did find that in the earlier PT's the LR section included more "abstract" questions and I don't see them as often in the newer ones. This could explain it.
  • LSATislandLSATisland Free Trial Inactive Sage
    1878 karma
    Generally, the newer PTs have slightly easier LR, much easier LG, and more difficult RC.

    As to whether a person finds the newer tests easier or not, it depends on where his strengths lie.
  • annkang1005annkang1005 Alum Member
    63 karma
    I agree with lsatisland. Slightly easier LR, although they take more time because we don't have one of those read-one-stimulus-and-answer-two-questions LR questions. MUCH easier LG if you get down the rule equivalent questions, and more difficult RC due to more time it takes with comparative readings and generally tougher inferences.
  • mvallani8mvallani8 Alum Member
    edited February 2014 40 karma
    Yeah makes sense. Although I like the comparative reading passages more than the single passages. Guess it is different for everyone.
  • LSATislandLSATisland Free Trial Inactive Sage
    1878 karma
    Ya, the comparative reading isn't bad. But the expectations are higher on the new RC. The questions demand greater understanding of the passage and inferences.
  • Jaguar007Jaguar007 Free Trial Member
    114 karma
    I love comparative reading passages! LG are easier in the new ones than the old ones that is for sure. and RC is much harder I agree with this too.
    How did you guys find the dec 2013 lsat? If you purchased it on here I mean.
  • neil4833neil4833 Alum Member
    40 karma
    RC is much harder with more details, logic functions and tricker inference questions.
Sign In or Register to comment.