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
- 25 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
Fire Alarm Went Off During December Test (and why we can't have water bottle labels EXPLAINED)
carson.denny
Free Trial Member
Fire Alarm went off during Section 3 (not experimental) in room and all of building. Extremely loud and lasted for over 5 minutes and less than 10 minutes (exam continued normally). This definitely adversely affected me.
Now, I had planned to make a 177+ as I've taken 33 consecutive practice tests (timed with experimental) and am consistently scoring in that range. With the fire drill, I think I still score around and above 170, but perhaps not by much. I don't know whether I should report the issue and/or lobby for a new test, or if the latter is even an option.
Any thoughts / similar experiences? "Be happy with 170+" isn't what I'm looking for, by the way.. It makes a difference.
Now, I had planned to make a 177+ as I've taken 33 consecutive practice tests (timed with experimental) and am consistently scoring in that range. With the fire drill, I think I still score around and above 170, but perhaps not by much. I don't know whether I should report the issue and/or lobby for a new test, or if the latter is even an option.
Any thoughts / similar experiences? "Be happy with 170+" isn't what I'm looking for, by the way.. It makes a difference.
Comments
Guys,
Something else weird happened. In the middle of the test (3rd section, post fire alarm), I suddenly had a hand on my shoulder. I looked up and it was one of the proctors, who (politely) informed me that when I cross out an answer choice, I need to only make one line (presumably because it was making noise).
A little background information: I was an LSAT instructor for Kaplan for many years (began while a junior at Duke) and I, like JY, and like all of the test course curriculi, advise students to mark out answer choices completely.
My response to the proctor was a very apologetic "I'm so sorry!" and I did exactly as he requested, but it completely threw me off because I had used this strategy for 8 months (I completed tests every Saturday since April, i.e. 30 straight Saturdays and 3 additional days, hence 33 Practice Tests). It also made me feel embarassed, and looking around wondering if someone had complained, etc. It's bizarre because the last thing I would want to do is distract another student, but keeping your pencil moving is one of the hallmarks of a high scorer test taker, and it's like, am I being told my pencil is too loud in the building where the fire alarm just went off for 8 minutes???
Anyway just venting and thanks for your support and thoughts.
I would absolutely not expect to be refunded my popcorn & soda $ bc of inconsiderate people and I'm generally cheap with stuff like that. yeah you should be offered a refund of ticket and maybe a future ticket but I don't find that analogous really. that is a service they are providing for entertainment and want you to come back. LSAC is administering a test that you will hopefully not return for. absolutely any building you have a test in a fire alarm could go off, someone could get up and walk out, someone can refuse to comply to a rule... you know how you felt during the disruption, if you feel it affected you negatively you cancel and retake free. if you accept the test as it was and keep the score that is your decision knowing the sides of both options. If they were to do what you suggest just think of all the possibilities. a perfect solution isn't really plausible and this is LSAC's best bet of not throwing money at everyone who has an issue. they give you two options and you know the consequences of both
OP, that sucks the proctor told you to not cross out your answers. Good for you for being polite; I don't know if I would have been able to keep my cool haha. Definitely call LSAC tomorrow and report the situation, find out your options regarding cancelling/retaking, and decide based on that. If you can only retake (for free) if you cancel, then I would probably cancel. If you can retake for free without cancelling, which I doubt, then I'd probably keep the score.
As an aside, your post has me kind of anxious. If you don't mind could you tell me the testing center you were at? PM me if you feel more comfortable. Reason I ask is that I was planning on taking it in the Durham/Chapel Hill area.
As far as the water bottle thing is concerned, there doesn't seem to be a whole lot of logic to that, so let's try to give them ten reasons:
(1) They don't know what's in your bottle if they can't see through the label. It could be the "special drink" in Space Jam that helped the Tunes defeat the Monstars. On the other hand, the special drink turned out to just be water (like you, they had it in them all along!). On the other hand, you have five fingers.
(2) The LSAT can't tolerate you NOT having water (or any illicit substance) in your bottle. They need to ensure you are hydrated for several reasons, one of which is apparently needing to run from, or put out, a fire.
(3) LSAC will not tolerate you performing product placement to potential law students.
(4) Law students and potential law students are particularly competitive. You wouldn't want a cut-throat fellow student to roofie you to try to break the curve. Being able to see if the water is clear eliminates many possible harmful substances, though not all. I hear drinking Moutain Dew Baja Blast instantly brings down your IQ by 14 points. (I still drink it).
(5) It's common knowledge that if someone turns the Deer on the Deer Park label to 3 o'clock, the answer to number 27 in the Logical Reasoning section is definitely C. It's not technically cheating since there's never 27 questions for LR, but the LSAC admins are sticklers here.
(6) Let's be honest, we can't all afford Fiji (side note, I can). LSAC knows this, and in order to foster culture inclusivity, without other students feeling inferior, they cannot allow students to showcase their purchase power via water bottles. But in my heart of hearts, I know that my square bottle made it crystal clear (get it?) that I was the best person in the room.
(7) Who can forget the Dasani cheating scandal of February 1992? It was just weeks after Tonya Harding put out a hit on Nancy Kerrigan's shins (the key to lying is specificity...)
(8) Only if there is no label will we not be uncertain that there isn't a magical genie in our water bottle that is granting our wishes by giving us the answers. They even used that exact wording in their proposal. The ultimate irony is that genies always find ways to undermine their masters, so LSAC really has our best interest in mind with this one.
(9) LSAC realizes that throwing in a random nonsensical rule or two will give us something to think or talk about that muddles the actual issues that pop up, like fire alarms, bad proctors, and the occassional but not-so-occassional poorly worded question.
(10) They just needed to make up another rule to exert authority and cover themselves in the name of fairness and due diligence.
Now that I've written all those, I've convinced myself. Shame on your for thinking you could bring in your water bottle label!
PS What's extra bizarre is that the water bottle stays in your zip lock bag under your desk anyway. PPS mine said Kroger. PPPS One point that hasn't been mentioned is that no one in the room, including the proctors, moved a muscle either to turn off the alarm, or at least ensure that there isn't a fire that we should be running from.
Also, your water bottle label reason list is absolutely hilarious.
On a more serious note, I'd definitely complain, but the LSAC isn't likely to do much for you. They kind of can't do anything satisfactory, if you really think about it - they're not going to bump your score up for free and you won't be satisfied with any other resolution, including getting a free test (because let's be honest - that doesn't solve anything). Regardless of the outcome of your complaint, you should also write an addendum to your application to explain what happened. I would not cancel the score if you're looking to apply for this cycle, and probably wouldn't cancel regardless.
Not sure how I even wandered this far back in the discussion boards, but this ^^ is beautiful!
I have a few additional points in defense of all-knowing LSAC's wise policy of water bottle labellessness.
(11) If you can't see your water, then it can't see you, a la ostrich with head in the sand. And if your water can't see you, how will we know whether or not we're truly living in the Matrix?
(12) Chuck Norris said we should only drink Aquafina during the LSAT, put LSAC can neither ignore his commands nor blatantly endorse a single corporation, this was the only compromise.
PS. Chuck Norris was unhappy with the arrangement, which explains why LSAC hasn't been seen in over 30 years.
(13) They're worried about people taking adderall before the LSAT, it is common knowledge that you can't take adderall if your water bottle has no label.