Official challenge to the 4th game in the scored LG section

getitdone
Posts: 44
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2010 12:27 am

Re: Official challenge to the 4th game in the scored LG section

Postby getitdone » Tue Jun 08, 2010 11:28 pm

ye they should just keep the game.. and make the curve nicee :lol:

apropos
Posts: 70
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2010 11:28 pm

Re: Official challenge to the 4th game in the scored LG section

Postby apropos » Tue Jun 08, 2010 11:43 pm

sca218ml wrote:One proposal: What if people just aren't used to grouping things twice (something that had to be done in this game) and THAT explains why people were confused?

This was an odd game. People do a lot of prep for LSAT and it's easy to fall into a pattern of saying, oh we are grouping, well let's put these variables in the nice slots I've drawn up. It's an interesting thought. There had to be people (maybe some of the same people complaining but who knows*) who just didn't read it closely and just assumed that's the way things were being grouped.

It was a hard game. It was not like many other games on LSATs past (with the 2 groupings necesary) but NEWS FLASH: Every LSAT the LSAC folks come up with has a new wrinkle on games that hasn't been explored before.

*Speaks to a point I made earlier: How is LSAC to know who "legitimately" misinterpreted the word and who just didn't read closely enough or simply didn't get the game?

PS. I love the guy who said he was pissed because he was relying on LG because he was bad at RC. Well maybe if you weren't bad at RC.....



I think this here is about right (for many of the complaints anyway). I literally completed every released logic game section from preptest 1 to 59 thinking that I wouldn't get thrown off if I saw them all. (I also thought they were kind of fun and I scored nearly perfect on LR from the start.) Every once in a while I would get thrown off on a weird game, but once I had it figured out I almost never miss more than 1 or 2 questions in an LG section. In the last couple months I took the LGs for granted because on every practice test I had no time issues and no problems. That game 4, though, threw me off anyway. I don't really think the ambiguity was terribly egregious. It was there, and it probably shouldn't have been. But, really, it was just a weird game, and from reading through these forums on it (since I am worried I killed my hopes of a high 170s score), it seems that people who are "good" at the games actually had a harder time with the last two than those who didnt count LGs as their strong point. I can see why. They were just different, and people like me expected to fly through them applying our tried and true methods of getting through accurately and timely. Didn't happen, unfortunately. Others, who perhaps didnt have an ingrained system they were applying, worked through it just like any game without getting as nervous about being outside the norm.
But I can't knock the complaints. I'm hoping for a favorable "curve," and I think that the ambiguity was probably more problematic due to the fact that people were knocked out of comfort zones on that section.

Edit: Just learned how to quote properly.

apropos
Posts: 70
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2010 11:28 pm

Re: Official challenge to the 4th game in the scored LG section

Postby apropos » Wed Jun 09, 2010 12:03 am

Casus wrote:That said, it would seem that an appeal has little chance of succeeding, at least from a casual review the information in this thread. Namely, whether the question was ambiguous is not the major consideration according to the LSAC policy. Part of the requirement for removing a question from scoring is that a petitioner demonstrate that "the credited response is not the one and only best answer to the question." If no other answer choices were correct under an alternative definition of the term in question, there could not have been another "best answer to the question." Consequently, the "one and only best answer to the question" would have been the one that relied on a correct interpretation of the term in question.

In other words, even if we grant that no answer choices appeared to be correct under a certain definition of the term in question, such a fact would still not rise to the level necessary to overturn a question if LSAC abides by the aforementioned policy.

Whether that is fair or not in the context of this debate is a wholly separate question.


I also think this is a really good point. Given that there was some ambiguity, and, moreover, that was found in a somewhat strange game, should have an influence on the curve. So while I doubt an appeal will do anything to remove any questions, I imagine there is a decent chance of it affecting the "curve" if there are circumstances that can affect the curve after LSAC has done its equating. Still, presumably these issues would have arisen when it was experimental, which influences the equation. Has anyone heard if people had worries about this game was scored scored when it was experimental?

sca218ml
Posts: 33
Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2010 7:58 pm

Re: Official challenge to the 4th game in the scored LG section

Postby sca218ml » Wed Jun 09, 2010 12:17 am

hesslerj wrote:
sca218ml wrote:PS. I love the guy who said he was pissed because he was relying on LG because he was bad at RC. Well maybe if you weren't bad at RC.....


If you're referring to me...

First off, not a guy (pretty presumptuous of you). And I also didn't say I was bad at RC. I usually rock the RC along with the rest of the sections. I just happened to be warn out on test day (the testing ended up taking 7 hours b.c. it was really unorganized) and I had 2 RC sections (one of them being the last section). I don't think I did that bad on the RC, but I know I did awesome on the games. My point is only that those of us that did well on the games want/need that section to help boost our scores.

Why be so rude?

I'm genuinely sorry for those of you who missed the game section b.c. of the ambiguity. It sucks, and I would want someone to empathize with me if I were in your shoes. But, kindness is a virtue and there's no need to be insulting.



Yea sorry I wasn't trying to be rude at all, and I don't even know who I was referring to, could have been somebody else: long thread and I'm lazy. In fact I seem to remember whatever I read was from someone who specifically had a problem with the game. Anyway, no matter, I was just trying to find some ironic humor in the situation (levity!) and am sorry if I caused offense.

User avatar
cinefile 17
Posts: 257
Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2010 10:32 pm

Re: Official challenge to the 4th game in the scored LG section

Postby cinefile 17 » Wed Jun 09, 2010 12:23 am

sca218ml wrote:
hesslerj wrote:
sca218ml wrote:PS. I love the guy who said he was pissed because he was relying on LG because he was bad at RC. Well maybe if you weren't bad at RC.....


If you're referring to me...

First off, not a guy (pretty presumptuous of you). And I also didn't say I was bad at RC. I usually rock the RC along with the rest of the sections. I just happened to be warn out on test day (the testing ended up taking 7 hours b.c. it was really unorganized) and I had 2 RC sections (one of them being the last section). I don't think I did that bad on the RC, but I know I did awesome on the games. My point is only that those of us that did well on the games want/need that section to help boost our scores.

Why be so rude?

I'm genuinely sorry for those of you who missed the game section b.c. of the ambiguity. It sucks, and I would want someone to empathize with me if I were in your shoes. But, kindness is a virtue and there's no need to be insulting.




Yea sorry I wasn't trying to be rude at all, and I don't even know who I was referring to, could have been somebody else: long thread and I'm lazy. In fact I seem to remember whatever I read was from someone who specifically had a problem with the game. Anyway, no matter, I was just trying to find some ironic humor in the situation (levity!) and am sorry if I caused offense.


No problem. Lots of respect for the apology. Good luck on your score.

Marino13
Posts: 12
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2010 5:34 pm

Re: Official challenge to the 4th game in the scored LG section

Postby Marino13 » Wed Jun 09, 2010 6:04 am

I think the problems with this were two-fold. First -- and I guess this only applies to whoever took Testmasters -- is that this game was written like it was a team/grouping game, when really could have been done much more easily like a complex association game. Well, that's what I did anyway, then when I worked it out it my head afterward, it would have been SO MUCH easier to do it as complex association.

Then, the rules, were a bit screwy in that, the ones that "couldn't be the same" had to be "together" and vice versa; so it was kind of counter-intuitive.

Jrugg88
Posts: 74
Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2010 4:11 pm

Re: Official challenge to the 4th game in the scored LG section

Postby Jrugg88 » Wed Jun 09, 2010 6:32 am

Marino13 wrote:I think the problems with this were two-fold. First -- and I guess this only applies to whoever took Testmasters -- is that this game was written like it was a team/grouping game, when really could have been done much more easily like a complex association game. Well, that's what I did anyway, then when I worked it out it my head afterward, it would have been SO MUCH easier to do it as complex association.


Wait, so let me make sure I'm interpreting this correctly - you think that a problem with the game is that LSAC didn't set it up to make sure that it could be solved using the methods taught to you by the private tutoring company that you paid for???

I'm sorry, but that's just ridiculous. If that's seriously the best argument you can muster (or even an argument that you can put forward with a straight face) then your score on this game is the least of your worries...

loptimist
Posts: 68
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2010 6:24 am

Re: Official challenge to the 4th game in the scored LG section

Postby loptimist » Wed Jun 09, 2010 6:56 am

when a game is fairly written, it would be difficult because of many possibilities and complex rules, not ambiguous rules.

but i want to have a good curve, not a thrown out game set.

d34d9823
Posts: 1915
Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2010 2:52 pm

Re: Official challenge to the 4th game in the scored LG section

Postby d34d9823 » Wed Jun 09, 2010 9:19 am

Marino13 wrote:I think the problems with this were two-fold. First -- and I guess this only applies to whoever took Testmasters -- is that this game was written like it was a team/grouping game, when really could have been done much more easily like a complex association game. Well, that's what I did anyway, then when I worked it out it my head afterward, it would have been SO MUCH easier to do it as complex association.

Then, the rules, were a bit screwy in that, the ones that "couldn't be the same" had to be "together" and vice versa; so it was kind of counter-intuitive.

This is pretty hilarious. It was fairly clear that LSAC wrote that game specifically to confuse people who relied on testing company strategies.

User avatar
3|ink
Posts: 7331
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2009 5:23 pm

Re: Official challenge to the 4th game in the scored LG section

Postby 3|ink » Wed Jun 09, 2010 10:33 am

Marino13 wrote:I think the problems with this were two-fold. First -- and I guess this only applies to whoever took Testmasters -- is that this game was written like it was a team/grouping game, when really could have been done much more easily like a complex association game. Well, that's what I did anyway, then when I worked it out it my head afterward, it would have been SO MUCH easier to do it as complex association.

Then, the rules, were a bit screwy in that, the ones that "couldn't be the same" had to be "together" and vice versa; so it was kind of counter-intuitive.


I think it had too many variable sets to work as a complex association game.

cmutone
Posts: 22
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 12:11 am

Re: Official challenge to the 4th game in the scored LG section

Postby cmutone » Wed Jun 09, 2010 12:05 pm

to be clear -

suppose x amount of test takers on this forum write to LSAC and complain about a particular question# that resulted in an answer that could not be selected due to this aforementioned ambiguity. I know some say the whole game was screwed, but let's assume its just one question.

Supposing LSAC agreed and omits that question ex post facto, does that only apply to the individuals that took the time to write in, or would they do the right thing and modify the scores of every affected individual?

Thanks for the clarification.

mges
Posts: 28
Joined: Sat May 22, 2010 8:34 pm

Re: Official challenge to the 4th game in the scored LG section

Postby mges » Wed Jun 09, 2010 12:29 pm

I interpreted the rule incorrectly, but I was able to find answers to the questions. I'm wondering if it was still possible to solve the game (or at least find a couple right answers), just with increased time used to find a solution. Any thoughts?

christinalsat
Posts: 147
Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2010 10:27 am

Re: Official challenge to the 4th game in the scored LG section

Postby christinalsat » Wed Jun 09, 2010 12:34 pm

Has LSAC ever omitted an entire logic game? I've seen omitted RC and LR questions, but seems in this case they'd have to omit the whole section since the ambiguity was in the rules and that seems like it would throw off grading on the whole exam. Seems unlikely to be fruitful, but I respect your effort.

Are you allowed to say what the specific ambiguous term is? I also misinterpreted the rule, but am drawing a total blank on the specific word they used.

User avatar
citrustang
Posts: 110
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 5:22 pm

Re: Official challenge to the 4th game in the scored LG section

Postby citrustang » Wed Jun 09, 2010 12:36 pm

Unconvincing reasons being used to try and dissuade people from writing the LSAC:

1) You might delay score reporting.

2) You're just pissed you didn't perform well.

3) Non-native English speakers tend to experience these kinds of problems during the test.

4) The wording wasn't ambiguous to me.

5) The game was meant to be hard, and the perceived ambiguity could have been an intentional part of that.

6) It might end up hurting my own score.

7) The LSAC probably won't do anything about it.

8.) Lesser-skilled test takers stand to benefit if you succeed.

9) There's no way the LSAC could have made a mistake of the alleged magnitude.

10) The majority disagrees, and you are a minority opinion.

User avatar
LSAT Blog
Posts: 1262
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 9:24 pm

Re: Official challenge to the 4th game in the scored LG section

Postby LSAT Blog » Wed Jun 09, 2010 12:39 pm

christinalsat wrote:Has LSAC ever omitted an entire logic game? I've seen omitted RC and LR questions, but seems in this case they'd have to omit the whole section since the ambiguity was in the rules and that seems like it would throw off grading on the whole exam. Seems unlikely to be fruitful, but I respect your effort.

Are you allowed to say what the specific ambiguous term is? I also misinterpreted the rule, but am drawing a total blank on the specific word they used.


Out of approx 6500 LSAT questions, LSAC has withdrawn only 6:

4 LR and 2 RC

I would bet against them removing any question from the game or making any sort of effort to appease those who are unhappy with the game.
Last edited by LSAT Blog on Wed Jun 09, 2010 12:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.

mges
Posts: 28
Joined: Sat May 22, 2010 8:34 pm

Re: Official challenge to the 4th game in the scored LG section

Postby mges » Wed Jun 09, 2010 12:39 pm

citrustang - Seems you're just worried because you didn't misinterpret the rule. Making calls about the majority and minority is unjustified, you have no idea who is the majority and who is the minority.

d34d9823
Posts: 1915
Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2010 2:52 pm

Re: Official challenge to the 4th game in the scored LG section

Postby d34d9823 » Wed Jun 09, 2010 12:42 pm

citrustang wrote:Unconvincing reasons being used to try and dissuade people from writing the LSAC:

1) You might delay score reporting.Not true

2) You're just pissed you didn't perform well. True

3) Non-native English speakers tend to experience these kinds of problems during the test.Irrelevant

4) The wording wasn't ambiguousto me.

5) The game was meant to be hard, and the perceived ambiguity could have been an intentional part of that.Possible

6) It might end up hurting my own score.Not true

7) The LSAC probably won't do anything about it.True

8.) Lesser-skilled test takers stand to benefit if you succeed.Irrelevant

9) There's no way the LSAC could have made a mistake of the alleged magnitude.Not true, but they didn't

10) The majority disagrees, and you are a minority opinion.The majority thinks you are full of yourself and annoying

FTFY

Pahnda
Posts: 22
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2010 1:30 pm

Re: Official challenge to the 4th game in the scored LG section

Postby Pahnda » Wed Jun 09, 2010 12:48 pm

After reading some of the comments of some people, I've come to realize the diagramming of this one must have really thrown a number of people also. You could diagram it in a pretty absurd way if you don't do any groupings and don't follow a criteria dictated about each of those general 'groups'... This one was extremely structured compared to a lot of games out there, which may have been a large point of confusion for some when setting it up.

Of course, this doesn't add anything against/for the argument about an ambiguous word... Just a realization after reading some of the thoughts/comments of people here.

User avatar
citrustang
Posts: 110
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 5:22 pm

Re: Official challenge to the 4th game in the scored LG section

Postby citrustang » Wed Jun 09, 2010 12:51 pm

cmutone wrote:Supposing LSAC agreed and omits that question ex post facto, does that only apply to the individuals that took the time to write in, or would they do the right thing and modify the scores of every affected individual?

christinalsat wrote:Has LSAC ever omitted an entire logic game? I've seen omitted RC and LR questions, but seems in this case they'd have to omit the whole section since the ambiguity was in the rules and that seems like it would throw off grading on the whole exam. Seems unlikely to be fruitful, but I respect your effort.

This thread is only concerned with encouraging people to write LSAC if they encountered a very specific situation during the test. Writing challenges is the part we can control. I'm not interested in speculating on how the LSAC will respond to these challenges, or what proper recourse might involve if a challenge is successful. The LSAC will make those decisions.

mges wrote:I interpreted the rule incorrectly, but I was able to find answers to the questions. I'm wondering if it was still possible to solve the game (or at least find a couple right answers), just with increased time used to find a solution. Any thoughts?

The consensus seems to be that the incorrect interpretation would have led to some questions having multiple "correct answers," while others may have had no "correct answers," and it is conceivable (but unlikely) that a question could have had only one "correct answer" that would not have been TCR.

User avatar
FuManChusco
Posts: 1217
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 8:56 pm

Re: Official challenge to the 4th game in the scored LG section

Postby FuManChusco » Wed Jun 09, 2010 12:53 pm

LSAT Blog wrote:Out of approx 6500 LSAT questions, LSAC has withdrawn only 6:

4 LR and 2 RC

I would bet against them removing any question from the game or making any sort of effort to appease those who are unhappy with the game.


Thank you for posting this. I've been trying to find out the answer to the history of omitting question. Every argument for both sides is basically meaningless. LSAC will not omit this game. People probably misunderstood it. Omitting it would reward those who would have gotten them wrong regardless, and it punishes people who actually answered them correctly. Maybe this is not a good reason to withhold from writing to LSAC, but it's a damn good reason for not omitting the game.

also citrustang

1.) won't happen. they're not changing anything

2.) this is only unconvincing because you're in denial

3.) probably true but seemingly irrelevant

4.) honestly, a 3rd grader could have understood what they meant

5.) yes to the hard, no to the ambiguity. they probably just thought people had a basic grasp of the english language. they overestimated apparently.

6.) no, because there's no way in hell it's going to be omitted, although it would probably hurt me.

7.) this is absolutely true

8.) also true but irrelevant

9.) I'm sure they could, but this wasn't that grievous of a mistake. it's surely a vocal minority that couldn't figure out what a term meant.

10.) sounds about right.

glad I could help. good luck and have fun writing LSAC. if they omit the game, I will eat the shoes on my feet. at best, and the chances are in the slim to none range, they'll adjust the curve if enough people got the questions wrong. omitting the game would only cause another wave of complaints to come through the door however.
Last edited by FuManChusco on Wed Jun 09, 2010 1:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.

d34d9823
Posts: 1915
Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2010 2:52 pm

Re: Official challenge to the 4th game in the scored LG section

Postby d34d9823 » Wed Jun 09, 2010 12:55 pm

FuManChusco wrote:if they omit the game, I will eat the shoes on my feet.

Are you currently barefoot? Because that would be cheating.

User avatar
FuManChusco
Posts: 1217
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 8:56 pm

Re: Official challenge to the 4th game in the scored LG section

Postby FuManChusco » Wed Jun 09, 2010 12:56 pm

d34dluk3 wrote:
FuManChusco wrote:if they omit the game, I will eat the shoes on my feet.

Are you currently barefoot? Because that would be cheating.


do sandals count? maybe I should edit to the OP, haha.

sharpnsmooth
Posts: 141
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2010 4:41 pm

Re: Official challenge to the 4th game in the scored LG section

Postby sharpnsmooth » Wed Jun 09, 2010 12:57 pm

In response to all of this:

side note: I do LSAT tutoring. Many of my students found the game section really difficult. Surprisingly, those who were not scoring perfect scores in LG and focused on that section the week of actually aced this section, while those who took it more for granted and focused on other sections suffered.

For having the game taken out:

1.) To the best of my knowledge, this has never been done before. A game has 5-7 questions. The LSAT, in all of the previous exams that are available 1-58, have never canceled more than 3 questions. They are not going to throw out an entire game. If they did, it becomes quite vexing as to how they'd score the curve. Would a raw score of a 94 constitute a 180?

2.) You are speaking about the specifics of the game on the internet, and your conversation can directly parallel whether students choose to cancel. Even if you got a 140, it is not worth the risk of being canned by LSAC who can but probably has better things to do than sue you, but can with one click of a button virtually end your law school ambition.

3.) I have not seen the game, but the reason many prefer this section is there is no vagueness -- they can all be solved, and you can be 100% sure you have the right answer. If others did not have to guess at the meaning, and solved it easily then perhaps this is because according to the LSAC scoring system, they're just out of your league. I have not seen the game, and know this might seem boisterous but when the test is released, if I am able to license it, I will gladly explain to anyone on here how it could have been solved.

Don't mean to seem condescending, but it is highly suspect an entire game produced by arguably the most reliable test designers in standardized testing would be unfair.

User avatar
citrustang
Posts: 110
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 5:22 pm

Re: Official challenge to the 4th game in the scored LG section

Postby citrustang » Wed Jun 09, 2010 12:57 pm

mges wrote:citrustang - Seems you're just worried because you didn't misinterpret the rule. Making calls about the majority and minority is unjustified, you have no idea who is the majority and who is the minority.

The list I posted above is a summary of different things other people have said in the course of the thread. They are not my personal opinions. My opinion is that none of the ten listed arguments should deter people from writing the LSAC.

Rocketman11 wrote:I am writing on behalf of all those test takers with an elementary-level grasp of the English language in hopes that you remain resolved in not making accommodations for a potentially vocal minority, thus altering the curve placement for the rest of us.

chicagobullsfan wrote:Just calm down and think about this instead of raving at the heavy majority of people who assumed correctly. I agree with the first poster who said it is in the interest of those who presumed correctly for you not to go for it, because it will adversely affect the majority who understood the LSAC's (fairly obvious) thinking.

sharpnsmooth
Posts: 141
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2010 4:41 pm

Re: Official challenge to the 4th game in the scored LG section

Postby sharpnsmooth » Wed Jun 09, 2010 1:01 pm

d34dluk3 wrote:
Marino13 wrote:I think the problems with this were two-fold. First -- and I guess this only applies to whoever took Testmasters -- is that this game was written like it was a team/grouping game, when really could have been done much more easily like a complex association game. Well, that's what I did anyway, then when I worked it out it my head afterward, it would have been SO MUCH easier to do it as complex association.

Then, the rules, were a bit screwy in that, the ones that "couldn't be the same" had to be "together" and vice versa; so it was kind of counter-intuitive.

This is pretty hilarious. It was fairly clear that LSAC wrote that game specifically to confuse people who relied on testing company strategies.


It'd be pretty brilliant if LSAC designed it specifically to confuse Testmasters students as I know they aren't a big fan... there was that big lawsuit a few years back when Testmasters was accused of violating the licensing standards posed by LSAC. It also wouldn't be a violation of the Civil Rights Act to go out of their way to throw off Testmasters students as such have their choice of which prep test company to choose.




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], bearedman8, dj9i27, foodlaw, gwillygecko, SunDevil14 and 19 guests