temp deleted.

MagnumLifeStyle
Posts: 112
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2010 9:53 pm

temp deleted.

Postby MagnumLifeStyle » Thu Aug 19, 2010 4:26 pm

temporarily deleted
Last edited by MagnumLifeStyle on Thu Aug 19, 2010 5:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.

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

Re: Some PTs Sold by Cambridge LSAT Contain Serious Defects

Postby 3|ink » Thu Aug 19, 2010 4:34 pm

Did you originally post this under another name?

Anyway, yeah. That's why I only buy my LSAT stuff from Amazon.

lparker
Posts: 148
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 10:14 am

Re: Some PTs Sold by Cambridge LSAT Contain Serious Defects

Postby lparker » Thu Aug 19, 2010 4:51 pm

Hm. Interesting. I was going to print 40-60 from Cambridge, but I will go with Amazon now.

MagnumLifeStyle
Posts: 112
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2010 9:53 pm

Re: Some PTs Sold by Cambridge LSAT Contain Serious Defects

Postby MagnumLifeStyle » Thu Aug 19, 2010 5:10 pm

3|ink wrote:Did you originally post this under another name?

Anyway, yeah. That's why I only buy my LSAT stuff from Amazon.


yeah, i'm currently studying at a library, and after posting it, saw that it wasn't my account, so i deleted that, logged out, and posted under my account.

MagnumLifeStyle
Posts: 112
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2010 9:53 pm

Re: Some PTs Sold by Cambridge LSAT Contain Serious Defects

Postby MagnumLifeStyle » Thu Aug 19, 2010 5:14 pm

lparker wrote:Hm. Interesting. I was going to print 40-60 from Cambridge, but I will go with Amazon now.


i believe that some of their later PTs were purchased as PDF files directly from LSAC, so later ones are probably foul-proof.

My concern is with the earlier PTs. They may not reflect my true ability, as I could have missed a problem because of an omitted word or sentence.

I don't know which PTs were typed-up by one of Cambridge LSAT's employees, or purchased as PDF files.

I wouldn't be so anal about this if LSAT wasn't such a big deal in law school admissions.

Just ONE PROBLEM can distinguish a 169 from 170, Columbia from Harvard (ok may be two points), etc, which is why I'm very concerned about such defects.

User avatar
Cromartie
Posts: 200
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 12:27 pm

Re: Some PTs Sold by Cambridge LSAT Contain Serious Defects

Postby Cromartie » Thu Aug 19, 2010 5:41 pm

MagnumLifeStyle wrote:
lparker wrote:Hm. Interesting. I was going to print 40-60 from Cambridge, but I will go with Amazon now.


i believe that some of their later PTs were purchased as PDF files directly from LSAC, so later ones are probably foul-proof.

My concern is with the earlier PTs. They may not reflect my true ability, as I could have missed a problem because of an omitted word or sentence.

I don't know which PTs were typed-up by one of Cambridge LSAT's employees, or purchased as PDF files.

I wouldn't be so anal about this if LSAT wasn't such a big deal in law school admissions.

Just ONE PROBLEM can distinguish a 169 from 170, Columbia from Harvard (ok may be two points), etc, which is why I'm very concerned about such defects.


Do you know when they started purchasing directly from LSAC? I bought 55-60 from Cambridge.

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

Re: temp deleted.

Postby LSAT Blog » Thu Aug 19, 2010 8:37 pm

I believe many of the older tests were scanned in with OCR (optical character recognition), which is good, but not perfect. This is likely the source of some problems. Don't know of the exact date when the change happened, though.

Here's a big list of PrepTests if you want to get them elsewhere, but I'm sure the errors in the Cambridge exams will decrease over time as people report them and they are subsequently corrected.




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ari1 and 6 guests