Experimental Obvious? Forum

[arean.ryan]

I was just talking to a friend who has taken the LSAT, and asked him about 5 vs 4 section PTs. He recommended 4 because it was obvious which section was the experimental, the questions were either "very hard or very easy". Just wondering, those who have taken the LSAT before...is this true?

[albusdumbledore]

I had a pretty strong hunch which was the experimental when I took it, not because they were "very hard or very easy" but because the experimental section didn't have the same flow as the others. Mine happened to be LR, and it was obvious that there was no ordering from easiest to hardest like a typical section. That being said, I doubt I would have been right if it had been RC or LG.

[NinjaWalrus]

It's not obvious. Do a search on experimental sections and you will see it takes a little work after the test to find the experimental sections.

[NonTradHealthLaw]

For the June 2010 administration I was able to correctly guess which section was experimental. It just felt a bit different. I wouldn't bank on this always being the case, though.

[StrictlyLiable]

Buy 5 section tests and take every section seriously. Picking the wrong one is surely not worth the risk

[Jeffort]

Experimental sections sometimes do stand out because some of them are balanced in a weird way(s) whereas other experimental sections have the same 'feel' as the scored sections. This is because of the way LSAC develops and pre-tests new test items and new test form sections.

Before appearing in a scored section of an administered LSAT test form each question/test item will have previously appeared in an administered experimental section at least twice for pre-testing/calibrating/test equating/psychometric gobbely goo stuff/etc.

According to the available LSAC articles about developing and assembling the LSAT some experimental sections are just meant to initially rate/calibrate each question individually and are not assembled as a set of questions intended to end up together as a future scored section whereas other experimentals (the 2nd time items appear in an administered experimental section) are designed to pre-test and rate/calibrate the section as a whole for possible inclusion as a later scored section.

The first type where they just throw a bunch of questions together they don't intend on keeping together as a section can sometimes be significantly and noticeably easier or harder than a typical scored section of the same type.

Anyway you look at it though, when you take the real thing you should treat all sections like they count, do your best, and don't let distracting thoughts about experimental or not intrude while you are taking the real thing, you have plenty of time to stress about that after the exam.

In terms of timed practice, I would go with 5 sections instead of 4 so that you get fully conditioned to that for test day since that is what you have to do.

[sanetruth]

At the very least, taking 5-section tests will highlight potential fatigue in the last section, which is important to be aware of.

[fosterp]

I read somewhere that the experimental is always one of the first three sections. Guess I would take that into consideration as well.

[Knock]

For the June 2010 administration I was able to correctly guess which section was experimental. It just felt a bit different. I wouldn't bank on this always being the case, though.

I had the 3 LR one, and although I wouldn't say I was able to guess the experimental section at all, in hindsight it makes sense.

The question that I was most stuck on for the entire LR sections was that all gorillas are animals and all horses are animals from the experimental section. It was just so funky and while I did it mechanically and got an answer, when I tried to think about it analogously I found a hole in that (cant remember exactly but had something to do with the categories of animals and sub category ie gorilla vs horse).

Anyways, my something is off radar went of, but I was definitely not taking any chances with letting up.

[cubswin]

I had 2 games sections on my exam, and I thought that the real section was the experimental.

[3|ink]

For the June 2010 administration I was able to correctly guess which section was experimental. It just felt a bit different. I wouldn't bank on this always being the case, though.

The RC experimental from June 2010 seemed really obvious. It seemed way too easy to be real. I'm really hoping that I don't get that RC for October. If RC is that easy, it must mean that LR and LG are super hard.

[xyzzzzzzzz]

so when you buy the pts does it come with the experimental section? or is everyone like mixing and matching?

[Knock]

so when you buy the pts does it come with the experimental section? or is everyone like mixing and matching?

Nope, the PT's only come with 4 sections. I mix and match. I recommend using google calendar and setting yourself a schedule, and planning it all out.

PT's 44-47 w/ PT 43 as experimental sections
PT 49-52 w/ PT 48 as experimental sections
PT 54-57 w/ PT 53 as experimental sections

Etc.

[Cromartie]

so when you buy the pts does it come with the experimental section? or is everyone like mixing and matching?

You can buy PT's with experimental sections from Cambridget LSAT. I've only been doing 4 section PT's so far, but I bought the 5-section ones for PT 56-60.

Note: Cambridge PT's are in pdf form and you will have to print them out. Also, they don't come with the answer/bubble sheets.

[xyzzzzzzzz]

ty Knock and Cromartie. I think I'm going to go with knock's schedule idea, since I've already invested.

[Jeffort]

so when you buy the pts does it come with the experimental section? or is everyone like mixing and matching?

Nope, the PT's only come with 4 sections. I mix and match. I recommend using google calendar and setting yourself a schedule, and planning it all out.

PT's 44-47 w/ PT 43 as experimental sections
PT 49-52 w/ PT 48 as experimental sections
PT 54-57 w/ PT 53 as experimental sections

Etc.

I'm very much in favor of this way of doing it where you set aside particular PT's to break apart and use as substituted 'experimental' sections for 5 section timed practice. After you take 4 PT's thereby then having done all 4 sections of one you broke apart and put in to make 4 5 section practice tests you score the four sections of that test and see how you did. So if you did the above schedule for example, after taking PT's44-47 w/ PT 43 as the experimental sections you then add up your raw points from and score the PT 43 sections according to it's score conversion chart.

[xyzzzzzzzz]

so when you buy the pts does it come with the experimental section? or is everyone like mixing and matching?

Nope, the PT's only come with 4 sections. I mix and match. I recommend using google calendar and setting yourself a schedule, and planning it all out.

PT's 44-47 w/ PT 43 as experimental sections
PT 49-52 w/ PT 48 as experimental sections
PT 54-57 w/ PT 53 as experimental sections

Etc.

I'm very much in favor of this way of doing it where you set aside particular PT's to break apart and use as substituted 'experimental' sections for 5 section timed practice. After you take 4 PT's thereby then having done all 4 sections of one you broke apart and put in to make 4 5 section practice tests you score the four sections of that test and see how you did. So if you did the above schedule for example, after taking PT's44-47 w/ PT 43 as the experimental sections you then add up your raw points from and score the PT 43 sections according to it's score conversion chart.

Interesting. Just let me make sure I've got this - say I break up pt 43 and then 44-47. After having those scored, find the score from each section of 43 and grade it? Also, it would be best to not do 43 by itself? Only do it as experimental for 44-47?

[Jeffort]

so when you buy the pts does it come with the experimental section? or is everyone like mixing and matching?

Nope, the PT's only come with 4 sections. I mix and match. I recommend using google calendar and setting yourself a schedule, and planning it all out.

PT's 44-47 w/ PT 43 as experimental sections
PT 49-52 w/ PT 48 as experimental sections
PT 54-57 w/ PT 53 as experimental sections

Etc.

I'm very much in favor of this way of doing it where you set aside particular PT's to break apart and use as substituted 'experimental' sections for 5 section timed practice. After you take 4 PT's thereby then having done all 4 sections of one you broke apart and put in to make 4 5 section practice tests you score the four sections of that test and see how you did. So if you did the above schedule for example, after taking PT's44-47 w/ PT 43 as the experimental sections you then add up your raw points from and score the PT 43 sections according to it's score conversion chart.

Interesting. Just let me make sure I've got this - say I break up pt 43 and then 44-47. After having those scored, find the score from each section of 43 and grade it? Also, it would be best to not do 43 by itself? Only do it as experimental for 44-47?

Yeah, you've got the idea. That way all 5 sections of each practice test you take are fresh sections you have never seen before. You take 4 practice tests and end up with 5 practice test scores!

[2014]

Keep in mind that every "Real" section was an experimental at one point. Trying to guess which one is experimental is a really bad idea.