December 2010 Curve Prediction Poll

For Dec. 2010 takers: what do you think the 170 curve will be?

-8
12
6%
-9
3
1%
-10
12
6%
-11
14
6%
-12
37
17%
-13
46
21%
-14
64
30%
-15
17
8%
-16
11
5%
 
Total votes: 216

Sandro
Posts: 2526
Joined: Sat Jul 18, 2009 12:12 am

Re: December 2010 Curve Prediction Poll

Postby Sandro » Sun Dec 12, 2010 11:08 pm

i'm sure some ppl were just joking but how can 20%+ of people reasonably think this test was easier than October? :?: And not just themselves, believe that LSAC will set the curve to below a -12 ?

2011Law
Posts: 822
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2010 3:40 pm

Re: December 2010 Curve Prediction Poll

Postby 2011Law » Sun Dec 12, 2010 11:21 pm

Sandro777 wrote:i'm sure some ppl were just joking but how can 20%+ of people reasonably think this test was easier than October? :?: And not just themselves, believe that LSAC will set the curve to below a -12 ?


my guess is that the people putting 8, 9, 15 or 16 are messing around, people putting 10 are messing around or are bad guessers, and th people putting 11 are giving a serious pessimistic prediction.

fosterp
Posts: 319
Joined: Tue Jun 22, 2010 5:09 am

Re: December 2010 Curve Prediction Poll

Postby fosterp » Sun Dec 12, 2010 11:27 pm

elaw wrote:I have the curve at a -16. Imagine the poor saps who tried to guess which 26 LR was fake. Last RC passage was a bit rough. LG was well, LG. Some tough questions. December test = tons of retakers and a ton of poor test takers. -16 curve for 170 - 31 for 160.


The pool of test takers for dec has nothing to do with the curve.

And to answer the guy above who asked why we do 170, its probably just because this is top law schools, and 170 or close to 170 is usually around what most people are shooting for, and generally if you know the 170 curve you know the 165-175 even up to 180 curve. However once you start getting into the lower 160s and below they generally have their own curve that can vary widely with how the 170 curve is. For example...a test A might be harder for 170 scorers than test B, and the curve will try to account for that by curving appropriately, however test A might be easier for 160 scorers than test B, so the curve will accordingly balance in the opposite direction. I know its counterintuitive to think that something that would be harder for one group be easier for a lower tier group but it has to do with the number of really hard questions relative to really easy questions and whatnot. Standardized testing, especially one as advanced as the lsat is really complicated shit, not something thats easy to explain in a few sentences.

Sandro
Posts: 2526
Joined: Sat Jul 18, 2009 12:12 am

Re: December 2010 Curve Prediction Poll

Postby Sandro » Sun Dec 12, 2010 11:29 pm

I don't know if -15 is messing around. I don't remember Dec09 but if they kept it at 102 its not out of the realm of possibilities, this test had 2 games that gave almost everyone some trouble. I didn't find RC or LR to be anything special but you never know.... although another -14 seems more likely.

2011Law
Posts: 822
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2010 3:40 pm

Re: December 2010 Curve Prediction Poll

Postby 2011Law » Sun Dec 12, 2010 11:34 pm

fosterp wrote:
elaw wrote:I have the curve at a -16. Imagine the poor saps who tried to guess which 26 LR was fake. Last RC passage was a bit rough. LG was well, LG. Some tough questions. December test = tons of retakers and a ton of poor test takers. -16 curve for 170 - 31 for 160.


The pool of test takers for dec has nothing to do with the curve.

And to answer the guy above who asked why we do 170, its probably just because this is top law schools, and 170 or close to 170 is usually around what most people are shooting for, and generally if you know the 170 curve you know the 165-175 even up to 180 curve. However once you start getting into the lower 160s and below they generally have their own curve that can vary widely with how the 170 curve is. For example...a test A might be harder for 170 scorers than test B, and the curve will try to account for that by curving appropriately, however test A might be easier for 160 scorers than test B, so the curve will accordingly balance in the opposite direction. I know its counterintuitive to think that something that would be harder for one group be easier for a lower tier group but it has to do with the number of really hard questions relative to really easy questions and whatnot. Standardized testing, especially one as advanced as the lsat is really complicated shit, not something thats easy to explain in a few sentences.


I'd bet the curve for 160 on this test will also be pretty generous. Overall, I don't think there were that many questions that were insanely hard, but just a lot more medium to hard questions than there were easy questions.

User avatar
well-hello-there
Posts: 320
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2010 8:38 pm

Re: December 2010 Curve Prediction Poll

Postby well-hello-there » Sun Dec 12, 2010 11:34 pm

http://lsatblog.blogspot.com/2010/02/ls ... -lsac.html
That link is part 1 of 3 explaining how the test is curved. It doesn't go into as much detail as I would like but it does a pretty good job.

testmachine45
Posts: 243
Joined: Fri Jul 16, 2010 12:09 am

Re: December 2010 Curve Prediction Poll

Postby testmachine45 » Sun Dec 12, 2010 11:37 pm

Yeah, you got no idea! -15, -16. I put my money on -16. 102 questions!

RefleX
Posts: 68
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2010 1:22 am

Re: December 2010 Curve Prediction Poll

Postby RefleX » Sun Dec 12, 2010 11:41 pm

I think the makers of the test used a lot of "shake up" tactics in comparison to other tests. I didn't notice as many decoy answers (which scares me), but I noticed on one LR section that the first 10 questions weren't as breezy as I'm used to. I remember the first two on my first LR section tripping me up and then getting easier.

jwmalone87
Posts: 384
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2010 6:46 pm

Re: December 2010 Curve Prediction Poll

Postby jwmalone87 » Sun Dec 12, 2010 11:45 pm

I'm putting my money on a -14 curve and -20 for a 165, the score I'm shooting for.

testmachine45
Posts: 243
Joined: Fri Jul 16, 2010 12:09 am

Re: December 2010 Curve Prediction Poll

Postby testmachine45 » Sun Dec 12, 2010 11:52 pm

RefleX wrote:I think the makers of the test used a lot of "shake up" tactics in comparison to other tests. I didn't notice as many decoy answers (which scares me), but I noticed on one LR section that the first 10 questions weren't as breezy as I'm used to. I remember the first two on my first LR section tripping me up and then getting easier.


+1. Was freaked about about that.

Canadiana
Posts: 22
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2010 7:51 pm

Re: December 2010 Curve Prediction Poll

Postby Canadiana » Sun Dec 12, 2010 11:53 pm

Anyone want to guess the 160 curve? I'm trying to convince a friend of mine not to cancel.

testmachine45
Posts: 243
Joined: Fri Jul 16, 2010 12:09 am

Re: December 2010 Curve Prediction Poll

Postby testmachine45 » Sun Dec 12, 2010 11:56 pm

Canadiana wrote:Anyone want to guess the 160 curve? I'm trying to convince a friend of mine not to cancel.


I would cancel this test for sure. 160 curve is probably -29

testmachine45
Posts: 243
Joined: Fri Jul 16, 2010 12:09 am

Re: December 2010 Curve Prediction Poll

Postby testmachine45 » Sun Dec 12, 2010 11:58 pm

-15 is not a joke. There have ben -15, -16 in the past. In fact, those tests had 102 questions as well(see 90's). Furthermore, I think it was at least 2 questions harder than October. At least. Whcih was -14.

testmachine45
Posts: 243
Joined: Fri Jul 16, 2010 12:09 am

Re: December 2010 Curve Prediction Poll

Postby testmachine45 » Mon Dec 13, 2010 12:00 am

testmachine45 wrote:-15 is not a joke. There have ben -15, -16 in the past. In fact, those tests had 102 questions as well(see 90's). Furthermore, I think it was at least 2 questions harder than October. At least. Whcih was -14.


One can not deny this test was special since the 102 questions. LOL. why did they do this? perhaps this is the new lsat dudes.....

Sandro
Posts: 2526
Joined: Sat Jul 18, 2009 12:12 am

Re: December 2010 Curve Prediction Poll

Postby Sandro » Mon Dec 13, 2010 12:06 am

testmachine45 wrote:-15 is not a joke. There have ben -15, -16 in the past. In fact, those tests had 102 questions as well(see 90's). Furthermore, I think it was at least 2 questions harder than October. At least. Whcih was -14.


Is this the first test in a while to test @ 102 questions? I can't remember a test going final @102 lately but maybe some tested at 102 and they just cut one or two out....

?

SchopenhauerFTW
Posts: 1793
Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2010 10:22 pm

Re: .

Postby SchopenhauerFTW » Mon Dec 13, 2010 12:07 am

.
Last edited by SchopenhauerFTW on Mon Dec 10, 2012 4:04 pm, edited 2 times in total.

testmachine45
Posts: 243
Joined: Fri Jul 16, 2010 12:09 am

Re: December 2010 Curve Prediction Poll

Postby testmachine45 » Mon Dec 13, 2010 12:10 am

anyone know why i suck so bad and couldnt even finish the test, let along the sections in time or think coherently at all vs being able to do all these things at home?

Canadiana
Posts: 22
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2010 7:51 pm

Re: December 2010 Curve Prediction Poll

Postby Canadiana » Mon Dec 13, 2010 12:12 am

Thanks, seems like 27-30.

User avatar
robotclubmember
Posts: 743
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2010 7:53 am

Re: December 2010 Curve Prediction Poll

Postby robotclubmember » Mon Dec 13, 2010 12:48 am

testmachine45 wrote:anyone know why i suck so bad and couldnt even finish the test, let along the sections in time or think coherently at all vs being able to do all these things at home?


If you need advice you should post a thread on the specific areas you are weak in, and people will give advice. If you don't know the specific areas you are weak in, you should grab your last five prep tests and tally up the wrongs by their type to see do you have a problem with assumption questions, in/out games, main points questions on rc passages, for example.

And no the curve will not be -16, sorry bro.

User avatar
The Gentleman
Posts: 670
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2010 12:25 am

Re: December 2010 Curve Prediction Poll

Postby The Gentleman » Mon Dec 13, 2010 12:49 am

I didn't take the exam, but the over/under is -11.5 for a 170.

User avatar
2014
Posts: 5831
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2010 3:53 pm

Re: December 2010 Curve Prediction Poll

Postby 2014 » Mon Dec 13, 2010 1:25 am

testmachine45 wrote:
testmachine45 wrote:-15 is not a joke. There have ben -15, -16 in the past. In fact, those tests had 102 questions as well(see 90's). Furthermore, I think it was at least 2 questions harder than October. At least. Whcih was -14.


One can not deny this test was special since the 102 questions. LOL. why did they do this? perhaps this is the new lsat dudes.....

Did you just quote yourself and reply to yourself?
I think you did!

thecynic69
Posts: 170
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 5:33 pm

Re: December 2010 Curve Prediction Poll

Postby thecynic69 » Mon Dec 13, 2010 2:27 am

Hey, I gave the lsat blog explanation of the 'curve' (http://lsatblog.blogspot.com/2010/03/ra ... curve.html) a quick [and i mean quick] read, and it seems that the 'curve' does not take into account the effect that the order of the questions has on test takers, since the 'curve' is based on pre-testing. I guess the LSAT could have pre-tested various orders, but I doubt it...if this is true, then one of the hardest aspects of the Dec 2010 game section (running out of time on game 4, which was a freebie) won't be accounted for (sad face).

While I'm posting, I'll throw in my two cents about the curve: -14. Making games difficult is death to a large portion of high scorers, since we tend to rely on a -0 games section to bolster our scores (games is the most learnable section, ppl who score highly tend to study a lot, ppl who study a lot should destroy the most learnable section). A -12 curve would be cruel and unusual...the Dec test was objectively harder than the Oct test (which had a -12 curve). I wouldn't rely on a -16 curve though; I'm sure there were plenty of people who -0ed the games section (game 1 could be done in 6 mins, game 4 in 4 to 5 mins, and the middle 2 games brute forced with the remaining 24-25 mins)

Word to the wise, I'd expect a more generous 170 than 160 curve (as a result of LG being (1) hard and (2) 'resilient' against traditional game strategies [make deductions, recycle old answers, diagram at the bottom [re: game 1 and the lack of space].

MRsimon
Posts: 35
Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2010 12:03 am

Re: December 2010 Curve Prediction Poll

Postby MRsimon » Mon Dec 13, 2010 2:41 am

Scored a 165 on prep test 61, but felt that was considerably easier than this one. That curve felt a little generous however. I wouldn't be surprised to see -12 again on this one, but would be ecstatic for -14/15 PLEASE

58932ugahoige
Posts: 75
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2010 2:23 am

Re: December 2010 Curve Prediction Poll

Postby 58932ugahoige » Mon Dec 13, 2010 3:20 am

-10.

RC was a joke, and there were no more than 5 LR questions that the above-average should have gotten wrong( knock on wood, knock on wood!). So those should counterbalance the rape of the LG.


That said, I didn't find LG to be that bad (I had time to review all the questions on stained glass, and a few of the management, so I'm hoping for the biggest, dirtiest curve ever :P.

akikaze
Posts: 99
Joined: Mon May 17, 2010 8:06 am

Re: December 2010 Curve Prediction Poll

Postby akikaze » Mon Dec 13, 2010 4:22 am

Shmuckluk wrote:RC was a joke, and there were no more than 5 LR questions that the above-average should have gotten wrong( knock on wood, knock on wood!). So those should counterbalance the rape of the LG.


I got -2 on LR in October (both sections total) and I thought this LR was considerably more challenging. There were many questions that got me: arthritis, marine dinosaurs and their fins vs. birds with fins, privatization of telephone companies vs. national parks, mental illness/ symptoms/compounds in the brain, strawberry nurseries, throat surgery, tropical fish and their camouflage , something about gerbils, etc.

I thought LG was very difficult but I got through it (without enough time to check my answers.)




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: bearedman8, Google [Bot], SunDevil14, Vino.Veritas and 6 guests