The Official February 2011 Waiting Thread

stilles
Posts: 93
Joined: Sun Nov 28, 2010 12:15 am

Re: The Official February 2011 Waiting Thread

Postby stilles » Tue Feb 22, 2011 4:07 pm

Here's what I don't understand. Why can't LSAC return scores faster for Feb compared to other administrations? There are thousands of fewer people who take the Feb LSAT yet the time frame for relased scores is the same. Plus, the Feb score is crucial for some people applying that year as someone mentioned deadlines like March 1st. !!!

lausseuns
Posts: 17
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 1:51 pm

Re: The Official February 2011 Waiting Thread

Postby lausseuns » Tue Feb 22, 2011 4:42 pm

stilles wrote:Here's what I don't understand. Why can't LSAC return scores faster for Feb compared to other administrations? There are thousands of fewer people who take the Feb LSAT yet the time frame for relased scores is the same. Plus, the Feb score is crucial for some people applying that year as someone mentioned deadlines like March 1st. !!!


I don't think that grading is a time consuming factor for any test, nor is calculating the curve, because that stuff is all done by a machine. So the fact that there are less tests to grade doesn't really translate to a significant time savings in how fast they can return scores. The time consuming parts of the turn-around are most likely the review process where they have to go through the questions (when there is a wrong answer choice that a lot of people marked) and make sure that there were no errors in the questions and answers (ex: multiple correct answers). Also, they might remove a question and have to deliberate about what question to remove. Those, more time consuming factors hold for all tests.

User avatar
8675309
Posts: 91
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 6:59 pm

Re: The Official February 2011 Waiting Thread

Postby 8675309 » Tue Feb 22, 2011 5:36 pm

Dale Cooper wrote:Most of my LSAT related dreams post-February LSAT have actually been fairly positive. That can't bode well...


I haven't had any this time. Which is either really good or really bad. I can't decide.

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

Re: The Official February 2011 Waiting Thread

Postby SchopenhauerFTW » Tue Feb 22, 2011 7:02 pm

8675309 wrote:
Dale Cooper wrote:Most of my LSAT related dreams post-February LSAT have actually been fairly positive. That can't bode well...


I haven't had any this time. Which is either really good or really bad. I can't decide.


I haven't had any bad dreams either. Maybe it's because I'm kind of a screw up and had to take it three times, making this past administration of the test feel like nothing.

User avatar
paul34
Posts: 316
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2011 12:37 am

Re: The Official February 2011 Waiting Thread

Postby paul34 » Tue Feb 22, 2011 7:45 pm

...
Last edited by paul34 on Fri Mar 02, 2012 12:07 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
she&him
Posts: 41
Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2011 10:26 am

Re: The Official February 2011 Waiting Thread

Postby she&him » Tue Feb 22, 2011 9:36 pm

SchopenhauerFTW wrote:
8675309 wrote:
Dale Cooper wrote:Most of my LSAT related dreams post-February LSAT have actually been fairly positive. That can't bode well...


I haven't had any this time. Which is either really good or really bad. I can't decide.


I haven't had any bad dreams either. Maybe it's because I'm kind of a screw up and had to take it three times, making this past administration of the test feel like nothing.


Not a chance. I'm a similar kind of screw up and also took it three times. This past one went so well compared to the other two, but I'm not sure if that's just because this time I actually spent time studying for it instead of acting like an idiot.

User avatar
misterbingley
Posts: 213
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 10:00 pm

Re: The Official February 2011 Waiting Thread

Postby misterbingley » Tue Feb 22, 2011 9:41 pm

the tests already go through a pretty rigorous screening before even becoming real questions. i wonder how many people actually petition LSAC after the test to object a question.

it would take so much mental effort to hold a question and all its nuances in order to be able to petition to LSAC, especially when you're still potentially staring at hours of testing still ahead of you.

butter33
Posts: 16
Joined: Sun Nov 28, 2010 10:43 pm

Re: The Official February 2011 Waiting Thread

Postby butter33 » Tue Feb 22, 2011 10:54 pm

i don't care if results are weeks away, i'm still checking multiple times a day. just in case.

taliepuff
Posts: 9
Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2011 12:56 pm

Re: The Official February 2011 Waiting Thread

Postby taliepuff » Tue Feb 22, 2011 11:00 pm

butter33 wrote:i don't care if results are weeks away, i'm still checking multiple times a day. just in case.


i thought i was the only neurotic one doing that :oops:

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

Re: The Official February 2011 Waiting Thread

Postby SchopenhauerFTW » Tue Feb 22, 2011 11:04 pm

misterbingley wrote:the tests already go through a pretty rigorous screening before even becoming real questions. i wonder how many people actually petition LSAC after the test to object a question.

it would take so much mental effort to hold a question and all its nuances in order to be able to petition to LSAC, especially when you're still potentially staring at hours of testing still ahead of you.


I trust the psychometricians to be able to figure out what needs to be thrown out for us. The profession fascinates me.

lausseuns
Posts: 17
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 1:51 pm

Re: The Official February 2011 Waiting Thread

Postby lausseuns » Tue Feb 22, 2011 11:12 pm

misterbingley wrote:the tests already go through a pretty rigorous screening before even becoming real questions. i wonder how many people actually petition LSAC after the test to object a question.

it would take so much mental effort to hold a question and all its nuances in order to be able to petition to LSAC, especially when you're still potentially staring at hours of testing still ahead of you.



word... i just thought they might go through another, less-extensive screening of the questions if they had weird spreads for the responses... for example, if around 30% of people chose the same wrong answer choice and about 30% of people chose correctly (with the other 40% spread in other various wrong answers) they might take a closer look at it just to check it again... i could definitely be wrong though

User avatar
classix
Posts: 97
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2011 3:47 pm

Re: The Official February 2011 Waiting Thread

Postby classix » Wed Feb 23, 2011 12:15 am

taliepuff wrote:
butter33 wrote:i don't care if results are weeks away, i'm still checking multiple times a day. just in case.


i thought i was the only neurotic one doing that :oops:



Haha you guys are crazy...

I would drive myself insane if I started doing that.

User avatar
8675309
Posts: 91
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 6:59 pm

Re: The Official February 2011 Waiting Thread

Postby 8675309 » Wed Feb 23, 2011 1:27 am

SchopenhauerFTW wrote:
misterbingley wrote:the tests already go through a pretty rigorous screening before even becoming real questions. i wonder how many people actually petition LSAC after the test to object a question.

it would take so much mental effort to hold a question and all its nuances in order to be able to petition to LSAC, especially when you're still potentially staring at hours of testing still ahead of you.


I trust the psychometricians to be able to figure out what needs to be thrown out for us. The profession fascinates me.


Hell, the name fascinates me. Could you imagine what it would be like if you went up and told someone your profession and they had no idea what it was. They'd probably run.

CaliforniaGurl
Posts: 145
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2010 2:03 pm

Re: The Official February 2011 Waiting Thread

Postby CaliforniaGurl » Wed Feb 23, 2011 2:06 am

or it could be like in rubicon and you're not allowed to tell anyone that you're a "psychometrician" :D

User avatar
EvanC
Posts: 48
Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2010 9:58 pm

Re: The Official February 2011 Waiting Thread

Postby EvanC » Wed Feb 23, 2011 2:27 am

You know, it actually has me worrying considering how good I felt about this test. When I first started studying for the LSAT, I felt really good upon completion of my first few tests and I scored in the mid-150s usually. When I was scoring mid-to-high 160s, I was always nervous about my score. I feel good this time and am hoping I'm not being overconfident. That was the best I ever felt after a timed LSAT administration and I want to get that 170 dangit.

lausseuns
Posts: 17
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 1:51 pm

Re: The Official February 2011 Waiting Thread

Postby lausseuns » Wed Feb 23, 2011 2:39 am

EvanC wrote:You know, it actually has me worrying considering how good I felt about this test. When I first started studying for the LSAT, I felt really good upon completion of my first few tests and I scored in the mid-150s usually. When I was scoring mid-to-high 160s, I was always nervous about my score. I feel good this time and am hoping I'm not being overconfident. That was the best I ever felt after a timed LSAT administration and I want to get that 170 dangit.



Don't worry about it man. First off, there is no PT that comes close to evoking the anxiety and post-test haziness that the actual stress-packed LSAT makes you feel. You're far less likely to accurately remember the difficulty of particular questions and thus the overall difficulty of the test. Second, even if you felt that way right after the test, your feeling that it went all too well is most likely, at least in part, a consequence of having so much time to reflect on it. After a PT you grade it and get the score, but this time it just isn't like that. Last, it's a done deal; in the bag; the jello's jigglin; the eggs are gettin' cold; and the lights are out. Chick Hearn status.

stilles
Posts: 93
Joined: Sun Nov 28, 2010 12:15 am

Re: The Official February 2011 Waiting Thread

Postby stilles » Wed Feb 23, 2011 2:59 am

lausseuns wrote:
EvanC wrote:You know, it actually has me worrying considering how good I felt about this test. When I first started studying for the LSAT, I felt really good upon completion of my first few tests and I scored in the mid-150s usually. When I was scoring mid-to-high 160s, I was always nervous about my score. I feel good this time and am hoping I'm not being overconfident. That was the best I ever felt after a timed LSAT administration and I want to get that 170 dangit.



Don't worry about it man. First off, there is no PT that comes close to evoking the anxiety and post-test haziness that the actual stress-packed LSAT makes you feel. You're far less likely to accurately remember the difficulty of particular questions and thus the overall difficulty of the test. Second, even if you felt that way right after the test, your feeling that it went all too well is most likely, at least in part, a consequence of having so much time to reflect on it. After a PT you grade it and get the score, but this time it just isn't like that. Last, it's a done deal; in the bag; the jello's jigglin; the eggs are gettin' cold; and the lights are out. Chick Hearn status.


I Love This. :D

spek
Posts: 385
Joined: Thu Aug 19, 2010 4:40 am

Re: The Official February 2011 Waiting Thread

Postby spek » Wed Feb 23, 2011 3:30 am

Before taking the test I had told myself I wasn't allowed to come on TLS until I had gotten my score. First thing I did when I got back from taking it was look up TLS :roll: . I check these forums everyday and read what people are saying but at this point I can't decide if it's easing or heightening my anxiety level.

I just really really want my score back. I can't remember the test at all and have no idea how I might have done. Just thought I'd add my "this really sucks" to everyone else's. *Fingers crossed* I don't have to re-take this darn thing!

User avatar
unc0mm0n1
Posts: 1714
Joined: Sat Dec 25, 2010 1:06 pm

Re: The Official February 2011 Waiting Thread

Postby unc0mm0n1 » Wed Feb 23, 2011 8:20 am

SchopenhauerFTW wrote:
wolfpack37 wrote:
8675309 wrote:
What does that mean? Do we get a score for each section? IE 15/23 LG, 15/26 LR, 16/25 LR, 12/27 RC?


The IRR I believe shows your response and the credited response. So we could definitely see that breakdown. We just won't know why we got something wrong.


If that's the case, then we will know the curve as long as someone gets a 170, right?

I had a dream last night that scores came out. My friend, who took the test in October, got a 180. I borrowed a friend's computer but didn't get to see my score before I woke up.


We don't see anything. I took it in Paris (all overseas are undisclosed) and it just had my score and a percentile.

User avatar
8675309
Posts: 91
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 6:59 pm

Re: The Official February 2011 Waiting Thread

Postby 8675309 » Wed Feb 23, 2011 11:08 am

unc0mm0n1 wrote:
SchopenhauerFTW wrote:
wolfpack37 wrote:
8675309 wrote:
What does that mean? Do we get a score for each section? IE 15/23 LG, 15/26 LR, 16/25 LR, 12/27 RC?


The IRR I believe shows your response and the credited response. So we could definitely see that breakdown. We just won't know why we got something wrong.


If that's the case, then we will know the curve as long as someone gets a 170, right?

I had a dream last night that scores came out. My friend, who took the test in October, got a 180. I borrowed a friend's computer but didn't get to see my score before I woke up.


We don't see anything. I took it in Paris (all overseas are undisclosed) and it just had my score and a percentile.


I'm going to keep telling myself the curve is -18.

User avatar
classix
Posts: 97
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2011 3:47 pm

Re: The Official February 2011 Waiting Thread

Postby classix » Wed Feb 23, 2011 4:54 pm

I have a working theory for the curve on this test. And it's not a favorable one.

Obviously there is little information out there about feb, but what is out there isn't exactly promising. http://lsatblog.blogspot.com/2010/04/ea ... -june.html

But one thing for certain is that fewer people take the feb LSAT than any other LSAT. I think, though, that most takers of the feb LSAT, compared especially to june, are repeat takers. People that have taken the LSAT at the beginning of the cycle and not scored so high are likely to re-try again later in the cycle, and feb is the last ditch effort for that cycle. Given that someone knows this fact, they are likely to study their asses off. More studying on average leads to a higher raw score.

The other tests probably have more first-time takers, who are likely, as a population, less experienced and practiced at taking the LSAT.

This population difference, in which feb has a higher concentration of repeat takers/ back against the wall studiers, could yeild a more competitive population of test takers for this month.


My theory is that, if curving is practiced to level out the scores for each test, february will be more difficult to score in a higher percentile compared to the other tests.


This is clearly a lot of assumptions and loose inductive reasoning...but it seems at least plausible.
Thoughts? Comments?

User avatar
Nulli Secundus
Posts: 2625
Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2010 7:19 am

Re: The Official February 2011 Waiting Thread

Postby Nulli Secundus » Wed Feb 23, 2011 5:12 pm

classix wrote:I have a working theory for the curve on this test. And it's not a favorable one.

Obviously there is little information out there about feb, but what is out there isn't exactly promising. http://lsatblog.blogspot.com/2010/04/ea ... -june.html

But one thing for certain is that fewer people take the feb LSAT than any other LSAT. I think, though, that most takers of the feb LSAT, compared especially to june, are repeat takers. People that have taken the LSAT at the beginning of the cycle and not scored so high are likely to re-try again later in the cycle, and feb is the last ditch effort for that cycle. Given that someone knows this fact, they are likely to study their asses off. More studying on average leads to a higher raw score.

The other tests probably have more first-time takers, who are likely, as a population, less experienced and practiced at taking the LSAT.

This population difference, in which feb has a higher concentration of repeat takers/ back against the wall studiers, could yeild a more competitive population of test takers for this month.


My theory is that, if curving is practiced to level out the scores for each test, february will be more difficult to score in a higher percentile compared to the other tests.


This is clearly a lot of assumptions and loose inductive reasoning...but it seems at least plausible.
Thoughts? Comments?


Know thy facts. The "curve" in any LSAT administration has nothing to do with relative performance of the takers of that administration. Because LSAT "curve" is not a real "curve". LSAC uses a method called equating and what sets your "curve" is the performance of people that had your questions as experimental sections in the past. Since you cannot know during which administrations that happened, you cannot argue that any one administration will have a better or worse curve simply by its placement in the calendar year.

User avatar
amc987
Posts: 568
Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2009 10:58 am

Re: The Official February 2011 Waiting Thread

Postby amc987 » Wed Feb 23, 2011 5:14 pm

8675309 wrote:My theory is that, if curving is practiced to level out the scores for each test, february will be more difficult to score in a higher percentile compared to the other tests.


This is clearly a lot of assumptions and loose inductive reasoning...but it seems at least plausible.
Thoughts? Comments?


I'm pretty sure that the LSAT curves are equated before anyone takes a given exam. My understanding is that the curve is based on the performance of the individuals who took sections of this year's February exam as their experimental sections. In other words, LSAC compiles the results of the people who had, for example, the February 2011 LG as their experimental section for the December 2009 test, and uses their scores on the experimental sections to determine what the curve will be in February. So, as far as I know, the curve is set before anyone actually takes the exam and doesn't depend on how other test takers did in February. Similarly, I think that the percentiles for LSAT test takers are determined by the performance of other test takers who have taken the LSAT in the past 2 years. Therefore, the percentiles are also fixed based on the results of test takers from all the tests administered from, say, Dec 2008 to Dec 2010, and are not determined by the performances of this administration's test takers.

If I'm right about this (and someone please correct me if I'm mistaken), when LSAC determines the curve and percentiles for Feb 2011 it shouldn't matter what the size distribution of this pool of test takers is, should it?

User avatar
classix
Posts: 97
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2011 3:47 pm

Re: The Official February 2011 Waiting Thread

Postby classix » Wed Feb 23, 2011 5:17 pm

Nulli Secundus wrote:
classix wrote:I have a working theory for the curve on this test. And it's not a favorable one.

Obviously there is little information out there about feb, but what is out there isn't exactly promising. http://lsatblog.blogspot.com/2010/04/ea ... -june.html

But one thing for certain is that fewer people take the feb LSAT than any other LSAT. I think, though, that most takers of the feb LSAT, compared especially to june, are repeat takers. People that have taken the LSAT at the beginning of the cycle and not scored so high are likely to re-try again later in the cycle, and feb is the last ditch effort for that cycle. Given that someone knows this fact, they are likely to study their asses off. More studying on average leads to a higher raw score.

The other tests probably have more first-time takers, who are likely, as a population, less experienced and practiced at taking the LSAT.

This population difference, in which feb has a higher concentration of repeat takers/ back against the wall studiers, could yeild a more competitive population of test takers for this month.


My theory is that, if curving is practiced to level out the scores for each test, february will be more difficult to score in a higher percentile compared to the other tests.


This is clearly a lot of assumptions and loose inductive reasoning...but it seems at least plausible.
Thoughts? Comments?


Know thy facts. The "curve" in any LSAT administration has nothing to do with relative performance of the takers of that administration. Because LSAT "curve" is not a real "curve". LSAC uses a method called equating and what sets your "curve" is the performance of people that had your questions as experimental sections in the past. Since you cannot know during which administrations that happened, you cannot argue that any one administration will have a better or worse curve simply by its placement in the calendar year.


I use the idea of the curve to illustrate that, in general, with more advanced test takers, it will be more difficult to get a higher percentile.

that will happen regardless of the curve.

User avatar
classix
Posts: 97
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2011 3:47 pm

Re: The Official February 2011 Waiting Thread

Postby classix » Wed Feb 23, 2011 5:19 pm

amc987 wrote:
8675309 wrote:My theory is that, if curving is practiced to level out the scores for each test, february will be more difficult to score in a higher percentile compared to the other tests.


This is clearly a lot of assumptions and loose inductive reasoning...but it seems at least plausible.
Thoughts? Comments?


I'm pretty sure that the LSAT curves are equated before anyone takes a given exam. My understanding is that the curve is based on the performance of the individuals who took sections of this year's February exam as their experimental sections. In other words, LSAC compiles the results of the people who had, for example, the February 2011 LG as their experimental section for the December 2009 test, and uses their scores on the experimental sections to determine what the curve will be in February. So, as far as I know, the curve is set before anyone actually takes the exam and doesn't depend on how other test takers did in February. Similarly, I think that the percentiles for LSAT test takers are determined by the performance of other test takers who have taken the LSAT in the past 2 years. Therefore, the percentiles are also fixed based on the results of test takers from all the tests administered from, say, Dec 2008 to Dec 2010, and are not determined by the performances of this administration's test takers.

If I'm right about this (and someone please correct me if I'm mistaken), when LSAC determines the curve and percentiles for Feb 2011 it shouldn't matter what the size distribution of this pool of test takers is, should it?



interesting about the pre-created "equating"...i never considered that.
Last edited by classix on Wed Feb 23, 2011 5:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 34iplaw, TecumsehSherman, Yahoo [Bot] and 10 guests