People who thought this test was easy

User avatar
99.9luft
Posts: 1244
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 4:32 pm

Re: People who thought this test was easy

Postby 99.9luft » Sun Oct 07, 2012 4:20 pm

dba415 wrote:Do they exist?

Seems like everyone is complaining about the test, the dumb !Kung and Zones for sure, but did anyone find this test easy?

Seems like with the amount of people scoring upwards of 175 on here on PTs, there has to be some folks with this opinion.


If this exam had, say, June 12's LG section, i'd say that it was overall easy, yes. I think they threw in the zones LG section (experimental in Oct 2010) to balance out the test, but I am pretty biased (and bitter) of course.

User avatar
VUSisterRayVU
Posts: 162
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2012 2:57 pm

Re: People who thought this test was easy

Postby VUSisterRayVU » Sun Oct 07, 2012 5:07 pm

99.9luft wrote:
dba415 wrote:Do they exist?

Seems like everyone is complaining about the test, the dumb !Kung and Zones for sure, but did anyone find this test easy?

Seems like with the amount of people scoring upwards of 175 on here on PTs, there has to be some folks with this opinion.


If this exam had, say, June 12's LG section, i'd say that it was overall easy, yes. I think they threw in the zones LG section (experimental in Oct 2010) to balance out the test, but I am pretty biased (and bitter) of course.


I'd say it was easy just because 66's LG was easy. But if you replace 67's LGs with 'average' LGs, I'd say the test was right around average. The big question in my head is whether LR was actually easy or if I just got better at recognizing 60s LRs. A lot of the Qs that would have been hard were really REALLY similar to Qs on the last 5 PTs that I got wrong, so I just 'ported' tcr and that thought process.

User avatar
99.9luft
Posts: 1244
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 4:32 pm

Re: People who thought this test was easy

Postby 99.9luft » Sun Oct 07, 2012 5:18 pm

VUSisterRayVU wrote:
99.9luft wrote:
dba415 wrote:Do they exist?

Seems like everyone is complaining about the test, the dumb !Kung and Zones for sure, but did anyone find this test easy?

Seems like with the amount of people scoring upwards of 175 on here on PTs, there has to be some folks with this opinion.


If this exam had, say, June 12's LG section, i'd say that it was overall easy, yes. I think they threw in the zones LG section (experimental in Oct 2010) to balance out the test, but I am pretty biased (and bitter) of course.


I'd say it was easy just because 66's LG was easy. But if you replace 67's LGs with 'average' LGs, I'd say the test was right around average. The big question in my head is whether LR was actually easy or if I just got better at recognizing 60s LRs. A lot of the Qs that would have been hard were really REALLY similar to Qs on the last 5 PTs that I got wrong, so I just 'ported' tcr and that thought process.


completely agree with you...

I, too am in serious doubts right now - did my flying through both sections of LR (LR2 felt almost too easy) indicate the learnt skills from PTing + adrenaline rush...or did i just gloss over things instead of being critical?

I have this feeling that after the LG fiasco, I abandoned some of my critical methods (e.g. crossing out wrong answers first, etc.). Not sure. Or maybe everything was actually easier because we practiced. What bothers me is that with more time away from the test I doubt my performance even more, haha.

User avatar
CardozoLaw09
Posts: 1750
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2010 1:58 pm

Re: People who thought this test was easy

Postby CardozoLaw09 » Sun Oct 07, 2012 5:37 pm

Someone earlier said those that take this PT in the future probably won't find it as difficult as we're finding it to be right now - I agree with that sentiment. Games weren't all that challenging if you didn't panic.. the first one was hard for a first game, but once you figured what it was asking then the questions turned out to be real easy to answer. LR's easiness compensated for the dense RC passages. I'm predicting a -11 curve. As far as the comparison to June, this test experience was immensely better in terms of the after-affect -- I think we can all agree June's was flat out weird (LR particularly)

User avatar
VUSisterRayVU
Posts: 162
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2012 2:57 pm

Re: People who thought this test was easy

Postby VUSisterRayVU » Sun Oct 07, 2012 5:48 pm

CardozoLaw09 wrote:Someone earlier said those that take this PT in the future probably won't find it as difficult as we're finding it to be right now - I agree with that sentiment. Games weren't all that challenging if you didn't panic.. the first one was hard for a first game, but once you figured what it was asking then the questions turned out to be real easy to answer. LR's easiness compensated for the dense RC passages. I'm predicting a -11 curve. As far as the comparison to June, this test experience was immensely better in terms of the after-affect -- I think we can all agree June's was flat out weird (LR particularly)


I didn't take June but I did the PT. Nothing was weird about it.

beautyistruth
Posts: 213
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 1:23 am

Re: People who thought this test was easy

Postby beautyistruth » Sun Oct 07, 2012 7:32 pm

Depends on how they take this test. If they take it early in their prep as an untimed, then it will probably be one of the easiest tests. Games are all extremely doable un-timed, anyways, logical reasoning was straight-forward, and reading was dense, but not too ambiguous (?) (...knock on wood).

Or if they did what I stupidly did, and cut themselves a lot of slack on games and timing.

User avatar
jone7007
Posts: 88
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2012 6:06 pm

Re: People who thought this test was easy

Postby jone7007 » Mon Oct 08, 2012 2:41 am

Other than Game 4, I thought this test was pretty easy. I wouldn't be surprised if I was 100% on the first 3 and -2 to -4 just because of question 4. I only had 1 question on LR I really felt tripped up on. Usually I feel that way about 2-4 per LR section. There were very few formal logic/parallel reasoning type questions which are the ones I usually miss. Which made LR feel really easy. I thought the RC just slightly easy but I usually have trouble with time on RC.

heyunthebushes
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue May 29, 2012 1:36 am

Re: People who thought this test was easy

Postby heyunthebushes » Mon Oct 08, 2012 12:30 pm

I did feel like the zones question was tough, and I had to guess on one question after eliminating 3 choices. So, unless I completely misread a rule somewhere, I feel confident I got no worse than a -2 in logic games, and it was the only section I felt was difficult. I breezed through all of the other sections with more than enough time to go back and check questions I was unsure about until I could articulate a justification I was happy with. Not saying it was easy, but I felt like I was in the zone. I walked out feeling like I had just kicked the LSAT in the nuts, and I was hoping for a 172 or 173, but if it was as hard as many seem to think, I feel like a generous curve puts a 175 within reach.

User avatar
nick_scheu
Posts: 64
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 3:32 pm

Re: People who thought this test was easy

Postby nick_scheu » Mon Oct 08, 2012 1:19 pm

heyunthebushes wrote:I did feel like the zones question was tough, and I had to guess on one question after eliminating 3 choices. So, unless I completely misread a rule somewhere, I feel confident I got no worse than a -2 in logic games, and it was the only section I felt was difficult. I breezed through all of the other sections with more than enough time to go back and check questions I was unsure about until I could articulate a justification I was happy with. Not saying it was easy, but I felt like I was in the zone. I walked out feeling like I had just kicked the LSAT in the nuts, and I was hoping for a 172 or 173, but if it was as hard as many seem to think, I feel like a generous curve puts a 175 within reach.


This more or less reflects my feelings, though I probably got a -3 or -4 on LG. The rest seemed pretty easy. I'm worried that I may have missed some stuff on LG/RC based on the other opinions here, though.

noobishned
Posts: 94
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2012 2:17 pm

Re: People who thought this test was easy

Postby noobishned » Mon Oct 08, 2012 2:12 pm

Just so I am clear about the LG.. Did you guys think it was hard because of the rules and questions or the wording in the rules and questions??

User avatar
annet
Posts: 218
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2012 1:19 pm

Re: People who thought this test was easy

Postby annet » Mon Oct 08, 2012 2:31 pm

noobishned wrote:Just so I am clear about the LG.. Did you guys think it was hard because of the rules and questions or the wording in the rules and questions??


From what I remember the main problem was the wording and length of the rules combine with the length of the questions. I don't think the questions themselves were hugely difficult types (although I'm not sure I even read the last one) but so much of it was first, figuring out what the game was saying, and then figuring out what the questions were asking. But, like I've said elsewhere, I had all of 5 minutes for this game so time was by far the biggest factor.

User avatar
boredtodeath
Posts: 632
Joined: Tue May 08, 2012 3:37 pm

Re: People who thought this test was easy

Postby boredtodeath » Mon Oct 08, 2012 2:58 pm

I thought this test was one of the easier ones I've taken. The second section of LR was somewhat tough for me on a few questions, but I thought every other section was easier than others I have taken on PTs. The RC was pretty easy, don't get why so many people are complaining about that. I actually read the book that the !Kung passage was referencing for a class in college though, so maybe that helped me somewhat on that part of RC. I though LG was pretty easy as well, the second and third games were cake, the first was actually pretty tough imo, and zones didn't seem to difficult, I just didn't have enough time to answer all the questions.

noobishned
Posts: 94
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2012 2:17 pm

Re: People who thought this test was easy

Postby noobishned » Mon Oct 08, 2012 6:36 pm

annet wrote:
noobishned wrote:Just so I am clear about the LG.. Did you guys think it was hard because of the rules and questions or the wording in the rules and questions??


From what I remember the main problem was the wording and length of the rules combine with the length of the questions. I don't think the questions themselves were hugely difficult types (although I'm not sure I even read the last one) but so much of it was first, figuring out what the game was saying, and then figuring out what the questions were asking. But, like I've said elsewhere, I had all of 5 minutes for this game so time was by far the biggest factor.


Ok. I see. I am sure I would have had a really hard time with the game if I had done it last.




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Alexandros, Instrumental, maybeman and 6 guests