Quick question for those who have taken PTs in the 30s...

User avatar
vuthy
Posts: 379
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2013 8:55 am

Quick question for those who have taken PTs in the 30s...

Postby vuthy » Tue Jul 02, 2013 3:38 pm

Did you find them overall easier -- i.e., were your scores higher on them than other PTs you took around the same time?

I know this is all subjective, and that in general the consensus is that RC has gotten tougher and the rest is roughly the same. But my dilemma is this: I'm aiming for a 170 in October, and my scores on most of the PTs in the 30s have been ~169 (studying about 8 weeks). Don't want to burn more recent PTs if I don't have to yet, but need to decide soon if I should get a tutor or do a 7sage course etc.

Thanks much.

User avatar
RobertGolddust
Posts: 370
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 9:09 pm

Re: Quick question for those who have taken PTs in the 30s...

Postby RobertGolddust » Tue Jul 02, 2013 4:34 pm

In my opinion the RC is harder on the more recent PTs. But, its the same questions, same passage structures, same topics; the biggest difference is the questions require more precise inferences. I compensate for this by spending less time reading the passage and more time referring back to it.

But to address your concern, I would suggest that if you are looking for an accurate assessment of your ability than you should take one of the most recent tests. Using one test to gauge your ability will still leave you plenty of material to work with.
Last edited by RobertGolddust on Wed Jul 03, 2013 4:43 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
vuthy
Posts: 379
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2013 8:55 am

Re: Quick question for those who have taken PTs in the 30s...

Postby vuthy » Tue Jul 02, 2013 4:38 pm

Solid suggestion. I guess I'm trying to avoid false positives and negatives that can happen w/ just one test. So to be accurate, I feel like you have to take 3+. Still, that should leave me plenty of fresh ones.

TheWalrus
Posts: 265
Joined: Sun Jun 02, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: Quick question for those who have taken PTs in the 30s...

Postby TheWalrus » Tue Jul 02, 2013 4:44 pm

RobertGolddust wrote:In my opinion the RC is harder on the more recent PTs. But, its the same questions, same passage structures, same topics; the biggest difference is the questions require more precise inferences. I compensate for this by spending less time reading the passage and more time referring back to it.

But to address you concern, I would suggest that if you are looking for an accurate assessment of your ability than you should take one of the most recent tests. Using one test to gauge your ability will still leave you plenty of material to work with.


I think this is the most important thing that studying for RC has taught me. On initial read all I pretty much go for now is structure and main point.

User avatar
RobertGolddust
Posts: 370
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 9:09 pm

Re: Quick question for those who have taken PTs in the 30s...

Postby RobertGolddust » Wed Jul 03, 2013 4:43 am

I wouldn't worry about finding a mean for a diagnostic. Just use it to gauge where your generally at, (meaning 150-155, 155-160, 160-165, and so on). I doubt you will see much of a difference in your score on a more recent prep test. Some of the the older games are brutal, such as grey hounds, and new/used cd's.




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: bcapace, cianchetta0, dontsaywhatyoumean, grandpapy360, gwillygecko, Pozzo and 13 guests