old LSAT Tests (early 1990s) vs more recent LSAT Tests

lawschool111
Posts: 46
Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2012 8:02 pm

old LSAT Tests (early 1990s) vs more recent LSAT Tests

Postby lawschool111 » Wed Aug 28, 2013 3:15 pm

I recently got my hands on some of the first LSAT tests ever administered, from the very early 1990s.

I had quite a difficult time with the LR sections. The language in the LR section appeared to be very convoluted. And the structure seemed different as well. For example, one LR section (I forgot from which test) had three Must Be False questions in a row. I have taken tests from the mid and late 90's and of course the 2000's and I usually average between 6-7 questions wrong in each LR section.

However, on the early 90's test I was averaging 10-11 questions wrong. Some questions I really struggled with and had no idea, while on the most recent LR sections I can narrow down to one or two answer choices (but will sometimes get the question wrong because i missed a distinction)

My question is should I be worried about my performance in the LR sections on the early 1990s test? Does this mean that I am not as prepared as I should be for LR? Or has the LSAT evolved so much that I should focus on just the more recent tests?

User avatar
wtrc
Posts: 2057
Joined: Mon May 30, 2011 9:37 pm

Re: old LSAT Tests (early 1990s) vs more recent LSAT Tests

Postby wtrc » Wed Aug 28, 2013 3:25 pm

lawschool111 wrote:I recently got my hands on some of the first LSAT tests ever administered, from the very early 1990s.

I had quite a difficult time with the LR sections. The language in the LR section appeared to be very convoluted. And the structure seemed different as well. For example, one LR section (I forgot from which test) had three Must Be False questions in a row. I have taken tests from the mid and late 90's and of course the 2000's and I usually average between 6-7 questions wrong in each LR section.

However, on the early 90's test I was averaging 10-11 questions wrong. Some questions I really struggled with and had no idea, while on the most recent LR sections I can narrow down to one or two answer choices (but will sometimes get the question wrong because i missed a distinction)

My question is should I be worried about my performance in the LR sections on the early 1990s test? Does this mean that I am not as prepared as I should be for LR? Or has the LSAT evolved so much that I should focus on just the more recent tests?


Yeah, LSAT has evolved. Base how you are doing off PT's in the 60's or even 50's (Mid 2000's and especially later).

People use the early 90's tests to get a handle on the fundamentals. Since you are still getting a decent amount wrong per section, I would still use the tests to drill and get a better sense of them. Cambridge LSAT has the first 40 tests grouped by type, which is what a lot of people on here use.




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: bcapace, Greenteachurro, njames1961, Pozzo and 14 guests