PT62 S2 Q4

User avatar
Clearly
Posts: 4166
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 4:09 pm

Re: PT62 S2 Q4

Postby Clearly » Mon Sep 30, 2013 5:40 pm

bilbaosan wrote:
Clearly wrote:And yet, the lsat does correlate with 1L grades...


Do the 1L grades correlate with the success in law school?

...1L grades ARE success in law school!

User avatar
ScottRiqui
Posts: 3640
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 8:09 pm

Re: PT62 S2 Q4

Postby ScottRiqui » Mon Sep 30, 2013 5:42 pm

bilbaosan wrote:
ScottRiqui wrote:Yes, the LSAT is inherently more difficult for people who don't have a firm grasp of English.


Good. Now do you agree that this extra difficulty tests your English ability (such as vocabulary, phraseology etc) in areas which are familiar to NA college graduates, but which are not relevant for law education?


No, I don't. Being able to pick up on the subtleties of language and know the correct meanings of commonly-used words is very important in the study of law.

Look at the question that started this whole thread - you struggled with what should have been a trivially-easy question, not because the question was flawed, not because the test is biased, not because of obscure vocabulary, and not because a woman buying a newspaper company has nothing to do with the law. No, you got fucked long and hard because you didn't know what "probably" meant.

If you can devise a test that measures what the LSAT measures, but doesn't require proficiency in any particular language, go ahead and do it - you'll be rich and successful without ever having to go to law school.

bilbaosan
Posts: 108
Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2013 2:58 pm

Re: PT62 S2 Q4

Postby bilbaosan » Mon Sep 30, 2013 5:51 pm

ScottRiqui wrote:No, I don't. Being able to pick up on the subtleties of language and know the correct meanings of commonly-used words is very important in the study of law.


Somehow I feel we study different law.

Look at the question that started this whole thread - you struggled with what should have been a trivially-easy question, not because the question was flawed, not because the test is biased, not because of obscure vocabulary, and not because a woman buying a newspaper company has nothing to do with the law. No, you got fucked long and hard because you didn't know what "probably" meant.


Yes, I did. And if it was English subtleties test, I'd agree with your assessment. In fact I'd never even attempted to take such a test.
But it kinda pisses me off when the test claims it tests reasoning skills, while in fact it tests something else.
That's why I'm bitching about it (and I've got nothing else to do while our app is recompiling).

User avatar
Clearly
Posts: 4166
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 4:09 pm

Re: PT62 S2 Q4

Postby Clearly » Mon Sep 30, 2013 6:03 pm

bilbaosan wrote:
ScottRiqui wrote:No, I don't. Being able to pick up on the subtleties of language and know the correct meanings of commonly-used words is very important in the study of law.


Somehow I feel we study different law.

Look at the question that started this whole thread - you struggled with what should have been a trivially-easy question, not because the question was flawed, not because the test is biased, not because of obscure vocabulary, and not because a woman buying a newspaper company has nothing to do with the law. No, you got fucked long and hard because you didn't know what "probably" meant.


Yes, I did. And if it was English subtleties test, I'd agree with your assessment. In fact I'd never even attempted to take such a test.
But it kinda pisses me off when the test claims it tests reasoning skills, while in fact it tests something else.
That's why I'm bitching about it (and I've got nothing else to do while our app is recompiling).

Edit: Forget it, this is a dumb discussion. Stop feeling so entitled.

User avatar
altoid99
Posts: 249
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 12:04 am

Re: PT62 S2 Q4

Postby altoid99 » Mon Sep 30, 2013 10:31 pm

bilbaosan wrote:
ScottRiqui wrote:No, I don't. Being able to pick up on the subtleties of language and know the correct meanings of commonly-used words is very important in the study of law.


Somehow I feel we study different law.

Look at the question that started this whole thread - you struggled with what should have been a trivially-easy question, not because the question was flawed, not because the test is biased, not because of obscure vocabulary, and not because a woman buying a newspaper company has nothing to do with the law. No, you got fucked long and hard because you didn't know what "probably" meant.


Yes, I did. And if it was English subtleties test, I'd agree with your assessment. In fact I'd never even attempted to take such a test.
But it kinda pisses me off when the test claims it tests reasoning skills, while in fact it tests something else.
That's why I'm bitching about it (and I've got nothing else to do while our app is recompiling).


The difference between "probability" and "probably" is not a "subtle" difference. English is not my first language either, but let's be honest. Sorry.

bilbaosan
Posts: 108
Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2013 2:58 pm

Re: PT62 S2 Q4

Postby bilbaosan » Mon Sep 30, 2013 11:19 pm

altoid99 wrote:The difference between "probability" and "probably" is not a "subtle" difference. English is not my first language either, but let's be honest. Sorry.


Does this not-a-subtle-difference have any relevance in assessing the candidate's chance to succeed in law school?

But we can get the pretty direct answer on that matter. Anyone here taken or seen a non-US administered LSAT? Is it exactly the same test as administered in NA or is it a different test?

User avatar
ScottRiqui
Posts: 3640
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 8:09 pm

Re: PT62 S2 Q4

Postby ScottRiqui » Mon Sep 30, 2013 11:44 pm

Like the February tests and the Sabbath tests, the overseas tests are never released. Overseas takers receive a scaled score and a percentile, but they don't receive a copy of the test, their raw score, or any indication of which questions they missed.

In some cases, the test may be the same. In Korea, for example, the test is administered the day "after" the U.S. test, which because of the time difference, really means they're being administered at the same time. In that case, the test might be the same as the U.S. test. But in other cases, the overseas test is administered weeks later, so that would have to be a different test from the U.S. version, or it would be too easy for U.S. takers to feed information to the people taking it later.

Regardless, I've never heard of anyone who's taken it overseas who has said that their test was significantly different than the released U.S. practice tests they studied with.

User avatar
Clearly
Posts: 4166
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 4:09 pm

Re: PT62 S2 Q4

Postby Clearly » Mon Sep 30, 2013 11:58 pm

bilbaosan wrote:
altoid99 wrote:The difference between "probability" and "probably" is not a "subtle" difference. English is not my first language either, but let's be honest. Sorry.


Does this not-a-subtle-difference have any relevance in assessing the candidate's chance to succeed in law school?

But we can get the pretty direct answer on that matter. Anyone here taken or seen a non-US administered LSAT? Is it exactly the same test as administered in NA or is it a different test?

for real? YES...READING THE RIGHT WORDS IS IMPORTANT IN LAW SCHOOL.

User avatar
Jeffort
Posts: 1896
Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2008 4:43 pm

Re: PT62 S2 Q4

Postby Jeffort » Tue Oct 01, 2013 12:18 am

Dude, you are losing badly.

The main core to your position is that it is unfair for law schools to require/screen candidates based on skills and knowledge beyond the bare minimum needed to perform certain specialized lawyer work tasks, such as the specific types of lawyer work tasks you have been exposed to so far.

Law school is not like trade schools where when evaluating candidates they only look and care about the bare essentials needed to be able to learn how and do a small set of specialized on-the-job tasks within a specific field/context, such as how to diagnose and repair an air conditioner or how to build a plumbing system, or how to structure a database.

If you are viewing what should and shouldn't be required from the perspective of the day to day work a lawyer with a particular specialty does, and that stuff beyond the reach of what is needed to do that specialty is irrelevant, I see your pragmatic based point of view. Too bad it is just wrong on many many levels with the realities of what law school is and isn't supposed to be and do and the role it plays in the process of people becoming lawyers by going to LS and THEN specializing with parts of what they learned after graduation once you get a job in whatever field you end up in.

Your argument is basically like saying: I want to become a lawyer and specialize in doing document review and make that my career, be a practicing document review lawyer. Therefore it is unfair and unnecessary for them to require high level English proficiency and a good vocabulary because I won't have to really understand the contents of the documents that well if at all, I just need to know in general what it is so I sort it properly for discovery purposes. How well I understand constitutional law and torts, etc. and my grades in those classes don't relate to my ability to do document review so employers shouldn't hold those grades against me when making hiring decisions since they are irrelevant to the tasks of the job. To do otherwise would be biased and unfair.

You see how that line of reasoning is going? Compare it to your argument please.

Whatever types of cases you read on a daily basis and whatever types of things you do with them for work clearly have only given you a very narrow view of a small specialized set of lawyer tasks within a particular specially focused aspect of legal practice. Much of the day to day work tasks even top lawyers at top firms spend many hours regularly doing is stuff high school graduates could be trained to do if it was only important to train them for a small set of specific tasks within a specific defined environment and nothing else matters.

You seem to have this it should only be like a specialized trade school idea in mind for what you want law school to be. That's just a really selfish point of view for one thing because you are in essence saying you don't want to waste your time doing things you don't see being directly connected to the specific job you want and that you should be exempt from the general ed type requirements all candidates face cuz you already know you don't need that stuff for your particular job.

I'm curious. What type of legal practice have you been exposed to that you work with that you keep citing as an example of lawyer work that doesn't require English fluency of at least an average American college graduate? What type of lawyer job/practice area do you want to do with a law degree that you think won't involve higher level reading skills? I really want to know since you keep saying the test should only pertain to specific legal related types of things and topics/subject matter. I suspect you might be confusing paralegal type work with what lawyers are expected to be able to do.
Last edited by Jeffort on Tue Oct 01, 2013 5:40 am, edited 3 times in total.

User avatar
Clearly
Posts: 4166
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 4:09 pm

Re: PT62 S2 Q4

Postby Clearly » Tue Oct 01, 2013 12:31 am

Jeffort wrote:Dude, you are losing badly.

The main core to your position is that it is unfair for law schools to require/screen candidates based on skills and knowledge beyond the bare minimum needed to perform certain specialized lawyer work tasks, such as the specific types of lawyer work tasks you have been exposed to so far.

Law school is not like trade schools where when evaluating candidates they only look and care about the bare essentials needed to be able to learn how and do a small set of specialized on-the-job tasks within a specific field/context, such as how to diagnose and repair an air conditioner or how to build a plumbing system, or how to structure a database.

If you are viewing what should and shouldn't be required from the perspective of the day to day work a lawyer with a particular specialty does, and that stuff beyond the reach of what is needed to do that specialty is irrelevant, I see your pragmatic based point of view. Too bad it is just wrong on many many levels with the realities of what law school is and isn't supposed to be and do and the role it plays in the process of people becoming lawyers by going to LS and THEN specializing with parts of what they learned after graduation once you get a job in whatever field you end up in.

Your argument is basically like saying: I want to become a lawyer and specialize in doing document review and make that my career, be a practicing document review lawyer. Therefore it is unfair and unnecessary for them to require high level English proficiency and a good vocabulary because I won't have to really understand the contents of the documents that well if at all, I just need to know in general what it is so I sort it properly for discovery purposes. How well I understand constitutional law and torts, etc. and my grades in those classes don't relate to my ability to do document review so employers shouldn't hold those grades against me when making hiring decisions since they are irrelevant to the tasks of the job. To do otherwise would be biased and unfair.

You see how that line of reasoning is going? Compare it to your argument please.

Whatever types of cases you read on a daily basis and whatever types of things you do with them for work clearly have only given you a very narrow view of a small specialized set of lawyer tasks within a particular specially focused aspect of legal practice. Much of the day to day work tasks even top lawyers at top firms spend many hours regularly doing is stuff high school graduates could be trained to do if it was only important to train them for a small set of specific tasks within a specific defined environment and nothing else matters.

But bro, its unfair...You should be allowed to misread things, that's only fair.

foggynotion
Posts: 46
Joined: Sun Nov 29, 2009 4:19 am

Re: PT62 S2 Q4

Postby foggynotion » Tue Oct 01, 2013 3:05 am

I know the discussion about the original question seems to have ended, but I just wanted to add something. Answer choice B says that Morris has recently offered...so this is something that would have already happened (it's in the past), and we already know that Azedcorp has steadfastedly refused to sell. So they would have already rejected this offer, if it had been made. That's a reason why even if this is true, it wouldn't change anything--telling us details about previous offers that we know weren't accepted can't possibly help this argument.

User avatar
ScottRiqui
Posts: 3640
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 8:09 pm

Re: PT62 S2 Q4

Postby ScottRiqui » Tue Oct 01, 2013 11:30 am

foggynotion wrote:I know the discussion about the original question seems to have ended, but I just wanted to add something. Answer choice B says that Morris has recently offered...so this is something that would have already happened (it's in the past), and we already know that Azedcorp has steadfastedly refused to sell. So they would have already rejected this offer, if it had been made. That's a reason why even if this is true, it wouldn't change anything--telling us details about previous offers that we know weren't accepted can't possibly help this argument.


That's a good point. I read "recently" to mean that the offer was still outstanding, and that Azedcorp has neither accepted nor rejected it yet. But "recently" could also mean that the offer in 'B' has already been rejected. And if that is the case, then as you said, 'B' provides absolutely no support for the analysts' position.

bilbaosan
Posts: 108
Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2013 2:58 pm

Re: PT62 S2 Q4

Postby bilbaosan » Tue Oct 01, 2013 5:42 pm

ScottRiqui wrote:Like the February tests and the Sabbath tests, the overseas tests are never released. Overseas takers receive a scaled score and a percentile, but they don't receive a copy of the test, their raw score, or any indication of which questions they missed.


That would be too easy I guess if they were released. But you don't need the exact tests, a testimony would be enough.

The fact the tests aren't released though suggest the tests are different - if the June test was exactly the same as June US test, it would make zero sense to keep it non-disclosed as it would definitely not be useful again.

Regardless, I've never heard of anyone who's taken it overseas who has said that their test was significantly different than the released U.S. practice tests they studied with.


Have you heard of anyone who said the test was basically the same difficulty?
Sorry but from your reply it is even unclear whether you heard of anyone at all who has taken the overseas test.

User avatar
ScottRiqui
Posts: 3640
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 8:09 pm

Re: PT62 S2 Q4

Postby ScottRiqui » Tue Oct 01, 2013 5:48 pm

bilbaosan wrote:
ScottRiqui wrote:Like the February tests and the Sabbath tests, the overseas tests are never released. Overseas takers receive a scaled score and a percentile, but they don't receive a copy of the test, their raw score, or any indication of which questions they missed.


That would be too easy I guess if they were released. But you don't need the exact tests, a testimony would be enough.

The fact the tests aren't released though suggest the tests are different - if the June test was exactly the same as June US test, it would make zero sense to keep it non-disclosed as it would definitely not be useful again.

Regardless, I've never heard of anyone who's taken it overseas who has said that their test was significantly different than the released U.S. practice tests they studied with.


Have you heard of anyone who said the test was basically the same difficulty?
Sorry but from your reply it is even unclear whether you heard of anyone at all who has taken the overseas test.

Google "taking the LSAT overseas", and you'll find a lot of threads, many of them from here on TLS. The consensus is that the tests given overseas are different for the purposes of preventing cheating, but not significantly different from the U.S.-administered tests as far as content or difficulty.

User avatar
Jeffort
Posts: 1896
Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2008 4:43 pm

Re: PT62 S2 Q4

Postby Jeffort » Tue Oct 01, 2013 5:53 pm

bilbaosan wrote:
ScottRiqui wrote:Like the February tests and the Sabbath tests, the overseas tests are never released. Overseas takers receive a scaled score and a percentile, but they don't receive a copy of the test, their raw score, or any indication of which questions they missed.


That would be too easy I guess if they were released. But you don't need the exact tests, a testimony would be enough.

The fact the tests aren't released though suggest the tests are different - if the June test was exactly the same as June US test, it would make zero sense to keep it non-disclosed as it would definitely not be useful again.

Regardless, I've never heard of anyone who's taken it overseas who has said that their test was significantly different than the released U.S. practice tests they studied with.


Have you heard of anyone who said the test was basically the same difficulty?
Sorry but from your reply it is even unclear whether you heard of anyone at all who has taken the overseas test.


You are really grasping at straws trying to find support for your argument.

The LSAT test forms administered internationally to people taking it to apply to a N American ABA law school are the same standardized LSAT that is administered in N America locations, just a different test form with different questions, no different than the June test in America being a different test form than the October test.

The test-forms administered internationally conform to the exact same test specifications since scores are meant to be comparable. They do not dumb down the English in the undisclosed test forms, that is a really silly notion. If that were the case, how would scores be comparable for admissions? Think about it, it is still the same test, just different questions so people can't get a sneak peek by talking to people that took it in a different time zone.

Your conspiracy theory about the international test forms being different and LSAC keeping them secret to hide something from people is ridiculous and known not to be the case, but you can continue to believe in an alternate reality if you want to continue try to find support for your incorrect theory.
Last edited by Jeffort on Tue Oct 01, 2013 6:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.

bilbaosan
Posts: 108
Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2013 2:58 pm

Re: PT62 S2 Q4

Postby bilbaosan » Tue Oct 01, 2013 5:54 pm

Jeffort wrote:Dude, you are losing badly.
The main core to your position is that it is unfair for law schools to require/screen candidates based on skills and knowledge beyond the bare minimum needed to perform certain specialized lawyer work tasks, such as the specific types of lawyer work tasks you have been exposed to so far.


Either you're putting your own words into my mouth, or you've significantly misinterpreted what I said.

I have said the test is biased because it requires the applicant to know more English than is necessary to succeed in law school.
For you this requirement is not really a requirement because your baseline is supposed to be well above it anyway. I bet none of you guys study English just for LSAT.
For us who are not native speakers it is a significant requirement, because it requires you to pick up vocabulary in topics which are only relevant for LSAT (such as medieval poetry, biology or painting) but which are not that relevant for studying law.

I'm curious. What type of legal practice have you been exposed to that you work with that you keep citing as an example of lawyer work that doesn't require English fluency of at least an average American college graduate?


See PM.

bilbaosan
Posts: 108
Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2013 2:58 pm

Re: PT62 S2 Q4

Postby bilbaosan » Tue Oct 01, 2013 6:02 pm

ScottRiqui wrote:I read "recently" to mean that the offer was still outstanding, and that Azedcorp has neither accepted nor rejected it yet.


Same. In fact if they removed "recently" and just stated that "Morris offered them a lot of money" it would be way easier to disqualify B because stimulus stated they refused to sell - so how much he offered would be irrelevant. "Recently" could be read as if a new offer is now on the table which hasn't been considered yet.

bilbaosan
Posts: 108
Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2013 2:58 pm

Re: PT62 S2 Q4

Postby bilbaosan » Tue Oct 01, 2013 6:18 pm

Jeffort wrote:You are really grasping at straws trying to find support for your argument.


I would really appreciate if you focus on argument, as comments like above add nothing to the discussion. Not that it bothers me, but it makes it harder to take what you are saying seriously. I hope I'm not asking too much.

The LSAT test forms administered internationally to people taking it to apply to a N American ABA law school are the same standardized LSAT that is administered in N America locations, just a different test form with different questions, no different than the June test in America being a different test form than the October test.
The test-forms administered internationally conform to the exact same test specifications since scores are meant to be comparable. They do not dumb down the English in the undisclosed test forms, that is a really silly notion. If that were the case, how would scores be comparable for admissions?


You just said it yourself above - for example, by adjusting the curve, making it less generous.
Then it is possible to have difficult questions written even in a very simple English. Look at June 2007 test S2 Q17, LsatQA assigns difficulty 4 to it but the English in the question is fairly simple.
And of course there are other possibilities. Here, for example panman36 provides at least one explanation - the easier RC is compensated by more difficult games, so the overall test difficulty stays the same.

Your conspiracy theory about the international test forms being different and LSAC keeping them secret to hide something from people is ridiculous and known not to be the case, but you can continue to believe in an alternate reality if you want to continue try to find support for your incorrect theory.


See above. Unless you have any evidence to support it, your conspiracy theory is no better than mine. I hope you understand at that when trying to talk from your high horse.

User avatar
Clearly
Posts: 4166
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 4:09 pm

Re: PT62 S2 Q4

Postby Clearly » Tue Oct 01, 2013 8:20 pm

oh my god.

062914123
Posts: 1846
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2008 2:11 pm

Re: PT62 S2 Q4

Postby 062914123 » Tue Oct 01, 2013 8:22 pm

.
Last edited by 062914123 on Mon Jun 30, 2014 8:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
PourMeTea
Posts: 6508
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2012 8:32 am

Post removed.

Postby PourMeTea » Tue Oct 01, 2013 8:32 pm

Post removed.
Last edited by PourMeTea on Fri May 08, 2015 12:21 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Jeffort
Posts: 1896
Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2008 4:43 pm

Re: PT62 S2 Q4

Postby Jeffort » Tue Oct 01, 2013 9:46 pm

bilbaosan wrote:
Jeffort wrote:Dude, you are losing badly.
The main core to your position is that it is unfair for law schools to require/screen candidates based on skills and knowledge beyond the bare minimum needed to perform certain specialized lawyer work tasks, such as the specific types of lawyer work tasks you have been exposed to so far.


Either you're putting your own words into my mouth, or you've significantly misinterpreted what I said.

I have said the test is biased because it requires the applicant to know more English than is necessary to succeed in law school.

For you this requirement is not really a requirement because your baseline is supposed to be well above it anyway. I bet none of you guys study English just for LSAT.

For us who are not native speakers it is a significant requirement, because it requires you to pick up vocabulary in topics which are only relevant for LSAT (such as medieval poetry, biology or painting) but which are not that relevant for studying law.



Whether your view is that it requires more English than is needed to perform a particular specialty or more than is needed to succeed in law school makes no difference as to why your argument fails. Either point of view is just your opinion about what you believe is necessary or relevant to being successful in law school and/or as a lawyer.

Your opinion on the matter is wrong, simple as that. I disagree as does everyone else on this forum that has engaged in this type of discussion with you previously, but our opinions are not the important ones. LSAC disagrees with you and so do law schools, that is what is important. If they didn't think English reading comprehension skills are important to be a successful law student, there wouldn't be the RC section such as it is included in the LSAT. LSAC has constructed the LSAT to measure skills and abilities that law schools have told them they believe are important for law students to have.

You can argue with their rational for believing it is important all you want and make a fool of yourself in the process if you want, that is your deal. English reading skills are important to succeed in law school, simple as that. You'll never convince me it isn't and I doubt you'll ever be able to convince anyone that has attended law school to agree with you. I think it is fair to say that law schools and LSAC are in a much better position to know what skills are and are not essential to law school success than you are since you haven't even become a law student yet. Feel free to take up the argument with them. Heck, do what other disgruntled students that feel unfairly slighted by the test do, sue LSAC! You'll get more people to participate in the debate and I guarantee it would light up all the LS related internet forums as well as get talked about a lot on ATL once news spreads of the suit being filed!

Your claim about having to learn/know, for example, medieval poetry, biology or painting vocabulary is wrong, you aren't expected you know those off the wall words unless you are talking about knowing what 'medieval' means. You don't have to know any weird specialized terminology about that or other off the wall subjects a passage could be about. They don't expect you to have prior knowledge of obscure terms specific to specialized topics.

RC passages use terminology that is unfamiliar to most college graduates all the time, intentionally! If the meaning of any specialized topic specific terminology is important to answering questions, the term will be explicitly defined OR ELSE the meaning will be established implicitly in context by the way it used along with the surrounding text.

There are specific RC questions designed to test this very type of thing!

Pick up a copy of the LSAT SuperPrep book and read page 47.
"Questions that require using Context to refine meaning (meaning in context)"

There you have it, LSAC specifically telling you what is going on with and being tested with passages about weird off the wall topics, such as the ones you complain are unfair and biased against you and that test things irrelevant to success in law school. They are not, they are designed so that the words are likely to be unfamiliar to pretty much almost EVERYONE that takes the test, not just non-native English speakers, which is why questions based on those words are designed to see if you figured out the meaning that was conveyed by context! Yeah, you have to understand the other words in the surrounding context to figure it out though, but those will be run of the mill basic level English vocab words. You had this same debate in a few other threads recently where BP Shinners and others pointed out that all the words and subjects you were complaining about not being familiar with didn't matter for solving the questions, but you choose to ignore them.

The reason RC passages about unfamiliar topics frequently appear is because law schools and LSAC believe an important skill for law school success is the ability to derive meaning of unfamiliar things, words, ideas, etc. from context clues and information. They think it's an important set of skills because law students will be exposed to a lot of new unfamiliar vocabulary words, ideas and concepts in law school that they need to make sense of on their own very quickly in the limited time available between classes. You will encounter tons of new topics and subjects in law school that are more foreign to you than biology or poetry and be expected to learn and make sense of them from context very quickly on your own.

Some questions on the LSAT are specifically to designed to test students abilities to derive and refine meanings of unfamiliar words from context! These are the types of passages/questions you are saying are unfairly biased against you cuz of language difficulties. That's not the problem you are having with these questions! They are testing everyone about the same skill, can you figure out what the word phrase means in context well enough to answer the question properly. That is what myself and others keep trying to tell you, sometimes with examples. You aren't being punished for not knowing the words, you are being tested to see if you can figure out what they mean, just like everyone else that faces the same question/passage.


Same thing here, you don't need to know advanced words, you just need a good grasp of basic college level English. I still don't have a clue about what impressionist art vs. expressionist art means. I have no clue, never have, never will and don't care, but I'm still able to get questions that talk about the stuff correct. I just pay attention to what they actually tell me about it and use that info to answer the questions. For the life of me I've still never been able to figure out what the heck they are talking about with art things like aesthetic value, extrinsic value, intrinsic value, existentialistic poetry, zizafrazzals, etc. You are just failing to realize that the questions don't require prior knowledge of any uncommon stuff and aren't testing you on their vocab meanings or understanding of those specialized concepts, unless they are defined in the passage! When not fully defined, the questions test you on relationships that don't depend on the meanings of the weird words and phrases.

If you are complaining about not knowing what a phrase such as "parodic use of color" means, join the club! What does that look like? How does one do that? I don't know! Nobody else knows what it means either, you aren't supposed to! You are supposed to inspect the context to try to figure out how the phrase plays out in relation to other stuff. I know that parodic means parody and 'use of color' means something visual, so then I look to see if any examples/descriptions/definitions are given to get a clearer idea. If none are given it won't be important to know what exactly it means, just important to know that they said somebody did it, whatever it is. If you are mainly complaining about stuff like this, then you have a wrong idea about what is/isn't being tested by many LSAT questions since almost everyone is faced with the same unfamiliarity problem with the substance of some questions regardless of their English vocabulary. You complained a while back about a LG being unfairly biased because the logic of the game was packaged in a story about a dormitory with wings, north and south I think and that you didn't know what a dormitory was or what wings of one meant. Problem with that example was it didn't matter to the logic, it could have been north and south houses, lockers, bricks, streets, blabzaps, tents, cans, jarndragero, UIFGKJ, etc. It was just two different places to place variables and that is all that was important to know.

I really don't know how to demonstrate to you that English competency is important to success in law school or to convince you that you are not being punished for not knowing a bunch of fancy off the wall $10 words. But yes, you will be rightfully discriminated against if you don't know the correct definitions for common basic level English words such as probably since they are important to know to be a good law student.

Your problem is that you just don't see or fail to recognize that testing your ability to quickly read, process and understand material about unfamiliar non law specific subjects is very much connected to your ability to succeed in law school. Believe me it is! You'll totally understand after your first week as a 1L!

Law school doesn't teach things with spoon feeding methods typically used in pre-grad schooling. You are thrown right into a giant confusing, overwhelming mass of new subjects, vocabulary, idea, concepts, types of thinking, styles of writing, etc. right into the deep end head first with a huge stack of books and no instruction manual about what to do with it all.
They just dive right into plowing through cases day one and expect you to be able to make sense of super old cases from as far back as Old English law and talk intelligently about them in class. They don't break the case down for you and tell you what is what, define new words and all that. No, you are supposed to figure that out before class during the short time you have before class to do the 20-30 pages of assigned reading. You will encounter tons of totally unfamiliar words and concepts and topics day 1 of law school and be expected to have been able to make heads or tails of the stuff in the short time you have for reading it before class.

Do you see the connection between the skill sets? It's pretty obvious.

User avatar
Jeffort
Posts: 1896
Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2008 4:43 pm

Re: PT62 S2 Q4

Postby Jeffort » Wed Oct 02, 2013 12:44 am

bilbaosan wrote:
Jeffort wrote:You are really grasping at straws trying to find support for your argument.


I would really appreciate if you focus on argument, as comments like above add nothing to the discussion. Not that it bothers me, but it makes it harder to take what you are saying seriously. I hope I'm not asking too much.

The LSAT test forms administered internationally to people taking it to apply to a N American ABA law school are the same standardized LSAT that is administered in N America locations, just a different test form with different questions, no different than the June test in America being a different test form than the October test.
The test-forms administered internationally conform to the exact same test specifications since scores are meant to be comparable. They do not dumb down the English in the undisclosed test forms, that is a really silly notion. If that were the case, how would scores be comparable for admissions?


You just said it yourself above - for example, by adjusting the curve, making it less generous.
Then it is possible to have difficult questions written even in a very simple English. Look at June 2007 test S2 Q17, LsatQA assigns difficulty 4 to it but the English in the question is fairly simple.
And of course there are other possibilities. Here, for example panman36 provides at least one explanation - the easier RC is compensated by more difficult games, so the overall test difficulty stays the same.

Your conspiracy theory about the international test forms being different and LSAC keeping them secret to hide something from people is ridiculous and known not to be the case, but you can continue to believe in an alternate reality if you want to continue try to find support for your incorrect theory.


See above. Unless you have any evidence to support it, your conspiracy theory is no better than mine. I hope you understand at that when trying to talk from your high horse.


You are getting snippy now and giving attitude because I don't agree with you. Drop the attitude please, I'm being very patient with you and explaining things very clearly to help you get past your misconceptions.

Your conspiracy theory is wrong and I know it because it is established and published fact that the internationally administered test forms are made to the same exact specs as disclosed tests. They don't differentiate when pre-testing questions. Which items end up on non-disclosed vs disclosed forms is determined by random selection when each test form is assembled since all items are drawn from the same pool of pre-tested questions. This info is published fact, do your research before you make really dumb arguments and statements.

To put a rest to your conspiracy theory about something different going on with internationally administered test-forms, just email LSAC and ask them about your theory. They will tell you the test is not constructed or scaled to different specifications than the disclosed N American administered test-forms. The test content is pre-tested the same ways on the same populations of test takers as the content that appears on disclosed test-forms. Seriously, just email them and ask the question to resolve the issue, they usually respond quickly to questions. If you won't believe them, then there is nothing anyone can do to change your mind.

If you want to improve your LSAT score, stop crying about the test being unfair because you don't see the connection of certain skills tested by the LSAT to law school success. Focus instead on learning what is really going on with the questions you believe are unfair due to vocab/language issues and how to solve them with the information you do understand. The connections between higher level English reading skills and law school success exist, you just don't recognize them. There is a rhyme and reason to all the different types of things tested on the LSAT and the ways they are tested. They are all relevant to success in law school whether you choose to believe it or not.

bilbaosan
Posts: 108
Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2013 2:58 pm

Re: PT62 S2 Q4

Postby bilbaosan » Wed Oct 02, 2013 2:46 am

Jeffort wrote:You are getting snippy now and giving attitude because I don't agree with you. Drop the attitude please, I'm being very patient with you and explaining things very clearly to help you get past your misconceptions.


And I appreciate that. It is just those kinds of comments essentially waste your good efforts, as it is hard to consider seriously someone who tries to speak from authority to a complete stranger.

To put a rest to your idea about something different going on with internationally administered test-forms, just email LSAC and ask them about your theory.


That would be a good point if it was something important. But it is not that important - it will be completely over in four days, and I'll forget about it forever.

If you want to improve your LSAT score, stop crying about the test being unfair because you don't see the connection of certain skills tested by the LSAT to law school success.


No, I'll pass on that. Otherwise I'll get 180 and those Yale people would force me there, and I absolutely hate the CT weather.

User avatar
Clearly
Posts: 4166
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 4:09 pm

Re: PT62 S2 Q4

Postby Clearly » Wed Oct 02, 2013 2:51 am

bilbaosan wrote:
No, I'll pass on that. Otherwise I'll get 180 and those Yale people would force me there, and I absolutely hate the CT weather.

Yeah, I'm not worried about this.




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], Giro423, Instrumental, jagerbom79, Pozzo and 5 guests