vicpin5190 wrote:Though probably not perfect by any means, I've found them somewhat reliable. I do notice a bias towards rating the later 60s significantly harder, and idk how accurate or not that is, but I wouldn't say it's complete nonsense. It's just supplementary and I linked it to give some perspective, nothing more.
That's ok, just don't put too much weight in them since they are obviously highly subjective according to whatever standards the zen guy decided makes questions harder or easier for him/her. A question that is hard for a 150s level test taker would likely only be considered medium difficulty for most 160s level students, etc. with ratings being relative to the skill level of the evaluator.
Maybe the guy that made these rating has lost his LSAT skills in recent years and that's why he thinks a bunch of questions early in the section were hard and that more per section are hard than for older tests! Based on rating six of the first 10 as hard in that section, I was expecting him to have a difficulty rating of 'impossible' for some of the super hard ones you typically find somewhere in the high teens/early 20s question numbers. lol