Page 1 of 1

Dec. Predictions

Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 6:50 pm
by kiklavan
I get that it’s a shot in the dark to even suggest that we could predict the logical difficulty/content of the Dec. test, but considering the unique GRE circumstances, maybe it’s a little less stupid of an idea than usual?

What do you guys think? Are we likely to have a test without surprises? No changes whatsoever?

Re: Dec. Predictions

Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 7:07 pm
by Mikey
I'm calling a weird game

Re: Dec. Predictions

Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 7:13 pm
by kiklavan
Mikey wrote:I'm calling a weird game


See that’s what I thought but would it be smart to do that when 6 schools just opened up the GRE door?

Re: Dec. Predictions

Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 7:26 pm
by Mikey
kiklavan wrote:
Mikey wrote:I'm calling a weird game


See that’s what I thought but would it be smart to do that when 6 schools just opened up the GRE door?

I personally don't think the LSAT is going to change in what they give us because of the GRE. idk

Re: Dec. Predictions

Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 7:35 pm
by kiklavan
Mikey wrote:
kiklavan wrote:
Mikey wrote:I'm calling a weird game


See that’s what I thought but would it be smart to do that when 6 schools just opened up the GRE door?

I personally don't think the LSAT is going to change in what they give us because of the GRE. idk


I will cry if I see a computer virus/trading/office game on my booklet. Cry.

Re: Dec. Predictions

Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 7:36 pm
by Platopus
Mikey wrote:
kiklavan wrote:
Mikey wrote:I'm calling a weird game


See that’s what I thought but would it be smart to do that when 6 schools just opened up the GRE door?

I personally don't think the LSAT is going to change in what they give us because of the GRE. idk


LSAC isn't going to miraculously start making the LSAT easier, and even if they did, it would be easier for everyone so in theory nothing would really change... Maybe you just need a 170 instead of a 168... but top 1% is still top 1% regardless if it is a 170 or a 175.

Re: Dec. Predictions

Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 7:42 pm
by kiklavan
Platopus wrote:
Mikey wrote:
kiklavan wrote:
Mikey wrote:I'm calling a weird game


See that’s what I thought but would it be smart to do that when 6 schools just opened up the GRE door?

I personally don't think the LSAT is going to change in what they give us because of the GRE. idk


LSAC isn't going to miraculously start making the LSAT easier, and even if they did, it would be easier for everyone so in theory nothing would really change... Maybe you just need a 170 instead of a 168... but top 1% is still top 1% regardless if it is a 170 or a 175.


100% agree it won’t be easier. But I’ve noticed that some tests (e.g. 72) are more predictable than for example 77 which has a weird game. Technically the test difficulties are the same (curves are the same) but one has a weird element to it. I’m just curious if the availability of another test would impact their willingness to shock us w/ a nasty game & such which I would assume pisses test takers off. Idk. Just speculating.

Re: Dec. Predictions

Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 7:51 pm
by sodomojo
Platopus wrote:LSAC isn't going to miraculously start making the LSAT easier, and even if they did, it would be easier for everyone so in theory nothing would really change... Maybe you just need a 170 instead of a 168... but top 1% is still top 1% regardless if it is a 170 or a 175.

Well how would that be any fair? If that does become the case, I don't see why the curve wouldn't just compensate as it always has.

Re: Dec. Predictions

Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 8:04 pm
by Platopus
sodomojo wrote:
Platopus wrote:LSAC isn't going to miraculously start making the LSAT easier, and even if they did, it would be easier for everyone so in theory nothing would really change... Maybe you just need a 170 instead of a 168... but top 1% is still top 1% regardless if it is a 170 or a 175.

Well how would that be any fair? If that does become the case, I don't see why the curve wouldn't just compensate as it always has.


That's my point. It wouldn't be fair to people taking the test, and if the test were somehow to actually be easier, everyone would benefit so it wouldn't make a difference anyway.

Re: Dec. Predictions

Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 8:44 pm
by april_ludgate
Aren't these tests created years in advance? Because they have to test them out in experimental sections first? So wouldn't the GRE or anything like that not have an affect for several years, if it had any at all?

Re: Dec. Predictions

Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 8:46 pm
by Ntp73821
april_ludgate wrote:Aren't these tests created years in advance? Because they have to test them out in experimental sections first? So wouldn't the GRE or anything like that not have an affect for several years, if it had any at all?

Re: Dec. Predictions

Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 9:56 pm
by Barack O'Drama
april_ludgate wrote:Aren't these tests created years in advance? Because they have to test them out in experimental sections first? So wouldn't the GRE or anything like that not have an affect for several years, if it had any at all?


I think this pretty much sums it up...

Maybe they have an easier LG section in the pipeline though? Wishful thinking I'm sure

Re: Dec. Predictions

Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 10:04 pm
by sodomojo
Platopus wrote:That's my point. It wouldn't be fair to people taking the test, and if the test were somehow to actually be easier, everyone would benefit so it wouldn't make a difference anyway.

Oh yeah, well I meant unfair to people who took the test in the past when top 1% was only say a 170. Although I guess that would only matter for a brief period while you might still have applicants with scores from before. That's assuming that the percentiles change because LSAC is actively making the test easier of course. If the percentiles change because test takers are getting smarter (which seems to be what has happened over the last 10-20 years), then that's a non-issue.

Re: Dec. Predictions

Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 10:32 pm
by kiklavan
Tbh part of why I posted this is because there was a blog on Blueprint's website analyzing the Sep 2017 LSAT which suggested that LSAC might be loosening up a bit so I wanted to see if anyone here saw any merit in that

Re: Dec. Predictions

Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 10:41 pm
by april_ludgate
kiklavan wrote:Tbh part of why I posted this is because there was a blog on Blueprint's website analyzing the Sep 2017 LSAT which suggested that LSAC might be loosening up a bit so I wanted to see if anyone here saw any merit in that


link?

Re: Dec. Predictions

Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 10:42 pm
by kiklavan
april_ludgate wrote:
kiklavan wrote:Tbh part of why I posted this is because there was a blog on Blueprint's website analyzing the Sep 2017 LSAT which suggested that LSAC might be loosening up a bit so I wanted to see if anyone here saw any merit in that


link?


http://blueprintlsat.com/lsatblog/lsat/ ... gic-games/

Re: Dec. Predictions

Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 10:53 pm
by april_ludgate
kiklavan wrote:
april_ludgate wrote:
kiklavan wrote:Tbh part of why I posted this is because there was a blog on Blueprint's website analyzing the Sep 2017 LSAT which suggested that LSAC might be loosening up a bit so I wanted to see if anyone here saw any merit in that


link?


http://blueprintlsat.com/lsatblog/lsat/ ... gic-games/


thanks!

Re: Dec. Predictions

Posted: Sat Nov 11, 2017 10:00 am
by Experiment626
kiklavan wrote:
april_ludgate wrote:
kiklavan wrote:Tbh part of why I posted this is because there was a blog on Blueprint's website analyzing the Sep 2017 LSAT which suggested that LSAC might be loosening up a bit so I wanted to see if anyone here saw any merit in that


link?


http://blueprintlsat.com/lsatblog/lsat/ ... gic-games/



This is pretty interesting. I mean we can only hope it's the reason and an easier test in December but I'm never a fan of hard RC. Rather have hard LG.