20 Feb Make up test - Experimental Section? Forum

[xcountryjunkie]

I had:

RC
Games
LR
RC
LR

+1. (Which would make the pre-break RC the experimental one)

Does that mean you had something different for the first RC? I think my first RC comparison passage was about dental caries and the second RC comparison passage was on contracts and cotton shipment. Is this the same for you xcountryjunkie?

I don't remember precisely what the readings for each RC of mine were... they all sort of blurred together. I just based my statement on the fact that the experimental section is almost always one of the first three sections. It's possible it was the post-break RC, but I'd bet against it.

[bbaggins]

My Order - LR, RC, Games, LR, RC.
First RC - Darwin comparative with other scientists defying status quo, some other stuff... overall quite easy, I was excited as RC is my worst.

2nd RC - Really really tough - SQUIDs and semiconductors, Bach, Contractual law with an old Cotton case... not sure about the others. 3/4 of these I found extrememly difficult and I'm praying this is not the section that counts. Can people confirm if they had this as their 2nd RC passage? If so I would assume it is the RC that matters and the easy first one was the experiemental. However, I've read that the people on the original test date had a darwin passage, so perhaps that could be the RC that counts? But I kind of doubt they would mash up tests...

These were the RCs that I had as well, in the same order, with the same analysis of difficulty. I'm starting to accept that the 2nd one is probably the one that counts.

[lesak1313]

I had:

RC
Games
LR
RC
LR

+1. (Which would make the pre-break RC the experimental one)

Does that mean you had something different for the first RC? I think my first RC comparison passage was about dental caries and the second RC comparison passage was on contracts and cotton shipment. Is this the same for you xcountryjunkie?

I think the contracts and cotton shipment must be the real one. My first RC comparison passage was on Darwin and my second RC comparison passage was on contracts and cotton shipment. I'm guessing everybody that took the test yesterday is going to have the same four sections scored. So, because some people had a section on dental caries and some didn't, and some people had a section on Darwin while some didn't, the section on contracts and cotton shipment must be real.

[DannyBoy_07]

most people seem to have had the RC passage with Darwin as their first RC section. However, the minority that had it as their second passage are starting to scare me.

With the exception of the Bach passage, I killed the second RC.

[fw22mk]

I believe someone else said this, but the experimental, I was told, is always given within the first 3 sections. So, the second one, and I took the test yesterday, was the experimental. I had LR-RC-LG-LR-RC. And I agree, the "Bach" reading was ridiculous. I got to the second question when the proctor called 5 minutes. I think I needed about 15 minutes on that one. The Squids one, and I usually don't do well on the science passages, wasn't too bad. But it depends on your familiarity with things. In my case, my girlfriend is an EE/Physics PhD candidate, and I've proofed things for her thesis. I was hoping the first RC was the real one because I teach Bentham's utilitarianism and the Darwin reading wasn't too hard. Apparently, LSAT writers love Native Americans, dinosaurs, and maximizing utility.

[lesak1313]

most people seem to have had the RC passage with Darwin as their first RC section. However, the minority that had it as their second passage are starting to scare me.

With the exception of the Bach passage, I killed the second RC.

What about the people that didn't have a passage on Darwin? That is really all that matters.

[keg411]

I dunno, I was way less comfortable with the first RC than with the second. I was thinking LG's was experimental because it seemed so much different than the new tests and was surprised at a second crack at RC.

Good find with the 2007 copyright. It really did feel like a test in the 40's minus the comparative passages. I'm also guessing that based on the information from '07 the scale will be between -10 and -12.

[DannyBoy_07]

most people seem to have had the RC passage with Darwin as their first RC section. However, the minority that had it as their second passage are starting to scare me.

With the exception of the Bach passage, I killed the second RC.

What about the people that didn't have a passage on Darwin? That is really all that matters.

Unless I am missing something, I have not seen anyone without two RCs.

I think people are forgetting or just delusional.

But, I am hoping I am wrong and if they didn't have the Darwin passage, awesome.

Please prove me wrong.

[lesak1313]

most people seem to have had the RC passage with Darwin as their first RC section. However, the minority that had it as their second passage are starting to scare me.

With the exception of the Bach passage, I killed the second RC.

What about the people that didn't have a passage on Darwin? That is really all that matters.

Unless I am missing something, I have not seen anyone without two RCs.

I think people are forgetting or just delusional.

But, I am hoping I am wrong and if they didn't have the Darwin passage, awesome.

Please prove me wrong.

I've heard at least one person say that the two RC comparison passages they had dealt with tooth decay and the cotton shipment contract case, in which case they did not have the Darwin comparison passage.

[tomwatts]

My second RC had that HARD AS FUCK Sebastian Bach passage.

--ImageRemoved--
Really? That seems like an... unusual... LSAT topic.

In other news, the reason that test-making companies don't release all their tests is that they give unreleased tests over again. All test-making companies do this, some more than others (it's sort of shocking the frequency of repeated tests in some of the less commonly taken tests, such as the SAT Subject Tests). I'm not surprised at all if this test (which I didn't take) was the same as the international test a few years ago.

[DannyBoy_07]

I had RC (about Hispanic Women and their contributions to literature), then analytical reasoning, then LR, then RC ( the infamous Darwin passage), and LR again. I can't wait to get my bloody score!!

If this guy's right that sucks.

But, it seems this passage has been administered several times which leads me to believe that maybe they are trying to fine tune an RC passage for future tests??? But,the link provided on page 1 of this thread regarding 07 foreign LSATters discusses Bach also.

This is our concern dude.

[DannyBoy_07]

My second RC had that HARD AS FUCK Sebastian Bach passage.

--ImageRemoved--
Really? That seems like an... unusual... LSAT topic.

In other news, the reason that test-making companies don't release all their tests is that they give unreleased tests over again. All test-making companies do this, some more than others (it's sort of shocking the frequency of repeated tests in some of the less commonly taken tests, such as the SAT Subject Tests). I'm not surprised at all if this test (which I didn't take) was the same as the international test a few years ago.

hahaha, that was after I got home from the test and literally talked to about 20 people asking, "how many RC sections did you have?"

Everyone said 2 and it was driving me nuts.

Darwin seems to have been seen several times, here's to hoping that was experimental.

[lostone]

Given that it seems like this test was the same as the September 2007 international, do you think the curve of -10 for the Sept 07 test will be the same for this test??

[keg411]

Given that it seems like this test was the same as the September 2007 international, do you think the curve of -10 for the Sept 07 test will be the same for this test??

It was an international test for September '07. It wasn't actually September '07. International tests don't have released curves either because they are undisclosed.

[eeegeman]

I took the make-up on the 20th and I didn't have a passage on Darwin. I had RC/LG/LR/RC/LR and my first RC dealt with tooth decay/carries and my second one had the Bach passage and a comparative on a cotton shipment contractual case.

Guess this means the one with the Bach passage is the real one.

[lesak1313]

I took the make-up on the 20th and I didn't have a passage on Darwin. I had RC/LG/LR/RC/LR and my first RC dealt with tooth decay/carries and my second one had the Bach passage and a comparative on a cotton shipment contractual case.

Guess this means the one with the Bach passage is the real one.

Which is the one with the cotton shipment contractual case. That is exactly what I wanted to hear. Thanks, man.

[lnc2109]

It seems that the Feb 2005 LSAT had the same reading passages and logic games as the Feb 20th LSAT: http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Past_LSAT_ ... _2005_LSAT

Except, LSAC replaced the Netherlands environmental passage in 2005 with the comparative reading passage on cotton shipments. Very Interesting....

[Alcoh]

It seems that the Feb 2005 LSAT had the same reading passages and logic games as the Feb 20th LSAT: http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Past_LSAT_ ... _2005_LSAT

Except, LSAC replaced the Netherlands environmental passage in 2005 with the comparative reading passage on cotton shipments. Very Interesting....

Does this mean this section was the real one....I feel as if everyone had this bach one as a section and the darwin as the other....is it clear which was the experimental....I thought the first section the darwin one was the real one....if the bach does count, do we know how this would impact the curve???

[keg411]

It seems that the Feb 2005 LSAT had the same reading passages and logic games as the Feb 20th LSAT: http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Past_LSAT_ ... _2005_LSAT

Except, LSAC replaced the Netherlands environmental passage in 2005 with the comparative reading passage on cotton shipments. Very Interesting....

Wow! Nice find!