For October 12 test takers Forum

[justadude55]

Is the curve for this test the same as the sat. test?

Because many seem to be guessing -11 http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... w=viewpoll

But it also says that they had 101 questions and according to the post here we only had 100 (I can't remember how many i had. it's all just a blur).

yeah i don't see it being a -8 curve. that would be insane. has that ever happened?

it's weird cause i think our LR was 30 yrs old. def puts us at a disadvantage cause it's impossible to predict how to study when they can fluctuate their structure from pt w all the way through pt 60 test to test.

i doubt it's a -8 curve. if so, i'd cancel right now.

[boogie with stu]

Also, is it okay to mention a question (not any of the answers) to get people's opinions on what the experimental section was?

Does anyone know the answer to this?

[justadude55]

Also, is it okay to mention a question (not any of the answers) to get people's opinions on what the experimental section was?

Does anyone know the answer to this?

not sure. this isn't as popular a topic section lol.

i do know it's ok to mention section breakdown:

LR, RC, LG, LR, RC

Judging by the fact that the experimental is always pre-break, I have my idea.

[delusional]

This post has been removed at the request of a third party alleging copyright infringement.

[JD=Doctor]

LR(experimental and superrrrr easy) LG LR -----RC LR

I usually am between -0 and -3 on games felt i did well on this one...but im a game guy

RC i feel was avg


LR was a HUGE curveball....maybe it was because i was super confident about my 1st LR (which i finished before the 5 minutes) but the 2 question per reading stem really shook me ... the cold blooded dinosaurs ... the chardonay grape wines (which i got right after coming back to at the end) the Plates and magantus rock volcano one... (let me know if i should delete this)

i heard they make todays curve in a comparison of difficulty to saturdays test so that if all of us get a -5 on the entire test it would still be considered a 176 or wtvr...... anyone hear this?

[Cromartie]

Is the curve for this test the same as the sat. test?

Because many seem to be guessing -11 http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... w=viewpoll

But it also says that they had 101 questions and according to the post here we only had 100 (I can't remember how many i had. it's all just a blur).

yeah i don't see it being a -8 curve. that would be insane. has that ever happened?

it's weird cause i think our LR was 30 yrs old. def puts us at a disadvantage cause it's impossible to predict how to study when they can fluctuate their structure from pt w all the way through pt 60 test to test.

i doubt it's a -8 curve. if so, i'd cancel right now.

June 2007 and if I'm not mistaken PT 48 both had -8 curves. The discomforting thought about our test is that it's undisclosed, so we'll never really know what the curve was.

[JD=Doctor]

Is the curve for this test the same as the sat. test?

Because many seem to be guessing -11 http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... w=viewpoll

But it also says that they had 101 questions and according to the post here we only had 100 (I can't remember how many i had. it's all just a blur).

yeah i don't see it being a -8 curve. that would be insane. has that ever happened?

it's weird cause i think our LR was 30 yrs old. def puts us at a disadvantage cause it's impossible to predict how to study when they can fluctuate their structure from pt w all the way through pt 60 test to test.

i doubt it's a -8 curve. if so, i'd cancel right now.

June 2007 and if I'm not mistaken PT 48 both had -8 curves. The discomforting thought about our test is that it's undisclosed, so we'll never really know what the curve was.

Do you know exactly what is disclosed to us?

just a "177" or raw 92/100 = 174 or LR -1 RC -2 LG -2 LR -1 ?

[Cromartie]

Is the curve for this test the same as the sat. test?

Because many seem to be guessing -11 http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... w=viewpoll

But it also says that they had 101 questions and according to the post here we only had 100 (I can't remember how many i had. it's all just a blur).

yeah i don't see it being a -8 curve. that would be insane. has that ever happened?

it's weird cause i think our LR was 30 yrs old. def puts us at a disadvantage cause it's impossible to predict how to study when they can fluctuate their structure from pt w all the way through pt 60 test to test.

i doubt it's a -8 curve. if so, i'd cancel right now.

June 2007 and if I'm not mistaken PT 48 both had -8 curves. The discomforting thought about our test is that it's undisclosed, so we'll never really know what the curve was.

Do you know exactly what is disclosed to us?

just a "177" or raw 92/100 = 174 or LR -1 RC -2 LG -2 LR -1 ?

Just the scaled score 177, etc. and the percentile. We will have no idea whatsoever how we did on individual sections, how many right/wrong answers we actually got, whether any questions were thrown out, etc.

[justadude55]

i thought about the wine question (some sleep goes over well). at the time, that did not strike me as one of the harder ones. it was pretty easy, just all in the wording of the choices.

but it's kind of obvious: for example if we're talking about a strip club, and i say only hot girls work there, that doesn't mean just cause your girlfriend's hot she's a strippa.

[JD=Doctor]

Best advice on test day i got and can give: After you read the Q twice and still can not figure out the answer (you never will at that point) Skip it and use your time on Qs you have a chance of getting right ...Then at the end come back (and like previous experiences of mine before) something will usually click the 2nd time.

-maybe that was too wordy....forgive me its only 8:53am in LA.


anybody wake up at 6am b/c there body just got use to it?

[Cromartie]

I'm up at or before 6 am everyday anyway.

[Cromartie]

LOL, I see that our thread got decimated. Fair enough, though.

[justadude55]

LOL, I see that our thread got decimated. Fair enough, though.

regardless,

whats the curve? same as october for reg people?

[Cromartie]

LOL, I see that our thread got decimated. Fair enough, though.

regardless,

whats the curve? same as october for reg people?

After getting feedback from the Asia test takers, I think probably -10, -11 if we're lucky.

[justadude55]

LOL, I see that our thread got decimated. Fair enough, though.

regardless,

whats the curve? same as october for reg people?

After getting feedback from the Asia test takers, I think probably -10, -11 if we're lucky.

it's top law school feedback... isnt it biased? do we get the same as the non-sabbath observers?

it's not fair being that, and i don't want to seem racist, but it is fact--jews and asians perform slightly better on average on standardized tests than the national average.

[justadude55]

i heard people in that topic say the RC was very hard.

[Cromartie]

i heard people in that topic say the RC was very hard.

Yeah, this is the feedback I've gotten as well.

[Cromartie]

One thing that's not clear is whether our test sections were comprised of previous experimentals administered exclusively to non-Saturday/overseas takers, exclusively to US takers, or a combination of both. Hence, figuring out what the curve could potentially be based on how we and our contemporary test takers feel about the test could be a challenge.

[justadude55]

One thing that's not clear is whether our test sections were comprised of previous experimentals administered exclusively to non-Saturday/overseas takers, exclusively to US takers, or a combination of both. Hence, figuring out what the curve could potentially be based on how we and our contemporary test takers feel about the test could be a challenge.

dude we're not gonna guess the curve. but it's def not -10. id bet u $ it's better than that. that was definitely not easy enough for -10. the games were easy by 59 and 60s standards. i think they were on par with 58, the RC was harder than 58 and the LR was about =. even their curve was -12.

overall, i am slightly pissed it was 100 and not 101 questions as most are as there's less you can get wrong. could have used a 23rd LG q. plus, theyre prob gonna cancel a question. who knows? it sucks our test isn't released.

[Cromartie]

One thing that's not clear is whether our test sections were comprised of previous experimentals administered exclusively to non-Saturday/overseas takers, exclusively to US takers, or a combination of both. Hence, figuring out what the curve could potentially be based on how we and our contemporary test takers feel about the test could be a challenge.

dude we're not gonna guess the curve. but it's def not -10. id bet u $ it's better than that. that was definitely not easy enough for -10. the games were easy by 59 and 60s standards. i think they were on par with 58, the RC was harder than 58 and the LR was about =. even their curve was -12.

overall, i am slightly pissed it was 100 and not 101 questions as most are as there's less you can get wrong. could have used a 23rd LG q. plus, theyre prob gonna cancel a question. who knows? it sucks our test isn't released.

A -12 would be fantastic. And I do believe they are going to cancel that 1 LR question with the misprint. But I still think there's a fair chance it's going to be -10, if the games were truly as easy as a lot of people seem to think. I wouldn't mind being wrong though. I'm hoping I'm wrong.

Too bad we'll never really know how the curve actually turns out.

[justadude55]

One thing that's not clear is whether our test sections were comprised of previous experimentals administered exclusively to non-Saturday/overseas takers, exclusively to US takers, or a combination of both. Hence, figuring out what the curve could potentially be based on how we and our contemporary test takers feel about the test could be a challenge.

dude we're not gonna guess the curve. but it's def not -10. id bet u $ it's better than that. that was definitely not easy enough for -10. the games were easy by 59 and 60s standards. i think they were on par with 58, the RC was harder than 58 and the LR was about =. even their curve was -12.

overall, i am slightly pissed it was 100 and not 101 questions as most are as there's less you can get wrong. could have used a 23rd LG q. plus, theyre prob gonna cancel a question. who knows? it sucks our test isn't released.

A -12 would be fantastic. And I do believe they are going to cancel that 1 LR question with the misprint. But I still think there's a fair chance it's going to be -10, if the games were truly as easy as a lot of people seem to think. I wouldn't mind being wrong though. I'm hoping I'm wrong.

Too bad we'll never really know how the curve actually turns out.

i don't think it's based off the games, dude. i think it's all the sections =. june was -12 out of 99 but the RC wasn't a piece of cake, and there were some very, very hard LR.

december had pretty easy games if you can do selection, and was -14...

also a misprint doesn't ensure a cancellation. a lot of PT's have misprints. it needs to substantially mess up the answer. there was a parallel principle question that had nothing that was 100% parallel. there was clearly a trick question that is the exact same parallel evidence chain, but the conclusion is a different level of certainty so it can't be right. it was a 19 or 20--rough question.

[kaveman]

One thing that's not clear is whether our test sections were comprised of previous experimentals administered exclusively to non-Saturday/overseas takers, exclusively to US takers, or a combination of both. Hence, figuring out what the curve could potentially be based on how we and our contemporary test takers feel about the test could be a challenge.

dude we're not gonna guess the curve. but it's def not -10. id bet u $ it's better than that. that was definitely not easy enough for -10. the games were easy by 59 and 60s standards. i think they were on par with 58, the RC was harder than 58 and the LR was about =. even their curve was -12.

overall, i am slightly pissed it was 100 and not 101 questions as most are as there's less you can get wrong. could have used a 23rd LG q. plus, theyre prob gonna cancel a question. who knows? it sucks our test isn't released.

A -12 would be fantastic. And I do believe they are going to cancel that 1 LR question with the misprint. But I still think there's a fair chance it's going to be -10, if the games were truly as easy as a lot of people seem to think. I wouldn't mind being wrong though. I'm hoping I'm wrong.

Too bad we'll never really know how the curve actually turns out.

Is the misprint you guys are referring to the one that had one professor talking about another?

[odoylerules]

yeah i remember reading the LR and realizing there was a bizarre misprint, it wasn't a typo, it was just something that didn't make any sense. I don't think it impacted the question though, it was just kind of silly

[Cromartie]

One thing that's not clear is whether our test sections were comprised of previous experimentals administered exclusively to non-Saturday/overseas takers, exclusively to US takers, or a combination of both. Hence, figuring out what the curve could potentially be based on how we and our contemporary test takers feel about the test could be a challenge.

dude we're not gonna guess the curve. but it's def not -10. id bet u $ it's better than that. that was definitely not easy enough for -10. the games were easy by 59 and 60s standards. i think they were on par with 58, the RC was harder than 58 and the LR was about =. even their curve was -12.

overall, i am slightly pissed it was 100 and not 101 questions as most are as there's less you can get wrong. could have used a 23rd LG q. plus, theyre prob gonna cancel a question. who knows? it sucks our test isn't released.

A -12 would be fantastic. And I do believe they are going to cancel that 1 LR question with the misprint. But I still think there's a fair chance it's going to be -10, if the games were truly as easy as a lot of people seem to think. I wouldn't mind being wrong though. I'm hoping I'm wrong.

Too bad we'll never really know how the curve actually turns out.

Is the misprint you guys are referring to the one that had one professor talking about another?

Yup, that's the one. It's true you could still come up with the right answer in spite of the error, but under the pressure conditions of the test, I can see how that error could have caused people to get thrown off.

[Cromartie]

One thing that's not clear is whether our test sections were comprised of previous experimentals administered exclusively to non-Saturday/overseas takers, exclusively to US takers, or a combination of both. Hence, figuring out what the curve could potentially be based on how we and our contemporary test takers feel about the test could be a challenge.

dude we're not gonna guess the curve. but it's def not -10. id bet u $ it's better than that. that was definitely not easy enough for -10. the games were easy by 59 and 60s standards. i think they were on par with 58, the RC was harder than 58 and the LR was about =. even their curve was -12.

overall, i am slightly pissed it was 100 and not 101 questions as most are as there's less you can get wrong. could have used a 23rd LG q. plus, theyre prob gonna cancel a question. who knows? it sucks our test isn't released.

A -12 would be fantastic. And I do believe they are going to cancel that 1 LR question with the misprint. But I still think there's a fair chance it's going to be -10, if the games were truly as easy as a lot of people seem to think. I wouldn't mind being wrong though. I'm hoping I'm wrong.

Too bad we'll never really know how the curve actually turns out.

i don't think it's based off the games, dude. i think it's all the sections =. june was -12 out of 99 but the RC wasn't a piece of cake, and there were some very, very hard LR.

december had pretty easy games if you can do selection, and was -14...

also a misprint doesn't ensure a cancellation. a lot of PT's have misprints. it needs to substantially mess up the answer. there was a parallel principle question that had nothing that was 100% parallel. there was clearly a trick question that is the exact same parallel evidence chain, but the conclusion is a different level of certainty so it can't be right. it was a 19 or 20--rough question.

Parallel questions don't have to be 100% parallel, though. Doesn't the question usually state "which one of the following most closely parallels the reasoning above" or something to that effect? So even if it's not an exact match, as long as it's the one that most closely resembles the stimulus chain among all 5 answer choices, it's still the correct answer.

And it's true that games are not the only section that determines the curve. However, it's more likely than not that games has a significant impact on the curve. Based on the threads immediately after the June test, I think a lot of people had at least as much trouble with Mulch and Interns as they had with RC.

Anyway, I'm not trying to put a damper on anything. I stand to gain as much as any other bloke if the curve turns out to be more generous than what I think it will be. However, I'm just trying to assess it as objectively as I can based collectively on what I know and what others have told me about their experience with the Tuesday/Asia test.