Do they tell you what section is experimental on the LSAT? Forum

[PDaddy]

Just wondering if I would know which one doesnt count? Or is it always the last section before the essay? Also, is the essay even worth prepping for really? From everything I have heard it doesnt count as anything.

There are some adcoms who like to read those stupid essays; so you should do your absolute best on them. Doing anything else is like buying a lottery ticket (or better yet, getting it free!) and immediately trashing it without even putting your name on it because you assume that it can't be the winner. Regardless of the odds of winning, SOMEONE has to win! Every year, someone gets into an elite school because their LSAT essay tipped the scales in their favor.

The essays usually aren't deal-makers or deal-breakers, but they always have that potential. One adcom at Yale actually likes to read and grade them, and use them to separate candidates. He can't be alone. Take advantage of every opportunity you have to make yourself stand out...you never know.

[dingbat]

The experimental questions become real questions on future tests, so I am extremely skeptical that anyone can truly identify the experimental section. I know I had no clue on the Oct 2010 test. (I had 2 LG, which was awesome. By far the least boring/fatiguing section.)

I just noticed that the wording needed tidying up here or there, or the question could be perceived as being somewhat ambiguous. Wasn't 100% sure until I got the results, though

I doubt they'd change the questions...statistically, the scores they got on the experimentals wouldn't be valid anymore.

That would defeat the rationale of an experimental section
I think that if they noticed a trend of a disproportionate number of people getting a question wrong, they'd adjust that question

[rinkrat19]

The experimental questions become real questions on future tests, so I am extremely skeptical that anyone can truly identify the experimental section. I know I had no clue on the Oct 2010 test. (I had 2 LG, which was awesome. By far the least boring/fatiguing section.)

I just noticed that the wording needed tidying up here or there, or the question could be perceived as being somewhat ambiguous. Wasn't 100% sure until I got the results, though

I doubt they'd change the questions...statistically, the scores they got on the experimentals wouldn't be valid anymore.

That would defeat the rationale of an experimental section
I think that if they noticed a trend of a disproportionate number of people getting a question wrong, they'd adjust that question

Nah, because then they wouldn't have data on that question to make the "curve". They need to know exactly how actual LSAT takers do on those exact questions to calculate that the real test they are used on is a -10 test or whatever. If too many people got a question wrong, they'd just remove the question and eliminate it from the calculation.

[Br3v]

The experimental questions become real questions on future tests, so I am extremely skeptical that anyone can truly identify the experimental section. I know I had no clue on the Oct 2010 test. (I had 2 LG, which was awesome. By far the least boring/fatiguing section.)

what i am hoping for

[dingbat]

Nah, because then they wouldn't have data on that question to make the "curve". They need to know exactly how actual LSAT takers do on those exact questions to calculate that the real test they are used on is a -10 test or whatever. If too many people got a question wrong, they'd just remove the question and eliminate it from the calculation.

I would assume they curve based in actual test results, not on predetermined factors (hence a realistic/consistent curve)
If they thought questions were unbalanced, they would not use those questions

[rinkrat19]

Nah, because then they wouldn't have data on that question to make the "curve". They need to know exactly how actual LSAT takers do on those exact questions to calculate that the real test they are used on is a -10 test or whatever. If too many people got a question wrong, they'd just remove the question and eliminate it from the calculation.

I would assume they curve based in actual test results, not on predetermined factors (hence a realistic/consistent curve)
If they thought questions were unbalanced, they would not use those questions

No, the "curve" is set before the test is taken. It's not actually a curve, technically speaking. (It might be adjusted on the rare occasion that a question is thrown out after the test is administered.) The "curve" is set by taking what actual test-takers scored on the experimental sections that are now being used on a real test, finding the median raw score, setting that to a 151, and fitting the 120-150 and 152-180 ranges to the raw score ranges. When you take the test, you're not being compared to your fellow test takers, your score is being interpreted on scale set by the people who took those sections as experimental.

This is all written down somewhere. I'm not just making it up.

[suspicious android]

That would defeat the rationale of an experimental section
I think that if they noticed a trend of a disproportionate number of people getting a question wrong, they'd adjust that question

I think you have a misperception of what the experimental section is for, it's not to outsource the copy-editing of questions out to the test takers. It's to determine the overall difficulty of a section, and the questions within it. Questions are rigorously tested before they are published on an experimental section. It's not like these are second-string questions that need to prove themselves to make the team. They're experimental in the sense that their difficulty hasn't been objectively established. After serving as experimental questions, they can figure out that question X is answered correctly 80% of the time for 170 scorers, 50% for 160 scorers, 40% for 150 scorers, etc. If they find that the answering the question correctly is not correlated with scoring well, then the question is found to be unreliable. When the difficulty of the experimental section as a whole is established, then it can be used to measure the difficulty of other sections, and the great circle of life continues.

[dingbat]

I learned something new
(still doesn't make sense, but c'est la vie)

[eav1277]

I know I'm reviving an old thread but I thought it'd be better than making a new one.

How many confirmed 4th or 5th experimental sections have there been? I believe I saw in this thread and a few others that October 2011 or 2010 was the first?

[star fox]

When I took the LSAT in June 2012 it started RC RC. My least favorite section.

Great way to ease the nerves.

[eav1277]

That sucks but at least you knew the rest would count. But it also was within the first 3 sections as usual (instead of the 4th or 5th).

So anyone in more recent LSATs have a 4th or 5th experimental section ?

[Theopliske8711]

My tutor apparently found out by flipping through her book quickly and noticing an RC on the fourth section, which she then assumed that the RC in the 1-3 was an experimental. Now that I hear that experimental has been placed in section 4 at some point, I am thinking twice about this strategy. Obviously, however, this is not a sure fire strategy since there are a vast number of variables...

[Icculus]

My tutor apparently found out by flipping through her book quickly and noticing an RC on the fourth section, which she then assumed that the RC in the 1-3 was an experimental. Now that I hear that experimental has been placed in section 4 at some point, I am thinking twice about this strategy. Obviously, however, this is not a sure fire strategy since there are a vast number of variables...

This is not recomended as it would be a LSAC violation and your score would be flagged if a proctor caught you. Not worth it.

Also, the LSAT is not curver it is equated. I think what messes up people's understanding is that when we throw around the idea of a curve it is not exactly what happens in standardized tests. Equating is designed to make sure that 170 on a particular test would be a 170 on any test, that is why harder tests allow you to score a 170 with more questions wrong than an easier test. It is has nothing to do with the test takers on that particular test but rather with how those questions were answered as previous experimental test qiestions.

[Kharon542]

This may come across as ignorant but what do you mean by experimental section? Is this a question that they are testing that gets removed later? Is it an entire section added to the test (i.e instead of 1 LG 1 RC 2 LR it is 2 LG 1 RC 2 LR)? EDIT: I'm guessing from what I read that they aren't counted?

[bp shinners]

This may come across as ignorant but what do you mean by experimental section? Is this a question that they are testing that gets removed later? Is it an entire section added to the test (i.e instead of 1 LG 1 RC 2 LR it is 2 LG 1 RC 2 LR)? EDIT: I'm guessing from what I read that they aren't counted?

The test is made up of 5 sections and an essay. Those 5 sections will include 2 Logical Reasoning, 1 Logic Games, 1 Reading Comprehension, and the experimental. The experimental could be any of the other section types, but it won't count towards your score. They use it to test questions for future administrations of the exam.