That's the only one I've taken for real. It was exactly like most of the PT tests in the 50s. (Except, mercifully, there were no dinosaurs.) I thought at the time some of the questions seemed less tightly written, but in retrospect, I'm pretty sure that was just test-day nerves.Dotson525 wrote:In your opinion, how does the previous Feb. test you've taken compared to the other tests? Since Feb. is undisclosed, there is little to compare it to.
Are you ready for total DOMINATION?!! (Feb. 2011) Forum
-
- Posts: 249
- Joined: Fri Dec 25, 2009 3:07 am
Re: The Slightly More Official February 2011 LSAT Thread
- 8675309
- Posts: 91
- Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 6:59 pm
Re: The Slightly More Official February 2011 LSAT Thread
Is anyone else finding it hard to study because of the NFL playoffs?
I am dying here. All I wanna do is watch some football.
I am dying here. All I wanna do is watch some football.
- Dotson525
- Posts: 72
- Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2010 9:40 pm
Re: The Slightly More Official February 2011 LSAT Thread
thsmthcrmnl wrote:That's the only one I've taken for real. It was exactly like most of the PT tests in the 50s. (Except, mercifully, there were no dinosaurs.) I thought at the time some of the questions seemed less tightly written, but in retrospect, I'm pretty sure that was just test-day nerves.Dotson525 wrote:In your opinion, how does the previous Feb. test you've taken compared to the other tests? Since Feb. is undisclosed, there is little to compare it to.
Thanks for the input. Reading around, you hear some pretty strange stories concerning the Feb. tests. I've taken the lsat before, just retaking to score higher for additional funding.
- Pleasye
- Posts: 8738
- Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 4:22 pm
Re: The Slightly More Official February 2011 LSAT Thread
This is my theory: you know how after every LSAT people come on here and are like ZOMG hardest/easiest test ever, LG WAS SO HARD, LR isa chaanginggg, RC made no sense, LSAC IS TRYING TO TRICK US!!1!1one, etc. That happens EVERY time, but then the test comes out and its like, "oh, it was a normal test just like all the other ones". However, the February test has just as much discussion and freaking out as the other tests but nobody ever gets to see it so there's still a mystery as to whether or not its actually different.Dotson525 wrote:thsmthcrmnl wrote:That's the only one I've taken for real. It was exactly like most of the PT tests in the 50s. (Except, mercifully, there were no dinosaurs.) I thought at the time some of the questions seemed less tightly written, but in retrospect, I'm pretty sure that was just test-day nerves.Dotson525 wrote:In your opinion, how does the previous Feb. test you've taken compared to the other tests? Since Feb. is undisclosed, there is little to compare it to.
Thanks for the input. Reading around, you hear some pretty strange stories concerning the Feb. tests. I've taken the lsat before, just retaking to score higher for additional funding.
- vissidarte27
- Posts: 434
- Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 3:43 pm
Re: The Slightly More Official February 2011 LSAT Thread
Is it weird that it doesn't bother me that it's undisclosed? I don't think I've ever taken a standardized test that was disclosed, so I was pretty surprised to find that LSAT releases your test (on other test dates, obviously) and you can see where you went wrong.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
- Pleasye
- Posts: 8738
- Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 4:22 pm
Re: The Slightly More Official February 2011 LSAT Thread
I don't think its weird. The only reason it bothers me now is because I took it in October and got to see where I went wrong then so its weird that I won't this time. If I get in the area of my target score I won't give a shiiiit that I can't see the test.vissidarte27 wrote:Is it weird that it doesn't bother me that it's undisclosed? I don't think I've ever taken a standardized test that was disclosed, so I was pretty surprised to find that LSAT releases your test (on other test dates, obviously) and you can see where you went wrong.
- vissidarte27
- Posts: 434
- Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 3:43 pm
Re: The Slightly More Official February 2011 LSAT Thread
Why are these 50s tests kicking my butt???? I want to go back to the 30s where I was getting 173s instead of these stupid 163s that I'm getting now.
WTF, LSAT? WTF?
(Should I be panicking yet? I'm not sure.)
WTF, LSAT? WTF?
(Should I be panicking yet? I'm not sure.)
- Pleasye
- Posts: 8738
- Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 4:22 pm
Re: The Slightly More Official February 2011 LSAT Thread
Where are you losing points? Also, you were doing tests untimed, there's a huuuge difference between untimed tests and timed tests so that may also be affecting you.vissidarte27 wrote:Why are these 50s tests kicking my butt???? I want to go back to the 30s where I was getting 173s instead of these stupid 163s that I'm getting now.
WTF, LSAT? WTF?
(Should I be panicking yet? I'm not sure.)
- vissidarte27
- Posts: 434
- Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 3:43 pm
Re: The Slightly More Official February 2011 LSAT Thread
My last couple of 30s tests were timed so I don't think that's the main factor.LSpleaseee wrote:Where are you losing points? Also, you were doing tests untimed, there's a huuuge difference between untimed tests and timed tests so that may also be affecting you.vissidarte27 wrote:Why are these 50s tests kicking my butt???? I want to go back to the 30s where I was getting 173s instead of these stupid 163s that I'm getting now.
WTF, LSAT? WTF?
(Should I be panicking yet? I'm not sure.)
I'm losing points on all of the sections, frankly. My last 30s PT was like this:
LR1: -2
LG: -0
LR2: -4
RC: -3
I scored a 173.
I took PT54 yesterday, and it looked like this:
RC: -6
LR1: -4
LG: -3
LR2: -5
I scored a 163.
It looks like it hit me across the board, not in any one specific area. I mean, it's better than PT 53 which was better than PT52, but still. That's a BIG difference.
-
- Posts: 42
- Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 10:17 pm
Re: The Slightly More Official February 2011 LSAT Thread
Yeah this is important advice, thanks for the reminder; this was a key realization for me on the path to consistently beating LR sections. I guess I just need more practice to feel as confident eliminating wrong RC answers. I'll just keep telling myself: its not that they are less objective, its just that you are missing something.thsmthcrmnl wrote:Keep in mind that an LSAT question won't have a good answer and a goodish answer; it has a right answer and a wrong answer. If you're unsure about a question, it's because you're missing something, maybe something as subtle as a word like "might" instead of "will" or calling a subsidiary conclusion "the conclusion" instead of "a conclusion." In the time left over after finishing a section, I'll go back and spend a few minutes on just one question I was unsure of to really carefully parse the diction of the two choices I'm considering.Lasker wrote:Got a bit lucky on the RC though; the final passage had some difficult questions where I didn't feel certain of my answer. I seem to have at least 1-2 questions like that on every recent (PT 50 on) RC section. Finding a way to eliminate those will be one of my main goals in the next few weeks. Does anyone have any advice?
The LSAT is a fascinating test. Even though I am getting high scores I can still see huge room for improvement.
- JenDarby
- Posts: 17362
- Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 3:02 am
Re: The Slightly More Official February 2011 LSAT Thread
Well, it's official, just registered, late fee and all, and ordered preptests 57-60. If nothing else, having already applied and been accepted to a few schools, I'm at least not the least bit nervous this time around. Though if I blow my first score out of the water, I WILL regret not having applied to any real reaches.
-
- Posts: 1793
- Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2010 10:22 pm
Re: The Slightly More Official February 2011 LSAT Thread
I sucked at the 50s test as well. Watched myself plummet in that generation from a 166 to a 160 to a 157. I almost lost my mind. A huge 'WTF?!' My score went back up with some of the later ones, but the previous tests felt like a bad dream.vissidarte27 wrote:My last couple of 30s tests were timed so I don't think that's the main factor.LSpleaseee wrote:Where are you losing points? Also, you were doing tests untimed, there's a huuuge difference between untimed tests and timed tests so that may also be affecting you.vissidarte27 wrote:Why are these 50s tests kicking my butt???? I want to go back to the 30s where I was getting 173s instead of these stupid 163s that I'm getting now.
WTF, LSAT? WTF?
(Should I be panicking yet? I'm not sure.)
I'm losing points on all of the sections, frankly. My last 30s PT was like this:
LR1: -2
LG: -0
LR2: -4
RC: -3
I scored a 173.
I took PT54 yesterday, and it looked like this:
RC: -6
LR1: -4
LG: -3
LR2: -5
I scored a 163.
It looks like it hit me across the board, not in any one specific area. I mean, it's better than PT 53 which was better than PT52, but still. That's a BIG difference.
I think LR and LG have been getting trickier over the past few years. I'm planning on doing a massive review of the 50s tests this week to see if there's a particular trend that's killing my score.
- Pleasye
- Posts: 8738
- Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 4:22 pm
Re: The Slightly More Official February 2011 LSAT Thread
Why are you retaking? Waitlists/scholarship money?JenDarby wrote:Well, it's official, just registered, late fee and all, and ordered preptests 57-60. If nothing else, having already applied and been accepted to a few schools, I'm at least not the least bit nervous this time around. Though if I blow my first score out of the water, I WILL regret not having applied to any real reaches.
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 2525
- Joined: Sat Jul 18, 2009 12:12 am
Re: The Slightly More Official February 2011 LSAT Thread
guys if you havent gotten LG down on the most recent tests I suggest focusing on it. It is only my personal experience but I missed a combined ~17 or so on Oct and Dec almost half of my total mistakes , and I scored in the 90-95th percentile each time. If I could go back I would alter my strategy to make sure I got 3 games down pat and got 2 or maybe even 3 right on the last game.... I missed -11 on my first ever LSAT a year+ ago and only improved to -9 on my most recent , despite doing the LG bible multiple times, Atlas LG guide, and doing dozens and dozens of games/sections.
- JenDarby
- Posts: 17362
- Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 3:02 am
Re: The Slightly More Official February 2011 LSAT Thread
Yea, I'm worried about UCLA. I think my chances at being accepted are decent, but they certainly won't be giving me any money. If I somehow manage to pull an amazing score, I may also wait and reapply next year, since the highest ranked school I applied to this year was Cornell.LSpleaseee wrote:Why are you retaking? Waitlists/scholarship money?JenDarby wrote:Well, it's official, just registered, late fee and all, and ordered preptests 57-60. If nothing else, having already applied and been accepted to a few schools, I'm at least not the least bit nervous this time around. Though if I blow my first score out of the water, I WILL regret not having applied to any real reaches.
-
- Posts: 1793
- Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2010 10:22 pm
Re: The Slightly More Official February 2011 LSAT Thread
I am drilling games this whole week. LR sucked the most for me on the recent test, but I just need to get back on track with games before I tackle LR again.Sandro777 wrote:guys if you havent gotten LG down on the most recent tests I suggest focusing on it. It is only my personal experience but I missed a combined ~17 or so on Oct and Dec almost half of my total mistakes , and I scored in the 90-95th percentile each time. If I could go back I would alter my strategy to make sure I got 3 games down pat and got 2 or maybe even 3 right on the last game.... I missed -11 on my first ever LSAT a year+ ago and only improved to -9 on my most recent , despite doing the LG bible multiple times, Atlas LG guide, and doing dozens and dozens of games/sections.
- 99.9luft
- Posts: 1234
- Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 4:32 pm
Re: The Slightly More Official February 2011 LSAT Thread
I am doing this old-ass testmasters handout called "LRO" - which is 450 LR questions from the 90s tests. Timing all of them. So far did 270 questions and got 88% of them right -- the same as getting -6 on both LR (50 questions) sections in a given PT. Not good for someone shooting for 170s, if you ask me. [goes back to studying]
Last edited by 99.9luft on Thu Feb 03, 2011 10:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 119
- Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 11:45 pm
Re: The Slightly More Official February 2011 LSAT Thread
Man the damn NFL play offs ruined my momentum! Bah...struggling to get back into it...especially since I'm taking a PT in the morning! >:(
- 8675309
- Posts: 91
- Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 6:59 pm
Re: The Slightly More Official February 2011 LSAT Thread
I feel you. I might be going to the Packers game on Sunday too. Talk about ruining momentum for the rest of the week.DarkPhantom wrote:Man the damn NFL play offs ruined my momentum! Bah...struggling to get back into it...especially since I'm taking a PT in the morning! >:(
edited spelling error
Last edited by 8675309 on Tue Jan 18, 2011 1:39 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 119
- Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 11:45 pm
Re: The Slightly More Official February 2011 LSAT Thread
^what?! Are you kidding me?!?!
T_T
p.s. are ear buds allowed during the test?
T_T
p.s. are ear buds allowed during the test?
- 99.9luft
- Posts: 1234
- Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 4:32 pm
Re: The Slightly More Official February 2011 LSAT Thread
DarkPhantom wrote:^what?! Are you kidding me?!?!
T_T
p.s. are ear buds allowed during the test?
No
Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.
Register now, it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 1793
- Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2010 10:22 pm
Re: The Slightly More Official February 2011 LSAT Thread
I must find this for myself. Are they grouped by type?99.9luft wrote:I am doing this old-ass testmasters handout called "LR Odyssey" - which is 450 LR questions from the 90s tests. Timing all of them. So far did 270 questions and got 88% of them right -- the same as getting -6 on both LR (50 questions) sections in a given PT. Not good for someone shooting for 170s, if you ask me. [goes back to studying]
- 8675309
- Posts: 91
- Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 6:59 pm
Re: The Slightly More Official February 2011 LSAT Thread
Nope, I find out tomorrow if I can get the tickets. I'm pretty excited. I have my first day of classes the next day though, so that's going to kind of suck.^what?! Are you kidding me?!?!
- 99.9luft
- Posts: 1234
- Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 4:32 pm
Re: The Slightly More Official February 2011 LSAT Thread
No, not grouped by type, it's all mixed.SchopenhauerFTW wrote:I must find this for myself. Are they grouped by type?99.9luft wrote:I am doing this old-ass testmasters handout called "LR Odyssey" - which is 450 LR questions from the 90s tests. Timing all of them. So far did 270 questions and got 88% of them right -- the same as getting -6 on both LR (50 questions) sections in a given PT. Not good for someone shooting for 170s, if you ask me. [goes back to studying]
-
- Posts: 1793
- Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2010 10:22 pm
Re: The Slightly More Official February 2011 LSAT Thread
Well, full speed ahead.
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login