February 2014 Waiters Forum

HanShotFirst · Post by **HanShotFirst** » Sat Feb 08, 2014 9:28 pm

ElliotNessquire wrote:I don't mean to ask a dumb question, but I thought I read that the lsat wasn't curved? I'm a first time test taker, so advanced apologies for being a noob on the subject!

It's curved based on how people performed when they took our sections as their experimentals

PattyCake · Post by **PattyCake** » Sat Feb 08, 2014 9:31 pm

generalmead wrote:was this the games kind/order? (Sorry trying to distinguish between my two games sections in my memory.) :

1) schools going to concerts
2) gardening, housekeeping, etc.
3) cities and months
4) diplomats at table

I think 2 and 3 might be reversed, but yes those were the games on the real section.

PattyCake · Post by **PattyCake** » Sat Feb 08, 2014 9:38 pm

xylocarp wrote:
jphiggo wrote:Hopefully this isn't the case, but if I have to take the Hellsat again, I'm going to practice next time with 10 or 12 people hacking their lungs out, tapping their feet, and a test proctor ripping pages out of a notebook so that I can simulate, more appropriately, real testing conditions. These people... sheesh
The 7Sage app actually has this feature

LOL Kaplan has an iPhone app that's a timer and a test simulator, so there are people coughing and snorting and sharpening pencils really loudly the whole time. But it's totally useless because it skips constantly. In one section it'll take off 5 minutes, then 6 in another, then 4. So the first time I did a diagnostic for them I used the app and my score was like, 150 because they cut off a total of about 25 minutes. The next time, after I used a real timer, I got a 164 and a message popped up: "Wow, our methods are really working!" Way to inflate your rate of success, Kaplan. PS their program is largely useless, but it's worth it for unlimited access to every lsat ever released.

nn1113 · Post by **nn1113** » Sat Feb 08, 2014 9:55 pm

anyone remember the LR question re orbits? was that experimental?

Baby_Got_Feuerbach · Post by **Baby_Got_Feuerbach** » Sat Feb 08, 2014 9:56 pm

nn1113 wrote:anyone remember the LR question re orbits? was that experimental?

I remember an RC passage about (planetary) orbits on the experimental.

Baby_Got_Feuerbach · Post by **Baby_Got_Feuerbach** » Sat Feb 08, 2014 9:56 pm

orangemochafrapp wrote:The experimental RC was so strange it made it pretty obvious. I debated putting my head down for that section.

What made it seem strange to you??

PattyCake · Post by **PattyCake** » Sat Feb 08, 2014 9:57 pm

nn1113 wrote:anyone remember the LR question re orbits? was that experimental?

I think so, I didn't have experimental LR and I don't remember that one.

haus · Post by **haus** » Sat Feb 08, 2014 10:03 pm

nn1113 wrote:anyone remember the LR question re orbits? was that experimental?

I am going to have to reference ScottRiqui who said it best...

ScottRiqui wrote:I'll admit I'm a little intimidated when people are talking about exactly how many questions were in each section, and can remember specific question types and which LR question was in which section, and I'm sitting here thinking "I'm pretty sure I wore shoes to the LSAT - yeah, I definitely had on shoes".

Baby_Got_Feuerbach · Post by **Baby_Got_Feuerbach** » Sat Feb 08, 2014 10:09 pm

re: our poll...

Most people are voting for -12. How come? I haven't studied past curves enough to get a feel for difficulty / curve ratio, or whatever.

rwhyAn · Post by **rwhyAn** » Sat Feb 08, 2014 10:22 pm

Baby_Got_Feuerbach wrote:re: our poll...

Most people are voting for -12. How come? I haven't studied past curves enough to get a feel for difficulty / curve ratio, or whatever.

I vote -16. LSAC is probably having a good laugh at our expense by knowing they created the most difficult test in history and won't have to disclose it, leaving us with more questions than answers. The last LSAT I took was in October 2011, which had a -13 curve, and I felt that this test was more difficult, so I'm guessing -13 or -14.

orangemochafrapp · Post by **orangemochafrapp** » Sat Feb 08, 2014 10:31 pm

rwhyAn wrote:
Baby_Got_Feuerbach wrote:re: our poll...

Most people are voting for -12. How come? I haven't studied past curves enough to get a feel for difficulty / curve ratio, or whatever.
I vote -16. LSAC is probably having a good laugh at our expense by knowing they created the most difficult test in history and won't have to disclose it, leaving us with more questions than answers. The last LSAT I took was in October 2011, which had a -13 curve, and I felt that this test was more difficult, so I'm guessing -13 or -14.

I think first time test takers (im not saying you are) get overwhelmed by the LSAT and think its the hardest ever. And I'll give you the tiered circular ordering game was insane. But, I don't think it was a hard as many on here think it was.

And the experimental RC seemed strange for reasons I can't say. All I can say is the mood, overall feeling, way the passage read and questions that were asked were very un-LSAT Like

PattyCake · Post by **PattyCake** » Sat Feb 08, 2014 10:37 pm

orangemochafrapp wrote:
rwhyAn wrote:
Baby_Got_Feuerbach wrote:re: our poll...

Most people are voting for -12. How come? I haven't studied past curves enough to get a feel for difficulty / curve ratio, or whatever.
I vote -16. LSAC is probably having a good laugh at our expense by knowing they created the most difficult test in history and won't have to disclose it, leaving us with more questions than answers. The last LSAT I took was in October 2011, which had a -13 curve, and I felt that this test was more difficult, so I'm guessing -13 or -14.
I think first time test takers (im not saying you are) get overwhelmed by the LSAT and think its the hardest ever. And I'll give you the tiered circular ordering game was insane. But, I don't think it was a hard as many on here think it was.

And the experimental RC seemed strange for reasons I can't say. All I can say is the mood, overall feeling, way the passage read and questions that were asked were very un-LSAT Like

I didn't have experimental RC, but there has been new(ish) phrasing in recent LR sections. Could be they're starting to test new RC question styles? They do it routinely, so the test continues to evolve.

rwhyAn · Post by **rwhyAn** » Sat Feb 08, 2014 10:43 pm

orangemochafrapp wrote:
rwhyAn wrote:
Baby_Got_Feuerbach wrote:re: our poll...

Most people are voting for -12. How come? I haven't studied past curves enough to get a feel for difficulty / curve ratio, or whatever.
I vote -16. LSAC is probably having a good laugh at our expense by knowing they created the most difficult test in history and won't have to disclose it, leaving us with more questions than answers. The last LSAT I took was in October 2011, which had a -13 curve, and I felt that this test was more difficult, so I'm guessing -13 or -14.
I think first time test takers (im not saying you are) get overwhelmed by the LSAT and think its the hardest ever. And I'll give you the tiered circular ordering game was insane. But, I don't think it was a hard as many on here think it was.

And the experimental RC seemed strange for reasons I can't say. All I can say is the mood, overall feeling, way the passage read and questions that were asked were very un-LSAT Like

Actually, I didn't think it was overly difficult, but I did take the official October 2011 administration, and I thought that Oct 2011 was easier. I didn't think RC was terribly difficult as others have stated, but the last game threw me for a loop. By comparison, in Oct 2011, RC was pretty easy, LR was straightforward, and there were no unusual games, and yet that exam had a -13 curve. I'd be surprised if this exam was less than -13.

PourMeTea · Post by **PourMeTea** » Sat Feb 08, 2014 10:45 pm

Post removed.

logicspeaks · Post by **logicspeaks** » Sat Feb 08, 2014 10:47 pm

The wording in the experimental RC was very straightforward IMO and didn't rely on so many inferences.

Baby_Got_Feuerbach · Post by **Baby_Got_Feuerbach** » Sat Feb 08, 2014 10:53 pm

PourMeTea wrote:I don't know what to do with my life now that the LSAT is over

I bought enough Chinese takeout tonight that they gave me three fortune cookies.

But yeah, I wish I could say the same. Decent chance I do this all over again for June.

Baby_Got_Feuerbach · Post by **Baby_Got_Feuerbach** » Sat Feb 08, 2014 10:54 pm

A little concerned that I didn't erase well enough on the scantron sheet.

jmjm · Post by **jmjm** » Sat Feb 08, 2014 10:54 pm

rwhyAn wrote: By comparison, in Oct 2011, RC was pretty easy, LR was straightforward, and there were no unusual games, and yet that exam had a -13 curve.

Oct 2011 had the notorious bicycles game.

PourMeTea · Post by **PourMeTea** » Sat Feb 08, 2014 10:56 pm

Post removed.

ws81086n · Post by **ws81086n** » Sat Feb 08, 2014 11:01 pm

Baby_Got_Feuerbach wrote:A little concerned that I didn't erase well enough on the scantron sheet.

You're being overly paranoid, most likely. I had a couple of less than ideal erasures for two questions the last LSAT I took, and both questions were scored appropriately.

Baby_Got_Feuerbach · Post by **Baby_Got_Feuerbach** » Sat Feb 08, 2014 11:07 pm

PourMeTea wrote:
Baby_Got_Feuerbach wrote:
PourMeTea wrote:I don't know what to do with my life now that the LSAT is over
I bought enough Chinese takeout tonight that they gave me three fortune cookies.

But yeah, I wish I could say the same. Decent chance I do this all over again for June.
I had a fortune cookie the week before the December LSAT and the lucky numbers added up to predict my score EXACTLY

I unwittingly did the same thing before this administration so I assume my score will be correctly predicted by the fortune cookie once again.

You mentioned that in tinychat. So I looked at my most recent cookie (yeah, so I save some of them...) and it added up to 114.

One of today's was well over 200. Maybe I should average the two?

PourMeTea · Post by **PourMeTea** » Sat Feb 08, 2014 11:15 pm

Post removed.

Baby_Got_Feuerbach · Post by **Baby_Got_Feuerbach** » Sat Feb 08, 2014 11:17 pm

PourMeTea wrote:They need to be from P.F. Chang's actually

Never been

xylocarp · Post by **xylocarp** » Sat Feb 08, 2014 11:21 pm

Baby_Got_Feuerbach wrote:
PourMeTea wrote:
Baby_Got_Feuerbach wrote:
PourMeTea wrote:I don't know what to do with my life now that the LSAT is over
I bought enough Chinese takeout tonight that they gave me three fortune cookies.

But yeah, I wish I could say the same. Decent chance I do this all over again for June.
I had a fortune cookie the week before the December LSAT and the lucky numbers added up to predict my score EXACTLY

I unwittingly did the same thing before this administration so I assume my score will be correctly predicted by the fortune cookie once again.
You mentioned that in tinychat. So I looked at my most recent cookie (yeah, so I save some of them...) and it added up to 114.

One of today's was well over 200. Maybe I should average the two?

Averaging makes no sense. The precedent is clearly pre-test cookies only. You got a 114.

Baby_Got_Feuerbach · Post by **Baby_Got_Feuerbach** » Sat Feb 08, 2014 11:23 pm

xylocarp wrote:
Baby_Got_Feuerbach wrote:
PourMeTea wrote:
Baby_Got_Feuerbach wrote:
I bought enough Chinese takeout tonight that they gave me three fortune cookies.

But yeah, I wish I could say the same. Decent chance I do this all over again for June.
I had a fortune cookie the week before the December LSAT and the lucky numbers added up to predict my score EXACTLY

I unwittingly did the same thing before this administration so I assume my score will be correctly predicted by the fortune cookie once again.
You mentioned that in tinychat. So I looked at my most recent cookie (yeah, so I save some of them...) and it added up to 114.

One of today's was well over 200. Maybe I should average the two?
Averaging makes no sense. The precedent is clearly pre-test cookies only. You got a 114.

Ack, I knew I misbubbled my bio info.