Skipping the experimental section? Forum

[Clearly]

The experimental section could be any section of the test. It used to be one of the first three, but LSAC has since started mixing experimentals towards the end.

You will not be able to identify the experimental section from the graded sections, so there is no way to reliably skip it.

Also realize that cheaters have been caught after the fact like this, if you go -1 on every section, then -14 on the experimental I guarantee lsac calls you to do some 'splainin

[JJ123]

The experimental section could be any section of the test. It used to be one of the first three, but LSAC has since started mixing experimentals towards the end.

You will not be able to identify the experimental section from the graded sections, so there is no way to reliably skip it.

Also realize that cheaters have been caught after the fact like this, if you go -1 on every section, then -14 on the experimental I guarantee lsac calls you to do some 'splainin

Citation needed.

[crestor]

The experimental section could be any section of the test. It used to be one of the first three, but LSAC has since started mixing experimentals towards the end.

You will not be able to identify the experimental section from the graded sections, so there is no way to reliably skip it.

Also realize that cheaters have been caught after the fact like this, if you go -1 on every section, then -14 on the experimental I guarantee lsac calls you to do some 'splainin

Bullshit. If anything lsac saw this practice where if the test taker WHO LOOKED AHEAD AND SAW WHAT WAS WHAT had lg or rc experimental and the experimental was ALWAYS in the first 3, the second rc or lg if it was 4-5 was the REAL one had they looked ahead and rectified it by putting the experimental anywhere. The point of the experimental for LSAC was to test how current test takers would fare on something if this section appeared in the future. As such, the cheaters who looked ahead were basically giving the finger to lsac and lsac responded. 2 proctors aren't terminator robots able to keep their eyes on every single group of 30 people in a room over a extended period of time.

[0913djp]

If the experimental is the last section, I'll be so mad. But that's how life is.

[guano]

Great Necro

When I took the test, I'm pretty sure section 4 was experimental.

You would have known for certain after the scores were released, right? Section 4 was experimental for me in June 2013.

I haven't looked in a while, which is why I'm not 100% sure.

I do remember that my test had 3 LR sections and that I noticed that some questions weren't as polished as the other sections, which made me suspect it was the experimental section, and that my suspicions were confirmed when I got the results.

Hello confirmation bias.
The experimental isn't "polished" between the time it's used as an experimental and the time it's used as a real section. Otherwise the scores they get from it when people take it experimentally wouldn't be valid for creating the "curve" later.

Probably true. Probably coincidence. I just happened to notice several questions were a bit awkward (hard to explain) relative to the rest of the test and assumed it was experimental. Still worked just as hard

[Clearly]

The experimental section could be any section of the test. It used to be one of the first three, but LSAC has since started mixing experimentals towards the end.

You will not be able to identify the experimental section from the graded sections, so there is no way to reliably skip it.

Also realize that cheaters have been caught after the fact like this, if you go -1 on every section, then -14 on the experimental I guarantee lsac calls you to do some 'splainin

Bullshit. If anything lsac saw this practice where if the test taker WHO LOOKED AHEAD AND SAW WHAT WAS WHAT had lg or rc experimental and the experimental was ALWAYS in the first 3, the second rc or lg if it was 4-5 was the REAL one had they looked ahead and rectified it by putting the experimental anywhere. The point of the experimental for LSAC was to test how current test takers would fare on something if this section appeared in the future. As such, the cheaters who looked ahead were basically giving the finger to lsac and lsac responded. 2 proctors aren't terminator robots able to keep their eyes on every single group of 30 people in a room over a extended period of time.

???
What you posted doesn't actually address what I'm saying. I'm not saying they moved the experimental to thwart cheating, I agree that they did...I'm telling you people have been investigated for cheating as a result of a huge disparity between the real sections, and the experimental section, which indicates they either had access to the real test in advance, or identified the experimental and opted not to take it...
Source: http://lsatblog.blogspot.com/2012/06/ho ... -lsat.html

[crestor]

The experimental section could be any section of the test. It used to be one of the first three, but LSAC has since started mixing experimentals towards the end.

You will not be able to identify the experimental section from the graded sections, so there is no way to reliably skip it.

Also realize that cheaters have been caught after the fact like this, if you go -1 on every section, then -14 on the experimental I guarantee lsac calls you to do some 'splainin

Bullshit. If anything lsac saw this practice where if the test taker WHO LOOKED AHEAD AND SAW WHAT WAS WHAT had lg or rc experimental and the experimental was ALWAYS in the first 3, the second rc or lg if it was 4-5 was the REAL one had they looked ahead and rectified it by putting the experimental anywhere. The point of the experimental for LSAC was to test how current test takers would fare on something if this section appeared in the future. As such, the cheaters who looked ahead were basically giving the finger to lsac and lsac responded. 2 proctors aren't terminator robots able to keep their eyes on every single group of 30 people in a room over a extended period of time.

???
What you posted doesn't actually address what I'm saying. I'm not saying they moved the experimental to thwart cheating, I agree that they did...I'm telling you people have been investigated for cheating as a result of a huge disparity between the real sections, and the experimental section, which indicates they either had access to the real test in advance, or identified the experimental and opted not to take it...
Source: http://lsatblog.blogspot.com/2012/06/ho ... -lsat.html

Where is one news story in Steve's blog where it says LSAC investigated people for cheating as a a result of a huge disparity between the real sections and the experimental section? I know the idiots at USC that had their friend run out with the test and the dumbass that put $100 or so a LSAC employee's car(lol) but there is nowhere in that source that indicates that LSAC has investigated a student solely on a disparity between the experimental and real sections.

[PDaddy]

Why in the world would you risk fucking up your score and future over one 25 minute section?

Just do it all to your best ability and ignore the fact there's an experimental section.

..."25 minute section"? OP asked about the experimental section (35 minutes!!) NOT the argumentative writing sample.

[guano]

Why in the world would you risk fucking up your score and future over one 25 minute section?

Just do it all to your best ability and ignore the fact there's an experimental section.

..."25 minute section"? OP asked about the experimental section (35 minutes!!) NOT the argumentative writing sample.

Does ten minutes really make that big a difference?

People, if you can't stay focused for the 3 hours the test takes, you should not start a career in law.

[bilbaosan]

Since your experimental will be a real section next time, and your real sections were all experimental sections on a past test, this is an idiotic statement to make. You can't just "tell" which section is experimental.

Several people mentioned that they knew the section was experimental. The key finding here is difficulty increase - if Q1-Q2 are easy, Q3 is incredibly difficult and Q4 is again easy, this is a good chance it is experimental section. Same if Q2 is PR question, or you got like four PR questions in a row.

I really doubt there was even one experimental section which made it into the real test unchanged. Some questions indeed made it from the experimental section into the test, and some of those maybe even made it unchanged. But I'm pretty confident not all of them, maybe not even the majority of them.

[crestor]

Since your experimental will be a real section next time, and your real sections were all experimental sections on a past test, this is an idiotic statement to make. You can't just "tell" which section is experimental.

Several people mentioned that they knew the section was experimental. The key finding here is difficulty increase - if Q1-Q2 are easy, Q3 is incredibly difficult and Q4 is again easy, this is a good chance it is experimental section. Same if Q2 is PR question, or you got like four PR questions in a row.

I really doubt there was even one experimental section which made it into the real test unchanged. Some questions indeed made it from the experimental section into the test, and some of those maybe even made it unchanged. But I'm pretty confident not all of them, maybe not even the majority of them.

Good luck trying to guess the experimental if you choose to do so. I was lucky enough to have two LGs (section 2 and 4) and section 2 seemed to me at the time to very wishy washy and section 4 seemed to be the real deal. I missed 4 max on section 4 and guessed on 2 whole games in section 2. 4 was the experimental and I cancelled.

[objection_your_honor]

Since your experimental will be a real section next time, and your real sections were all experimental sections on a past test, this is an idiotic statement to make. You can't just "tell" which section is experimental.

Several people mentioned that they knew the section was experimental. The key finding here is difficulty increase - if Q1-Q2 are easy, Q3 is incredibly difficult and Q4 is again easy, this is a good chance it is experimental section. Same if Q2 is PR question, or you got like four PR questions in a row.

I really doubt there was even one experimental section which made it into the real test unchanged. Some questions indeed made it from the experimental section into the test, and some of those maybe even made it unchanged. But I'm pretty confident not all of them, maybe not even the majority of them.

You will not be able to reliably identify the ungraded section. Hard questions are no indication.

[crestor]

Since your experimental will be a real section next time, and your real sections were all experimental sections on a past test, this is an idiotic statement to make. You can't just "tell" which section is experimental.

Several people mentioned that they knew the section was experimental. The key finding here is difficulty increase - if Q1-Q2 are easy, Q3 is incredibly difficult and Q4 is again easy, this is a good chance it is experimental section. Same if Q2 is PR question, or you got like four PR questions in a row.

I really doubt there was even one experimental section which made it into the real test unchanged. Some questions indeed made it from the experimental section into the test, and some of those maybe even made it unchanged. But I'm pretty confident not all of them, maybe not even the majority of them.

You will not be able to reliably identify the ungraded section. Hard questions are no indication.

Also add the pressure that the test makes up more than anything else in terms of admission to law school so doing such a task is made that much harder.

[Clearly]

Since your experimental will be a real section next time, and your real sections were all experimental sections on a past test, this is an idiotic statement to make. You can't just "tell" which section is experimental.

Several people mentioned that they knew the section was experimental. The key finding here is difficulty increase - if Q1-Q2 are easy, Q3 is incredibly difficult and Q4 is again easy, this is a good chance it is experimental section. Same if Q2 is PR question, or you got like four PR questions in a row.

I really doubt there was even one experimental section which made it into the real test unchanged. Some questions indeed made it from the experimental section into the test, and some of those maybe even made it unchanged. But I'm pretty confident not all of them, maybe not even the majority of them.

So much of this is wrong.

[bilbaosan]

Good luck trying to guess the experimental if you choose to do so. I was lucky enough to have two LGs (section 2 and 4) and section 2 seemed to me at the time to very wishy washy and section 4 seemed to be the real deal. I missed 4 max on section 4 and guessed on 2 whole games in section 2. 4 was the experimental and I cancelled.

I think it all depends. You said you wasn't able to find out the one, other people said they were. Of course there is no absolutely reliable way. Even if you see the whole test book before the test you can get LG/RC section as #1 and #3, and you'd have no way to know which one is scored. So obviously there is risk involved, and it is up to each test taker whether they take the risk or not. Different people have different risk tolerance and different goals.

[Clearly]

Good luck trying to guess the experimental if you choose to do so. I was lucky enough to have two LGs (section 2 and 4) and section 2 seemed to me at the time to very wishy washy and section 4 seemed to be the real deal. I missed 4 max on section 4 and guessed on 2 whole games in section 2. 4 was the experimental and I cancelled.

I think it all depends. You said you wasn't able to find out the one, other people said they were. Of course there is no absolutely reliable way. Even if you see the whole test book before the test you can get LG/RC section as #1 and #3, and you'd have no way to know which one is scored. So obviously there is risk involved, and it is up to each test taker whether they take the risk or not. Different people have different risk tolerance and different goals.

This is a terrible justification of a terrible idea, the consequences are huge and the benefit is slim. Do not try.

[bilbaosan]

At the extremes, the LSAC would not want to use a section that everybody got a -0 on.

A small comment: it applies to the individual questions, not the section as a whole. Generally the question is bad (and not going into test) if:

- Everyone answered it correctly (too easy, so it doesn't test anything);
- Nobody answered it correctly (either too difficult, or something really wrong with it);
- People who scored high on real sections answered it incorrectly, while those who scored low on real sections answered it correctly (the question is not suitable for LSAT purposes, i.e. it is either wrong or tests something not relevant for LSAT such as outside knowledge);

[bilbaosan]

This is a terrible justification of a terrible idea, the consequences are huge and the benefit is slim. Do not try.

I disagree with the statement that the consequences are huge. You're not going to be shot to death, imprisoned or fired from your job. You're not going even to be disqualified from the test for that. The worst which could happen is that you'd get a much lower score that you'd otherwise would. To me this is hardly huge.

Neither the benefits are slim. Someone who guessed correctly early that the section is experimental gets an extra break which will benefit him in the next section, so he might score better on the next section than if he otherwise would.

So this is just a typical risk-reward estimation, which is personal and unique to everyone.

[Clearly]

This is a terrible justification of a terrible idea, the consequences are huge and the benefit is slim. Do not try.

I disagree with the statement that the consequences are huge. You're not going to be shot to death, imprisoned or fired from your job. You're not going even to be disqualified from the test for that. The worst which could happen is that you'd get a much lower score that you'd otherwise would. To me this is hardly huge.

Neither the benefits are slim. Someone who guessed correctly early that the section is experimental gets an extra break which will benefit him in the next section, so he might score better on the next section than if he otherwise would.

So this is just a typical risk-reward estimation, which is personal and unique to everyone.

Or...You know...You prep to take all 5 sections..

[A. Nony Mouse]

I just don't think sitting doing nothing for 35 minutes in the middle of the test surrounded by a room full of scribbling panicked test takers, waiting for it to be time for me to start up again, would really be that much of a break for me. I'd rather just do the damn section and keep my momentum and keep my mind engaged. I mean, it's an exam, not a death march. A "break" isn't going to make a significant difference.

[10052014]

.

[bilbaosan]

Or...You know...You prep to take all 5 sections..

Nah, that's too easy, and involves no risk assessment. Boring! Where's your entrepreneur spirit? Aren't you up for a little challenge?

[RodneyRuxin]

Me to this thread

[bilbaosan]

This is largely a debate between the lazy and those who have the will.

or perhaps between those with ethics and morals, and those without such rich qualities.

Everyone has ethics and morals. It is just their ethics and morals might be different from yours.

And wll? For the majority of people LSAT is not the goal, it is just one of the artificial hurdles to overcome on the way to the goal.

[Clearly]

This is largely a debate between the lazy and those who have the will.

or perhaps between those with ethics and morals, and those without such rich qualities.

Everyone has ethics and morals. It is just their ethics and morals might be different from yours.

And wll? For the majority of people LSAT is not the goal, it is just one of the artificial hurdles to overcome on the way to the goal.

Tell you what, skip the writing sample and whatever section you think the experimental is, let me know how that goes.