Curving Question Forum

Prepare for the LSAT or discuss it with others in this forum.
Post Reply
User avatar
Knock

Platinum
Posts: 5151
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 3:09 pm

Curving Question

Post by Knock » Sat Apr 03, 2010 4:41 pm

So to determine the curve, you take the highest possible raw score (usually 101) and subtract the number of correct answers to get a 170 scaled score (for example, a 89 raw), so the curve is -12. Is that correct?

And usually the range of scores varies from -14 (hardest) to -8 (easiest)?

Also, what has the highest (hardest) curve and the lowest (easiest) curve been?

Thanks.

User avatar
Knock

Platinum
Posts: 5151
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 3:09 pm

Re: Curving Question

Post by Knock » Tue Apr 06, 2010 4:42 pm

Knockglock wrote:So to determine the curve, you take the highest possible raw score (usually 101) and subtract the number of correct answers to get a 170 scaled score (for example, a 89 raw), so the curve is -12. Is that correct?

And usually the range of scores varies from -14 (hardest) to -8 (easiest)?

Also, what has the highest (hardest) curve and the lowest (easiest) curve been?

Thanks.
Still confused about this, help appreciated.

Thank you.

JasonR

Bronze
Posts: 410
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2010 9:09 am

Re: Curving Question

Post by JasonR » Tue Apr 06, 2010 4:54 pm

I have to start off with my usual annoying reminder that the test is not actually curved, so you aren't really calculating a "curve" here.

That said, you are correct in your method of calculating the so-called "curve."

I don't remember seeing any PT where missing fewer than 8 would drop you to 170. I remember a -16 PT from back in the 1990s. I think one of the SuperPrep PTs (B?) is -15 or -16.

Here's a link for score conversion tables from Dec 06 to Sept 09 (Dec 09 is -14):

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 6&t=100147

User avatar
Knock

Platinum
Posts: 5151
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 3:09 pm

Re: Curving Question

Post by Knock » Tue Apr 06, 2010 5:00 pm

JasonR wrote:I have to start off with my usual annoying reminder that the test is not actually curved, so you aren't really calculating a "curve" here.

That said, you are correct in your method of calculating the so-called "curve."

I don't remember seeing any PT where missing fewer than 8 would drop you to 170. I remember a -16 PT from back in the 1990s. I think one of the SuperPrep PTs (B?) is -15 or -16.

Here's a link for score conversion tables from Dec 06 to Sept 09 (Dec 09 is -14):

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 6&t=100147
Thank you, and apologies for my incorrect terminology.

So I am correct in inferring that a -14 test is substantially more difficult than a -8 test?

User avatar
mazzini

Bronze
Posts: 120
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2010 2:16 pm

Re: Curving Question

Post by mazzini » Tue Apr 06, 2010 5:08 pm

So I am correct in inferring that a -14 test is substantially more difficult than a -8 test?
It really depends on your particular strengths and weaknesses. But as a general rule and according to the LSAC, yes.

JasonR

Bronze
Posts: 410
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2010 9:09 am

Re: Curving Question

Post by JasonR » Tue Apr 06, 2010 5:12 pm

Knockglock wrote: Thank you, and apologies for my incorrect terminology.
Haha, don't apologize. I'm just being a pain.
Knockglock wrote:So I am correct in inferring that a -14 test is substantially more difficult than a -8 test?
You are correct in that, without reference to a scaled score, a -14 test is substantially more difficult than a -8 test. The test-makers' aim is for a 170 (or any given score) to represent the same level of ability on every test, so, for the test-taking aggregate, getting a given scaled score on a -14 or a -8 test should be equally difficult for both tests.

Want to continue reading?

Register now to search topics and post comments!

Absolutely FREE!


Post Reply

Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”