Older/Recent LSATs Vs Very Recent LSATs Forum

[313D313]

Just wondering about the score difference between the older LSATs vs the more recent ones. I recently took the oct 2001 LSAT timed and i scored a 168. This is one of the few timed practice LSATs i have taken and i am just trying to put the score in perspective. Are the more recent LSATs alot harder? Should i take this score as low 160's for example?

[Sandro]

I think there is definately a difference in older vs newer pts . It seems to me the RC has gotten "harder" , LR uses much different language and better trap answers, and LG easier. But thats just my opinion.

[313D313]

I think there is definately a difference in older vs newer pts . It seems to me the RC has gotten "harder" , LR uses much different language and better trap answers, and LG easier. But thats just my opinion.

I have heard that before too. From my understanding this applied to the much older LSATs, noit sure about the ones from 2000 and on. It might be so.

[Sandro]

I took PT 36 a while back. Got a 168. Outside of my usual terrible LG -9, i only missed 5 on LR and RC combined. Took PT 44 yesterday and missed 21 on LR and RC combined.

[AverageTutoring]

RC passages seem less dense as of late but the questions are much harder.
LR has become easier to comprehend but the subtleties of the language present a lot of new/harder tricks.
LG have become more predictable and a little bit easier.

[Anaconda]

I took PT 36 a while back. Got a 168. Outside of my usual terrible LG -9, i only missed 5 on LR and RC combined. Took PT 44 yesterday and missed 21 on LR and RC combined.

I doubt there's that much difference between the late 30's and early 40's, was probably an off day.

[yzero1]

RC passages seem less dense as of late but the questions are much harder.
LR has become easier to comprehend but the subtleties of the language present a lot of new/harder tricks.
LG have become more predictable and a little bit easier.

I think this sums up the most notable differences. I felt that the games in the 30s were particularly difficult (34 and 36 were brutal) because there seemed to be 2 medium/semi-difficult questions, 1 easy question, and 1 very difficult question. On the other hand, the games in the 40s-50s have been much more straightforward, usually consisting of 2 easier questions, 1 medium-dfficulty question, and 1 above-average difficulty question. There obviously have been exceptions to this general trend, but if you're doing well in the LGs in the 30s, then I'm confident that you'll do just as well (if not better) on the more recent LGs.

[3|ink]

LR is more skillfully written. There are many old LR questions that were very poorly written.

PT 26: September 1998, LR 1 # 12.

You'll notice that answer choices B and D are similar in structure. Logically speaking, they both introduce a third element to throw off the proported cause/effect relationship. However, you must employ your common sense to rule out answer choice B over answer choice D. Environmental pollution is more likely to cause cancer than wealth.