Top Law Schools

Obviously for the ACTUAL lsat you take, the overall score is the only thing that should matter

But when it comes to preptests and such? i notice the number of questions i miss keeps getting lower and lower every preptest, yet my score fluctuates up and down? Obviously this could be cause some of the questions on a certain PT were harder than others on a certain PT(subjective), or maybe LSAT testakers were better prepared for their LSAT test than a dif class of LSAT test takers of a different time?

paulshortys10 wrote:Obviously for the ACTUAL lsat you take, the overall score is the only thing that should matter

But when it comes to preptests and such? i notice the number of questions i miss keeps getting lower and lower every preptest, yet my score fluctuates up and down? Obviously this could be cause some of the questions on a certain PT were harder than others on a certain PT(subjective), or maybe LSAT testakers were better prepared for their LSAT test than a dif class of LSAT test takers of a different time?

Focus on what types of question you are getting wrong not your score. This way you can better improve.

id say dont worry about the scaled score. As long as the number of questions you get right you're on the right track. The scaled score relies on the curve established for the test, which we wont know for sure until 3 weeks later. keep up the good work

Yeah, don't count on the curve. My last couple tests were 178 and 179, and I wound up with a 172 on the real thing, all the while missing the same number of questions. Focus on missing the lowest number of questions possible.

Number wrong tells you what to study. Ultimately the only final score that matters is on the real one. If it keeps going down, don't sweat the scale.

clintonius wrote:Yeah, don't count on the curve. My last couple tests were 178 and 179, and I wound up with a 172 on the real thing, all the while missing the same number of questions. Focus on missing the lowest number of questions possible.

I'd say focus on the # wrong as well, there's really not much you can do about the scaled score (except pray that LSAC decides to give out a -14 curve again)

kazu wrote:

clintonius wrote:Yeah, don't count on the curve. My last couple tests were 178 and 179, and I wound up with a 172 on the real thing, all the while missing the same number of questions. Focus on missing the lowest number of questions possible.

I'd say focus on the # wrong as well, there's really not much you can do about the scaled score (except pray that LSAC decides to give out a -14 curve again)

Holy crap what test was that?

Sept 09. To be fair, the last couple tests I took were pretty old and had a more generous curve. To be unfair, so did the test immediately after the one I took.

clintonius wrote:Sept 09. To be fair, the last couple tests I took were pretty old and had a more generous curve. To be unfair, so did the test immediately after the one I took.

Yep.. the legendary Dec 09 -14 curve... So unfair

kazu wrote:

clintonius wrote:Sept 09. To be fair, the last couple tests I took were pretty old and had a more generous curve. To be unfair, so did the test immediately after the one I took.

Yep.. the legendary Dec 09 -14 curve... So unfair

I don't even understand how they can differentiate curves and still feel like test scores are the same. Especially when it can vary so much. I've had many tests where I get fewer wrong than are in the curve differentiation.

Hannibal wrote:

kazu wrote:

clintonius wrote:Sept 09. To be fair, the last couple tests I took were pretty old and had a more generous curve. To be unfair, so did the test immediately after the one I took.

Yep.. the legendary Dec 09 -14 curve... So unfair

I don't even understand how they can differentiate curves and still feel like test scores are the same. Especially when it can vary so much. I've had many tests where I get fewer wrong than are in the curve.

I think it depends on where/how you're scoring. Some people are more susceptible to the curves, while others, especially as you get to the 170+ region, are curve-proof and almost always get the same # wrong. I agree with you that it's unfair, but I think having a "set" curve would also be unfair as well, perhaps even more so.

I don't think it's necessarily unfair, but I agree that the differentiation between the impact of certain scorers is evident. I wonder if they couldn't space the curve out more.