score inconsistency Forum

[squirrelgirl]

Is anyone else having this problem? I'm taking about two practice tests per week, but my scores have been really inconsistent. These are the scores for the last four practice tests I've taken: 172, 162, 176, 163. What is happening? I'm taking the test on Saturday, and this is freaking me out!

[bjc314]

I share your frustration. I've been taking practice tests daily, and my scores have ranged from a high of 176 to a low of 158, with the majority falling in the high 160s and low 170s. It seems certain tests cater to my strengths better than others. What tests have you been taking btw?

[squirrelgirl]

I did the three tests in the Super Prep book. I've also done most of the tests in the 50s (using a couple of them to simulate experimental sections), as well as few others in the Powerscore course I'm taking. And it seems completely random. I can feel really good about a test, then score 162, but when I scored 176 I felt rushed and just crappy all-around. I feel like the questions I'm missing aren't really in the same areas, either, which makes it even more frustrating. If I were missing assumption questions every time, I could just focus on that.

[ElvisAaron]

Same shit happening here, only recently though.
August- always 164-167
Sept- always 168-172
Past week
164, 165, 162
Puke.

[bball85]

Same here and it's particularly frustrating since these tests are supposed to be standardized. It's unquestionable that some of the logic game sections in the early 50's are significantly easier than the ones in the later 50's. I've found the reading comps to be fairly consistent in difficulty except for the random killer passage here and there. I usually get between 8-12 questions per test wrong but just took PT 59 and got 21 wrong. Despite the generous curve on that test, this is still very worrisome and frustrating for me. Hopefully Saturday's test won't be similar to that one.

[testmachine45]

it seems the test really caters to some strengths. i just bombed the june 2010 test and on june 09 i was in the 170s

[squirrelgirl]

Well, it's good to hear I'm not the only one having this experience!

[testmachine45]

on another note, i think the october test will be a doozy. as hard as june.

[Hedwig]

Well, then, hopefully we'll get as nice a curve as June did.

[testmachine45]

i just hope they don't include the 'slight questions' like they did in june. the june LR was not straightforward at all. it required a very high level of thinking, more so than the past lsats. in fact, the june 2010 lsat LR had many questions that could not really be taught through formal logic, through such courses as testmasters and powerscore, which use formal logic as strategies.

[deadpoetnsp]

I think one of the reasons for this is that we encounter many of the questions that appear on the tests while studying from the Bibles and other Prep books. We would tend to get higher scores on tests that happen to have many of the questions seen earlier, and do worse on tests where all questions are unseen. I would take the lower scores rather than the higher scores to be truly indicative of the actual performance.

[incompetentia]

I've definitely noticed a drop in scores upon getting to the 50s, although I still managed to scrape a 174 on PT53. I'd been scoring consistently 175+ on tests in the 20s and early 30s, but 169 on 56, and 162 on PT60. (Stupid neighbor rang the doorbell with ten minutes to go and I got the last 8 all wrong, but even with that, that many wrong in a row is inexcusable)

That being said, it seems like the majority of the crap is happening in RC. That section's just gotten more and more ridiculous as the tests get newer. (Not to mention that it was my weakness to start with...)