Can we get to the bottom of this Experimental nonsense? Forum

Prepare for the LSAT or discuss it with others in this forum.
lieg

New
Posts: 19
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 10:50 am

Can we get to the bottom of this Experimental nonsense?

Post by lieg » Sun Oct 10, 2010 7:47 pm

I apologize if any part of this is redundant. but I keep getting conflicting answers from a lot of the posts. Maybe this will help?
My exam:

1 - LR: Very difficult with some strange questions stems. Very different feel from most PT's. Not sure I remember any q's.
2- LR: Definitely much easier
3- RC: (real) - African American/ historical writing, animal communication, UN human rights, etc.
4- LR: Easier again
5- LG: (real) - artifacts, van +drivers, running a race, etc.

The most confusion I have seen has been figuring out which LR is experimental. People have been claiming that sections containing Kofka, alcohol drinking, soaking beans have been real. I had three LR's and did not have any of these questions. I am fairly certain on that. Someone did raise a point that it is possible that 2 different experimentals existed, and further, that even tests with the same layout had the experimental at a different time. I tend to this this is possible, and would certainly explain the difficulty in figuring this out.

I do remember these LR questions, more than likely from the last 2 sections: Antibiotics/Chef analogy, College presidents, car theft, earthworms, spotted fish, time devoted to recreation/psychologist, liberty/freedom/goodlife, etc.

I assume that the 4th LR was real, and I believe it had 25 ques. and I also believe my second LR had 26. It appears that the test ended up with a 26 and 25 LR, so if I am not incorrect by this logic (which i am hoping!) if you had the same sequence as me the first LR was experimental.

PLEASE SHARE THOUGHTS/INPUT!

User avatar
DearCan

Bronze
Posts: 302
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2010 6:13 am

Re: Can we get to the bottom of this Experimental nonsense?

Post by DearCan » Sun Oct 10, 2010 7:51 pm

My experimental section was LG.

I did not have a question about soaking beans or Kafka.

minnbills

Gold
Posts: 3311
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2010 2:04 pm

Re: Can we get to the bottom of this Experimental nonsense?

Post by minnbills » Sun Oct 10, 2010 7:51 pm

I had:

RC (real)
LR (25) easy
LR (25) super hard... every stimulus seemed really long. Lots of complex questions.
LG
LR easy

Unfortunately I don't remember where any specific questions were for LR.

sidhesadie

Bronze
Posts: 454
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2010 4:54 pm

Re: Can we get to the bottom of this Experimental nonsense?

Post by sidhesadie » Sun Oct 10, 2010 7:58 pm

I had the same as minnbills, but I don't remember which questions were in which sections. I thought the first LR was SUPER easy. I actually had time to go to the bathroom when I was done. the second and third were harder, but I still thought they were really easy. I have no idea which was experimental.

User avatar
Patriot1208

Platinum
Posts: 7023
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 11:28 am

Re: Can we get to the bottom of this Experimental nonsense?

Post by Patriot1208 » Sun Oct 10, 2010 7:59 pm

DearCan wrote:My experimental section was LG.

I did not have a question about soaking beans or Kafka.

Want to continue reading?

Register now to search topics and post comments!

Absolutely FREE!


User avatar
txadv11

Silver
Posts: 922
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 3:06 pm

Re: Can we get to the bottom of this Experimental nonsense?

Post by txadv11 » Sun Oct 10, 2010 8:25 pm

I had:
LR
*LG
RC
LR
LG

cowgirl_bebop

Silver
Posts: 919
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2010 2:32 pm

Re: Can we get to the bottom of this Experimental nonsense?

Post by cowgirl_bebop » Sun Oct 10, 2010 8:28 pm

Kafka was definitely experimental. I had an experimental RC section so both of my LRs were real, and there was definitely no Kafka question on my test. I would remember that, because I like him so much

lieg

New
Posts: 19
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 10:50 am

Re: Can we get to the bottom of this Experimental nonsense?

Post by lieg » Sun Oct 10, 2010 8:46 pm

Cowgirl, did you have a question about technicians vs. writers salaries in terms of seniority?

User avatar
Patriot1208

Platinum
Posts: 7023
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 11:28 am

Re: Can we get to the bottom of this Experimental nonsense?

Post by Patriot1208 » Sun Oct 10, 2010 8:47 pm

lieg wrote:Cowgirl, did you have a question about technicians vs. writers salaries in terms of seniority?
I did and I only had two LR's

Want to continue reading?

Register for access!

Did I mention it was FREE ?


cowgirl_bebop

Silver
Posts: 919
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2010 2:32 pm

Re: Can we get to the bottom of this Experimental nonsense?

Post by cowgirl_bebop » Sun Oct 10, 2010 8:47 pm

lieg wrote:Cowgirl, did you have a question about technicians vs. writers salaries in terms of seniority?
Yes, that one was real as well

lieg

New
Posts: 19
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 10:50 am

Re: Can we get to the bottom of this Experimental nonsense?

Post by lieg » Sun Oct 10, 2010 8:51 pm

Was the section that contained the salary question included in the "weird" one that everyone is freaking out about, or in an easier section?

PS I really appreciate the input guys, thanks so much!

User avatar
raspberry

New
Posts: 10
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2010 4:47 pm

Re: Can we get to the bottom of this Experimental nonsense?

Post by raspberry » Sun Oct 10, 2010 8:52 pm

lieg wrote: The most confusion I have seen has been figuring out which LR is experimental. People have been claiming that sections containing Kofka, alcohol drinking, soaking beans have been real. I had three LR's and did not have any of these questions. I am fairly certain on that. Someone did raise a point that it is possible that 2 different experimentals existed, and further, that even tests with the same layout had the experimental at a different time. I tend to this this is possible, and would certainly explain the difficulty in figuring this out.
I saw the thread where they were talking about those questions, but the first post is actually from 2006. That could explain things! I remember those questions from PTs.

5823

New
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2010 10:20 pm

Re: Can we get to the bottom of this Experimental nonsense?

Post by 5823 » Sun Oct 10, 2010 8:55 pm

.
Last edited by 5823 on Fri Apr 29, 2011 12:23 am, edited 1 time in total.

Register now!

Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.

It's still FREE!


LSU Undergrad

New
Posts: 67
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 1:13 am

Re: Can we get to the bottom of this Experimental nonsense?

Post by LSU Undergrad » Sun Oct 10, 2010 9:15 pm

I was thinking LR1 was experimental towards the end because it had a couple of question structures that I had not seen often. I believe one was what role something played in an analogy. I don't remember that one too often from practice. I only had 2 LRs so it was a real one.

lieg

New
Posts: 19
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 10:50 am

Re: Can we get to the bottom of this Experimental nonsense?

Post by lieg » Sun Oct 10, 2010 9:16 pm

Great info guys, that's so funny about the one thread being a few years old.

Still can't get a handle on which LR was experimental, wish I could remember what questions were from which sections. Anyone with only 2 LR's remember one just seeming a bit odd? I know that's really vague, but honestly its the best way I can describe my first LR, I found it a bit difficult and after the first few I was just thinking, "Wow, these are just really unlike the last 6 or so PT's"

minnbills

Gold
Posts: 3311
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2010 2:04 pm

Re: Can we get to the bottom of this Experimental nonsense?

Post by minnbills » Sun Oct 10, 2010 9:17 pm

LSU Undergrad wrote:I was thinking LR1 was experimental towards the end because it had a couple of question structures that I had not seen often. I believe one was what role something played in an analogy. I don't remember that one too often from practice. I only had 2 LRs so it was a real one.
Hmm well 2 of my LR were very typical, with another being very weird. I think we may have our answer here folks.

User avatar
fatduck

Gold
Posts: 4135
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2010 10:16 pm

Re: Can we get to the bottom of this Experimental nonsense?

Post by fatduck » Sun Oct 10, 2010 9:18 pm

Don't think my post was against the rules but editing just to be safe...
Last edited by fatduck on Mon Oct 11, 2010 12:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Get unlimited access to all forums and topics

Register now!

I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...


ArghItsBlarg

Bronze
Posts: 204
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 5:21 pm

Re: Can we get to the bottom of this Experimental nonsense?

Post by ArghItsBlarg » Sun Oct 10, 2010 9:18 pm

lieg wrote:Was the section that contained the salary question included in the "weird" one that everyone is freaking out about, or in an easier section?

PS I really appreciate the input guys, thanks so much!
I had two LG sections, and I had the salary question, so I'd imagine that it's in a real section.

User avatar
Patriot1208

Platinum
Posts: 7023
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 11:28 am

Re: Can we get to the bottom of this Experimental nonsense?

Post by Patriot1208 » Sun Oct 10, 2010 9:18 pm

fatduck, you better edit out that question or you will get banned. But yes that was real.

lieg

New
Posts: 19
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 10:50 am

Re: Can we get to the bottom of this Experimental nonsense?

Post by lieg » Sun Oct 10, 2010 9:21 pm

ITSBLARG, do you remember if that section you had it in was the "unusualy LR" or one that seemed fairly normal?

User avatar
jonillson

New
Posts: 60
Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2010 1:14 pm

Re: Can we get to the bottom of this Experimental nonsense?

Post by jonillson » Mon Oct 11, 2010 12:37 am

minnbills wrote:I had:

RC (real)
LR (25) easy
LR (25) super hard... every stimulus seemed really long. Lots of complex questions.
LG
LR easy

Unfortunately I don't remember where any specific questions were for LR.
i had the same layout. however, i definitely did not have two 25 LRs in sections 2 and 3 (25, 26, but not sure in which order). i felt the same way about the two sections, but in reverse order:

RC (real)
LR (?) very difficult, very long, complex stimuli
LR (?) felt like a normal LR, ended with university president elections, a question that appears to have been on the scored section. i think this section also contained the sandstone worm question
LG (real)
LR (real)

i've concluded that there were two RC LR LR LG LR layouts, and that for some, section 2 was exp., for others, section 3.

can anyone corroborate?

Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.

Register now, it's still FREE!


Sandro

Gold
Posts: 2525
Joined: Sat Jul 18, 2009 12:12 am

Re: Can we get to the bottom of this Experimental nonsense?

Post by Sandro » Mon Oct 11, 2010 1:02 am

I had the same one I think, i'm assuiming LR 1 (sec2) was experimental because it was a lottt harder....

Hedwig

Silver
Posts: 835
Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2010 1:56 am

Re: Can we get to the bottom of this Experimental nonsense?

Post by Hedwig » Mon Oct 11, 2010 1:10 am

My experimental LR identified itself by being SUPER DUPER EASY and I loved every question and rocked my way through it and then found another LR and then another and was sad :(.

Sandro

Gold
Posts: 2525
Joined: Sat Jul 18, 2009 12:12 am

Re: Can we get to the bottom of this Experimental nonsense?

Post by Sandro » Mon Oct 11, 2010 1:17 am

actually i'm not even so sure anymore if LR1 or LR2 was easier for me. I know I finished LR2 with more time left but went back to a question or two. I hate not being able to remember much.

minnbills

Gold
Posts: 3311
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2010 2:04 pm

Re: Can we get to the bottom of this Experimental nonsense?

Post by minnbills » Mon Oct 11, 2010 8:25 am

jonillson wrote:
minnbills wrote:I had:

RC (real)
LR (25) easy
LR (25) super hard... every stimulus seemed really long. Lots of complex questions.
LG
LR easy

Unfortunately I don't remember where any specific questions were for LR.
i had the same layout. however, i definitely did not have two 25 LRs in sections 2 and 3 (25, 26, but not sure in which order). i felt the same way about the two sections, but in reverse order:

RC (real)
LR (?) very difficult, very long, complex stimuli
LR (?) felt like a normal LR, ended with university president elections, a question that appears to have been on the scored section. i think this section also contained the sandstone worm question
LG (real)
LR (real)

i've concluded that there were two RC LR LR LG LR layouts, and that for some, section 2 was exp., for others, section 3.

can anyone corroborate?

I think this is the case. unfortunately I don't remember where any questions were in particular.

Seriously? What are you waiting for?

Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!


Post Reply

Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”