does it matter which pt's i take Forum

[imbored25]

i bought the first 10 actual lsat pts book. it includes tests 9-16, 18. should i get the next book when im finished with these or instead by more recent pt's, or does it not matter. i've read in other threads that the more recent ones are more difficult, is this true?

[09042014]

i bought the first 10 actual lsat pts book. it includes tests 9-16, 18. should i get the next book when im finished with these or instead by more recent pt's, or does it not matter. i've read in other threads that the more recent ones are more difficult, is this true?

Recent is slightly better because the test slowly changes over time. It won't make a huge difference though.

The one major change is a different type of reading passage. It has to compare two passages athat are about similar topics.

[TheTallOne0602]

I would highly recommend the more recent ones.

[amorfati]

Definitely try to go with the most recent ones, preferably late 40s to present (December will be 62), and especially the late 50s. In my opinion, the logic games get somewhat easier, but the reading comprehension harder. (LR might be a bit tougher too, not sure though.)

[benito]

I have gone through almost every pt now, and all from 30 on, and I honestly believe all the talk of a difference between the older and newer tests is way overblown. Even the dual passages in RC really don't change anything fundamentally. The same skill set required to do well in the first ten pt's is the same thats required in the last ten. Sure they go through some trends in terms of the # of sequencing games vs grouping games, or the types of question they ask in LR more or less principle questions assumption questions etc....But ultimately people logic does not change, and they call it a standardized test for a reason. For everyone on here that claims they crushed 28-38 and struggle with 50-60 or whatever there is someone else who will claim the inverse. This has to do with lots of variables involving that individual person, and not so much with a difference in the tests. Whatever slight difference that does exist is accounted for in the curve.

[imbored25]

thanks for the advice people

[gloriouscause]

what i did was i used the earlier tests (the tests in the actual lsat books) for more focused studying, like doing isolated passages or focusing on s specific question type. I used the later preptests (50 and up) as actual timed practice tests (occasionally did this with the later ones from the big books). Another difference that I havent seen mentioned is that more recent tests rarely use one passage for two questions in LR, but this is a common format in earlier tests.

[niederbomb]

what i did was i used the earlier tests (the tests in the actual lsat books) for more focused studying, like doing isolated passages or focusing on s specific question type. I used the later preptests (50 and up) as actual timed practice tests (occasionally did this with the later ones from the big books). Another difference that I havent seen mentioned is that more recent tests rarely use one passage for two questions in LR, but this is a common format in earlier tests.

There were several of these on the undisclosed October test. So you can't count on anything.

[luckyme]

i bought the first 10 actual lsat pts book. it includes tests 9-16, 18. should i get the next book when im finished with these or instead by more recent pt's, or does it not matter. i've read in other threads that the more recent ones are more difficult, is this true?

I found the 50s to be most useful. In fact, after taking a few of the exams in the 50s, I completel abandoned the "first 10 actual" book

[Adjudicator]

In my opinion, if you had to choose between tests 50-60 and tests 1-49, take 50-60.

[c_dubya_s]

Absolutely do 50-62, and focus especially on about 56-62. That's when (in my opinion) the question types that were emphasized changed a little, and the difficulty went up slightly (the choices for some of the LR and RC questions get harder to differentiate). I remember having some difficulty the first few times I took a test in the late 50s (I had been PTing, working my way up from PT 8 or so to around PT 40). My score dropped by around 8 points from what I had been averaging on the older tests, which caused a brief moment of panic. It took 2-3 PTs to get it back up close to what it had been on the earlier tests.

Moral of the story: Yes, definitely do the later practice tests. If you can do most of the ones from 50-62, especially 56-62, you'll be fine.

[shanemahsa]

Do all of them. Starting with the oldest and working to the most recent. If you can't do all of them, make sure you do the most recent ones, but do the newest ones last. But do them all if you can . It works.

[vdbl1901]

I can't recall exactly off of the top of my head but the older tests such as the PT's 1-20 and some more after that where written by a different company and they use logic games that are weird compared to what you will see on more current lsat exam. I recomend doing a google search on it. But my advice would be to either learn to identify these problems and skip them in the logic games section or just skip logic games sections in these older practice tests entirely. These problems will not prepare you for the actual exam.

[niederbomb]

Actually, I think the "50's" begin with PT 47, if we define 50's in terms of style: hard RC, moderate games, tricky LR, tight curves.

Start with 47. Then you'll have at least 15 full PT's to do. Then, do the logic games from 1-41 for extra practice if you have trouble in that area.

Same with LR. It's mostly the same difficulty level from 1-61, even though the modern tests are easier in the sense that they have less ambiguous language and it's, thus, easier to prove the correct answer through formal logic.

On RC, though, you're screwed if you don't get it quickly because nothing is anything like RC from 49 up.

[SchopenhauerFTW]

.

[niederbomb]

I can't recall exactly off of the top of my head but the older tests such as the PT's 1-20 and some more after that where written by a different company and they use logic games that are weird compared to what you will see on more current lsat exam. I recomend doing a google search on it. But my advice would be to either learn to identify these problems and skip them in the logic games section or just skip logic games sections in these older practice tests entirely. These problems will not prepare you for the actual exam.

I agree. I've gotten way better with the games over the past month, and today I just did the LG from PT 7 today (it was the last one left in the book I have). Two of the games seemed so bizarre that I ended up just staring at the page for a minute, not even knowing where to start.

Pretty sure if you followed that strategy and found Mulch, Digits from June 2007, Zephyr Airlines, or Dinos on an early test, you would probably skip it for being "bizarre." The ONLY older game types that they have never used in recent history are pattern games, and it could be argued that Mulch from PT 60 is like a pattern game.

[SchopenhauerFTW]

.

[bartleby]

I did the LRs and RCs on PT15 and 14 today. RC is way easier. LRs are def. different. Long and wordy and they clump a bunch of the same question types together. Also, I saw a a weird one that resembled the Otter question from June. For those who aren't taking December, it is def. worthwhile to take the older exams. These new exams have some unpredictable ques. on them.

[justbubbles]

...the PT's 1-20 and some more after that where written by a different company and they use logic games that are weird compared to what you will see on more current lsat exam. I recomend doing a google search on it....

I have also heard this. Anyone know exactly at which LSAT PT did LSAC actually make the company change?

As for recycling logic games, well, anything is possible. I wouldn't discount anything. Take a look at this:

http://lsatblog.blogspot.com/2009/01/lo ... ns_22.html