Raw vs scaled scores Forum

[westinghouse60]

Probably the #1 thing driving me crazy before the June LSAT. First 10 PTs my average raw score was ~82 raw and 166.1 scaled. The past 9 I've gotten ~86 raw while only 167.3 scaled. Yes, I know it's only 4 points raw improvement, but it seems like that should yield a scaled increase of more than a point or so.

The most recent 9 I've done are older tests so I don't know if they're supposed to be easier and that's why they're scaled that way or what. I haven't noticed any substantial difference in difficulty, and I categorically do better on the "harder" tests with more favorable scaling. So I guess my question is how reflective are the scaled scores of performance? (Yes, I know in the end they're all that really matters.) Should I be happy with my raw improvement at all or is the scaling more telling?

Thanks in advance for replies, I'm really frustrated about this now because it feels like I have barely progressed.

[BrightLine]

Do not worry about things you cannot control (scales, curves experimental). It sounds so silly, but the trick really is to do the best that you can. Just keep at it, keep practicing, stay focused on doing better not specific scores and points.

[iphone7]

Although scaled scores seem to be what's important, what really matters is getting questions right. That is what raw score reflects and has been the focus of my studying so far. The curve matters, but you can't effect what the curve is, so focus on how many questions you can answer correctly. If you have improved that, then your score will increase in relation.

[99.9luft]

Although scaled scores seem to be what's important, what really matters is getting questions right. That is what raw score reflects and has been the focus of my studying so far. The curve matters, but you can't effect what the curve is, so focus on how many questions you can answer correctly. If you have improved that, then your score will increase in relation.

THIS.

[seancris]

.