Skipping the experimental section? Forum

[rubydandun]

Is it too big a risk? Or is it guaranteed that it's always one of the first 3 sections?

Anyone know of a situation where an experimental was 4th or 5th?

[NYC Law]

Why in the world would you risk fucking up your score and future over one 25 minute section?

Just do it all to your best ability and ignore the fact there's an experimental section.

[blurbz]

How would you guess which of the first three it is?

[gbpackerbacker]

Wow. Just wow....

[risktaker]

No, experimental will always be one of the first three. If you have the balls to look at section 4 and 5 before the test starts or during the test, more power to you. Just realize that you could potentially ruin your future if you get caught.

[Cupidity]

There are some situations where it is easy to guess it with perfect accuracy, and some students do it. Be aware, if your proctor or anyone else in the room notices you working on the sections out of order, your test will be revoked, a notice will be placed in your LSAC file, and you will not go to law school.

[mushybrain]

...why? what is it that you plan to do with your time instead of that section? The only way it would be useful to skip it entirely would be if you planned to work on another section, and I don't think you'll find anyone here telling you it's a good idea to cheat.

[incompetentia]

You don't need to worry about any of the six sections, really. None of them will test anything useful, really.


Seriously, man up and treat the entire thing as if it were scored.

[Capitol A]

Is it too big a risk? Or is it guaranteed that it's always one of the first 3 sections?

Anyone know of a situation where an experimental was 4th or 5th?

The experimental is always one of the first 3. If you've been prepping properly you will be able to tell which one it is just based on the way the questions/games are worded. And yes, you should definitely skip it. This will give you time to just sit there and clear your head and you will perform significantly better on the sections that actually count because you will be much fresher. This is what I did, and it definitely paid off.

[rinkrat19]

Is it too big a risk? Or is it guaranteed that it's always one of the first 3 sections?

Anyone know of a situation where an experimental was 4th or 5th?

The experimental is always one of the first 3. If you've been prepping properly you will be able to tell which one it is just based on the way the questions/games are worded. And yes, you should definitely skip it. This will give you time to just sit there and clear your head and you will perform significantly better on the sections that actually count because you will be much fresher. This is what I did, and it definitely paid off.

Since your experimental will be a real section next time, and your real sections were all experimental sections on a past test, this is an idiotic statement to make. You can't just "tell" which section is experimental.

The only way to deduce which section is the experimental is if you get one RC in the first 3 and one RC in the last 2 (or same with LG). Then you know the first one was experimental, but you don't know until you see sections 4 and 5. If your experimental is LR, there's no way to tell. If you peek ahead at sections 4 and 5, you risk wrecking your entire future by getting caught cheating on the LSAT.

In short: man up, buttercup, and take the whole test like a big girl.

[amorfati]

umm, moral considerations aside, wouldn't it be a bit odd (particularly to the proctor) if you were the only person sitting there staring at the ceiling? the only productive alternative use for your time would be to cheat, and obviously you might get caught. (also, you will get rightfully torn apart in this thread for screwing everyone else.)

if I were you, and if I were actually incredibly confident about which section is the experimental, then I would work on the section, but just take it easy. That way you might not do great on it, but nothing about your test will seem fishy. (Or be fishy, period.) Just consider it a warm-up section... anyway, I don't know about everyone else, but I always do better once I get on a roll after a section or two - so why waste the extra practice opportunity?

[Gizmo]

Since your experimental will be a real section next time, and your real sections were all experimental sections on a past test, this is an idiotic statement to make. You can't just "tell" which section is experimental.

Not all experimental sections/questions make the cut. There would be no need to include them if they were already known to be "real section" quality. They presumably test for something that varies, and you might be able to identify outliers.

That said, I had two RC passages before the break and was positive I knew which one was fake. I was wrong.

[JamMasterJ]

120

[Capitol A]

Is it too big a risk? Or is it guaranteed that it's always one of the first 3 sections?

Anyone know of a situation where an experimental was 4th or 5th?

The experimental is always one of the first 3. If you've been prepping properly you will be able to tell which one it is just based on the way the questions/games are worded. And yes, you should definitely skip it. This will give you time to just sit there and clear your head and you will perform significantly better on the sections that actually count because you will be much fresher. This is what I did, and it definitely paid off.

Since your experimental will be a real section next time, and your real sections were all experimental sections on a past test, this is an idiotic statement to make. You can't just "tell" which section is experimental.

The only way to deduce which section is the experimental is if you get one RC in the first 3 and one RC in the last 2 (or same with LG). Then you know the first one was experimental, but you don't know until you see sections 4 and 5. If your experimental is LR, there's no way to tell. If you peek ahead at sections 4 and 5, you risk wrecking your entire future by getting caught cheating on the LSAT.

In short: man up, buttercup, and take the whole test like a big girl.

RC fail. I said IF you've been prepping properly. Maybe you couldn't tell the difference, but you must not have prepped properly. I was obvioulsy able to tell.
I don't know if it was fishy to the procotors or not that I was just sitting there. I made productive use of my time by resting my brain and thinking of what I wanted to name my new kitten. Ended up going with Sebastian, so obviously paid off.

[rinkrat19]

Is it too big a risk? Or is it guaranteed that it's always one of the first 3 sections?

Anyone know of a situation where an experimental was 4th or 5th?

The experimental is always one of the first 3. If you've been prepping properly you will be able to tell which one it is just based on the way the questions/games are worded. And yes, you should definitely skip it. This will give you time to just sit there and clear your head and you will perform significantly better on the sections that actually count because you will be much fresher. This is what I did, and it definitely paid off.

Since your experimental will be a real section next time, and your real sections were all experimental sections on a past test, this is an idiotic statement to make. You can't just "tell" which section is experimental.

The only way to deduce which section is the experimental is if you get one RC in the first 3 and one RC in the last 2 (or same with LG). Then you know the first one was experimental, but you don't know until you see sections 4 and 5. If your experimental is LR, there's no way to tell. If you peek ahead at sections 4 and 5, you risk wrecking your entire future by getting caught cheating on the LSAT.

In short: man up, buttercup, and take the whole test like a big girl.

RC fail. I said IF you've been prepping properly. Maybe you couldn't tell the difference, but you must not have prepped properly. I was obvioulsy able to tell.
I don't know if it was fishy to the procotors or not that I was just sitting there. I made productive use of my time by resting my brain and thinking of what I wanted to name my new kitten. Ended up going with Sebastian, so obviously paid off.

LR fail. You lucked out. There is no way to tell. Experimental questions are REAL QUESTIONS. They will be used on a future test as-is.

[Capitol A]

Since your experimental will be a real section next time, and your real sections were all experimental sections on a past test, this is an idiotic statement to make. You can't just "tell" which section is experimental.

Not all experimental sections/questions make the cut. There would be no need to include them if they were already known to be "real section" quality. They presumably test for something that varies, and you might be able to identify outliers.

That said, I had two RC passages before the break and was positive I knew which one was fake. I was wrong.

At least, at least 15% of your prep time should be spent developing the ability to determine which is the experimental section. This time will absolutely pay off with the reward of having an extra break that other people, who aren't properly prepped don't get the luxury of taking.

[Gizmo]

LR fail. You lucked out. There is no way to tell. Experimental questions are REAL QUESTIONS. They will be used on a future test as-is.

This is not smart.

[Kilpatrick]

LR fail. You lucked out. There is no way to tell. Experimental questions are REAL QUESTIONS. They will be used on a future test as-is.

RC fail - he's kidding

[rinkrat19]

LR fail. You lucked out. There is no way to tell. Experimental questions are REAL QUESTIONS. They will be used on a future test as-is.

RC fail - he's kidding

Now that I could believe. My trolldar is pretty bad.

[Gizmo]

At least, at least 15% of your prep time should be spent developing the ability to determine which is the experimental section. This time will absolutely pay off with the reward of having an extra break that other people, who aren't properly prepped don't get the luxury of taking.

This is not smart either.

[Capitol A]

LR fail. You lucked out. There is no way to tell. Experimental questions are REAL QUESTIONS. They will be used on a future test as-is.

RC fail - he's kidding

How did you figure that out? You must be super smart. Or maybe you know me IRL and you know my cat's real name is Gepetto.

[rinkrat19]

LR fail. You lucked out. There is no way to tell. Experimental questions are REAL QUESTIONS. They will be used on a future test as-is.

This is not smart.

How do you think they determine the grading scale for the next test?

[Gizmo]

LR fail. You lucked out. There is no way to tell. Experimental questions are REAL QUESTIONS. They will be used on a future test as-is.

This is not smart.

How do you think they determine the grading scale for the next test?

Even if that were the only thing that the experimental section were checking (they still need to control for race/gender/etc), again, large variance in the scaling would be detectable. At the extremes, the LSAC would not want to use a section that everybody got a -0 on. There will never be a real test with a -5 or -18 scale (for 170), and how test takers perform on the experimental questions makes sure that sections that might cause this will never make it in.

[BackToTheOldHouse]

I would skip all three of the first three sections. You wouldn't want to accidentally waste your time on the experimental section.

[OhOkay]

At least, at least 15% of your prep time should be spent developing the ability to determine which is the experimental section. This time will absolutely pay off with the reward of having an extra break that other people, who aren't properly prepped don't get the luxury of taking.

LOL. And how exactly should we be developing this ability? Taking the real LSAT multiple times?