When I mentioned I was taking the LSAT this year, my friend's older brother gave me a bunch of prep books he'd never used. There's one that consists solely of practice tests that I want to use, but they're all from between 1999 and 2002. Has the LSAT changed significantly since 2002 – enough so that studying from these tests wouldn't be beneficial?
Thanks for your help!
Worth using older prep tests? Forum
-
HuskyHopeful
- Posts: 78
- Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2012 8:46 pm
Re: Worth using older prep tests?
I find that the RC sections on the older tests tend to be more challenging. Really haven't noticed too much of a difference between LRs. and the LGS from that time frame are worded awkwardly; can result in easier or much harder games IMO
-
skova
- Posts: 5
- Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2012 8:32 pm
Re: Worth using older prep tests?
Really??
I've found the opposite -- I've pulled myself up to 23-25ish on the older test and noticed myself dropping to 20-22ish on the newer tests....
I hate RC.
I've found the opposite -- I've pulled myself up to 23-25ish on the older test and noticed myself dropping to 20-22ish on the newer tests....
I hate RC.
-
Nova
- Posts: 9102
- Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2012 8:55 pm
-
dowu
- Posts: 8298
- Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2012 9:47 pm
Re: Worth using older prep tests?
The general agreement is that the RC sections become progressively harder as the tests become more recent. You might be in trouble dude!HuskyHopeful wrote:I find that the RC sections on the older tests tend to be more challenging. Really haven't noticed too much of a difference between LRs. and the LGS from that time frame are worded awkwardly; can result in easier or much harder games IMO
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
totaltest.milan
- Posts: 84
- Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2011 9:45 pm
Re: Worth using older prep tests?
Some of the games in the earliest 10 tests (7 - 18) haven't come up since then so there's not much of a point in studying them. The args and RC have remained fairly constant, args more so.
With my students I start at PT 29, I find that that's generally enough material otherwise given their schedules it might be burn-out and overwork. And if I feel that more prepping is required I can always go back to the earlier tests. Skipping the above-mentioned games of course.
With my students I start at PT 29, I find that that's generally enough material otherwise given their schedules it might be burn-out and overwork. And if I feel that more prepping is required I can always go back to the earlier tests. Skipping the above-mentioned games of course.
-
bp shinners
- Posts: 3086
- Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2011 7:05 pm
Re: Worth using older prep tests?
More recent practice tests are definitely more indicative of the modern LSAT.
However, the difference between them and the old ones isn't big enough to warrant worrying about them not being good prep. While I would drop the money on some more recent ones, if you want to get started with the older ones, they'll still be good prep. A few LG types won't show up anymore, but they're still good practice. You won't get a comparative RC passage, but having 4 normal ones is good practice. Some of the LR language will seem a bit wonky, but it's still good practice. Notice a pattern?
However, the difference between them and the old ones isn't big enough to warrant worrying about them not being good prep. While I would drop the money on some more recent ones, if you want to get started with the older ones, they'll still be good prep. A few LG types won't show up anymore, but they're still good practice. You won't get a comparative RC passage, but having 4 normal ones is good practice. Some of the LR language will seem a bit wonky, but it's still good practice. Notice a pattern?
