How do you reconcile better scores on tests used prior Forum

[boblawlob]

I'm scoring in 168-174 range on a lot of the tests that I have seen prior.
But on some of the tests that I have never taken, I score between 164-168 (mostly these are the February Preptests).


Back when I was prepping for the June 2012 test (which I ended up not sitting in for), I took the December 2011 PT(brand new)...and scored 165.


It's weird scoring in the 170s on old tests because it goes both ways: 1. Yes, you realize you are improving and you are getting in a rhythm for the mindset of how to approach the problems 2. However, these are not brand new questions and so there's an unconscious familiarity with it all.

How do you exactly reconcile these scores, especially if you are aiming for flawlessness?

[Zensack]

Just be aware that some of them are inflated. I flat out remembered an answer I missed on an old RC section today, and probably would have missed again if not for that voice of certainty. I did, however, know why the answer was correct, so I'm at least closer to hitting a comparable question in the future.

[Cerebro]

Of someone aiming for flawlessness I would ask, "Why did you fail to answer all the questions correctly (i.e., 180) the second (third, fourth, fifth, etc.) time you saw them?"

In my mind, this is a more useful question to answer than how much to handicap your score based on the fact that you had seen the questions before.

[Jeffort]

Of someone aiming for flawlessness I would ask, "Why did you fail to answer all the questions correctly (i.e., 180) the second (third, fourth, fifth, etc.) time you saw them?"

In my mind, this is a more useful question to answer than how much to handicap your score based on the fact that you had seen the questions before.

This^ is important to do after taking a particular test again when you incorrectly answer many of the same questions as before. It provides a list of questions to focus on and review in detail to identify logical concepts and associated strategies/techniques that need to be reviewed and improved.

[bp shinners]

Of someone aiming for flawlessness I would ask, "Why did you fail to answer all the questions correctly (i.e., 180) the second (third, fourth, fifth, etc.) time you saw them?"

In my mind, this is a more useful question to answer than how much to handicap your score based on the fact that you had seen the questions before.

This^ is important to do after taking a particular test again when you incorrectly answer many of the same questions as before. It provides a list of questions to focus on and review in detail to identify logical concepts and associated strategies/techniques that need to be reviewed and improved.

There's also 2 ways to get something wrong a second time - either by picking the same answer as the first time or by picking a different answer.

If you pick the same wrong answer both times, the trick they used to get you to pick that answer is very strong for you, and figuring out how they're tricking you into that particular wrong answer is paramount.

If you pick a different wrong answer each time, then the way they're hiding the correct answer is something that you fall for easily, and figuring out that trick is paramount.

[penguinbrah]

What if you get answers you got right the first time, wrong the second time you take it? And, the ones you got wrong last time you got right this time? I understand the reasoning in questions when I'm reviewing them so I can't figure out why I get them wrong when I'm doing it.