Top Law Schools

Consensus seems to be that RC is more difficult nowadays. When did this change begin?

.

didnt notice such a change

vegso wrote:didnt notice such a change

same. if anything the passages may have changed style a bit, but the questions and density don't seem to have changed. imo the most dense passages i've read were in the earliest lsat's.

RC in PT 7-18 was a joke.

Alorain wrote:RC in PT 7-18 was a joke.

Credited. They were almost a joke.

For me, somewhere in the 50's the RC ether became a bit more difficult, but after drilling, they became less difficult.

I started to notice a step rise in passage density after the 30s. The difference between a passage in the 20s to one in, say, 42 was immense.

IMO, RC got much more difficult starting with PT 49 which had the maize passage.

I thought that pre-test 49, the inference questions were really obvious and close to the text whereas more recent RC's take more logical leaps.

But that's my opinion anyway.

In any case, RC was the bane of my existence. I will forever be traumatized by Riddle Basins of Attraction. Biggest mind/psychological rape I've ever endured on a PT.

Also Maxine Kingston can go jump off a bridge.

See... This is another one of those times where I disagree with the general consensus. This is anecdotal, but my worst PTs for RC this time around were 46 and 47, where I went -6 and -5 respectively. In all the 60s tests that I did afterwards, I averaged -1. Admittedly that doesn't mean much in a vacuum, but I don't think (beyond the addition of CR passages) there is a significant difference. Some tests have harder sections than others, but over the course of the whole exam, I think the difficulty is pretty consistent for RC.

40s LG is definitely a joke, though.

NoodleyOne wrote:See... This is another one of those times where I disagree with the general consensus. This is anecdotal, but my worst PTs for RC this time around were 46 and 47, where I went -6 and -5 respectively. In all the 60s tests that I did afterwards, I averaged -1. Admittedly that doesn't mean much in a vacuum, but I don't think (beyond the addition of CR passages) there is a significant difference. Some tests have harder sections than others, but over the course of the whole exam, I think the difficulty is pretty consistent for RC.

40s LG is definitely a joke, though.

I think everyone will have a view on it though. I consistently went -2 to -4 on 19 to 49, but once the 50s started went up to -5 to -8. The last few PTs (66 and 64) I managed to do a bit better on, but I definitely thing RC got harder.

steel_shot wrote:

NoodleyOne wrote:See... This is another one of those times where I disagree with the general consensus. This is anecdotal, but my worst PTs for RC this time around were 46 and 47, where I went -6 and -5 respectively. In all the 60s tests that I did afterwards, I averaged -1. Admittedly that doesn't mean much in a vacuum, but I don't think (beyond the addition of CR passages) there is a significant difference. Some tests have harder sections than others, but over the course of the whole exam, I think the difficulty is pretty consistent for RC.

40s LG is definitely a joke, though.

I think everyone will have a view on it though. I consistently went -2 to -4 on 19 to 49, but once the 50s started went up to -5 to -8. The last few PTs (66 and 64) I managed to do a bit better on, but I definitely thing RC got harder.

Yeah, I know personally, I thought there was a RC-LG switch in difficulty. More lol for RC than for LG. Then again, I just took October and thought RC was really simple and the zone game was rofl... so hey, what do I know?

dproduct wrote:

steel_shot wrote:

NoodleyOne wrote:See... This is another one of those times where I disagree with the general consensus. This is anecdotal, but my worst PTs for RC this time around were 46 and 47, where I went -6 and -5 respectively. In all the 60s tests that I did afterwards, I averaged -1. Admittedly that doesn't mean much in a vacuum, but I don't think (beyond the addition of CR passages) there is a significant difference. Some tests have harder sections than others, but over the course of the whole exam, I think the difficulty is pretty consistent for RC.

40s LG is definitely a joke, though.

I think everyone will have a view on it though. I consistently went -2 to -4 on 19 to 49, but once the 50s started went up to -5 to -8. The last few PTs (66 and 64) I managed to do a bit better on, but I definitely thing RC got harder.

Yeah, I know personally, I thought there was a RC-LG switch in difficulty. More lol for RC than for LG. Then again, I just took October and thought RC was really simple and the zone game was rofl... so hey, what do I know?

I don't think I did too hot on either, so looks like we both don't know. I just hope this torture of waiting is over Friday.

7-30 I averaged -2/0, and mostly -1/0 in the 20's.

52-66: -4 average, with more variation in the 50's (had one 0, another -8)