Top Law Schools

I'm completely done with Prep Tests 40ish-69, having taken the test twice before. Is there anything I can do to simulate taking an actual fresh LSAT or am I doomed to reuse tests for the next month? I read EarlCat's (i think) thread about re-using exams and completely agree, but I do want to find some way to figure out if I'm making progress or regurgitating something I did 6 months ago.

Thanks in advance.

Take old tests. They're not so different that they aren't useful.

rinkrat19 wrote:Take old tests. They're not so different that they aren't useful.

Will the scaled score still be a relatively accurate benchmark for current scores?

I've done almost all of them twice too. Unless your memory is far better than mine (#18 is B! #19 is C!) I still think there's a lot of use for tests seen, even twice. Aim for a 180. Think about why each answer choice is correct before circling it.

eaad91 wrote:

rinkrat19 wrote:Take old tests. They're not so different that they aren't useful.

Will the scaled score still be a relatively accurate benchmark for current scores?

Yes.

wtrcoins3 wrote:I've done almost all of them twice too. Unless your memory is far better than mine (#18 is B! #19 is C!) I still think there's a lot of use for tests seen, even twice. Aim for a 180. Think about why each answer choice is correct before circling it.

Memory definitely isn't that good and I did take them several months ago so it's not overly fresh. Been doing what you're suggesting, just hope it all pays off on test day. Thanks and good luck to you.

rinkrat19 wrote:Yes.

Thanks.

I am also in the process of retaking some exams (most actually) and scattering the 8 or so that I havent seen through the ones I am retaking for. On every other test I remember 1 LG or 1 RC, and I mean just the concept, I dont remember any answers or specific questions...for LR maybe 1-2 questions...but again just the ideas, not answers. I was worried that this gives me a biased score...I scored a 177 on a recent PT that was a retake and I just didnt feel like it was a true score since I remember seeing 1 game/passage.

eaad91 wrote:

rinkrat19 wrote:Take old tests. They're not so different that they aren't useful.

Will the scaled score still be a relatively accurate benchmark for current scores?

Not to contradict, but I was under the impression that the curve has tightened in the past decade or so?

http://lsatblog.blogspot.com/2010/04/ea ... -june.html
(Takeaway is that the 170 curve for June '94 - '01 was -12 on average, but only -10 for June '02 - '09)

The older scaled score can tell you if you bombed or rocked a test, but I personally wouldn't be using the scaled score to track 1-2 point improvements. I would track the raw score instead for older tests.

yot11 wrote:

eaad91 wrote:

rinkrat19 wrote:Take old tests. They're not so different that they aren't useful.

Will the scaled score still be a relatively accurate benchmark for current scores?

Not to contradict, but I was under the impression that the curve has tightened in the past decade or so?

http://lsatblog.blogspot.com/2010/04/ea ... -june.html
(Takeaway is that the 170 curve for June '94 - '01 was -12 on average, but only -10 for June '02 - '09)

The older scaled score can tell you if you bombed or rocked a test, but I personally wouldn't be using the scaled score to track 1-2 point improvements. I would track the raw score instead for older tests.

The scores are scaled so that if you do a 170-level performance, you'd theoretically get a 170 on any test. The tighter modern curve means that the test is easier now, so you can afford to miss fewer to get the same score. If you looked at the raw scores for an old test vs. a new test, they'd be different, but the scaled score (the ultimate measure of your performance, since it is theoretically constant) is the same.

Thanks for the clarification! I stand corrected.