LSAT Fluke & Questions on Average of LSATs (October 13 LSAT) Forum

[UCLAHopeful2014]

Hi All,

So, I have been taking prep tests fairly regularly since the beginning of August and I have scored as follows: 160, 163, 163, 167, 165, 168, 164, 167, 169, 168, 170 and then the last two times I have taken it, I did worse on the RC section than normal and scored: 167 and ... 163 (which the 163 scares the shit out of me). Besides for the last time (the 163), the last 5 times have all been 167 and above.

Do you think the 163 is a fluke? The night before I had drank a little bit but I got about 6 hours of sleep or so. I have already taken the LSAT once and do NOT want to score a 160 again. I am worried about not achieving my goal of at least a 167 . What do you all think? I am registered to take the October 2013 LSAT.

Thanks!

[Nova]

163-170 is a pretty normal score band

[yot11]

I personally never bought into the whole "LSAT is super consistent" thing. I found that my practice tests would vary pretty wildly from test to test, depending on my focus (and how often I almost fell asleep xD), in about a 6 point range. Then again, maybe I did it wrong.

I wouldn't sweat the 163, just relax and the next time you take a PT, you'll probably be back on track.

[bilbaosan]

I personally never bought into the whole "LSAT is super consistent" thing. I found that my practice tests would vary pretty wildly from test to test, depending on my focus (and how often I almost fell asleep xD), in about a 6 point range. Then again, maybe I did it wrong.

To give the credit when it is due, LSAC doesn't claim the test is super consistent; they claim the score might vary within approximately 3 points. This of course assumes similar test conditions

Which, obviously, is not the case. My own score varies from 154 to 171 for the same conditions depending on prep., which makes it closer to a random number generator than a real test.

[Clearly]

I personally never bought into the whole "LSAT is super consistent" thing. I found that my practice tests would vary pretty wildly from test to test, depending on my focus (and how often I almost fell asleep xD), in about a 6 point range. Then again, maybe I did it wrong.

To give the credit when it is due, LSAC doesn't claim the test is super consistent; they claim the score might vary within approximately 3 points. This of course assumes similar test conditions

Which, obviously, is not the case. My own score varies from 154 to 171 for the same conditions depending on prep., which makes it closer to a random number generator than a real test.

To be more specific (and clear up common misconception about score bands) The 3 point score band isn't claimed by lsac to be representative of ones true ability. The score band is a range of scores that has a certain
probability of containing your actual proficiency level. The standard error of measurement (SEM), a statistic
that indicates the average amount of error in scores, is used to construct the band. For example, an
individual’s test score is within one SEM of his or her “true score” approximately 68 percent of the time, and
within two SEMs approximately 95 percent of the time. A 68 percent score band, constructed using one
SEM, is being reported for the LSAT. This means 32% of the time, LSAC is acknowledging a persons skill level is outside even the whole range of the currently used score band. They also concede that at the extremes, 1% and 99% scores, the SEM accuracy goes well outside the 68% point.

And I can't find the literature on this, but I remember hearing it somewhere. The value of a real score isn't even intended to remain constant forever. I believe the goal of the predictive value of a score is to remain within the score band 68% of the time for all tests issued within some years (I believe 5) of a given test...They don't set out to claim that you should be +-3 on PT1 and PT 68. Rather that you have a 68% chance of falling within your score band for all administrations within the last set number of years (which again I think is 5, but not sure).