Top Law Schools

So I just took one of the Princeton Review tests in the Cracking the LSAT book and got a full ten points lower than my practice tests average!

How do you all feel that these tests compare with the real thing? Should I be freaking out about this? Was this just a bad test for me or are these things totally bunk?

It seems the games are spot on, but the other 2 sections rely on some really strange logic, or maybe I'm just making excuses... Please share your thoughts if you have any experience with these virtual LSATS.

--

Certainly the instruction is terrible. I'm referring specifically to the virtual exams at the back of the book and how they compare to an actual LSAT preptest.

Not realistic. You should stick to the actual PrepTests, of which there are more than 40.

Theres about 55 actual preptests, why would you even bother taking some made up exam?

You dont get better at baseball by playing cricket...

Princeton Review's LR questions are the worst I've ever seen.

Try the Nova book, they have some LR, RC and LG of their own design that I thought were pretty good. There is Kaplan 180 too

I did much worse when studying with the PR practice tests. They are much more "difficult" than actual lsat tests IMO. I did much better when studying with the 10 actual lsat books. The score i received on those tests was very close to my eventual lsat score.

fwiw i also think Kaplan tests are more difficult as well. I remember taking a Kaplan diagnostic test and it was 12 points lower than my actual lsat score. I have always suspected that those tests are intentionally more difficult to scare people into believing they should pay for an lsat course.

Glad that someone else experienced this with Princeton Review LR sections.

I took an LR section because I don't have any more actual PT's right now. (On their way)

I normally am at -3 LR with it all done in 30 minutes.

I barely finished the Princeton Review Cracking the LSAT Logical Reasoning Test in the time. And I got -9!!!! (This would be enough to make me want to pay the 1200 bucks for one of their courses). I also went back and reviewed all of those questions and I am very unhappy with the wording they used in many of them. They changed the variables around in some of them and it was very sloppy. (See: professional school vs vocational school) The LSAT would never change terms in the questions, at least for a correct answer.

I have taken 5 actual LSAT logical reasoning sections, and my lowest was a -5 with 7 minutes to spare.

This shocked/depressed me. However, I have found BLATANT errors in their games. (Check out Section 1 of the the same test, where it talks about "Which plane must be a prop".) Which, I found interesting since no where in the question does it mention anything about a prop. I looked and realized they just copy and pasted the questions from a very similar game and didn't update the questions to relate to the game scenario. Terrible.

Avoiding this

LateNight wrote:This shocked/depressed me. However, I have found BLATANT errors in their games. (Check out Section 1 of the the same test, where it talks about "Which plane must be a prop".) Which, I found interesting since no where in the question does it mention anything about a prop. I looked and realized they just copy and pasted the questions from a very similar game and didn't update the questions to relate to the game scenario. Terrible.

Great to hear! when i first saw 'prop' I thought it's some slang that i don't understand as a non-native speaker....and obviously i got that one wrong.

anyway, i've only did one test in that book, i used that as my first diagnostic and i got 151...should i feel more reassured after reading this thread?

Those tests are there, I'm imagining, as more of a marketing than a teaching tool. They're spiraled off of real LSAT questions (which means we change them just enough that we can't be sued for copyright infringement). Spiraling well is actually really hard, though, and I suspect that this Cracking book may not quite have pulled it off every time. Redo old PTs. Practice on real questions. The examples in the book are just examples, not real practice.

Oh, that vocational school vs professional school problem. That was a fail on my part.

The PR Logic Games Workout book I was using had several errors in it. Avoid them.

I used the Princeton Review to help study for the LSAT, and almost cried about how horrible I was consistently doing on the practice tests, but when it came time for the actual LSAT I scored a full 10 points better than I had on average with the Princeton Review practice tests. Hope that provides some consolation!

LateNight wrote:Glad that someone else experienced this with Princeton Review LR sections.

I took an LR section because I don't have any more actual PT's right now. (On their way)

I normally am at -3 LR with it all done in 30 minutes.

I barely finished the Princeton Review Cracking the LSAT Logical Reasoning Test in the time. And I got -9!!!! (This would be enough to make me want to pay the 1200 bucks for one of their courses). I also went back and reviewed all of those questions and I am very unhappy with the wording they used in many of them. They changed the variables around in some of them and it was very sloppy. (See: professional school vs vocational school) The LSAT would never change terms in the questions, at least for a correct answer.

I have taken 5 actual LSAT logical reasoning sections, and my lowest was a -5 with 7 minutes to spare.

This shocked/depressed me. However, I have found BLATANT errors in their games. (Check out Section 1 of the the same test, where it talks about "Which plane must be a prop".) Which, I found interesting since no where in the question does it mention anything about a prop. I looked and realized they just copy and pasted the questions from a very similar game and didn't update the questions to relate to the game scenario. Terrible.

I feel your pain, their book is totally unrealistic. I got -10 as well....I finally made up my mind to throw it to the garbage, forever.