Top Law Schools

Seriously? I got LR: -2, LG: -0, and then RC: -10.

What the fuck?

Why would they make it so hard? I was sweating the entire time and struggling through it. That talk-story thing was easy to understand...until you get to the questions! REALLY, COMPARING THE LAST SENTENCE WITH COTTON FIBER (I got it right, but it took me 2 minutes)?

You would think after that behemoth of a passage (equal to basins of attraction IMO), that would be it. But noooo! Between the lily passage which also has strangely worded questions and answers, and that economics passage which seems easy (this vs this) until you get to the Qs, and finally passage #1 which is supposedly easy...until you realize you only have 5 minutes left to finish it (I got #6 wrong).

AND TO TOP IT OFF, THE CURVE IS -9. WHO IS THE GENIUS WHO CAME UP WITH THAT CURVE? What is up with curving easy exams at -11 and hard exams at -9? Actually, what is up with the -9 in the first place? Really? 9 mistakes for a 170? Why would they do this to people?

Am I the only one who got triple penetration ass raped by this ridiculous exam?

bump

--ImageRemoved--

I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE'RE YELLING ABOUT

Sourpunch wrote:Seriously? I got LR: -2, LG: -0, and then RC: -10.

What the fuck?

Am I the only one who got triple penetration ass raped by this ridiculous exam?

Boo hoo, I only got a 168

as the governator would say, "stop whining"

triple penetration ass raped?

just...ew...

I wish it was 1998 so I could post up goatse

168 is bad if you've been testing at 172+ all the way until the shitfest that is PT 55! lol. Man.

Dont get me started on PT 55. I will rage all acorss this forum.

Glad to see I'm not the only one. Man, what an exam, I am still in shock over the -9 curve! (such an insanely unfair curve! I pity the people who did it on October '08!)

At least for you it's only a PT. I wrote it for real in Oct '08. I've hated Maxine Hong Kingston and cotton fibers ever since.

I guess the Oct '08 test takers included an unusually large proportion of comparative lit/English majors.

I got a 164 on that... but who cares now.

Stupor wrote:At least for you it's only a PT. I wrote it for real in Oct '08. I've hated Maxine Hong Kingston and cotton fibers ever since.

I guess the Oct '08 test takers included an unusually large proportion of comparative lit/English majors.

+1

And don't forget the f*ing busses! That OP got -0 on LG is pretty kick ass.

I've heard nothing but complaints from people who took Oct 08 for real even from people who don't normally complain. Also, I got 5 points worse than my average on that PT when I took it, so I feel your pain.

Fuck the talk story and the buses, even though I only missed 2 questions on the bus because of my awesome guessing skills. I took PT55 for real last year and the talk story itself made me its bitch. But I reviewed it heavily yesterday and now when I look at it I think I'm ready to make it MY BITCH.

Also you think you hated the talk story. I thought it was gonna be a super easy article about Chinese-Americans or ancient Chinese history, both of which I would have raped. I was jumping in my seat when I came across it. But imagine my horror as the passage began to delve into the convoluted literary jargon and wishy washyness of the WORST kind...needless to say as my 2nd section, it totally affected me for the rest of my test.

It would have helped me immensely to know what "ex nihilo" in paragraph 1 meant. Do most people know wtf that means?

It's actually comforting to know others have struggled with this one as much as I did! I got a -6 on the first LR and rounded out the PT with a 165. That's the lowest I've gotten in the past 5 PTs by five points.

Speaking of, I suspect my first section was so bad bc I did it at 7:30am, fifteen minutes after waking up. I wasn't feeling foggy or anything though, so I'm confused -- has doing a PT right after waking up made anyone else bomb the first section??

k77 wrote:It's actually comforting to know others have struggled with this one as much as I did! I got a -6 on the first LR and rounded out the PT with a 165. That's the lowest I've gotten in the past 5 PTs by five points.

Speaking of, I suspect my first section was so bad bc I did it at 7:30am, fifteen minutes after waking up. I wasn't feeling foggy or anything though, so I'm confused -- has doing a PT right after waking up made anyone else bomb the first section??

Absolutely, coffee, a solid breakfast, and some movement to get the blood flowing (even if it's just walking to GET coffee or to the library) are all a must. I've bombed plenty of sections as I sip my coffee at 7 AM because my mind's not awake yet, even though I don't feel foggy.

Also, that entire RC section was absolutely terrible, except I found purple loosestrife mildly interesting (I admit, I wikipedia'd (yes, its a verb now) it when I was done).

I got 175 on PT55 - my best PT ever

Fuck the talk story and the buses, even though I only missed 2 questions on the bus because of my awesome guessing skills. I took PT55 for real last year and the talk story itself made me its bitch. But I reviewed it heavily yesterday and now when I look at it I think I'm ready to make it MY BITCH.

Also you think you hated the talk story. I thought it was gonna be a super easy article about Chinese-Americans or ancient Chinese history, both of which I would have raped. I was jumping in my seat when I came across it. But imagine my horror as the passage began to delve into the convoluted literary jargon and wishy washyness of the WORST kind...needless to say as my 2nd section, it totally affected me for the rest of my test.

I can only imagine! Thank god I didn't take that exam!

I am going to revive an old thread, b/c I just took this PT and it raped me as well. I'm kinda frightened because I felt like I was going to do very poorly but I got some very lucky guesses, which saved my score. I hope June isn't like this.

EDIT: and I hope I didn't use up all my luck.

The RC was a bitch on this test. I actually left during the break and know of several other people who did as well. Just be grateful it is not an actual blemish on your LSAC report... And read the New Yorker for prep.

Shit, i'm scared now I'm scheduled to take that PT on May 27th, so i'll have to update this after I've experienced this PT.

modestsquirrel wrote:The RC was a bitch on this test. I actually left during the break and know of several other people who did as well. Just be grateful it is not an actual blemish on your LSAC report... And read the New Yorker for prep.

I agree with this assessment, but somehow I got -1 on RC. This is fairly typical for me on RC, but I didn't feel like I was up to par on this, or any other sections. I thought I had bombed RC, but I didn't want to second guess myself.

I also think that there were several LR questions that were very atypical. For example:

S2#14: I think I've seen one other argument whose correct answer basically says that the stimulus "rejects a claim without considering the arguments for at claim," or "accepts a claim without considering the arguments against a claim"

S3#9: Although not necessarily atypical, this uses the weakener that a previous group had more of a given attribute before a study to weaken the force of the evidence that the same group had more of that attribute after a study. However, the way it was phrased was tricky, plus it talks about the "negative" group, i.e. the group that didn't benefit as much. Usually I see these as some group had more of an attribute before a study, and more after, etc.

S3 #24: There are actually two assumptions required by the argument, and the alternate answer choices dance around this idea, but don't really phrase it right. I hate these "aesthetic," "beauty," "art," "happiness," "morality," wishy-washing flim-flam B.A. bullshit questions.

Not to mention that the fourth game was a very weird type, that for me, required slogging and hypotheticals on virtually every question.

Is this the one with an LR question on mafia crime? I think it's #12? If so, I had a similar experience.

Haha, wow, I just took this PT today. I did fairly in line with my PT average... but yeah it had some seriously weird questions.

Definitely agree with the OP on the cotton fiber question. WTF?!

And yeah the bus one was a little tricky... i missed 1 cause of time. And the only reason i did that well was because i got to it with about 11 minutes left.

Sourpunch wrote:Glad to see I'm not the only one. Man, what an exam, I am still in shock over the -9 curve! (such an insanely unfair curve! I pity the people who did it on October '08!)

RANT:

Yea! no shit. I took it on that cold October morning. Goin in, I was solid @ LR & LG... just worried about RC, so I wanted to get it out of the way in a hurry.

First section, RC... I was pumped ...completely focused... knew I completely kicked it's ass! ... next section... RC... FUCK!!! ... my brain was dead from the first RC (just prayed that the 2nd section was experimental)... ended up missing 12 on that second section & the fist ended up being experimental.

Still curious what my score would of been if the experimental section was changed to my 2nd section.