LSAT Diaries: Making Extra Copies of Logic Games

Photocopy Machine LSAT BlogRosemary's first LSAT Diary gave some tips on getting started with LSAT studying. In her second LSAT Diary, Rosemary dealt with the distraction of watching TV, found a study space, and visited her first-choice law school.

In this week's, she balances her final semester of college with LSAT studying and gives some tips on making copies of Logic Games.

If you want to be in LSAT Diaries, please email me at LSATUnplugged@gmail.com. (You can be in LSAT Diaries whether you've taken the exam already or not.)


Rosemary's 3rd LSAT Diary

I am officially down to my last two weeks of classes before I’m finished with my bachelors! While I’m excited to finally be in the home stretch, the end of classes also means an increased workload. Within the next 14 days I have three papers and a take home exam. This workload in itself can be stressful but add to that prepping for the LSAT and a 40-hour workweek and suddenly there are simply not enough hours in the day to get done what I need to. For the next 2 weeks I need to cut back on my LSAT prep to focus on the last of my coursework. Notice how I said “cut back” instead of “cut out,” that’s because I have a refined study strategy and will be focusing on Reading Comprehension and Logic Games for the next 2 weeks.

One of the requirements for my history class is to write up chapter summaries for 16 chapters. Personally I hate busy work and this is classic busy work, in fact if they weren’t worth so many points I would have skipped the assignment entirely. Once I started prepping for the LSAT I realized that writing up all those summaries was really helping me practice my reading comprehension skills. I’ve never been one to write notes in my texts of even highlight, but since I am prepping for the LSAT I’ve been spending more time on the summaries and treating them like reading comprehension passages. The readings themselves aren’t as dense as those on the LSAT but I’ve noticed that I can pick out evidence, thesis, and conclusions much quicker than in the past. Best part, I’m getting the LSAT practice that I need and my homework done at the same time.

When I gathered all my study materials the first thing I did was make copies of all of my practice logic games. I’m using Steve’s 4-month study plan, which means that the last 20 prep tests I will use for full-length practice exams and all the others are free game for practicing. I made 2 additional copies of all the logic games and separated them by type and difficulty, one copy stays in my desk at work and the other I keep in the notebook I take to class. I can usually get at least 4 games done at work and 1-2 between breaks in class. I give myself at least a week before redoing a game and even though I’ve done it once, after a week I don’t remember enough of the specifics from doing the game the first time around to impact the second attempt.

To everyone who is trying to balance their LSAT prep with the rest of their lives the one piece of advice I can give is try to do something every day. Even if it’s as small as one logic game, the intention is what is important. I can tell you from experience it is much easier to pick back up a study routine when you’ve remained committed than if you pack away the books for several weeks.

Photo by osuvalleylibrary / CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

Funny LSAT and Law School YouTube Videos

LSAT Blog Funny YouTube VideosHere are 3 funny LSAT/law school videos on YouTube.

At least, I think they're funny.






Parody of the movie Downfall (best for people waiting to hear back from law schools, but some great Logic Games jokes, too):





Mr. Show Parody of Law School / The Paper Chase:





I Gotta Feeling by Black Eyed Peas (LSAT Remix):



Photo by sheriffof0 / CC BY-NC-ND 2.0

LSAT Blog Bingo Game Board

LSAT Blog Sarah Palin Bingo Game BoardLike Sarah Palin and Barack Obama, the LSAT repeats certain words and phrases enough to make you sick.

Studying for the LSAT can be boring, so I figured I'd do something to spice it up.

I pulled some words from my Logic Games Vocab, Logical Reasoning Vocab, and 15 Common Logical Reasoning Topics blog posts and mixed them all into a Bingo game.


I've included 1 game board below. I'm linking to boards 2, 3, 4, and 5, so you can play with a few friends.

If you're the drinking type, you can turn your study group into a party and do a shot each time you cross off a square. You might do a lot less studying, but you'll have a lot more fun.

(You might also discover that members of your study group are more attractive than you previously thought.)

What are your suggestions for future versions of LSAT Blog Bingo?

Enjoy!


LSAT Blog Bingo Game Board 1





















Photo by darrienw / CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

Photo by sgtfun / CC BY-NC-ND 2.0

LSAT Question Difficulty Ratings

LSAT Blog Difficulty Ratings SignThis post is Part 4 of the "The LSAT Curve" series. The series starts with The LSAT Curve | Test-Equating at LSAC.

Deciding which questions are "difficult"

Difficulty is all relative, right?

One way to make a question difficult is to include less-obvious conditional indicator words (using "if" and "then" kinda give the game away).

Another way is to make the question about a boring topic that few test-takers know about, like morality, aestheticism, or brown dwarf stars.

The issue, however, is that it's not always clear how difficult a question actually is in practice. The experimental section allows LSAC to determine how tens of thousands of test-takers perform on its latest questions.

Let's assume that LSAC gave a particular Logical Reasoning section to a bunch of test-takers on a given administration of the LSAT.

If only a small percentage of test-takers get question #17 right, and these are primarily the same test-takers who scored 170+ on the 4 sections of the exam that counted, then LSAC can safely assume that this is a question with a "Difficulty Rating" of 5.

If a large percentage of test-takers get question #3 right, and it's mainly the sub-140-scorers who get it wrong, then LSAC can safely assume this is a question with a "Difficulty Rating" of 1.

However, if a small percentage of test-takers get question #5 right, and these test-takers are mainly the sub-140-scorers, then LSAC can safely assume that something's very wrong with this question. This question is unlikely to make it into any part of the scored exam, at least, not in its current form. This question just isn't doing its job.

Similarly, if a large percentage of test-takers get question #20 right, but the 170+-scorers aren't getting it right, then something's probably wrong with this question. This question isn't doing its job either.

Cases where questions aren't doing their job are probably rare. LSAC's people generally know what they're doing, but it's worth thinking about the fact that LSAC trusts the opinions of its top scorers. Since they get the greatest number of questions right, most of them probably know what they're doing when it comes to the LSAT (or they're just really lucky).

***

Next week, we move on to Part 5: Creating the LSAT's Raw Score Conversion Chart (aka, the Curve)

Want to start at the beginning? Begin with The LSAT Curve | Test-Equating at LSAC.

Photo by sea-turtle / CC BY-NC-ND 2.0

LSAT Diaries: The 29-Year-Old Law School Long Shot

Rocky LSAT Blog Statue PhiladelphiaThis LSAT Diary is from Nicholas in Wyoming. He has some great insight into what it'll take for him to rock the exam, and his background's pretty interesting, too.

If you want to be in LSAT Diaries, please email me at LSATUnplugged@gmail.com. (You can be in LSAT Diaries whether you've taken the exam already or not.)

Leave Nicholas some encouragement below in the comments!

Nicholas' LSAT Diary:

Greetings all from sunny Wyoming, which prides itself on being a such a frontier western state that there's a bumper sticker, "Wyoming, not for everybody." Seriously, I saw it the other day!

I'm 29 years-old, just out of college, working full time at a blue-collar warehouse job here in Laramie WY, married with three children, an army vet having served 4 years active duty, and now dedicated to getting a law degree. I'm a law school hopeful looking to attend the University of Wyoming law school in the fall of 2011. The reason I call myself a law school long shot is because my GPA isn't the greatest, and in order to have a 50 to 75 percent chance at getting into the school I'm looking at (University of Wyoming) my LSAT score must be at least 165. Not the greatest odds, but I'm sure i can do better than my old high school buddy who took the test last year and got a 138. So I'm looking at a June or October test date.

My aspirations may be a bit lofty, but I'm only trying for one school, here at the University of Wyoming, and if I don't succeed it's no skin off my teeth because I have other back up plans. I'm saving the good personal stuff for my personal statement, so for right now I'll talk about my interest in the LSAT, my situation as far as scheduling is concerned, my study goals, my study plan, and my thoughts on the test in general.

For the next year, I have dedicated myself to learning all I can about the LSAT, which I must admit is both driving me crazy and intriguing me all at the same time. Crazy in the fact I feel like an idiot after completing a practice logic game without fully reading the rules or creating a ridiculously complicated diagram. We'll visit that later when we get to my study strategy. Intriguing because logic is so crucial to understanding the test, given time and effort, it can be tamed and used to my advantage. A phrase I often tell myself is, "what one man can do, another can do", and so I have decided to take the plunge and attempt to conquer the LSAT.

First off, tip of my hat to Steve for providing a wonderful study resource, which I admit I have been reading obsessively lately. Armed with Steve's advice, I am following his four month LSAT study regimen. Combining that with my schedule requires a bit more time management than I'm used to, so we can begin there. I'm 29 years old, an army vet having served 4 years of active duty in the US Army as a paratrooper in the 82nd Airborne Div. and a year stint in S. Korea from 1999 to 2003. I came back to Wyoming and enrolled at the only four year university in the state, aptly named the University of Wyoming, in 2004 and graduated in 2009. If you do the math, I spent more time in college than I did in the military, but that's another story entirely.

I received my bachelor's degree in journalism and with the state of the media right now, I'm currently employed at a grocery warehouse 40 miles away where I make double and sometimes triple the hourly wage of your average entry level reporter. I don't mind that people value food more than journalism, but given the fact that my job could be done by monkeys driving forklifts, it's a bit disconcerting knowing my degree is collecting dust while I freeze my ass off in the refrigerated receiving dock unloading crates of processed cheese and bologna. I am married with three children, all under the age of 7, and am the primary breadwinner because my wife is enrolled in nursing school. So in the meantime I spend my week, Tuesday through Friday, taking care of the kids, doing chores, and cooking dinners while my wife is away at school. On the weekends (Saturday through Monday) I drive the long commute to the warehouse, where I work an 11 hour swing shift that starts early in the afternoon and ends very early in the morning.

Now that we have that out of the way, let's talk about my LSAT strengths and weaknesses. I'm a funny case, I'm a nerd for logical thinking, but have a hard time doing it myself. So in terms of the test, my only strength is the reading comprehension and the writing portion of the test...at least in terms of clarity and conciseness, which I have practice with due to my journalism background. My big weakness is logical thinking, but I'm a skeptical reporter, so hopefully that's my way into cracking this test. My degree in journalism has made me a more empowered skeptic, but I need to sharpen my logic if I plan on accomplishing what I set out to do: score a 165 or better.

I started my study regimen two weeks ago, completing Steve's list of basic linear games from preptests 19 - 38. My study habits are improving, I've just started the LSAT study regimen and have kept to it...somewhat. Like I said, I have three kids and my wife is in school so it leaves me with just enough time to cover what I need.

According to the study plan, I was supposed to add advanced linear games to the plan, but my performance in basic linear was pretty bad, so I extended it another week. I squeezed in the testpreps whenever I could: While the kids were taking their naps, during down times when I'm waiting to pick up my son from school, early in the morning while everyone is asleep, late at night while everyone is asleep, and during the small breaks at work.

Doing the preptests exercises at work is more tough, because of the limited time and because every Tom, Dick, and Harry come by my table in the breakroom and ask about what I'm doing. They either ask me what I'm studying for, and go blank when I tell them it's the LSAT. Others ask me about the particular question I'm working on, and when I respond they give me another blank response. So basically I'm pestered every five minutes by guys who are intrigued and bewildered by the nerdy kid burying his nose in a book. I get less grief from my kids for pete's sake!

So it took me a good week to work out all the logic game problems and about a couple of days to redo the ones I did terribly on. From my assessment, I have concluded I can think logically, but struggle in a few key areas: Attention to detail, making key deductions for more complex games, and focusing on one scenario so much I lose track of other possibilities.

It's a different way of thinking, and like I said before, both frustrating and fascinating at the same time. It's too bad my study regimen can't be done through some Hollywood montage. How much easier it would be for the Rocky theme to be playing while shots of me working out problems, getting frustrated at first, doing situps with huge rocks, finding that eureka moment, growing a beard, smoking through timed tests, and that moment where I climb the snowy summit and yell out "LSAT!" whiz by the screen and afterwards I arrive at the testing center and ace it.

But life doesn't work out that way and I'm left to work things out the slow and steady way. I'm halfway through week 2, and am finding it very challenging but rewarding because the LSAT isn't some math theorem that hasn't been solved for centuries, it's only a standardized test with only one right answer for each question. With that in mind, and the fact that there are guys out there who have scored in the 99th percentile, it's possible.

A friend of mine in the army told me about his sports heroes, and how they weren't always the most naturally gifted athletes on the field. In fact, he said, they were better in his eyes because they had to work twice as hard to get to where they're at. I suppose he saw a bit of himself in those guys, or maybe a piece of himself that felt it was possible. I feel the same way about the LSAT. I'm not the most gifted test-taker, but with enough practice and determination, anything is possible right?

Thanks for your time and more to come when I get to advanced linear games.

Photo by afagen

Advertise on LSAT Blog | Now Open to Submissions!

LSAT Blog Red Bull Racing CarThis blog post is intended for my non-LSAT-taking readership. For the most part, I mean people in the law school admissions community.

I've decided to devote a bit of space on the LSAT Blog sidebar to paid advertisements in the form of banner ads (175 width x 75 height in pixels).

Don't worry, dear readers. They won't be too big or too in-your-face. Nothing like the above picture. They'll be the same size as the Best LSAT Prep Books image at the top of the left sidebar.

As part of my commitment to your LSAT and law school admissions success, I will only accept ads for products/services/websites that I believe are useful. Nothing sketchy. Additionally, all ads will be clearly labeled as such (more on that below).

I expect interested advertisers might include, but are not limited to, the following:

-admission consultants
-admission-related websites
-personal statement / essay editors
-law schools
-law school prep companies
-authors
-publishers
-bloggers
-anything related to pre-laws, college students, recent grads
-anything related to law school
-Red Bull?

Potential advertisers, please email me:

* A bit about yourself
* Your URL
* Brief description of your site/business
* Desired sidebar ad placement
* Amount you're willing to pay for a month of advertising for each ad slot that interests you
* Specific months, and number of months, you'd like your ad to run

(I expect that the closer an ad slot is to the top of the page, the more demand there will be for it, and the higher the price will be.)

You'll design the banner ad yourself (as a jpg or png). The words "what's this?" will appear directly below your banner with a link back to this blog post.

Looking forward to your submissions!

Photo by e01

The Experimental Section and Difficulty of LSAT Questions

LSAT Blog Experimental SectionThis post is Part 3 of the "The LSAT Curve" series. The series starts with The LSAT Curve | Test-Equating at LSAC.

"The LSAT is equated so that a test score obtained in the current year is comparable to scores obtained in previous years." - LSAC (Executive Summary)

Test-equating requires pre-testing.

After LSAC's elves write individual LSAT questions, they compile these questions into various 35-minute sections. If you've taken the LSAT before, you've already completed one of these sections as the hated "experimental section." In LSAC language, this is the "pretest" section where new questions are tested to:

provide test development staff with statistical information about each question, and with information about possibly ambiguous or misleading information in the question or in one or more of the answer choices. If problems are identified, either the question is discarded or it is revised and pretested again. All questions that pass the quality standards of a pretest administration are placed in the LSAT test question item bank. New test sections are assembled by selecting questions from this LSAT item bank. Each fully assembled test section is administered on one or more separate occasions for the purpose of pre-equating the new form.

Pre-equating is a statistical method used to adjust for minor fluctuations in the difficulty of different test forms so that a test taker is neither advantaged nor disadvantaged by the particular form that is given. Following each pre-equating administration, the statistical information about each question is reviewed to assure that the data support that the question is of appropriate difficulty, discriminates higher ability test takers from lower ability test takers, is unambiguous, and has a single best answer. When the test is given at a regular LSAT administration, but before final scoring is completed, statistical analysis is conducted one last time. Each question is evaluated using the same criteria that were applied following the pretesting and pre-equating administrations. If a problem is found, the question is eliminated from the test before final scoring and reporting are accomplished.
(Source: Page 2 of Policies and Procedures Governing Challenges to Law School Admission Test Questions. I divided this excerpt into two paragraphs. Just like some Reading Comp passages, it lacked paragraph breaks.)

Most of us know LSAC pretests questions in order to avoid using flawed questions that will later be withdrawn from scoring. This is what they mean by "is unambiguous and has a single best answer." (second para, second sentence)

However, the other parts of that particular sentence are worth noting.

Questions have various levels of difficulty
- LSAC is careful to make sure "the question is of appropriate difficulty" and "discriminates higher ability test takers from lower ability test takers."

LSAC wants to have a certain number of super-easy, easy, medium, difficult, and super-difficult questions on each exam (as part of the test-equating process).

It's not enough to just make a bunch of super-difficult questions and say whoever answers them right deserves to get into Harvard Law School.

How would you distinguish the students who got those questions wrong from each other?

For law schools, it's not enough to separate the 175+-scorers from everyone else. You also have to separate the 170-scorers from the 165-scorers from the 160-scorers, etc.

If you make every single question very difficult, some test-takers will get them all right, but most will just end up guessing. Obviously, LSAC won't know whether a test-taker guessed or not on a given question. However, if most test-takers end up guessing, the LSAT will no longer be a good predictor of law school performance (which is what it's supposed to be, after all), and the LSAT won't be able to adequately distinguish a good test-taker from a decent one from a bad one.

By including questions of various levels of difficulty, the LSAT meaningfully separates test-takers into multiple ability levels - not just 175+ and "everyone else."

For insight into how LSAC views the difficulty of various questions, check out the SuperPrep book's explanations (which are written by LSAC). After each question, you'll see a "Difficulty Rating" of anywhere from 1 to 5.

***

Next week, we move on to Part 4: LSAT Question Difficulty Ratings

Want to start at the beginning? Begin with The LSAT Curve | Test-Equating at LSAC.

Photo by practical owl / CC BY-NC 2.0

LSAT PrepTest Raw Score Conversion Charts

LSAT Blog Raw Score
In this blog post, I include the LSAT PrepTest raw score conversion charts for every released LSAT PrepTest. The below pictures show the minimum number of credited responses (correctly-answered questions) that will allow you to get a particular score.

At the end of this blog post, I include links to some analysis of the below data.

First, some notes on the LSAT PrepTest raw score conversion charts:

"__*" means no test-taker received that score on that exam.

Here's a big list of released LSAT PrepTests.

"SP" stands for SuperPrepOfficial (Feb 97) is the Official LSAT PrepTest with Explanations, and Free (June 07) is a free PDF on LSAC's website.

***

You can view this information as a series of picture files. One click to enlarge each picture, and you're there.

The following pictures cover raw score conversions for LSAT scores from ~140-180.


PrepTests A, B, C, Feb 97, and 1-17:
LSAT Blog Raw Score Conversion Chart 1










PrepTests 18-36:
LSAT Blog Raw Score Conversion Chart 2









PrepTests 37-54 (and June 07):
LSAT Blog Raw Score Conversion Chart 3









PrepTests 55-69:
LSAT Blog Raw Score Conversion Chart 4














PrepTest 70-74:
LSAT Blog Raw Score Conversion Chart 5














You probably won't score anywhere close to 140 once you start doing full-length PrepTests towards the end of your prep (that's when people tend to start thinking about raw score conversions). If you're scoring below 140, or if you're just plain interested, here are the raw score conversion charts for LSAT scores below 140:


PrepTests A, B, C, Feb 97, and 1-17:
LSAT Blog Raw Score Conversion Chart 5





PrepTests 18-36:
LSAT Blog Raw Score Conversion Chart 6





PrepTests 37-54 (and June 07):
LSAT Blog Raw Score Conversion Chart 7





PrepTests 55-69:
LSAT Blog Raw Score Conversion Chart 8








PrepTest 70-74:
LSAT Blog Raw Score Conversion Chart 9









***
To learn about how raw scores and score conversions work, see the LSAT Curve series starting with: The LSAT Curve | Test-Equating at LSAC.

Also see: LSAT Graph / Spreadsheet: How Many Questions to Score 170 and 160 and Easiest LSAT Curve: December | Hardest LSAT Curve: June

Photo by viewmaker

All actual LSAT content used within this work is used with the permission of Law School Admission Council, Inc., Box 2000, Newtown, PA 18940, the copyright owner. LSAC does not review or endorse specific test preparation materials or services, and inclusion of licensed LSAT content within this work does not imply the review or endorsement of LSAC. LSAT is a registered trademark of LSAC.

LSAT Graph / Spreadsheet: How Many Questions to Score 170 / 160

LSAT Blog Fancy Line GraphAfter I compile a lot of data, I like to analyze it.

I just published the Raw Score Conversion Charts for every released LSAT PrepTest, so I decided to create a graph illustrating the maximum number of questions you can miss on every LSAT PrepTest and still get a 170. (I also made one about getting a 160 - scroll to the end for info about that one)

(Click image to enlarge, and see details and analysis below.)

LSAT Blog Line Graph Max Number Questions Incorrect to Score 170 from PT1-PT59















Details

This graph covers all released LSAT PrepTests to date (PrepTest 1 - PrepTest 59). It includes the SuperPrep exams, the Feb 97 LSAT, and the June 07 LSAT (PDF), and it places all exams in chronological order from left-to-right on the x-axis.

(In the data lists below, "SP" stands for SuperPrep, Official (Feb 97) is the Official LSAT PrepTest with Explanations, and Free (June 07) is a free PDF on LSAC's website.)

There wasn't enough space to include the data for the x-axis (the horizontal line) on the graph itself. However, I've uploaded the data as 2 separate images below (click images to enlarge) so you can see the # of questions you can miss and still get a 170 for specific PrepTests.

You might wonder why I look at the number of questions you can get wrong and still get a 170. Why don't I look at the number of questions you need to get right?
Because not all exams have the same number of questions. The # of questions of exams has ranged from 99 to 102. For this reason, it makes sense to look at the difference between the number of questions required for a 170 score and the total number of questions on a given exam.

Data Images
(Click images to enlarge.)

PrepTests 1-36:




PrepTests 37-59:




Analysis
As you can see, there's been a significant downward trend in the number of questions you can get wrong and still get 170. That green line on the graph illustrates this decreasing average.

Basically, you can't miss as many questions today as you used to and still get a 170. The average has moved from -13 (13 incorrect) to -11. A change of 2 raw score points (getting 2 fewer questions wrong) might not seem very significant, but it's significant when the historical range is only 8-16.

The cushy days of getting 15 or 16 questions incorrect but still walking away with a 170 score are long gone.


What does this all mean for you?

I only posted this graph and data to satisfy your curiosity and give you a sense of the trend.

In short, the raw score conversion charts of older exams don't adequately represent those of more recent exams. There's been a shift. You'll need to get more questions right than you would've in the past in order to get a 170.


The bottom line:

Your goal should be the same as its always been - get as many questions correct as possible.


***

I made a similar graph depicting how many questions you can get wrong and still get a 160. As you might expect, there's a downward trend for that one also.

(Click image to enlarge.)

LSAT Blog Line Graph Max Number Questions Incorrect to Score 160 from PT1-PT59

The range for this graph is 22-31 questions incorrect, with the -31 occurring some time ago and the -22 being much more recent. The average # of questions you can get wrong and still get a 160 has dropped from 29 to 25.

My analysis for this is pretty much the same as for the 170 graph.


Data Images
(Click images to enlarge.)


PrepTests 1-36:




PrepTests 37-59:




Photo by blprnt_van

The LSAT Curve | Test-Equating at LSAC

LSAT Bell CurveThis post is Part 1 of the "The LSAT Curve" series of blog posts. Click here for links to each part of the series.

There's a lot of confusion about the LSAT's curve. The LSAT is not actually scored to a curve, but most test-takers think it is.

This series is my effort to explain LSAC's process of test-equating, raw score conversions, percentiles, and why the test isn't actually curved. Because I dislike statistics (and because most of you probably do also), this blog post involves very little math. However, it might involve some thinking.

You've been warned.

LSAC's Associate Director of Psychometric Research, Lynda Reese, recently wrote the following to one test-taker who asked about the curve (I've added the links):
[T]he LSAT is not graded to a curve...Rather, for every form of the LSAT, a statistical process called test equating is carried out to adjust for minor differences in difficulty between different forms of the test. Specifically, the item response theory (IRT) true score equating method is applied to convert raw scores (the number correct) for each administration to a common 120 to 180 scale. A detailed description of this methodology can be found in...Applications of Item Response Theory to Practical Testing Problems...The equating process assures that a particular LSAT scaled score reflects the same level of ability regardless of the ability level of others who tested on the same day or any slight differences in difficulty between different forms of the test. That is, the equating process assures that LSAT scores are comparable, regardless of the administration at which they are earned.
I'm not a psychometrics expert, but I decided to go ahead and learn more about how LSAC constructs the exam and ensures different PrepTests are of relatively equal difficulty.

I looked up the book Ms. Reese referenced (and believe me, it wasn't exactly a walk in the park).

The following is my understanding of how LSAC creates each LSAT and goes about the test-equating process. Feel free to leave questions and comments, especially if you have a decent understanding of statistics, psychometrics, etc. LSAC's also welcome to leave comments. They haven't commented on the blog yet, but the door's always open.

If you're new to the LSAT, see the LSAT FAQ for more on the basics before getting into all the details.

If you're not new to the LSAT, read on, starting with these definitions of basic terms and concepts:

Conversion Chart: Chart at the end of each PrepTest that helps you translate a raw score into a score out of 180

Percentile: The percentage of test-takers whose scores fall below yours. If you score in the 50th percentile, you scored higher than half of all test-takers. If you score in the 97th percentile, you scored higher than 97% of all test-takers.

PrepTest: Previously administered and released LSAT exam

Psychometrics: The study of psychological measurements. As far as we're concerned, it's the "science" of standardized testing.

Raw Score: The number of questions you answer correctly on the LSAT

Test-equating/Pre-equating: "a statistical method used to adjust for minor fluctuations in the difficulty of different test forms so that a test taker is neither advantaged nor disadvantaged by the particular form that is given" - LSAC (PDF).

Test form: A particular LSAT exam

Scores have to be meaningful and consistent
The LSAT is a standardized exam. This means that a 160 on the Feb 2010 LSAT should be equivalent to a 160 on the June 2010 LSAT, which should be equivalent to a 160 on the October 2010 LSAT, etc. Law schools can't be bothered to look at particular Logic Games, Logical Reasoning, and Reading Comprehension on various exams to see if students with identical scores actually performed at different levels. They can't bother to look at test-takers' raw scores. That's why they have equated numerical scores out of 180, after all.

Administering the same questions over and over wouldn't work
One theoretical (and stupid) way to ensure that all scores were equal would be to create only one LSAT PrepTest and administer it over and over. This would ensure that all test-takers were treated equally and that the "raw score conversions" were always fair. However, this ignores the fact that test-takers would share information with each other.

People who took the February 2010 LSAT would give/sell info about questions that appeared to test-takers who took it in June 2010, etc. Under such a system, the later one took the exam, the more inflated his/her score would be, on average. Thus, LSAC can't just keep giving the exact same questions exam after exam.

For this reason, LSAC needs to create different exams for each released test administration and make them of relatively equal difficulty. A 160 on one LSAT (aka "test form") needs to be equivalent to a 160 on any other LSAT.

***

Read on for Part 2: Why the LSAT Isn't Scored on a Curve: Myth and Fact

Photo by hname / CC BY 2.0

Why the LSAT Isn't Scored on a Curve: Myth and Fact

LSAT Blog Why Not CurveThis post is Part 2 of the "The LSAT Curve" series. The series starts with The LSAT Curve | Test-Equating at LSAC.

Myth: The LSAT is curved
solely on how everyone does that day.

A lot of test-takers believe that the LSAT is "curved", meaning that you should try to figure out which month's exam will have the greatest percentage of low-scorers and take it with them.

The idea goes:

-If you take the same LSAT as a lot of lower-scorers, you'll look better than you would have otherwise (by comparison) and get a higher score as a result.

-For this reason, you should sabotage your fellow test-takers. Lace their food with laxatives, steal their prep books in the library, etc. Anything to get a leg up on them.

Unfortunately for the dishonest and sneaky among you, LSAC can't just compare all test-takers who took the February 2010 LSAT with each other and have that be it.

Why?

Perhaps February test-takers don't adequately represent LSAT-takers as a whole.


Fact: Different pools of test-takers might perform differently.

Let's assume for a moment that, on average, February test-takers answer fewer questions correctly than the theoretical "average test-taker" would on any other exam. If this were true, the average test-taker would get a higher score than he/she deserves by taking the LSAT in February (all other things being equal).

LSAC can't allow this to happen. If it did, then a 160 on the February 2010 LSAT would be easier for the average test-taker to achieve than a 160 on the June 2010 LSAT, and the 160s would not, therefore, be "equal." Whether the average test-taker intentionally (and foolishly) took the February LSAT with the purpose of being compared to a lower-scoring pool is less important than the results. LSAT scores would not mean as much. They wouldn't be as reliable because one would have to consider the context in which the exam was taken.

For this reason, and due to the fact that there are minor differences in difficulty between exams, scores are not simply curved based on each "test form" in isolation.

The magic solution?

Test-equating.

***

Read on for Part 3: The Experimental Section and Difficulty of LSAT Questions

Photo by petereed / CC BY-NC 2.0