Law School Discussion

it's over... October 2004 LSAT

_EKC_

  • ****
  • 2640
  • LisBeth
    • View Profile
it's over... October 2004 LSAT
« on: October 02, 2004, 11:54:40 AM »
Here's my take (I just got home):

I'm somewhere between a 168 and a 174, depending on how it is scaled. I'm fairly confident that I missed between 8 and 12 questions. (Of course, it's always possible that I missed significantly more or less, but based on my practice tests, the amount of time I had left to double check my answers, and my gut instinct, I think I'm around a 170.)

I rocked LR, was happy with RC, and may have missed as many as 5 game questions. Three of the games were easy and I spent too much time on them - then when I got to the 4th it seemed hard and I was rushed doing it.

Interesting fact: This LSAT had only 100 questions on it. The experimental was game, and the experimental (which came 2nd) was easier than the regular, although neither was particularly hard, neither was particularly easy either.

Anyone else?

scurred1

  • ****
  • 112
  • Where am I?
    • View Profile
Re: it's over... October 2004 LSAT
« Reply #1 on: October 02, 2004, 12:06:39 PM »
I had three LR sections; two before the break and one after. The first one was absolutely brutal! Someone please tell me it was experimental.
The rest of the test was about average. I finished the games section, which is something that I was rarely able to do during practice tests. THe RC passages were much easier than some of the most recent. All in all not a bad test but my head is still pounding from that first LR section.

Re: it's over... October 2004 LSAT
« Reply #2 on: October 02, 2004, 12:09:32 PM »
Here's my take (I just got home):

I'm somewhere between a 168 and a 174, depending on how it is scaled. I'm fairly confident that I missed between 8 and 12 questions. (Of course, it's always possible that I missed significantly more or less, but based on my practice tests, the amount of time I had left to double check my answers, and my gut instinct, I think I'm around a 170.)

I rocked LR, was happy with RC, and may have missed as many as 5 game questions. Three of the games were easy and I spent too much time on them - then when I got to the 4th it seemed hard and I was rushed doing it.

Interesting fact: This LSAT had only 100 questions on it. The experimental was game, and the experimental (which came 2nd) was easier than the regular, although neither was particularly hard, neither was particularly easy either.

Anyone else?

I had LR in sections one and two--how are you sure section 2 was the exp?

Tks

TDPookie1

  • *****
  • 7929
  • the sugar cane is back!
    • AOL Instant Messenger - PookieEsq2B
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: it's over... October 2004 LSAT
« Reply #3 on: October 02, 2004, 12:10:28 PM »
if the real games section was after the break, then section 2 was experimental for you guys

Re: it's over... October 2004 LSAT
« Reply #4 on: October 02, 2004, 12:20:00 PM »
if the real games section was after the break, then section 2 was experimental for you guys

Did you have games in 2 and 4 or 5 then?

I had LR-LR-RC-LR-LG, so it's not so easy for me to tell--could be one or two just from my test.

Re: it's over... October 2004 LSAT
« Reply #5 on: October 02, 2004, 12:24:17 PM »
Why is everyone so sure that the second games section after the break was the experimental one?  I had two games sections.  One was section 2 and one was section 5.  I was really hoping section 2 (The first games section) might be the experimental one, because I had to guess at 5 questions in that section, but I finished the other games section completely.  Is there any precedent for the first games section being the experimental one?

dr_draino

Re: it's over... October 2004 LSAT
« Reply #6 on: October 02, 2004, 12:26:22 PM »
The one with the parking tickets and the dogs and the archeologists (8th 9th and 10th century?)  was the real one, which should have been the 5th one for you.

D'you get your buzz from Lexy mid test?

Why is everyone so sure that the second games section after the break was the experimental one?  I had two games sections.  One was section 2 and one was section 5.  I was really hoping section 2 (The first games section) might be the experimental one, because I had to guess at 5 questions in that section, but I finished the other games section completely.  Is there any precedent for the first games section being the experimental one?

TDPookie1

  • *****
  • 7929
  • the sugar cane is back!
    • AOL Instant Messenger - PookieEsq2B
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: it's over... October 2004 LSAT
« Reply #7 on: October 02, 2004, 12:28:20 PM »
if the real games section was after the break, then section 2 was experimental for you guys

Did you have games in 2 and 4 or 5 then?

I had LR-LR-RC-LR-LG, so it's not so easy for me to tell--could be one or two just from my test.

i took the test in june.  i was just answering your question about how one would know which games section was experimental.  so if you had YOUR one game section after the break, then the one before the break for ekc was the experimental one.

Re: it's over... October 2004 LSAT
« Reply #8 on: October 02, 2004, 12:37:46 PM »
if the real games section was after the break, then section 2 was experimental for you guys

Did you have games in 2 and 4 or 5 then?

I had LR-LR-RC-LR-LG, so it's not so easy for me to tell--could be one or two just from my test.

i took the test in june.  i was just answering your question about how one would know which games section was experimental.  so if you had YOUR one game section after the break, then the one before the break for ekc was the experimental one.

Got it--from the prev post I see it had to be 2. Good news for me!

Re: it's over... October 2004 LSAT
« Reply #9 on: October 02, 2004, 12:45:08 PM »
so if i had LR as section 1 and 2 and 4, 2 was the experimental?