Lack of Experimental Section on Practice Tests

[moshei24]

Hi,

What do I do about the lack of experimental sections in the tests Powerscore provides? In order to replicate testing conditions, I need to have five sections, but the tests only have four. I want to take a practice one tomorrow. What do I do?

Thanks,
Moshe

[moshei24]

And if the answer is that I should take a section from an old test, which section should I take? As in Logical Reasoning, Games, or Reading Comp. And where should I insert it into the test I'm taking? (I plan on taking the June 2004 tomorrow.)

And isn't there a slight issue with that that I know which one is the experimental? Is there a way to prevent that? Or do I just need to have the discipline to treat it like all of the other sections?

[Dave Killoran]

Hi Moshe,

Thanks for the question. In the four in-class tests we use, there are experimental sections. However, for the non-in-class tests, we don't put experimental sections in, for several different reasons:

1. Not everyone uses the other tests as full practice tests. Some people take them as section challenges, half tests, general homework, etc.

2. Some people like to use certain tests as full practice tests, and if we happened to use that particular test as the source for experimental sections, they could couldn't do that.

So, instead, we provide the tests as they are released by Law Services--in their complete form.

As you suspected, the solution is an easy one: use a section from one of the other tests as your experimental (this works regardless of whether you go for a regular 5 section test, or go for an "overdrive" scenario where you do 6 sections at once). It actually doesn't matter which test you choose for the experimental, but I'd suggest using one of the older exams on the list.

Is there an issue with knowing which section is experimental? I definitely don't think so. On the real exam, you don't know which sections are real or experimental, but as I explain here (http://www.powerscore.com/lsat/help/experimental.cfm), experimental sections are used on future tests, so they are as "real" as a scored section (especially since they will be used on a future test as a scored section).

When taking a practice test and you encounter an experimental that you know doesn't count, treat it as scored and do your best. Then, after you have taken four different practice exams and used the four sections from that test, total your scores on the "experimentals" and you have a fifth practice test result.

If knowing which one isn't part of the test really bothers you, the best approach is to print out several exams, note which test each section is from on the back, and then shuffle the extra section into the exam you are taking. You'll see a double of a particular section (two section "1s," or two section "2s," etc), but you won't know which one of the two "counts."

Please let me know if that helps. Thanks!

[moshei24]

Thank you. That was the conclusion I had come to. But another thing. First off, the combination of the four experimental sections isn't really the best example of a practice test score because it isn't really under real testing conditions.

But in terms of where to place the experimental section, where in the order of the sections should I place it? Does it matter? Where would you suggest placing it?



And on a side note: On page 7-89 on question #30, the question and explanation equate "belief" and "opinion." I just did some quick research where it became clear that there are some small differences between the two. Does the LSAT equate the two terms, though? Should I assume that in LSAT terms the two are synonymous?

[Dave Killoran]

Thank you. That was the conclusion I had come to. But another thing. First off, the combination of the four experimental sections isn't really the best example of a practice test score because it isn't really under real testing conditions.

Agreed. But, taking those experimentals isn't the point--taking the regular full test is. This method at least allows you to get some additional feedback, and you will be taking it under regular timed conditions within a stream of sections. The alternative is to ignore your performance in those sections, which I'm sure we both agree isn't optimal

But in terms of where to place the experimental section, where in the order of the sections should I place it? Does it matter? Where would you suggest placing it?

Historically, the experimental has appeared as sections 1, 2, 3, and 4 (not 5--yet). I'd vary the placement in your tests, putting it in different places each exam.

And on a side note: On page 7-89 on question #30, the question and explanation equate "belief" and "opinion." I just did some quick research where it became clear that there are some small differences between the two. Does the LSAT equate the two terms, though? Should I assume that in LSAT terms the two are synonymous?

As you can see in the problem itself, they did equate the two. Could they have a question trade on the difference between the two? Sure, but it would likely be a stimulus focused specifically on those two ideas. Otherwise, I’d say that’s way too subtle a distinction to show up independently, and it isn't something you need to worry about.

Please let me know if that helps. Thanks!

[moshei24]

Okay.

Does it occur more often in some of those four sections than others?

And so you're saying that unless the question is focused on a distinction between "belief" and "opinion," I should assume that it has the same meaning? And that the odds of a question like that showing up are negligible?

Thank you.

[moshei24]

Another side question: When it comes to taking untimed practice tests, does that mean taking all four or five sections in a row and grading them all at the end, but without timing the sections? Or does it mean just taking sections untimed whenever?

Also, the last time I took a practice test was at the very beginning of May. At that time I was scoring in the low 160s. I'm taking my first one since then tomorrow. I'm taking the LSAT in October. My goal score is 170-175 (if not higher). I took a course in the Spring, but didn't do much studying on my own besides for doing some logic games during my college classes. My original scores before the course were low 150s. Over the last month, I started taking my studying of logical reasoning more seriously, and I have seen improvement in how I approach those questions. I've mainly been reading the homework lesson, and then doing the questions in the book. I still need to take a look at reading comp more closely, and I haven't really done logic games since May.

Not sure what of my studying background I'm missing, but what would you suggest to be my plan of attack moving forward? I plan on finishing up Flaw in the Reasoning (Lesson 7) today, and to move on to Lesson 8 logical reasoning over the weekend. I'm also going to do a few logic games from Lesson 7 today before I take the practice LSAT tomorrow.

Sorry that I'm throwing out a lot of information and questions at once. My biggest concern about the LSAT is that I'll lose focus during some of the questions and mistime myself. For the logical reasoning, my instructor from the Spring (John) suggested doing the first three questions and then working from the end so that I'll be pressured while doing some of the easier questions as opposed to the more difficult ones.

Anyway, I'll end my rant. I'm just looking for some studying advice. If you want to see my breakdown in question types, etc., ask.

[Adam Tyson]

Moshei,

It sounds to me like your study plan is a good one, and we'll know more after you take your next practice test. Go through the lesson and the questions, then do the homework for that lesson to reinforce what you learned. Intersperse that with some of the supplemental sections that you can find in the online student center, so you're getting some practice with a mix of question types. After every few lessons, plan on a practice test, but pace yourself - you don't want to run out of tests in mid-August! I usually suggest to my students that in the 2-3 weeks prior to the test they should plan on two practice tests per week, but it really varies, and only you can figure out what will work best to get maximum results with minimal burn-out.

I don't think it matters where you place your "experimental" section - part of the point is to build up stamina to do three uninterrupted sections, then a short break, and then two more sections, and still be able to maintain focus to the very end. Vary it, and then when taking the test don't give any thought to which one is experimental - just do your best on every section.

As to the suggestion of working from the back of the section, it's an interesting one, but keep in mind two issues there: 1) What makes a question easy or hard is based on the percentage of students who answered it correctly when they took the official test. Since many students don't get to finish every section, they tend to be rushed at the end, if they even get there. In other words, a lot of times it's not that a question is at the end of a section because it's hard, but rather it's "hard" because it's at the end of a section. The backwards approach could just shift your pressure point from the last five questions to somewhere in the first 10, and they may not be any easier than the last five. 2) That approach could run you into a very real risk of making transposition errors - that is, bubbling in an answer on the wrong line (for example, the answer for question 19 in the line for question 18). That's a risk you already run every time you take a test, and this sounds to me like it might increase the risk. If you are going to do that, try it in practice several times first, and see if it actually improves your score AND that you don't have transposition problems. I suspect that as you improve generally in your understanding of and approach to the questions, you won't need to use that risky, albeit creative, approach.

Hope that helps. Let us know how the practice test goes.

Adam M. Tyson
PowerScore LSAT Instructor

[moshei24]

Thank you.

I've used that technique twice, and it has worked. As long as I don't mistime myself, it works great. As long as I have about 1-1:15 for questions 4-10, it works fine. The hardest questions tend to appear in the late teens, and with this method, I get to face those with minimal time pressure. That's why it's worked. The two tests I took using that technique I scored a 163 and a 161. My logical reasoning went up a little bit, too, especially when I time myself accordingly. The transposition isn't really a problem. I've gotten used to it. I could always try out doing it the normal way; but wouldn't that just ruin any continuity I've had with this strange method? The method was one that my Powerscore instructor had suggested to many students scoring in the 160s to improve their score, and the overwhelming majority of people have said that it helped...

[Adam Tyson]

It's an interesting bit of advice, one I've not heard before, and I would be curious to see what others think of it.

It does seem somewhat like a causal argument, doesn't it? "I tried this method, and my score went up; therefore this method caused my score to go up." If I were to approach it as an LSAT problem, I would offer an alternate cause - maybe your score went up because you've been studying and have a better overall understanding of the material?

We can try an experiment, of course - try doing it the "normal" way, front to back, and see if in the absence of the cause, the effect (your score going up) remains!

At the end of the day, you have to choose the method that works best for you. If you like this method, and you get good results, then it doesn't matter why it works - it works for you, so you should keep doing it. I would worry about transposition errors, so I wouldn't do it myself, but how I do it doesn't dictate how you should.