Random but Strong curiosity regarding Killer LG & RC

[lathlee]

Random but Strong curiosity regarding Killer LG & RC *In case anyone wonders what they are, i listed them in below links

Hi. Dave and Powerscore, today my question is about these lists, how it affected scores, and how some test takers dealt such issues, and just what happened. I post this thread in GEneral LG even though Killer RCs are involved as well cuz I think Killer RC, Strong Powerscore student can scrap some or many questions correctly EVEN in a killer RC passage using VIEWSTAMP Method Properly even if one is totally lost IN comprehension of RC passage whereas in Killer LG,I think such scrapping is less optimal.

I know there are killer LR Questions too but those questions, at WORST, anyone can just skip one or two of those and come back later which i am skeptical such Killer LR questions would really influence the score that much.

I will just ask scenario based on killer LGs that are published after year 2000, where internet was more readily available for more number of test takers and sharing of difficulty of Questions were possible. Also, I am sure powerscore experts gave many helpful tips in readily available fashion in appropriate timing due to internet.

As in the PT31, June 2000, Game #2: CDs for Sale; PT40, June 2003, Game #3: Zephyr Airlines; PT57, June 2009, Game #3: Dinosaurs; PT62, December 2010, Game #2: Stained Glass Windows; PT77, December 2015, Game #3: Employee Offices, PT79, September 2016, Game #4: Computer Virus + one I always grinds my teeth for PT.84. G.4- Corporate Bond.

Let's say of following scenario,
I think many excellent test takers who usually score fluctuate above one of 160 zone or 170 zone average, if such test taker unluckily meets one of such listed killer LG, i can totally see unless someone achieved the level of a LSAT Prep Instructor virtuoso, that particular usually Strong LSAT test taker would get questions a lot more incorrectly from LG section comparison with their average practices or expected HIGH scores that are totally optimal from such a test taker (As many supporting testimonies are made in various LSAT Forums, threads and Websites Support my claim)

-- especially if one meets such LG games of PT31, June 2000, Game #2: CDs for Sale,PT62, December 2010, Game #2: Stained Glass Windows, PT67, October 2012, Game #4: Zones and Subzones, PT79, September 2016, Game #4: Computer Virus ... It is very easy to envisage that such LG wrecks someone's LSAT dream.

what happens in those LSATs? For example, usually every lsat, people who getting 170, are given with a condition that usually a test takers with 8-10 wrong Qs... maybe can expect 170 with 12-14 Wrong?

Also, does Score gap for getting Qs correctly or incorrectly for high mark test takers, usually widen or smaller in these kind of scenarios given such killer LG game featuring?

Lastly, usually high scores of LSAT ...but got bombed by these Killer Questions. Do they usually convince themselves that they got unlucky and
...do they usually choose to rewrite their LSAT?

*https://blog.powerscore.com/lsat/bid-15 ... -all-time/
*https://blog.powerscore.com/lsat/killer ... -all-time/

[Dave Killoran]

what happens in those LSATs? For example, usually every lsat, people who getting 170, are given with a condition that usually a test takers with 8-10 wrong Qs... maybe can expect 170 with 12-14 Wrong?

Also, does Score gap for getting Qs correctly or incorrectly for high mark test takers, usually widen or smaller in these kind of scenarios given such killer LG game featuring?

Lastly, usually high scores of LSAT ...but got bombed by these Killer Questions. Do they usually convince themselves that they got unlucky and
...do they usually choose to rewrite their LSAT?

*https://blog.powerscore.com/lsat/bid-15 ... -all-time/
*https://blog.powerscore.com/lsat/killer ... -all-time/

Hi Lathlee,

Good questions! A few things can happen when high difficulty items appear on a test:

• 1. They can adjust the scale to be looser (this is one of the factors we use in predicting scales—when we know a high-difficulty item appeared, we often loosen our prediction), and you see that in some of these scales. December 2010, for example, featured the brutally difficult Stained Glass Windows game and is -14 for a 170.
  
  and/or
  
  2. They can pack the rest of the test with easier level items. This explains what occurred in tests like October 2012, which featured the difficult Zones and Subzones game. There, the rest of the test offset that higher difficulty.

Of course, they can also combine both these elements, so it makes it very hard to predict scales based on a single item of high difficulty. As LSAC would say, it's the entirety of the LSAT that produces the scale, which then affects outcomes.

Most students who have high PT scores seem to look at these occurrences for what they are: the effect of chance. So, they basically tell themselves (correctly) that this is unlikely to happen again, and they take another shot

Thanks!