LSAT Experimental Section Order

[RyanM12]

Hello,

After reading your blog post on the experimental section and the evolution of how it has been used, I had a question. Now that LSAC has removed the restriction as to when it can appear including the 4th and 5th section, does it create an potentially uneven playing field? Especially since standardized tests are much longer than undergraduate ones, it would seem if someone had the experimental as the fifth section, it would be advantageous to them because when stamina levels are lowest for many test takers, they would be taking that section as unscored one, while other test takers would be taking that one as a scored one.

Does LSAC try not to create too much of a gap in between the experimental sections amongst test takers? If on the December 2016 LSAT (as a hypothetical) if someone had Test form A and Section 1 was experimental and someone had Test form B and had an experimental as 5 I could see that as being potentially disadvantageous to the person with test A.

Sorry if it is a bit of a nerdy question, but I'm curious as to how LSAC maintains its standardization despite the change that the experimentals are no longer limited to sections 1-3

[Dave Killoran]

Hey Ryan,

Good question, and I think the answer is that it clearly creates an uneven playing field. Exactly as you point out, if I have an Experimental first and you have it fourth, I feel like you have an advantage because by the fourth section your energy will be down a bit whereas in the first section mine will be at maximum. So they take away a potentially strong section for me, and a potentially weaker section for you. Then, there are the side effects of even having different forms of the same section in play. For example, if we both have LG experimentals but mine has some killer game in, that may have more of a negative effect on my test than your section has on yours.

I haven't seen LSAC attempting to obviously manage this issue, but it may help to know that as of this writing, there hasn't been a 5th section experimental yet. It wasn't that long ago that they added the 4th section as possible, but I feel like using the 5th is just too prejudicial and on that basis it will be forever avoided.

It was always the case that students having different sections advantaged some and disadvantaged others. That has always been an issue. But personally, I feel like the variance in placement adds a new level to these advantages/disadvantages. I'm not sure it bothers LSAC though, and they probably have data suggesting that the effect is minimal. And since they are in charge, we just have to accept that. But I think it adds an additional element of chance to a test that is already quite challenging.

So, short version is that I agree with you 100%, lol

Thanks!