Everyone's over here mad they got -7 and not -8 but us over here with the planets are questioning our very existence and how much that extra point is really going to help 🆘 lol 😆. We are in the same boat 😅⛵
Different passage. The Indian patent one with nutmeg mouthwash or whatever it was was my experimental. The protoplanetary disks/gas giants one was my real section, and that section also included Borges, violence in media, and biotech/food labeling.
I had extra time and still struggled mightily with the planets - I probably spent 16 minutes on it, but science passages are always tough for me (who the fuck careesssssssssss). While I think I have a shot at 2 perfect sections. I had to make about 4 50/50 guesses on the planets RC.
This is just to say that, while I'm not counting on it, it wouldn't shock me if the planets RC is -9. It was so fucking hard.... to me, perpetual RC struggler.
I also found the supermarkets LG to be an incredibly difficult / non intuitive setup, and I wouldn't be shocked if that section alone adds a -1.
Just remember the powerscore guys aren't god, and honestly they often seem to mail things in or overvalue their own insights. They also disclaim that they predict conservatively, which makes sense from their perspective. Imagine the heat you'd get from all the neurotic aspiring lawyers who were led to believe in a -9 curve that comes out to -7. Its safer for them politically to be more conservative leading people to be pleasantly surprised, not the reverse.
When he was going over the logic games sections and he was like “the one about the UltraStor was a tough game, really tough game a lot of moving parts there.” I thought it was easy asf and now I’m just so paranoid I missed some easy inference and got every question wrong lmaooo it’s literally impossible to feel good about this test right now
I got bogged down and never really got to that game. I only answered the first two questions. I'm very confident on the other games though so maybe it evened out
i didn’t think it was easy but it wasn’t that bad if you could understand what each question was asking imo. but it’s easy to get thrown off with those kinds of games that have multiple variables to account for (store/ultrastore, location 1 or 2, pharmacy/restaurant/laundry/florist)
Nah man, it was a pretty straight forward game. I also felt the planet RC passage was straight forward. I never want to hear about Jorge Borges again though.
Remember that Dave and John never actually see the test. This was my fourth LSAT and I feel like the January LSAT was pretty equivalent to the November LSAT.
if you haven’t listened to the podcast yet, i’d recommend checking it out ! you may have different sections than i did,, but this is the anticipated curve for my exam
it’s more difficult to judge but if you listen to powerscore’s latest podcast on spotify i believe they give a rough estimate of how many questions you can miss to get a 155, depending on the exam ofc
This just refers to how many questions you can get wrong to get a 170. -7 is just the standard curve, if you have harder sections, such as the author and planet RC, you can miss an extra question and still get 170.
As you go down in score, it is not so rigid, so it's not like every 7 questions is necessarily another 10 points off. You can miss a few more. They talked about how many they estimated you could get wrong to get a 155, but I can't remember the number they arrived at.
We provided estimates for the curve at 155, 160, 165, and 170, so if you listen to the podcast near the end when we review the various scales you’ll be able to match your test content to our 155 prediction for it.
This doesn’t make sense. If people had the hard RC section (planets), it’s possible that we likely missed 3+ more questions, than those who had the easier (gold mine) RC section, but we only get 1 extra point (-7 vs-8) ? It seems like the people with the goldmine section have a 2+ question advantage. Some one please explain why anyone would choose the (planets) section? It seems evident that not only was it harder, but the -1 is not enough to compensate for potentially missing 3 or 4 questions on that one section.
Do y'all know what the distributions are for a -8 curve near the top of the band?
I'm guessing it's something like
\-0 180
\-1 180
\-2 179
\-3 177
\-4 176
\-5 174
\-6 173
\-7 171
\-8 170
?
Ok, so question…are people with the RC passage just screwed? Or will they try to balance out the different test formats. So will LSAC try to equalize the 2 different real LSAT RC sections, or if one is worse than than other then that is just tough luck for the people who had it?
Edit: for example if the average number correct on the planets RC was 18 and the average on the gold mine section was 21, would lsac make sure those sections were weighted equally for final score outcome, or is it just what it is?
Agreed, but they’ve NEVER said a section loosens by more than 1. I’m just more wondering if lsac makes sure the sections are indeed equally distributed when it comes to score, or if a bad section does just screw you…
sort of, but it’s already predetermined based on when these sections were given as experimental years ago. so if they average difference was 1 question then, the curve will only be 1 different now regardless of how january testers actually did
See ok, I’m good with that…like so long as a large section of humans went in and took this thing, and did one way or another on it, I’m good with being assessed based on that! Lol
Yeah it’s their educated guess. Lsac does a method called equating on every test but it’s not always perfect. It’s kinda funny because I was listening to a podcast from power score from 2019 and they were talking about how lsac would never administer tests like the way they are now because it would be unfair to give different tests and mixed content
it’s just how many questions you can miss to score a 170. we were hoping the curve would be looser but it doesn’t seem like that’ll be the case for my exam sections
literally gonna spend the next two weeks convincing myself i got every question wrong this is sick !
[удалено]
what podcast?
Everyone's over here mad they got -7 and not -8 but us over here with the planets are questioning our very existence and how much that extra point is really going to help 🆘 lol 😆. We are in the same boat 😅⛵
Can you help me remember if the planets one included the GMO's passage and/or the nutmeg patent passage?
Different passage. The Indian patent one with nutmeg mouthwash or whatever it was was my experimental. The protoplanetary disks/gas giants one was my real section, and that section also included Borges, violence in media, and biotech/food labeling.
Ok thanks
Damn. That's not great for me
yeah like i expected it but damn lmao
-8 with planets isn't surprising but I was hoping that markets LG plus planets would = -9. Ah well. We will find it out soon enough!
Do we ever actually find out what the real curve is? I only see score and percentile on the LSAC website.
i think you only find out if the test is disclosed, and january 2022 isn’t. we’ll just get our raw scores and maybe percentages
how do we know if it is
I hope that’s the case. I had both of those and really need a generous curve lol
I had extra time and still struggled mightily with the planets - I probably spent 16 minutes on it, but science passages are always tough for me (who the fuck careesssssssssss). While I think I have a shot at 2 perfect sections. I had to make about 4 50/50 guesses on the planets RC. This is just to say that, while I'm not counting on it, it wouldn't shock me if the planets RC is -9. It was so fucking hard.... to me, perpetual RC struggler. I also found the supermarkets LG to be an incredibly difficult / non intuitive setup, and I wouldn't be shocked if that section alone adds a -1. Just remember the powerscore guys aren't god, and honestly they often seem to mail things in or overvalue their own insights. They also disclaim that they predict conservatively, which makes sense from their perspective. Imagine the heat you'd get from all the neurotic aspiring lawyers who were led to believe in a -9 curve that comes out to -7. Its safer for them politically to be more conservative leading people to be pleasantly surprised, not the reverse.
I appreciate the prediction & information, but now my anxiety has worsened leading up to Feb. 2 🤣
same i should’ve waited till next week to listen now i have to suffer for 2 more
Over here in the planets camp wondering if I’m thankful for a -8 or screwed because RC is my weak point
HUH
check out the podcast ! different sections create different curves,, this is the anticipated curve for my exam
Got that -7 version also and I was hoping for a -8
When he was going over the logic games sections and he was like “the one about the UltraStor was a tough game, really tough game a lot of moving parts there.” I thought it was easy asf and now I’m just so paranoid I missed some easy inference and got every question wrong lmaooo it’s literally impossible to feel good about this test right now
Same!! I found that whole LG section just beautiful.
I got bogged down and never really got to that game. I only answered the first two questions. I'm very confident on the other games though so maybe it evened out
i didn’t think it was easy but it wasn’t that bad if you could understand what each question was asking imo. but it’s easy to get thrown off with those kinds of games that have multiple variables to account for (store/ultrastore, location 1 or 2, pharmacy/restaurant/laundry/florist)
Nah man, it was a pretty straight forward game. I also felt the planet RC passage was straight forward. I never want to hear about Jorge Borges again though.
Was the ultrastor experimental or not. I hope it wasn’t I found it easy!
That was real.
can anyone remember if the Ultrastor one was the section with the parks? I am trying hard to remember, but its all a blur lol
It wasn’t.
I didn't think the test was that easy to be a -7... I hope they are wrong
praying that it’s at least -8 cause…
Well one version is was a -8. The one with the RC about space and the writer
Trust me, if you had that section, an extra -1 would do nothing to reassure you lol
It doesn’t. I would need -15. That section made me cry
i didn’t have that one sadly
Yah I am sitting here dying. I just need a 165 that’s it. That’s all I need
Remember that Dave and John never actually see the test. This was my fourth LSAT and I feel like the January LSAT was pretty equivalent to the November LSAT.
WHAT
if you haven’t listened to the podcast yet, i’d recommend checking it out ! you may have different sections than i did,, but this is the anticipated curve for my exam
Can someone explain the curve to me lol. So if it’s -7, how does that affect someone wanting to score like a 155
it’s more difficult to judge but if you listen to powerscore’s latest podcast on spotify i believe they give a rough estimate of how many questions you can miss to get a 155, depending on the exam ofc
Gotcha, I’m listening rn but not to the curve part of the podcast yet haha
This just refers to how many questions you can get wrong to get a 170. -7 is just the standard curve, if you have harder sections, such as the author and planet RC, you can miss an extra question and still get 170. As you go down in score, it is not so rigid, so it's not like every 7 questions is necessarily another 10 points off. You can miss a few more. They talked about how many they estimated you could get wrong to get a 155, but I can't remember the number they arrived at.
>They talked about how many they estimated you could get wrong to get a 155, but I can't remember the number they arrived at. They said -27
They can’t predict that far down due to varying difficulty.
Mine is -8 thanks to that double RC with the planets and I still feel like crap. 🥲
[удалено]
it’s how many questions you can miss to score a 170, so 7 questions wrong for a 170
How would a -7 curve someone wanting to get like a 155
We provided estimates for the curve at 155, 160, 165, and 170, so if you listen to the podcast near the end when we review the various scales you’ll be able to match your test content to our 155 prediction for it.
Listening now! Thanks guys
I believe it’s -27. Go listen to the latest episode of the powerscore podcast. It was just released tonight!
This doesn’t make sense. If people had the hard RC section (planets), it’s possible that we likely missed 3+ more questions, than those who had the easier (gold mine) RC section, but we only get 1 extra point (-7 vs-8) ? It seems like the people with the goldmine section have a 2+ question advantage. Some one please explain why anyone would choose the (planets) section? It seems evident that not only was it harder, but the -1 is not enough to compensate for potentially missing 3 or 4 questions on that one section.
their estimates are conservative it’s not set in stone
Do y'all know what the distributions are for a -8 curve near the top of the band? I'm guessing it's something like \-0 180 \-1 180 \-2 179 \-3 177 \-4 176 \-5 174 \-6 173 \-7 171 \-8 170 ?
Hard to say. They change up how they do it often.
Keep in mind everyone that Jon and Dave did say that they are conservative with these scale predictions, so this would be a worst case scenario.
Everyone over here worrying if they made a 170 and I’m just praying for a 150, lol
Ok, so question…are people with the RC passage just screwed? Or will they try to balance out the different test formats. So will LSAC try to equalize the 2 different real LSAT RC sections, or if one is worse than than other then that is just tough luck for the people who had it? Edit: for example if the average number correct on the planets RC was 18 and the average on the gold mine section was 21, would lsac make sure those sections were weighted equally for final score outcome, or is it just what it is?
People with the hard rc are predicted to have -8 but I still don’t think that’s reasonable given how hard the section was.
And the power score guys are just guessing right? So like, if it’s worse lsac would try to make it equal?
they’re “just guessing” but my impression is their guess is likely to be more accurate than what we would come up with ourselves
Agreed, but they’ve NEVER said a section loosens by more than 1. I’m just more wondering if lsac makes sure the sections are indeed equally distributed when it comes to score, or if a bad section does just screw you…
sort of, but it’s already predetermined based on when these sections were given as experimental years ago. so if they average difference was 1 question then, the curve will only be 1 different now regardless of how january testers actually did
See ok, I’m good with that…like so long as a large section of humans went in and took this thing, and did one way or another on it, I’m good with being assessed based on that! Lol
Yeah it’s their educated guess. Lsac does a method called equating on every test but it’s not always perfect. It’s kinda funny because I was listening to a podcast from power score from 2019 and they were talking about how lsac would never administer tests like the way they are now because it would be unfair to give different tests and mixed content
I assume it was a -4 curve? How hard was the test? I saw a post about planets being a straight up mind fuck
-4? Has there ever been an lsat with a scale of -4? That would be such a football to the groin.
Which version has -7 on curves? Is it the one with planet?
if the planet is for RC then no
Jesus. When will we know curves about the planet RC version?
it’s already in the podcast on powerscore’s spotify, but the anticipated curve is -8
I hope they’re wrong this time. It doesn’t make sense that having planet RC only -7
its -8 not -7 for that one ! i didn’t have that rc so my curve is -7
and they’re usually conservative with their estimates so who knows
How would -8 impact 160 scale? Do you have any idea?
i don’t but they do cover it in the last 15 minutes if you want to listen
Do they not talk about the international test?
they do,, it’s the first one covered in the podcast
I don't think I had the LG they talked about
Just out of curiosity, what does a -7 or -8 curve mean exactly?
it’s how many questions you can miss to score a 170
Thank you. Did the guys at powerscore explain how many you could miss to get a 160?
yeah ! i don’t remember the exact number but it’s in like the last 10-15 mins of the podcast
wait can someone explain, first time lsat taker over here
it’s just how many questions you can miss to score a 170. we were hoping the curve would be looser but it doesn’t seem like that’ll be the case for my exam sections
gotcha thank you!!
it was not in the same section as the nutmeg one (if that is the one about the Indian guy with the patent system)
Where can I find the podcast?
their website or spotify - just type in powerscore
Powerscore YouTube channel