Dec. Predictions Forum

[kiklavan]

.

[Mikey]

I'm calling a weird game

[kiklavan]

.

[Mikey]

I'm calling a weird game

See that’s what I thought but would it be smart to do that when 6 schools just opened up the GRE door?

I personally don't think the LSAT is going to change in what they give us because of the GRE. idk

[kiklavan]

.

[Platopus]

.

[kiklavan]

.

[sodomojo]

LSAC isn't going to miraculously start making the LSAT easier, and even if they did, it would be easier for everyone so in theory nothing would really change... Maybe you just need a 170 instead of a 168... but top 1% is still top 1% regardless if it is a 170 or a 175.

Well how would that be any fair? If that does become the case, I don't see why the curve wouldn't just compensate as it always has.

[Platopus]

.

[april_ludgate]

Aren't these tests created years in advance? Because they have to test them out in experimental sections first? So wouldn't the GRE or anything like that not have an affect for several years, if it had any at all?

[Ntp73821]

Aren't these tests created years in advance? Because they have to test them out in experimental sections first? So wouldn't the GRE or anything like that not have an affect for several years, if it had any at all?

[Barack O'Drama]

Aren't these tests created years in advance? Because they have to test them out in experimental sections first? So wouldn't the GRE or anything like that not have an affect for several years, if it had any at all?

I think this pretty much sums it up...

Maybe they have an easier LG section in the pipeline though? Wishful thinking I'm sure

[sodomojo]

That's my point. It wouldn't be fair to people taking the test, and if the test were somehow to actually be easier, everyone would benefit so it wouldn't make a difference anyway.

Oh yeah, well I meant unfair to people who took the test in the past when top 1% was only say a 170. Although I guess that would only matter for a brief period while you might still have applicants with scores from before. That's assuming that the percentiles change because LSAC is actively making the test easier of course. If the percentiles change because test takers are getting smarter (which seems to be what has happened over the last 10-20 years), then that's a non-issue.

[kiklavan]

Tbh part of why I posted this is because there was a blog on Blueprint's website analyzing the Sep 2017 LSAT which suggested that LSAC might be loosening up a bit so I wanted to see if anyone here saw any merit in that

[april_ludgate]

Tbh part of why I posted this is because there was a blog on Blueprint's website analyzing the Sep 2017 LSAT which suggested that LSAC might be loosening up a bit so I wanted to see if anyone here saw any merit in that

link?

[kiklavan]

.

[april_ludgate]

Tbh part of why I posted this is because there was a blog on Blueprint's website analyzing the Sep 2017 LSAT which suggested that LSAC might be loosening up a bit so I wanted to see if anyone here saw any merit in that

link?

http://blueprintlsat.com/lsatblog/lsat/ ... gic-games/

thanks!

[Experiment626]

Tbh part of why I posted this is because there was a blog on Blueprint's website analyzing the Sep 2017 LSAT which suggested that LSAC might be loosening up a bit so I wanted to see if anyone here saw any merit in that

link?

http://blueprintlsat.com/lsatblog/lsat/ ... gic-games/

This is pretty interesting. I mean we can only hope it's the reason and an easier test in December but I'm never a fan of hard RC. Rather have hard LG.