Monday, December 13, 2010

Logic Games Were Difficult on December 2010 LSAT?

Of the clients who have gotten back to us, it seems the logic games were particularly difficult on the December 2010 LSAT. Leave some comments if you had similar or a completely different experience. I'm particularly excited when people allege tricky logic games, as I look forward to analyzing them for the Zen system.

If you're thinking about retaking the LSAT, check out the calendar for the February 2011 LSAT and how I went about preparing for my second LSAT.

Meanwhile, I'm in the middle of an 8-hour Property exam--don't worry, I wrote this early Sunday and had it automatically post!--and I wanted to use that experience to make a couple points.

Logic games are relevant to law school: they measure your ability to creatively apply rules to novel situations and test whether you can see the interactions of different actors, groups, and competing interests. In fact, if a section type needed to be removed while minimizing the damage to predictive validity, it would be reading comprehension. The two more traditional sections tell law schools relatively similar information, while the logic games add an entirely separate group of information.

For this reason, some researchers and law school admissions officers have argued--unsuccessfully and at least since the 1990s--that the LSAT sections should be reported separately, similar to how the GMAT breaks its reports into quantitative and verbal scores.

For those of you who can't imagine ever using you logic games diagramming skills, let me assure you that it has helped me multiple times in simplifying party relationships in common law courses like Contracts and Property.  Still don't believe me?  Here's an example outline I created for a practice exam question.
Actors, groups, transfers, relationships, and conditionals. Sounds like a logic game to me!