2013 February LSAT Instant Recap

BPPshinners-lsat-blog-2013-february-lsat-instant-recap
While some (extremely annoyed) pre-law students are spending today digging out from under Nemo instead of taking the February LSAT, the rest of the country is sitting down for five sections of what the LSAC assures us is “fun.”

If you took the February LSAT today, stop in and leave some comments below! And if you’re one of the unlucky people stuck under a few feet of snow, read about what you missed out on.

Initial reports coming in suggest that Logical Reasoning on the February LSAT was the hardest section. There were a few killer questions mentioned. Not only was the language for these questions dense and difficult to understand, the logic behind them was troublesome, as well. Many mentioned this as being the most difficult LR out of the recent practice LSATs (those numbered in the 60s). However, outside of the killer questions, the rest of the section seemed to be manageable.

And manageable is the word of the day. February LSAT Logic Games have been cited as being remarkably easy. And while some people struggled a bit with Reading Comprehension, others found it to be “a breeze.” That’s honestly the first time I’ve ever heard someone describe LSAT Logic Games in that way.

So what did you think of the February LSAT, loyal MSS readers? Let us know! As always, comments will be moderated to comply with LSAC guidelines (remember: mentioning specific subject matter from any of the LSAT questions is not allowed). Now relax, go out, have some fun, and check back on the LSAT blog Monday for what to do now that the February LSAT is behind you (cancelled LSAT test-takers not included).

Feb 9, 2013 - 4:09 pm - By Matt Shinners
Tags: , , , ,
Photo By Ennev Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.0 Generic (CC BY-NC-SA 2.0)
lsat blog email icon lsat blog facebook icon lsat blog twitter icon lsat blog digg icon lsat blog reddit icon lsat blog stumble icon

44 Responses to 2013 February LSAT Instant Recap

  1. Alexandra says:

    The logic games were so simple that I started second guessing myself. I just knew that if they were THAT easy, I had to have messed something up! There were several LR questions that I had to read over and over and over again in order to understand, but I’ll take difficult LR over difficult logic games any day! The reading comprehension was so-so. Overall, I think this LSAT was much more reasonable than last February’s. I’m definitely glad I gave it another shot!

  2. Curtis Jackson says:

    This was my 1st test, and and after doing 17 practice tests, this was the most manageable. My order was LR RC LR LR LG. Overall, over the entire test I only didn’t ‘get’ to 5 questions, and was able to finish all 3 LR and RC sections, one with a bit of time to spare. I was dreading the RC being far more dense and complicated than it was, but it was extremely manageable. The only section I had trouble with was LG, and only because I ran out of time before I could attack the last set of questions. The games were pretty straight forward, and not surprising, but I wasted a little too much time on the 3rd game getting my answers.

    I think, and hope, that the 3rd LR was the experimental section. I wasn’t so hard, but there were a couple questions asked in ways I hadn’t prepared for. But, using the same techniques still worked…I believe. Now to wait and see if this is all false confidence.

    C

  3. May says:

    The Logical Reasoning was WEIRD. I remember being totally thrown off by a few questions–they also seemed a bit more wordy than normal, which cut into my time a lot. Logic Games was really straight forward, which I disliked, because it means the curve is probably not going to be too generous this time around. Reading Comprehension had a question I thought was a tad buggy and passage three wasn’t as clear in its exposition as I would have liked it to be. I had 3 Logical Reasoning sections, which sucked, since I think all 3 suffered from a case of bizarrely phrased questions.

    Overall, not a hard test (I’ve certainly taken much worse practice tests, and I’ve taken something like 50 of them my god), but a really wonky one. Not surprised people were thrown off-guard by the Logical Reasoning. The sections didn’t seem to conform to typical LR sections and some of the questions were roundabout and needlessly complex in language. It sucks that there won’t be anything disclosed, since it’s a February test, but I feel like scores can really be anything. I can typically gauge my rough performance on these things, but I have no idea this time around. Maybe I got the weird questions right, maybe I didn’t. Who knows?

    Blegh. This was a very ‘blegh’ test.

  4. Abbie says:

    I had LR RC LR LR LG and I really hope that my first LR was an experimental, because that was VERY odd and time-consuming. Otherwise everything else seemed pretty fair.

    • Monty says:

      I agree, had the same order and thought the first LR was pretty tough. Destroyed my confidence. The rest wasn’t all too bad. Really hoping for that section to be the experimental, although I believe it wasn’t :/

      • Emily says:

        I had the same thing! I ran out of time and freaked out a little bit. After the test I remember thinking that the first LR section was the strangest one I had ever seen.

  5. Ruth says:

    LG isn’t my strong suit but this section was manageable. I found the last passage in RC somewhat complicated, but over all it wasn’t an unusual section. The LR sections actually didn’t seem that unusual to me either. There were a couple of hard questions, but no more than on a typical PT.

    Now how can we speed up time to the score release date?

  6. Lalli says:

    I had LR LC LR LR LG and I really really hope that first LR section was the experimental. I got soo many ‘role’ questions (god I hate those!) and didn’t get to finish. I thought the LC section was easier than usual and the LG section on the easier side, although I could have done with a few extra minutes on the last game. Overall, I think the curve will be pretty high on this one, so I’ll be praying.

  7. Monty says:

    LR1-some really weird questions in this section. Barely finished on time.
    RC-nothing out of the ordinary, pretty manageable. One passage was pretty dense.
    LR2-not bad at all, pretty straightforward (I believe this one had an agree Q, as predicted, fairly easy)
    LR3-same as 2
    LG-not bad, all games were pretty decent in difficulty.

    really hope section 1 is the experimental!!

    • Sam says:

      I’m trying to figure out which of the two RC sections on my LSAT were experimental. For those of you who only had one RC section, do you remember any specifics from the writing samples?

  8. Daniel says:

    I had RC LR RC LG LR. The second RC was weird and kind of difficult, hopefully experimental. The logic games were so easy that I seriously regret how.much I studied those type of questions.

  9. Weird says:

    This is really odd. Are all the LSAT question papers the same for all test centers? I took mine in Europe and the LG section was not at all straight forward. It totally blew me away. I then found out after the test everyone I talked to found that section more difficult than usual, and most of us left around 5/6 questions, from there- even the ones who said it was their best section going the test. The other sections were okay, though.

  10. John says:

    I had RC LR RC LG LR. I found the RC to be somewhat more difficult than the ones I had previously encountered in my prep. One of the LR sections was brutal. Consistently I answer all LR questions usually missing two or three. I failed to get to 4 LR questions on the one section. The other section was manageable. LG were the easiest I’ve ever encountered.

  11. Mary says:

    I had RC,LR,LG,LG,LR the LG were somewhat easy so I too second guessed but I found that RC was the hardest part of the test. The LR were so so I agree though that some questions were worded weirdly. 1st time taking the actual test studied with Powerscore hoping I did good but unsure.

    • anonymous says:

      I had the same set up as you did as far as the makeup of the test. Have you determined which game section you think will count toward the score? My first game section was easy the second I know i didnt do as strong…

  12. Marcedes says:

    Damn, and here I thought my ease with LG was due to my diligent practice. I had to leave six questions on the table in December and finished before the five minute warning. I almost wish it had been tougher to get the curve a little higher than it ultimately will be.

    LR and RC both seemed significantly more difficult this go ’round. The 25 question LR section wasn’t so tough, but the 26 one was just so poorly worded. For those of us burdened with 3 LR sections, it seemed the experimental section was also a killer (i don’t know which 26 question LR section was the experimental, but they were both pretty brutal).

  13. Robert says:

    I also had 3 LR. My first LR was on the tough side but manageable (26 questions so pretty sure this one was real), the second one was oddly easy (relatively) and the third one must have been difficult or weird, because I ran out of time with 4 questions left, which never happens to me for LR. Hoping this last one was the experimental.

  14. Robert says:

    I also feel like there might have been something weird about 1 or 2 of the games — they weren’t exactly hard, but I found myself sort of wondering how to diagram some of them (I felt like I hadn’t ran into those exact game types in PTs before). But I did finish a few minutes early so hopefully that’s a good sign.

  15. Sabi says:

    I had RC-LR-LG-LG-LR. I felt like the RC was the most difficult. It was hard to pay attention. The LR def. threw some curve balls. It would be classified as time consuming and long answer choices. The two LG both were manageable, one was really easy the other was somewhat easy. It should be interesting to see my score this time around.

  16. parker395 says:

    My test went as follows-RC, LR, LG, LG, LR.

    The only standout for me was the first LG which I feel must have been the experimental because one game set-up was like nothing I had seen before and I barely finished in time. I was very glad after the break to find a second LG’s section that I finished with 7 minutes to spare.

  17. zeke says:

    I had RC,LR,LG,LG,LR i found the logic games to be more simple than i had on the practice tests and that was one of my weaknesses so i made sure to make it one of my strengths. What sucked was the RC to open things up, my passages were very tough and i had about 3-4 questions left when our proctor said 5 min remaining. Overall though I will use this as my baseline score and will probably take it again in June.

  18. Matt says:

    Hey Mary, yeah I had the same layout for sections as you did. I thought the RC wasn’t bad at all, yet it still took some time. But the LR was really wordy and frustrating. The passages were pretty darn long and they all seemed that way, so lots of re-reading. LG you could kind of tell which was the experimental but overall it wasn’t too bad.

  19. Mike says:

    LR RC LR LR LG

    WORDY!

    The folks at LSAC are obviously doing their best to counteract methods like BP’s, as evidenced by the disguised question types. (But they don’t stand a chance!) And what’s with all the EXCEPT questions? And guess who stopped in to remind us they’re still alive? AGREE and CRUX made their annoying cameos again. I’m glad I was able to spend some time on the 2012 exams (especially Dec) since this awkward style of LR seems to be a growing trend that reared its head yesterday.

    I would hardly refer to any part of the test as “a breeze,” although LG wasn’t bad as a whole. (I think Shinners got it right: http://blueprintprep.com/lsatblog/lsat-preparation/matt-shinnerss-2013-february-lsat-predictions/). One game was one of the easiest games I’ve ever done. One average. Two others were a bit more time consuming, though they didn’t venture into the unconventional like “Mauve Dinos” or “Stained Glass Windows.”

    I found RC to be a bit dense, one passage in particular. Scores can’t come out fast enough. I have no idea where I’ll be on the curve. This one could really go either way.

  20. janet says:

    I had RC, LG, LR, LR, LG. I thought the games seemed very easy compared to the practice tests and I too worried that I had done something wrong. Now its just waiting on pins and needles to see the score.

  21. Alyssa says:

    If it helps anyone at all, my experimental was LG and both my LR sections were 26 questions each (meaning that the 25 question LR section that people are talking about is probably the experimental one).

    • Alyssa says:

      The people below are probably right, and I’m probably wrong about the 2 26 LR sections. Here’s to hoping it’s my memory that’s wrong and that I didn’t mess up my answer sheet and actually bubble up till the 26th question for the second LR section…

  22. Marcedes says:

    Well, if both 26 question LR’s were real then, a, fuck those were difficult and i might be a bit screwed, and b, this is a rare 102 question tests. Because the RC was 27 and the LG was 23.

  23. Bill says:

    I think LG were below-average difficulty, though I think people have underestimated their difficulty a little bit. In my opinion, one of the games was more than sufficient to give a decent number of test-takers a good deal of trouble. LR was legitimately challenging, and RC was pretty tricky, which is more or less par for the course for RC nowadays. We can safely say that it will not be a super-generous curve, though I would say 12 is possible, with a range of 10-12. One way to get a better idea would be to compare it to October, which was a -10. RC seemed about the same, LG substantially easier, and LR substantially harder (and remember, it’s 2 sections). All things being equal, I think it was a bit harder. -11 would be my guess.

  24. Tommy says:

    I had LR-RC-LR-LR-LG….

    The LG section was the one I was most dreading as I generally can’t get to the last 5-6 questions. I thought it was by far the easiest, every single game was so easy that I thuoght I had to of misread a rule but the general consensus appears to be that everybody found the LG quite doable to say the least. As far as the LR goes I thught the third section was a ltitle hard but nothing to crazy and one of the passages from the RC had me drawing a few blanks, all in all though feel really good about it!

  25. The dude says:

    RC-LR-LG-LG-LR
    (27)-(26)-(23)-(23/Experimental)-(25)
    IMHO, I thought the Reading Comp was substantially different than prior tests. There was maybe 1-2 main point questions, most of them were implication questions within there. It made you really have to read carefully or else you’d lose all your time on the first few passages re-reading.

    The LR was on par, many flaws, MBT, ~MBT, strengthen, weaken. In the first 15 Q’s sufficient question types were nonexistent.

    The flaw questions had wordy, diluted answer choices. Usually one irrelevant word made the answer choice wrong in comparison to the correct answer.

    Games were far easier than the past tests. I had done Oct/Dec 2012′s games in the morning before the test for review, and I was expecting more combo/tiered ordering games. Maybe even a vertical ordering game, (But none came!)

    Essentially I think a raw score of 57 = 150, 70-71 = 158, 77 = 162

    Let’s hope for the best all!

    • Gitty Jean says:

      Hey, man . I think your guess on the experimental section is wrong because most people recall the 4th section is true. I wish you are right too.
      Hope for the best for all/.

  26. Simon says:

    Any consensus as to which the experimental section was?

    LR(26)-RC-LR(25)-LR(26)-LG

    • Abbie says:

      It seems either the first or the fourth- unless there were 102 questions on the exam… then it could be the third, but that seems unlikely. Personally I hope it was the first!

  27. Mo says:

    First 3 Sections: RC, LR, RC
    I was exhausted by the time I got to break- I had 2 punishing RC sections which were among the hardest I’ve come across- couldn’t discern which was the real thing. I nearly blacked out when I saw that my 3rd section was RC, but thought one of the passages was entertaining. My first LR was okay, really wordy, but had enough time.
    Last 2 Sections: LG then LR
    LG was easy. The first game looked impossible but it was simple (after re-reading 5x). I saved it for the end.
    LR was tough… I was stuck on the glee question for nearly 4 minutes, glad I saved it for the end.

    Overall, my impression: LG was easy and the RC/LR’s were punishing. I would have preferred if the LG were moderately difficult and lowered the difficulty of RC and LR.

  28. mike says:

    Anyone vividly recall the passages of their RC section for those with 3 LR, 1LG and 1RC? I’m feeling as though this section will drastically impact my score, so if anyone would be willing to share passage and question details and some likely write answer choices I’d highly appreciate it.

    • Hank says:

      Discussing specific questions would be a violation of LSAC’s policies, so unfortunately any comments that do so will not be approved.

  29. Davis says:

    So have we now established that for those whose test was LR (26)-RC (27)-LR (25)-LR (26)-LG (23), it was in fact the LR (25) that was the experimental section, and this was a 102 question exam?

  30. Simon says:

    That can’t be a possibility.

    Our version was LR(26)-LR(25)-LR(26)…

    There are other versions that were LR(26)-LR(25)-LR(25)…

    And the people who had LG or RC as experimental, recall having one 26 LR and one 25 LR.

    This test was 101 questions…. The question remains whether the experimental for us was Section 1 or Section 4.

    I didn’t get to the last 4 on Sec 1, which has never happened to me. I have some suspicion that it may be a real one, but I’m hoping it isn’t. I’m reminding myself of the rarity of a post-break experimental, even if it’s not a rule, it’s still, even after 2011, a convention that seems to be broken only in rare occasions..

    If anyone has shed any light on the experimental, please let us know!

    • Emily says:

      I had the same set up as you and ran into the same problem with section one. I am fearing that this one wasn’t experimental, but it was a VERY strange section. This is giving me hope. I’ve talked to other test takers and the majority have said that their experimental sections really threw them off. I’m going to go with my gut and say that for the test that had LR (26), LR (25) and LR (26) that the first LR was the experimental section. Keep the hope!!

  31. Jason says:

    My sections were as follows:

    RC, LR, LG, (Break), LG, LR

    I pray that the first Logic Games section was the experimental section. I feel as though I was messing up left and right. The second Logic Games section was a breeze. The rest of the exam seemed about par for the course.

    • CP says:

      I took a snow make-up test. My sections were RC LR LG LG LR. First LG was fine. I had a hard time with the second and my timing was off, so I’m hoping the second LG was the experimental, but I fear it was the other way around.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>