June 16 2008 LSAT: The Recap

[ImmurnMoomo]

Hey guys, let's go over this: Year 2008, Sixteenth of the Month of June, LSAT.

I had the RC section for my experimental. I talk to several testakers and found out which one was the experimental.

The experimental RC section included a science passage about brain physiology and temporal relationship. There was alot of Jargon but the passage was easy. In the context of the passage "temporal relationship meant" timed intervals. I think discerning that was the key. There was a law passage on an organiztion called CITES. It was managable; however, the last few questions were tough. I can't recall the other two passages.

THe first game in the game section was easy. It involved assigining side effects to 4 drugs w,x,y,z. THe side effects were f,p,s,h. The game was easy because of the clue limiting that F&P can never go together. Infact, the only possible side effect that W had in common with X was H.

Game 2 was easy but tricky. The best setup was a two tiered diagram using rows assigned to named roller coasters and row two was to decide if the coaster was wooden or steel. This game also involved ordering. The key to this game was to figure out the location of H. After H exactly two steel roller coasters followed it. There were 7 roller coasters so it best to use a number diagram 1 through seven. 1 = a Steel roller coaster, you could deduce that 6= a steel roller coaster and 7 = a wooden roller coaster. 6 = a steel roller coaster because no two consecutive roller coasters could be wooden. P= 2.

Game 3 was easy if your good at conditional statements. THey were fairly straight forward. Mostly if then statements. It invlvoed assigning a doctor to a 7 story building. Can't recall the detials. I'll write more later my head is pounding.

[dyewPypeInere]

I just took it too; but I had 2 Games sections--1st and 3rd.

Thank goodness the latter was scored, as you report. The first one was brutal! My second Games section had the roller-coasters, Dr.'s floors, and drugs. For the life of me, I can't remember the 4th one....

Phew. Thanks for your post. I feel a lot better.

Best of luck!

UPDATE: My friend just took it at UCSB (Santa Barbara, CA). He said there were 3 LR sections (1-3-5, I think), and he just blew right through the first. The other two seemed to be of equal difficulty (not considering the fatigue factor). He says that with his luck, the 1st was probably the experimental.

[Peertytrounty]

I concur with your assessments on the games and reading comprehension sections. It looks like for those of us that had an experimental logical reasoning (LR) section, it's a bit tougher to figure out which two were graded.

I can't remember any single argument/question from any individual LR section; so I can't match any of my LR sections with any described by those individuals who only had 2 LR sections. What I do remember is that the LR sections were 1-3-5, and that the first seemed much much easier than the last two (even considering the fatigue factor). The last two LRs seemed to both be of equivalent difficulty, at what I would describe as between moderate and high.

If ya'll had only two LR sections, do you remember if one of them seemed much easier than the other? All other things being equal, this might suggest that my easy LR section was one of the graded ones, which would be pretty cool.

[UrbavaFrica]

at this point I don't really care to dwell on the test; however, for some of you anxious test takers I don't mind helping out. I had the LR section 2 and 4. Anyhow, I can't recall which questions belonged to what section (Ie 2 or 4); Neverthless I managed to remember a few questions.

I believe there was a strengthing question towards the end of the section (#19 I think)....The argument was about breaking the world record for swimming. Basically you had to strenghten the author conclusion: the swimmer will break the world record in his/her next tournament

another question was a weaken question regarding a blood test that diagnose some disorder. The conclusion of the argument was that docotrs recommend that eveyone should undergo this treament. Again you were to weaken this recommendation.

I also recall two principle question. One question stated that dogs were anecestors of wolves. The wustion further stated that wolves were more inteligent but nonethless dogs had more evolutionary success compared to wolves.

Another question was a principle question regarding the plasma protein Albumin. You had to find a principle that justifed the advantages of using Albumin against blood plasma.

Sorry I ca'nt recall too many other args. Good Luck.