<p>
[quote]
Beginning with the June 2007 administration, LSAC will introduce a variant of reading comprehension, called comparative reading, as one of the four sets in the LSAT reading comprehension section. In general, comparative reading questions are similar to traditional reading comprehension questions. However, there is one significant difference: instead of being based on one longer passage, comparative reading questions are based on two shorter passages. The two passages together are of roughly the same length as one reading comprehension passage, so the total amount of reading in the reading comprehension section will remain essentially the same. A few of the questions that follow a comparative reading passage pair might concern only one of the two passages, but most questions will be about both passages and how they relate to each other. More information, including test preparation material for comparative reading, will be available on the LSAC website (<a href="http://www.LSAC.org%5B/url%5D">www.LSAC.org</a>) in mid-February 2007. This information will also appear in the printed 2007-2008 LSAT & LSDAS Information Book, to be distributed in February 2007.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Thank goodness I am taking the LSAT in February:)</p>
<p>Thanks for the info- I just e-mailed this to my d. Her plan is to take the Dec. LSAT- but if she didn't feel she was ready for it, she was planning to take a pass and take it in June or the following October. She'll be doing a study abroad program next semester so the 2/2007 LSAT is not in the cards for her.<br>
I really do not know if this is a good thing or a bad thing. And may it be worth your while to take the new format if you don't do well on the present LSAT??<br>
As Law schools may not know how to respond to the new test, they may look at grades and EC's more closely than the LSAT's.<br>
Just remember the colleges did not take into consideration the new SAT writing portion of the test for the first year, as they felt it was "untested". They may respond to the new LSAT in the same manner.</p>
<p>Marny, I partially agree. The thing that is really different between college admissions and law school admissions is the curriculum. High schools have pretty much the same stuff - sure, students will take it in a different order, and some might take Latin while others take Spanish, but everyone takes English,history, science, math, and language. You can compare chemistry grades among two students and English grades among two students. The LSAT is so important in law school admissions because you cannot compare, say, advanced thermodynamics grades with African Tribal Dance grades. </p>
<p>Second, ECs are not very important in law school admissions. A lot of people have worked before going to law school, so an impressive resume credential (such as investment banking) will help, but college newspaper work tends to not be very important. </p>
<p>Third, when I read Nspeds' post, I thought, "Wow, they are trying to test law school skills." A lot of law school is reading several cases on the same subject and trying to make sense out of them. </p>
<p>That all said, law schools and lawyers tend to be very reluctant to change anything that works. So we'll see.</p>
<p>Assuming these changes do take place as planned, how would (anyone who cares to reply) suggest changing LSAT studying in order to reflect this slightly different challenge?</p>
<p>Is this new way supposed to be easier or harder than past tests? If it is designed to be substantially more difficult I could take the LSAT in February if absolutely necessary. I was planning on taking a prep class during the summer after my senior year and taking the sept/oct test. But I COULD take the test during my senior year and cut back on some classes to have time to prepare if it will make a difference. Thoughts?? Ideas? </p>
<p>If you are using the US NEWS and World Reports rankings (which you should be since its the gospel that every major firm goes by), the first thing to notice is that there is no such thing as tier 2. There is Tier 1... and then 3 and then 4.</p>
<p>Why? Because USN considers the top 100 schools tier 1. so if you want to make up a tier 2, I guess you would be looking at #'s 50-100</p>
<p>
[quote]
Assuming these changes do take place as planned, how would (anyone who cares to reply) suggest changing LSAT studying in order to reflect this slightly different challenge?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You could start by reading the bottom of my post:</p>
<p>
[quote]
More information, including test preparation material for comparative reading, will be available on the LSAC website (<a href="http://www.LSAC.org%5B/url%5D">www.LSAC.org</a>) in mid-February 2007. This information will also appear in the printed 2007-2008 LSAT & LSDAS Information Book, to be distributed in February 2007.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Unless anyone here also works for the LSAC, I doubt you will receive any more substantive information.</p>
<p>Well- just spoke to my d. As she is currently taking the Kaplan course, she asked her instructor if he was aware of this change and how it was going to affect future test preparation classes.
He was totally clueless about this change. My guess is that the Test Prep companies will not commit to any changes until they receive info from LSAC.
The "good thing" is that everyone is in the same boat and that may actually level the playing field. Those kids who are naturally strong in reading comprehension, may come out ahead.<br>
My d is thinking that she is now more likely to go ahead with the Dec. exam as she is becoming familiar with the present format and really doesn't want to study for a brand new type of test that she has never seen before.<br>
I think those kids who were planning to take the 6/2007 and 10/2007 will be most affected by the change as they will have the least amount of time to fully prepare for the new format.<br>
It seems that no official info is going to be made available until Feb. 2007.</p>
<p>My best advice would be to take the test before the change if you are planning to apply to law school in fall 2007. Law schools won't be prepared to compare a score from a new LSAT test to an older format test (assuming that the changes make more than a marginal difference) after only one administration of the test. If you are planning to apply to law school in the fall of 2008 or later, I would suggest taking the new format test. Often (and again, I only anticipate this would happen to the extent that the changes make more than a marginal difference), law schools will prefer, or even require, you to report a new format score at some point. This is definitely what happened when the LSAT changed its scoring from a 10-48 scale to the 120-180 scale.</p>
<p>i can't decided what to do. i took the sept. exam. want to improve and attend law school for 2008.</p>
<p>the december exam seems too soon. the february exam is undisclosed (you won't be able to see your answer sheet. i just received a point because the machine messed up).</p>
<p>I have been spending more time on another "law school discussion.org" site as it seems more geared to students in the process of taking LSAT's and applying to Law school. I guess that is where most of you will be in the next year or two.<br>
On only one thread was the new test mentioned. This seems to be a pretty new development and no one really knows how to interpret this info. and I think alot of people are unaware of the change.
Take this with a "grain of salt"- but someone's whose friends parent is an attorney and has been asked to advise LSAC in developing the new format is giving the impression that the reading comprehension will be more straightforward and not as convoluted as it is presently.
Everyone will know more in the next few months as actual info will be made available in February.
I guess my advice to anyone who is a college sophomore or if you have not started prepping for the LSAT's, is that it may be worth your while to wait until info about the new test format comes out and concentrate on that test only. Follow the info on the official LSAC (?) site carefully and get the newest prepping material from LSAC when it becomes available.<br>
I think the kids most disadvantaged are the Juniors who are now prepping for the June test and may not be aware of this change. (at least my d is aware of the change-- Thanks to the OP)
My d is still planning to take the Dec. test as she has already been prepping for it, but if she is not happy with her results, she will be switching gears and will probably take the new formatted test next October or later. Good luck to all!</p>
<p>dude you guys, the lsac and law schools both know what's happening here. just because the test changed so minimially (and only in the RC part for crying out loud), law schools aren't going to be like "OMG! what do we do?! he took this slightly new form of the LSAT....by golly, we are so stupid, that we can only base our decision on the former LSAT!" </p>
<p>in fact, law schools might like the new part of the test, and may entice them. out w/the old and in with the new! tackle the new subject, or let it tackle you.</p>
<p>Its better if the reading selections are convoluted because real laws are quite inane in their prose and grammar. Simplification only leads to a more top heavy bell curve where a life-changing 165 versus 170 is decided by fewer questions than it currently is.</p>
<p>I'm failing to see how a curved test can be "harder" or "easier". Maybe better suited to your individual strengths, but overall, it remains identical.</p>
<p>An "easier" test means a less normal bell curve. Remember, 2% will always get 170 or above. However, the number of questions that determine that score will change from year to year. </p>
<p>It sounds like the test is being made easier so that a difference between 175 and 170 may only be 1 question rather than 2 for example.</p>