<p>Hello Everybody,
Does anybody know for sure if there is a substantial difference between the older LSATs ( early to mid 90's), and the newer ones? I've been taking numerous practice exams, however they have all been older exams. I've read conflicting information about this. Some say that the older exams are much too easy compared to the newer ones, and some say the difference is negligible. And even some others say that the older exams are more difficult.
I've ordered some newer practice exams, but I'm just wondering if I've been wasting my time or not. </p>
<p>Thanks</p>
<p>The older exams are "harder."</p>
<p>The older exams often had very abstract and seemingly long-winded problems that were designed to frustrate most test takers.</p>
<p>The new LSAT is much more streamlined ever since Collegeboard took over. That means in general, problems are generally more straightfoward (at least IMO). </p>
<p>I think the proof of this is in the uneven distribution curves for grades on the LSAT. Lots of tests have people only making 180's, 178's, 176's without the 179's and 177's and similar quantized trends near the top. You would expect that kind of trend if raw scores are becoming more similar at the top (more people are missing either 1, 2, or 3 problems from the 175-180 range verus 1,2,3,4, and 5).</p>
<p>This trend seems to only affect top scores though. People more near the middle of the bell curve are still separated in pretty much the same way they were before.</p>