<p>Hi, after a reasonable amount of searching, I haven't found anything that really answers my question very well.</p>
<p>I am wondering how predictive a score on an old LSAT taken under timed conditions can be of an actual score in the future. Specifically: I took a February of 1993 LSAT, timed myself while so doing, and was shocked to have gotten a 170. Of course, this test was lacking the 5th experimental section, but otherwise, all conditions should have mirrored the actual test. I was wondering if this means that I could score in the ballpark of a 170 on a more recent exam, or if the score is kind of irrelevant.</p>
<p>I do intend to take a more recent exam soon, but because this score was so high, I am a little excited about it, but don't want to get my hopes up. And yes, I did take this cold, or at least mostly cold (I was quite familiar with the format and what to expect, but didn't know techniques for logic games, and thus had to skip one of the sections. However, out of the sections I did take the time to do, I got every question right.).</p>
<p>Any information would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.</p>
<p>I would think that your result on an old LSAT is one of the best possible indicators of a good result on the actual test, particularly if it energizes you into preparing thoroughly for the real thing.</p>
<p>Even though the test is from 1993? I thought I had read that more recently used tests would be more accurately diagnostic, but is it the case that all are fairly similar in terms of predictiveness?</p>
<p>The reason the test designers include "experimental" sections is to demonstrate that the tests scaled consistently from administration to administration. That's not to say there won't be any drift over the years. But people who have done well on such tests tend to continue to do well on them.</p>
<p>The scales have become more rigid on recent tests. I once got a 179 on some old test with 7 wrong, which would have been a 172 on the October test. Your raw score on older exams is a probably better indicator of future performance than the converted score is.</p>
<p>The test itself has also changed since 1993. I think games have gotten much easier. Reading comprehension is more difficult (and new tests have two comparative passages, which are arguably harder than a single passage). Taking old tests is fine and will help you improve your performance, but you should be mindful that current LSATs will give you a better idea of how you will do on the real thing and their content is more indicative of what you will see on test day.</p>