December 2009 Scale

[Ashley O]

I heard this test just came out and the scale was very favorable. Anybody know anything about it?

[Dr. Troy]

Hey Ashley,

Apparently the scale was -14 for a 170 (generally the barometer of sorts people use to gauge "looseness") and -3 for a 180. So that is definitely a favorable scale. In fact, with the exception of maybe December 2004 this is about the most generous scale in the last ten years.

Of course, the downside to a very favorable scale is that it usually indicates the test itself proved quite difficult for people and fewer questions were answered correctly on average, but good test takers who perform consistently no matter what can really capitalize on a scale like this and produce some very high scores. I hope any December test takers reading this fall into that group!

[Tailgator2010]

Hey Ashley,

Apparently the scale was -14 for a 170 (generally the barometer of sorts people use to gauge "looseness") and -3 for a 180. So that is definitely a favorable scale. In fact, with the exception of maybe December 2004 this is about the most generous scale in the last ten years.

Of course, the downside to a very favorable scale is that it usually indicates the test itself proved quite difficult for people and fewer questions were answered correctly on average, but good test takers who perform consistently no matter what can really capitalize on a scale like this and produce some very high scores. I hope any December test takers reading this fall into that group!

173 is 99% fwiw. Friend of mine got a 172 and is pissed he didn't hit 173. Talk about someone who is never satisfied...

[Jeffort]

 

-14 for a 170 is a significant difference from the raw points to scaled score conversion charts applied to the tests from the previous years.  That is surprising given the recent trend.  However, all in all, there is no need to be concerned about the conversion scale and you should not spend mental power worrying about it. 

Your goal is to select as many credited responses as you can while taking the test.  As a test taker you have ZERO control about what the score conversion chart for the test form will be, LSAC controls and dictates that. 

Instead of worrying about those psychometric factors you should just focus your mental power and attention on things you can control:  properly analyzing questions to select credited answer choices and trying to get as many correct as you can.  Let LSAC worry about and deal with all the rest and just put that stuff out of your mind.

[Tailgator2010]

Yeah, but still, its pretty important because after you answer as many as you can, you have to sit around and wonder how many are needed to get a particular score. If there are looser scales floating around, thats good info to know.

Just sayin!

[Wintermute]

Hey Ashley,

Apparently the scale was -14 for a 170 (generally the barometer of sorts people use to gauge "looseness") and -3 for a 180. So that is definitely a favorable scale. In fact, with the exception of maybe December 2004 this is about the most generous scale in the last ten years.

Of course, the downside to a very favorable scale is that it usually indicates the test itself proved quite difficult for people and fewer questions were answered correctly on average, but good test takers who perform consistently no matter what can really capitalize on a scale like this and produce some very high scores. I hope any December test takers reading this fall into that group!

173 is 99% fwiw. Friend of mine got a 172 and is pissed he didn't hit 173. Talk about someone who is never satisfied...

Well, maybe your friend wanted to teach for Powerscore. Can't do that with a 172.

[Tailgator2010]

Yeah, I doubt it. He just wanted to be in the top 1% to lord it over everyone else!

[Ashley O]

Hey Ashley,

Apparently the scale was -14 for a 170 (generally the barometer of sorts people use to gauge "looseness") and -3 for a 180. So that is definitely a favorable scale. In fact, with the exception of maybe December 2004 this is about the most generous scale in the last ten years.

Of course, the downside to a very favorable scale is that it usually indicates the test itself proved quite difficult for people and fewer questions were answered correctly on average, but good test takers who perform consistently no matter what can really capitalize on a scale like this and produce some very high scores. I hope any December test takers reading this fall into that group!

So, what you are saying is that even if the scale is favorable they compensate by making the test itself harder, right?

[Dr. Troy]

Essentially, yes. Although it's probably more accurate to say that the difficulty of the test (how test takers as a whole performed) determines the scale used. So a test where people performed slightly worse than usual (answered on average fewer questions correctly and thus had lower raw scores than is typical) will produce a scale that is more "favorable," so that fewer correct answers are needed to achieve a given final score out of 180 compared to what's usually required.

[Mitch Cumstein]

I remember seeing something with the actual numbers (correct answers needed for certain scaled scores) from past LSATs online somewhere, although I'm drawing a blank on exactly where I saw it.

But I'm pretty sure that info is available if you search for it!

[Ashley O]

Essentially, yes. Although it's probably more accurate to say that the difficulty of the test (how test takers as a whole performed) determines the scale used. So a test where people performed slightly worse than usual (answered on average fewer questions correctly and thus had lower raw scores than is typical) will produce a scale that is more "favorable," so that fewer correct answers are needed to achieve a given final score out of 180 compared to what's usually required.

I get it. Hard test means easy scale, easy test means hard scale. So since this scale was apaprently easy, that means that the test must have been hard. Very interesting.

[Amby]

Essentially, yes. Although it's probably more accurate to say that the difficulty of the test (how test takers as a whole performed) determines the scale used. So a test where people performed slightly worse than usual (answered on average fewer questions correctly and thus had lower raw scores than is typical) will produce a scale that is more "favorable," so that fewer correct answers are needed to achieve a given final score out of 180 compared to what's usually required.

I get it. Hard test means easy scale, easy test means hard scale. So since this scale was apaprently easy, that means that the test must have been hard. Very interesting.

Does it really matter though? I mean, you do how you do.

[Tailgator2010]

Essentially, yes. Although it's probably more accurate to say that the difficulty of the test (how test takers as a whole performed) determines the scale used. So a test where people performed slightly worse than usual (answered on average fewer questions correctly and thus had lower raw scores than is typical) will produce a scale that is more "favorable," so that fewer correct answers are needed to achieve a given final score out of 180 compared to what's usually required.

I get it. Hard test means easy scale, easy test means hard scale. So since this scale was apaprently easy, that means that the test must have been hard. Very interesting.

Does it really matter though? I mean, you do how you do.

It does matter. If you are wondering whether to cancel your score, it helps to understand how they make these tests up and how the scores are ultimately calculated. If I thought the test was a bitch but that I did decent on it, understanding that a loose scale is possible might make me keep the score instead of cancel it.

[Amby]

It doesn't make you answer more questions right, and so it still doesn't change how you did. 

[Tailgator2010]

It doesn't make you answer more questions right, and so it still doesn't change how you did. 

Umm, yeah, I'm not arguing that point. I'm saying that AFTER the test it helps. Do you get it?