Some good news about the LSAT, even though I don't have my score yet.
The
LSAT Blog posted an article about the "dinosaur game" from the June LSAT. While I can't talk about it explicitly until the test results are out, suffice it to say it sucked. Apparently, lots of other people thought so too, according to the author. Why is this good news?
First: The dinosaur game was on the group of logic games I felt better about, which means that the other logic games section was experimental and dismissed.
Second: The author thinks that the curve might be more generous than normal if most people had difficulty with the game. Because scores represent a percentage ranking of students, the lower the average score, the lower a high score can be. Practically, I'm hoping that this means the 175 cutoff is -10 or -11, instead of the usual -8 or -9.
Third: While I think I may have missed some questions on the dinosaur game, it didn't seem all -that- hard to me. Some of the questions were tough, no doubt, but I think I got most of them right. If so, I have a very real opportunity to jump ahead of everyone else by picking up a couple questions that most everyone else missed.
It's all speculation at this point, but it's encouraging none the less.