BREAKING: LSAC To Remove LSAT Logic Games Next Year

[@surpriseimblack]

The best news I've ever heard..

[@vv5179]

I really liked the LG section. Not only is it a learnable section, but it helps with LR. By doing LG I’ve expanded my own knowledge, I am faster as evaluating complex situations.

[@reginaldcharles1133]

In essence Lsat is back the way it was precovid with 2LR sections...not bad

[@lobot8692]

Amazing news, I prefer LR questions, short and straight forward. The most pure and essential answer within one sentence. LG was all time consuming , and it became more of a drawing game.

[@Milwaukee_Woman]

Do you think there is a possibility that LSAC will make the LR and RC questions harder to compensate for the LG cut? And, in your experience, do you share LSAC's view that the change won' t affect the mean score of test takers (do you generally feel that students do better with LG or RC and LR)?

[@Peezy71421]

That could be a possibility. AR in my opinion was far too gamified. I respect the dry tedious paragraphs in RC, because it prepares and assesses you for the dry tedious nature of law. LR translates as well. Seems like AR existed as a weird rite of passage meant to extract a pound of flesh from you and to liquefy your gray matter 😅. I come from the intelligence community where critical thinking, deductive reasoning, and comprehension is a prerequisite to being an effective intelligence officer. I excelled in that capacity, however AR had me questioning my cognitive abilities!

[@Peezy71421]

That could be a possibility. AR in my opinion was far too gamified. I respect the dry tedious paragraphs in RC, because it prepares and assesses you for the dry tedious nature of law. LR translates as well. Seems like AR existed as a weird rite of passage meant to extract a pound of flesh from you and to liquefy your gray matter 😅. I come from the intelligence community where critical thinking, deductive reasoning, and comprehension is a prerequisite to being an effective intelligence officer. I excelled in that capacity, however AR had me questioning my cognitive abilities!

[@UnpluggedPrep]

Some do better with LG, some do better without LG. These are individual personal differences. I don't see LSAC changing the difficulty of LR and RC questions, but they can always adjust raw score conversions as necessary. And although the change may not affect the mean or median score of test-takers, it certainly affects test-takers on an individual level. And given that most scoring 170+ are perfect or near-perfect on LG, it will undoubtedly change things at the top.

[@Peezy71421]

HIP HIP HOORAY!!! It was stupid and unnecessary. RC and LR is more than adequate enough. The LSAT itself is merely a gatekeeper assessment. Since I’m taking the LSAT in 2024 I can now focus solely on RC and LR exclusively…which I score much better on.

[@UnpluggedPrep]

If you score much better on RC and LR, and don't want to work on LG, it does seem clear that going for August 2024 or later is your best course of action!

[@lee_rayyy58]

I score much better on RC and LR as well and LG was the bane of my LSAT existence. Ironically, I’ve grown to like LG and finally have fun with them but score wise I think I would benefit without it. For me, LG b Is best for fun instead of being tested on it but ima go for both type of exams

[@jayjayeffron9249]

You made a very interesting point here. I have noticed that in the practice of law the skills most necessary come from what is learned 1L and 1L summer years, depended upon your desired area of practice. The LSAT is not even close to being an adequate representation of what being an attorney entails, and quite frankly even worse as a determining factor in whether one has the skills needed to be successful in law school. We live in an inherently sinful world that has racism at the top of the sin-list. Why wouldn't we want to get rid of a section that procures vitriol? It costs MONEY to hack LG. For anyone to deny that this change won't affect these prep programs is not being honest with themselves. All of these test preps highlight the LG section because they know it's the section that FORCES you to PAY for REAL training. I watched a lot of free videos on the LG section, and boy let me tell you, they never really intended for that to be the only resource, in fact they always point you to some practice exam that costs an extra $200 or a private that is "worth" $50 an hour. It is all one big arbitrarily racist and wicked pay wall used to complicate a very transparent career path. You can either last in law or not, but there is no trick to this career path if the skills are developed properly in LAW SCHOOL. P.S. Look up the history of the bar exam and the ABA, it is equally as gross.

[@jreevez]

I'm about to embark on my LSAT journey. I work a high-demand 60 hours+ corporate job and I have a 2 year old, so I wanted to give myself at least a year to study anyways. What I'm trying to decide is if it makes sense for me to take the test before August 2024 and will it matter if I don't apply for another year or two? Will schools think its weird if i take the test in 2024 and don't apply to law school until 2026? I have a bunch of reasons why I want to wait to go to law school (vesting stock can pay for school, 2 year old in daycare, would rather wait until he is in real school). Any thoughts? I'd like to decide whether or not I take the AR section to not waste any of my time studying. Scheduled to take my diagnostic this weekend so I guess maybe that would be a good place to start? If i get a good AR score then I should shoot for August test? But is it weird to have that aug 24 test score when applying in a few years?

[@SethPearson-nz3jq]

It's great that you're planning ahead and considering your personal circumstances in deciding when to take the LSAT and apply to law school. Taking the LSAT requires a significant amount of time and dedication, so it's important to find a balance that works for you. If you're planning to take the test before August 2024, that can still give you plenty of time to prepare and allow for flexibility in your application timeline. Many law schools accept LSAT scores that are a few years old, but it's essential to check the specific policies of the schools you're interested in applying to, as they may vary. Taking the test in 2024 and applying in 2026 should not be viewed as unusual. Admissions committees understand that applicants come from diverse backgrounds and may need time to balance work, family, and other commitments. It can even be an advantage if you have relevant work experience to bring to your application. Regarding the Analytical Reasoning (AR) section, it's a good idea to gauge your initial performance on the diagnostic test. If you find that you're naturally strong in that section, it might make sense to include it in your study plan and aim for the August test. However, if you struggle with it, you can still prepare for the other sections and consider not taking the AR section if it doesn't align with your strengths. In summary, taking the LSAT in 2024 and applying in 2026 is a reasonable plan. Just be sure to check the specific policies of the law schools you're interested in and tailor your LSAT preparation to your strengths and goals. Good luck with your LSAT journey!

[@reginaldcharles1133]

In Essense Lsat is back being the same format before Covid...Yikes 3LR sections starting August 2024 oh well

[@Peezy71421]

Also, isn’t ambiguities more akin to the actual practice of law than the more absolute nature of AR? I can see how the cottage industry of LSAT test prep would shudder at this news.

[@UnpluggedPrep]

I agree LR and RC with their perceived ambiguities and use of complex sentence structures have more obvious applicability to the practice of law. I don't think the test prep industry is shuddering, though. There have been low-cost/free LG explanations available for over a decade (for example, I've released nearly 200 of them on KZbin), yet students still seek out paid prep.

[@iloveeveryone8611]

They have removed the most learnable part of the LSAT. Lmao

[@jayjayeffron9249]

I think that is the point. You do know this arbitrary exam was created in 1948 as a barrier to keep people out who may not be able to afford to learn and hack this exam., right? The logic games was the only section I needed to pay someone for because the other areas of the exam are up my alley and are most aligned with the skills needed for law school. Logic games is just that, a game. It is not actually beneficial to law school study AT ALL. It really is just evil.

[@Cambria138]

@@jayjayeffron9249agree! Plus logic games are not truly learnable for everyone either! They’re great for people who aren’t atrocious at math.

[@Cambria138]

No they didn’t. That’s a pretty bold statement to make that it’s the “….most learnable part of the LSAT.” Have you truly looked at how discriminatory the logic games are for some individuals?

[@rosesforviolets]

college freshman here starting to prepare wish me luck

[@justanotherhandle1]

I see the LSAT going away when AI takes over and the legal market hires fewer lawyers.

[@samuelblackwell5990]

If you’ve ever actually worked with AI, you’d know that would never happen

[@justanotherhandle1]

@@samuelblackwell5990 No one has yet. AGI hasn’t been invented yet. That’s real AI.

[@samuelblackwell5990]

@@justanotherhandle1 Anyone who thinks AI is going to take over does not understand the industry. If anything, it will take over entry-level software dev positions first.

[@justanotherhandle1]

@@samuelblackwell5990 they literally have videos on KZbin of studies they’ve done comparing lawyers to ai. Look it up. My point is, just wait till AGI which doesn’t exist yet but will in 5 years.

[@justanotherhandle1]

@@samuelblackwell5990 they literally have videos on KZbin of studies they’ve done comparing lawyers to ai. Look it up. My point is, just wait till AGI which doesn’t exist yet but will in 5 years.

[@DearBlackAmericaWakeUp]

Nice, I was gonna take June '24 but I'll wait now. I think its a good idea. I believe the reason why it takes so long to study for the LSAT is because, although LG is learnable, learning it takes a month-month and a half, and to master it even longer. Also, it takes a lot of mental energy since there's steps that you mentally don't do naturally, diagramming-ordering-etc, that will sap you before heading into the next section. I believe LR and RC are cousins and since we've been conditioned since elementary for this type of reading is not as draining, and it will allow us to focus our energy more efficiently. I feel now studying can be condensed and focused on the variety of question, properly identifying reasoning structure, and reading speed. I like the mental quirk I got when doing a LG but I'm def liking this change!

[@UnpluggedPrep]

Glad you like the change and that the new version may be better for you!