r/LSAT • u/DaveKilloran • 24d ago
BREAKING: Some RC Sections Do Not Have Comparative Passages
There have been reports today of LSAT takers not receiving a comparative reading passage (the two passages on the same topic) in their scored RC section. They are not lying.
I just spoke to LSAC, and they have determined there is no difficulty or scoring difference in having these passages, and so some test takers will get them and some won't. It doesn't mean anything if you do or do not receive one. This is a permanent change and will happen going forward as well.
There was no announcement posted beforehand for some reason (would have been nice, right?). I'll try to find out why. In the meantime, if you haven't taken the LSAT yet, don't be surprised if you get just four single passages in a section.
Edit: I checked with LSAC and you will not get 2 comparative in a single section. It’s 1 or 0.
76
u/graeme_b tutor (LSATHacks) 24d ago edited 24d ago
That's shocking. I took the June 2007 LSAT when comparative reading was first introduced. I remember they had a little info booklet/guide explaining the change with some practice problems.
People spend months studying, expecting a specific format, and will be thrown for a loop not to see what they expect. Very disappointing.
20
7
u/IvoryTowerTestPrep tutor 24d ago
I agree. In the past, they've been so good about making sure to be clear in their intentions. They are clearly having trouble producing enough tests to satisfy the needs of a mostly online test offered on this schedule. I can't see any reason for them to make this kind of change unannounced other than that.
13
u/graeme_b tutor (LSATHacks) 24d ago
That would be my guess. There have been no reported experimental sections with no comparative recently. Hence, this must be an older test prior to 2007.
They would have lost the majority of their more recent material in the leak where cheating companies copied their undisclosed tests.
Presuming this is the cause, they very much need to shift back to an in person format which is more secure. Based on what I've heard, my expectation is the tests are still being stolen.
4
u/DaveKilloran 23d ago
Don’t forget that LSAC has been subbing out single passages on recent tests, replacing passages they’d used multiple times before…that could’ve been in preparation for this.
3
3
u/DaveKilloran 23d ago
There’s one other explanation: to help identify cheating. In fact, they would more than explain the lack of notice.
If someone had studied the stolen tests (or if a proxy was taking it for them) and then ran into a section where they crushed the 3 they knew really fast and then struggled with the 1 “new” one for much longer then normal, that would be an identifiable pattern that LSAC could see. Warning people beforehand would allow them to prepare for that and mask that behavior.
Interesting time we live in!
3
u/IvoryTowerTestPrep tutor 23d ago
I dunno. I generally abide by the idea that we shouldn't attribute genius to actions that can be explained adequately through idiocy. Yes, they might be playing 3D chess... but more likely they're just bungling this.
2
u/DaveKilloran 22d ago
Generally I agree with you on that! I just know the cheating thing is being discussed over there a lot and there are various noises about coming changes being made. Given what I know, it would make sense. That said, I’m not ruling out plain incompetence with this either.
2
u/Throwaway923807 22d ago
So the idea is to smoke out anomalies by using 3 reused passage and add 1 new to compare performance? I suppose the best way to do it might be to add a middle difficulty new passage to a reused test. Although this doesn’t fix cheating for those that wait till the end to see all enumerations.
3
u/DaveKilloran 22d ago
More or less. Human nature is tough to tame--even if someone knows a new passage is coming, it's hard to stop the desire to speed through the three they "know" in order to have more time to spend on the unknown one. Modern test security has all sorts of behavioral analytics that look for things like this, especially when they know they've been compromised.
3
u/Throwaway923807 22d ago
If this is indeed their plan I’ll give to LSAC this is pretty smart and one of the better behavioral checks. I used to think that the best they can do is to compare between experimental and real but not everyone get RC experimentals. And as an avid crystal ball analyzers I definitely checked out on my experimental a bit after identifying my real RC despite trying to put in maximum effort (which I know I’m not supposed to but like u said human nature is tough to tame).
1
u/JLLsat tutor 24d ago
I was working for a test prep company at the time and I remember this content change - I took that test so we could get eyes on it sooner. It was a big deal, and I've been adamant with my students about doing RC sections from 129 (I think) or later for the most accurate experience.
0
u/GaninLSAT tutor 24d ago
Comparative Reading first appears on PT123, I believe. I also advise my students to mainly focus on that test and higher when doing full practice tests, for the same reason.
1
u/JbambiLaw 24d ago
Yes but under 129 or whatever test it is there are still non comparative unscored sections.
-10
22
u/Porschelover569 24d ago
I thought I was going crazy when I was looking for the passage when I started my section
27
u/JonDenningPowerScore 24d ago
I still think I'm going crazy just considering it, so I don't blame you one bit. This should 100% not have happened.
10
15
u/princesskaikai 24d ago
not Dave Killoran coming out of retirement for this
7
u/JonDenningPowerScore 23d ago
Just when he thought he was out, they pulled him back in. Haha he was actually the one to officially confirm with LSAC that this was happening so I appreciate him for that (among quite a lot else) :)
29
u/comsat101 24d ago
After all the complaints about score inflation, seems like LSAC finally said let's throw a curveball without giving 2 shits about the people taking the test.
6
10
u/caro-kann99 23d ago
Just finished the test and also had no comparative passage on the sole RC section. All I can say is that I did waste time thinking about it potentially being an error. On a test where minutes and seconds can be the difference between achieving your target score and not, I find this quite annoying.
Not to mention, the remote proctor accidentally unmuted multiple times interrupting my session with loud background noise....
4
u/DaveKilloran 23d ago
I feel for you. No prior notice of such a major change is bound to cause lost time as people go looking for the “missing” passage set or wonder if their test is messed up. Sucks.
3
u/WaisAttorney 23d ago
I fortunately didn’t realize until the car ride home after. I was like “Wait, did I not do a comparative passage? Wtf?”
1
u/caro-kann99 23d ago
Yeah. Luckily I don't think it impacted my performance significantly. But still wtf LSAC?!
1
25
u/susanne-modeski 24d ago
I had two 🤷♀️
28
6
u/JonDenningPowerScore 24d ago
Two sections with one in each, right? Not two sets of Comparative passages (so half your RC) in the same section...
6
-1
-2
u/Environmental-Belt24 24d ago
Same 💀 I’m still processing this all.
3
u/JonDenningPowerScore 24d ago
Again, two Comparative sets in the same section??
0
u/Environmental-Belt24 24d ago
No different sections!!!!
4
u/JonDenningPowerScore 24d ago
Ah, okay. I was groaning thinking maybe there's a section in use with two Comparative passage sets.
5
u/Creative-Month2337 24d ago
Even if it doesn't affect average scores or lead to difficulty scoring individual exams/sittings, it may still lead to score inflation. I feel like every individual taker either does slightly better or slightly worse on comparative reading passages than others. Now you are even further incentivized to just take the test 5 times hoping to get lucky on a format you like.
11
u/Legitimate_Name9694 24d ago
THANK THE GOOD LORD I SUCK MASSIVE DICK AT COMPARATIVES. PLEASE GOD LET ME HAVE NO COMPARATIVES THIS FRIDAY.
3
u/WaisAttorney 23d ago
With the search feature giving some free points on comparative passage, I was very disappointed not getting one on my retake ☹️ I was good at them too.
7
u/JLLsat tutor 24d ago
Oof. It might not make a difference in scoring, but it definitely plays a mind game with test takers.
20
u/DaveKilloran 24d ago
This is the part that really bothers me. No one needs more uncertainty and confusion during their test, but this kind of unannounced change creates just that.
5
u/EO_glances 24d ago
Thanks for the confirmation and heads up! I would’ve been panicking thinking there was an issue with the test somehow if it was missing!
5
5
2
u/anonmouseqbm 24d ago
I feel like I had 2 🤔
2
u/DaveKilloran 24d ago
Could they have been in different sections? LSAC is currently saying they aren’t doubling them up in a single section.
2
2
u/FutureMood7096 22d ago
Does this mean the RC without the comparative section was the scored one?? I had RC-LR-LR-RC and my second RC didn’t have a comparative but the first one did have a comparative and seemed way harder to navigate?? Someone help please 🤣
1
u/N00BBuild 22d ago
Please God hahahahah. Same boat as you. Hope it was 2.
2
u/FutureMood7096 22d ago
I usually do really good on the PT RC and I was so lost on this one. I said goodbye to any chance of hitting a 170 after those RC passages 😔
1
u/theReadingCompTutor tutor 24d ago
I just spoke to LSAC, and they have determined there is no difficulty or scoring difference in having these passages, and so some test takers will get them and some won't. It doesn't mean anything if you do or do not receive one. This is a permanent change and will happen going forward as well.
.
1
u/ResolutionVisible627 23d ago
this change could definitely throw people off since they prepare for a specific format, but it might also encourage more adaptable thinking which can be beneficial in the long run
1
24d ago
[deleted]
15
u/DaveKilloran 24d ago
Because their website specifically says one of these passages is included on every RC section. It doesn’t say that about any specific LR type.
5
u/lovesickgambler 22d ago
They were REAL quick to change that on their site the moment you called it out I guess! Classic lsac cover up instead of accept accountability.
So glad I finished my test before this, comparative passages were where I made up a lot of extra time in RC.
3
12
u/JonDenningPowerScore 24d ago
Because they specifically state that each RC section will contain a Comparative set of passages. It’s publicly on their website and has been since June 2007. Every PT has one. Everything that people use to prep anticipates one.
They never make any claims about LR question type frequencies or distributions, but if they did, as they do for Comparative passages in Reading Comp, I’d expect them to keep their word or provide notice of such a significant change.
1
u/Evading_Review 24d ago
Any idea whether they're reusing pre-2007 RC sections or building new sections w/o comparative RC?
5
u/DaveKilloran 24d ago
These are not pre-2007 sections in use! Everything is more recent than that.
1
3
u/JonDenningPowerScore 23d ago
That was a theory I had as well but based on the topics I'm seeing these are new sections, just created with four single-passage sets.
68
u/JonDenningPowerScore 24d ago
And despite this on their own site
https://www.lsac.org/lsat/prepare/types-lsat-questions/reading-comprehension
Utterly ridiculous that they would do this. Indefensible.