The February LSAT is coming up this weekend, so as usual it’s time for us to predict what delights it’ll hold. I’m honored to take over the LSAT predictions (I didn’t know you were allowed to do it if you’re not named Matt), but I also feel lucky: since the February LSAT is undisclosed, no one will be able to prove me wrong. It’s a nice way to start off, as I get my powers of clairvoyance back into shape.

2014 February LSAT prediction I: Logic Games

The December LSAT had a harder than usual Logic Games section. None of the games was all that bad on its own, but only one was truly easy. Of the others, one was standard but hard, one was a bit unusual and moderately hard, and the last one was typical and moderate.

On the February LSAT, I’d expect a return to the recent trend: one killer game, with the other three being easy-to-moderate and fairly standard. The December LSAT had two rule substitution questions, whereas usually there’s no more than one. Expect a break from those.

Crazy prediction: Legal-themed games were fairly common early in the history of the modern LSAT, so I’ll predict a return; let’s say defendants and whether they’re guilty.

2014 February LSAT Prediction II: Logical Reasoning

Recent LSATs have had a number of interesting little variations on Logical Reasoning questions. They’re not really anything new; they’re just a little bit disguised if anything. A few recent LSATs have had fill-in-the-blank sufficient assumption questions, and the December LSAT even had a fill-in-the-blank strengthen question. The common thread is that the blank is a premise, not a conclusion, and I’ll predict at least one question along those lines.

LSAC has also pulled some unusual question types out of the vault on recent LSATs. Can anyone explain their recent love affair with crux questions? Or two agree questions on one test? That’s bonkers. I’d expect this to continue. There’s going to be a crux question.

Otherwise, I think Logical Reasoning is going to be pretty standard in difficulty. The December LSAT had more tricks than usual, and while I’m predicting some unusual stuff, I’d expect the vast majority of it to be very normal. Even the weird stuff will be normal once you figure out what it’s really asking.

Crazy prediction: Model rocketry.

2014 February LSAT Prediction III: Reading Comprehension

The December LSAT had a fairly standard Reading Comp section. There were some hard questions, of course, but none of the passages really stood out. For the February LSAT, expect a killer passage, one of the ones that just makes you shake your head. It’ll be hard to find the main point, but once you do it’ll make your life so much easier.

I also have a feeling that the comparative Reading Comp passages will be abstrusely connected: on first reading you may not know what they have to do with each other. But if you figure out the relationship, it’ll unlock everything.

Crazy prediction: Australian Aborigines.

2014 February LSAT Prediction IV: The Curve

Now this is the prediction that absolutely no one who doesn’t work for LSAC will ever know if I’m right or wrong about. Even if you take the February LSAT, you won’t ever know what the LSAT curve is. I’ve predicted typical difficulty in games and LR, and some hard reading comp. Put that all together and I think you’ll see a February LSAT curve of –12 for a 170, –25 for a 160, and –45 for a 152. But you’ll never know.

Specific predictions:

Logic Games:
–Criminal defendants
–One killer question on the easiest game
–A 1:1 ordering game (the easiest prediction in the world to make, but now I’m confident I won’t strike out entirely)

Logical Reasoning:
–Model rockets
–A fill-in-the-blank strengthen or sufficient assumption question
–A parallel-principle question

Reading Comp:
–Australian Aborigines
–A question that asks you to apply a principle from a passage
–Tricky author’s attitude