We’re two days from the December LSAT, which can only mean one thing: LSAT Predictions! Clairvoyance is one of the LSAT’s favorite question topics, so it only makes sense that we put our powers to the test (no pun intended). Before we get going, the usual disclaimer: the predictions that follow aren’t based off of any insider knowledge about what’s going to be on the LSAT. They’re predictions. Nothing more, nothing less.
Let’s start with the Logical Reasoning sections. So far the theme this year is that things have been pretty normal. I don’t see any reason that won’t continue. I expect plenty of conditional logic, though perhaps not always on the usual suspect question types. And while you’ll be able to diagram the conditional logic, you’ll have to use both the stuff you can diagram and the stuff you can’t to get questions right. Quantifiers will come up on a question or two, but I suspect those questions will be more straightforward and the diagram will solve everything.
The distribution of question types will be fairly normal. I’m seeing lots of Flaw, Soft Must Be True, Strengthen, and Necessary assumption questions. I suspect some of the question stems will be unusual and tricky — a Strengthen question described as a sufficient assumption, perhaps (e.g., “The reasoning above is most justified if which one of the following is assumed?”), or a Sufficient assumption question presented without any variation of the work “assume” (e.g., “Which one of the following, if true, enables the conclusion above to be properly drawn?”). There’ll be some rare question types represented — a Crux question, an Agree question, maybe more than one.
At least one question will drive test takers nuts because it’ll seem to require outside knowledge. It’ll make people uncomfortable but the assumptions you’ll have to make to reach to get to the answer will ultimately be pretty reasonable and common sense.
On to Reading Comprehension. The trend lately has been tough Reading Comp and I see no reason to think that’ll abate. There might be an author who’s present but doesn’t make it clear all in one place — getting the big picture questions right will require picking up on the little crumbs of attitude sprinkled throughout. I’m also seeing a tricky relationship between the comparative reading passages. They might seem not even to have much to do with each other at first but then maybe a principle in one of them will apply to a situation in the other, or something like that.
If I’m really going to go out on a limb and make predictions about the passage topics, here’s what I’m picturing. The LSAT might go full meta and have a passage about standardized testing or about law school admissions. I’m also seeing a Death Metal scene in a far-off country. But maybe that one’s experimental.
Last but not least (hey, that could be a rule in a game), the Logic Games. The LSAT’s love affair with Unstable Grouping games has gone on long enough that it’s not even like this anymore:
By now, it’s more like the LSAT and 1:1 Ordering are sleeping in separate bedrooms. The LSAT is even cheating on Unstable Grouping with her cousin, Profiling games. That said I expect both 1:1 Ordering and Unstable Grouping on Saturday. Also, there’s been at least one weird game a year for the last three years. There hasn’t been one yet this year. I know this is fallacious reasoning, but I expect one Saturday. It’ll be weird but not all that hard. If you don’t worry too much about the setup and read and follow the rules carefully you’ll be fine.
All in all, though, it’ll be a normal LSAT. LSATs usually are. Finally, let’s talk the “curve.” For some reason, December LSATs often seem to have forgiving curves. This one will be more on the average-to-forgiving side. I’m seeing 12 questions wrong for a 170.
Whether this all turns out true or not, good luck Saturday! Be sure to check this blog for an instant recap and let us know what you thought in the comments.