The June LSAT is coming up in but a few days, so it’s time for our quarterly exercise of predicting what will appear on the test. I spent a week in the desert chasing visions of the LSAT. I also spent several days hiding in the bushes in the LSAC parking lot to really get in touch with the energy coming from that building. Here’s what I’m feeling:

2014 June LSAT Predictions: Logic Games

February LSAT Logic Games were reported to be a bit unusual. Rumor has it that there was even a circular ordering game, something that hadn’t been on a released LSAT in more than 10 years.

I predict a return to basics for the June LSAT: a little bit of routine ordering, maybe an in and out game, and so on. My crystal ball also says there’ll be a 1:1 ordering game with a bit of a unique twist. I also expect this LSAT to follow the pattern of the last few June LSATs: the games will be of fairly moderate difficulty. At most one will be really easy, but none will be a real killer either. The challenge will be getting through the two or three moderately challenging games within the 35 minutes you’re allotted. And there’ll be one or two rule substitution questions to keep things interesting.

And as for the topics, I’m seeing law firm hiring. I wouldn’t put it past LSAC to find yet another way to stress out LSAT test-takers about the future.

2014 June LSAT Predictions: Logical Reasoning

I think it’s going to be raining principles on Monday. There will be the typical strengthen and soft must be true questions with principles, but that won’t be all. Expect a question asking you how an application of a principle is flawed, or maybe a question asking for a sufficient principle.

I also think they’ll put some variety into fill-in-the-blank questions. The June LSAT won’t just ask you to fill in the conclusion; I think there’ll be questions asking for a missing premise, either as a strengthen or sufficient question.

They may also disguise a question type or two. I think there might be a parallel flaw question asking you which of the answers would be best used to point out the flaw in the original argument, for example.

There will be questions on badly behaved airline passengers and on wooly mammoths. But they won’t be the same question, I don’t think. And there’s going to be an agree question.

All in all, the difficulty will be fairly normal on Logical Reasoning. The unusual questions I’ve predicted won’t be especially hard if you identify them correctly; if a prompt sounds strange, read it carefully to figure out what it’s asking you to do. There’ll be some killer questions, but not too many, and they’ll occupy their usual place at the end of the sections. There’ll also be a decent sprinkling of fairly easy questions.

2014 June LSAT Predictions: Reading Comprehension

One weird trend I’ve noticed on the last couple June LSATs is that the first passage has argued for a truly strange and questionable business idea. Two years ago, the first passage predicted that the digital revolution would transform publishing not through ebooks on Kindles and iPads, not through just-in-time printing for mail-order books, but by making it possible to put on-demand printing kiosks in bookstores. Really? And last year’s June LSAT led off with a passage suggesting that small farms could ensure their survival by getting city dwellers to come pick their own produce. You’ve got to be kidding me.

Expect LSAC to keep that delightful trend going this year. My guess: a mail-order subscription service for clothing along the lines of the original Netflix service (back when it was about DVDs).

Otherwise, I expect a tricky comparative reading passage that’s more about the details than about the arguments, for a change. But the other passages will have tricky arguments, and it’ll be important to break those arguments down accurately for all the role and viewpoint questions they’re going to throw at you.

2014 June LSAT Predictions: The Curve

I expect the 2014 June LSAT to be in line with the last few June LSATs. You’ll have to be perfect for a 180; a single question wrong will bump you down to a 179 or maybe even 178. Then, I predict 11 wrong for a 170 and 27 wrong for a 160. Nothing too unusual.

Oh, and the writing sample? Wedding planning.