Why the LSAT is an "Incomplete" Test

(Applications Advice, Letters of Recommendation . . . )

If you could change the LSAT, how would you do it?

1) Make it computer-adaptive to allow more flexible scheduling.
10
14%
2) Allow students to complete sections in personally preferred order, i.e., give students 4 hours and let them fire at-will.
17
24%
3) Drop a student's weakest of six sections from scoring.
3
4%
4) Keep the current LSAT for day one, and add the Berkeley exam for day two, scoring them equally.
0
No votes
5) Eliminate logic games or the analytical/argumentative writing.
3
4%
6) Give 1 RC, 1 LG and 1 LR sections, and allow students to pick their fourth.
3
4%
7) Eliminate the proctored "pregame warmup".
2
3%
8) Impose a "3 strikes rule" on test-takers for life.
11
15%
9) Score the test in 10-point "bands" instead of specific numbers. Ex. "Applicant A scored in the 155-165 band."
7
10%
10) Allow 40 min per section, eliminate the experimental section on test day, or make some other change.
16
22%
 
Total votes: 72

pwyoung
Posts: 163
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Why the LSAT is an "Incomplete" Test

Postby pwyoung » Wed Sep 28, 2011 4:38 am

Opie wrote:I say score the writing sample like GMAT does. I think they're considering that already though.


I'm just not big on having subjectivity involved in the test. The only real remedy is some master grading system like SAT or AP have for the people scoring the writing section, which sort of kills it and makes it gameable.

AspiringAcademic
Posts: 130
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 12:36 am

Re: Why the LSAT is an "Incomplete" Test

Postby AspiringAcademic » Wed Sep 28, 2011 8:32 am

TheFutureLawyer wrote:now that I'm a 1L, I can honestly say I don't give a fuck what they do. Make them draw unicorns. Ask them to do advanced physics. Could give a fuck.

I'm not even a 1L, but being a few months past my LSAT gives me a similar feeling.

More helpfully:

5 minute breaks between sections. A few minutes to reset would help people give each section their all, which I think would make the test slightly more valid.

No more small desks. Though many of the factors that make one test center better than another can't be predicted - noise, annoying neighbors, and things of that nature - you can tell the size of the desks in a room by just looking. It would certainly be better if this could be standardized, though whether it would be worth it is hard to saw.

Other than that, it's a fairly standard IQ-ish test and I don't see any reason to change it much.

LawSchoolChampion
Posts: 133
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2011 11:41 pm

Re: Why the LSAT is an "Incomplete" Test

Postby LawSchoolChampion » Wed Sep 28, 2011 10:23 am

If you study the LSAT long enough, it will make sense. You can isolate your weaknesses and improve upon them.

If you don't do that, you've made a personal decision not to.

If you have tried that for months on end and still have no luck then you're clearly not the brightest bulb...and don't deserve a T14.

Analyzing a performance and improving upon it is a crucial skill for success. Most people (I'd say 99%, if not 100%) of the people who score 168+ have done this.

Taking an LSAT cold and scoring 168+ does not happen often.



So, keep the test. If anything, add a few more breaks between sections.

User avatar
bjsesq
TLS Poet Laureate
Posts: 13383
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2010 3:02 am

Re: Why the LSAT is an "Incomplete" Test

Postby bjsesq » Wed Sep 28, 2011 10:26 am

JusticeHarlan wrote:The best argument against the LSAT is that DF did so well on it.


This deserved more love. I see you.

User avatar
Kabuo
Posts: 1114
Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2010 8:53 am

Re: Why the LSAT is an "Incomplete" Test

Postby Kabuo » Wed Sep 28, 2011 10:29 am

Don't change anything, even breaks. It's supposed to be stressful and time intensive. Learning to deal with that is an important part of doing well on it, and if anything from the LSAT transfers to LS exams, I'm expecting it to be this.

acrossthelake
Posts: 4431
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009 5:27 pm

Re: Why the LSAT is an "Incomplete" Test

Postby acrossthelake » Wed Sep 28, 2011 10:31 am

LawSchoolChampion wrote:If you study the LSAT long enough, it will make sense. You can isolate your weaknesses and improve upon them.

If you don't do that, you've made a personal decision not to.

If you have tried that for months on end and still have no luck then you're clearly not the brightest bulb...and don't deserve a T14.

Analyzing a performance and improving upon it is a crucial skill for success. Most people (I'd say 99%, if not 100%) of the people who score 168+ have done this.

Taking an LSAT cold and scoring 168+ does not happen often.



So, keep the test. If anything, add a few more breaks between sections.


Meh, I think you're overestimating your percentages by quite a bit. I know a handful of people who start over 168 to begin with, and I'd guess a decent chunk of those who get that final score start there as well. This is part of what makes suggestions like adding more time a bit odd. There already are people who start out in the 170s cold. Not quite sure I see the point of making the test easier since more people would just hit ceiling.

In seriousness, there are some changes that I think are valid...just not really the ones in the poll.

The LSAT limits their testing days because of the amount of time/effort it takes for them to construct the tests. It'd probably increase the cost to increase testing dates, but it really would be nice to add in one more.

I also second the idea that there shouldn't be so much variation in the desks at testing centers.You should at least be able to lay out your test booklet with the bubble sheet off to the side. The timing constraints weren't really meant to include dealing with that sort of inconvenience. I had mine with a good set-up, but I've taken practice tests on small desks and it was certainly annoying having my booklet falling onto the floor every so often.

User avatar
westinghouse60
Posts: 392
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2010 2:27 am

Re: Why the LSAT is an "Incomplete" Test

Postby westinghouse60 » Wed Sep 28, 2011 1:42 pm

acrossthelake wrote:
LawSchoolChampion wrote:If you study the LSAT long enough, it will make sense. You can isolate your weaknesses and improve upon them.

If you don't do that, you've made a personal decision not to.

If you have tried that for months on end and still have no luck then you're clearly not the brightest bulb...and don't deserve a T14.

Analyzing a performance and improving upon it is a crucial skill for success. Most people (I'd say 99%, if not 100%) of the people who score 168+ have done this.

Taking an LSAT cold and scoring 168+ does not happen often.



So, keep the test. If anything, add a few more breaks between sections.


Meh, I think you're overestimating your percentages by quite a bit. I know a handful of people who start over 168 to begin with, and I'd guess a decent chunk of those who get that final score start there as well. This is part of what makes suggestions like adding more time a bit odd. There already are people who start out in the 170s cold. Not quite sure I see the point of making the test easier since more people would just hit ceiling.

In seriousness, there are some changes that I think are valid...just not really the ones in the poll.

The LSAT limits their testing days because of the amount of time/effort it takes for them to construct the tests. It'd probably increase the cost to increase testing dates, but it really would be nice to add in one more.

I also second the idea that there shouldn't be so much variation in the desks at testing centers.You should at least be able to lay out your test booklet with the bubble sheet off to the side. The timing constraints weren't really meant to include dealing with that sort of inconvenience. I had mine with a good set-up, but I've taken practice tests on small desks and it was certainly annoying having my booklet falling onto the floor every so often.


+1

I remember panicking when they brought us into an auditorium with 1 foot by 1 foot fold out "desks" attached to the chairs. Huge relief when I realized we wouldn't be taking it in that room. But I know some people who have had to test under those conditions.




Return to “Law School Admissions Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests