Tautology wrote:Just to repeat it for everyone's benefit my original argument was that learnability was a trait that probably provides disadvantages to certain groups of people (the poor was the one I named, people with children was another suggested group) and was therefore an undesirable trait in a standardized test.
While we've agreed that anyone with a job can afford it, I've agreed with the first half of what I emboldened, because there certainly are people who can't afford the materials. But since the LSAT is supposed to test for a skill set that is learn-able, I disagree with the second half: I don't think it's an undesirable trait, I think it's a necessary trait if your aim is correlation with LS performance. Unfortunate, yes, but as a couple have pointed out, it's far less biased against poor folk than most of life. My suggested solution was for LSAC to provide a bunch of PT's for those who qualify for a fee waiver.
I think you may be arriving at your "learn-ability" is "undesirable" in part because you say you're a natural LSAT whiz