Can LSAT please consider a CBT Forum

[robotclubmember]

I would be in favor of this given that they provide scratch paper/ scratch booklet. Waiting for your LSAT score is really unnerving.

NOOOOOO. I'm so glad the LSAT is still a written test.

Although apparently giving us room to diagram is too much to ask...maybe they're transitioning to CBT?

ZOMG is that a self tar?!!1?!?1

This is what happens when girls go on the internet.

[robotclubmember]

I guess I'm one of few who says bring on the LSAT CBT! For all of the LSAT's insane rules (like not allowing mechanical pencils while allowing snacks, coats, etc in the room), it's still not as secure as a CBT. With a CBT (like the GMAT), you put all your stuff in a locker outside the room. Your jacket must be left outside. They check your pockets. The only thing you can bring in with you is
the plastic scratch pads they give you. There are cubicles separating people seated next to each other, etc.

Where did you go where they actually checked your pockets? Lol.

There's plenty of space on the scratch pads for diagramming/notes, and it's a dry erase marker so you can erase whatever you're done with. Not being able to mark directly on the test might be harder (I would definitely have a harder time with RC also), but it would be harder for everyone. One thing that is easier is you don't have to worry about the time because the time left on a section is accurately displayed at all times. If you want to change an answer, you don't have to worry about erasing a bubble, leaving smudges, etc. You don't have to worry as much about misbubbling since the answer choices are right next to the bubbles you click on. And the obviously the writing sample would be easier to do.

What's this about dry erase markers? The proctors are instructed to give you only one set of six sheets of scratch paper, and one black marker. You can't erase a dry erase marker off a piece of paper. In fact, the reason they give you the marker is to make sure you are limited in how much scratch paper you can use, precisely because you can NOT erase it...

Also, if you want to change an answer on the GMAT, you can't. Once you complete a question, you may not return to it (though this is because GMAT is computer adaptive, not just because it's on a computer).

And not diagramming GMAT RC is not a problem, because their critical reasoning (equivalent to LR) and their RC are substantially easier (and shorter). I can't imagine reading Noguchi on a computer screen and not being able to underline anything. And I like being able to circle answers and return to them.

However, this is probably not going to happen because I don't know how Prometric sites will be able to accomodate so many people at the same time for a test administered 4 times a year. The GMAT can be administered almost every business day because it varies the kind of questions you get depending on your performance during the exam...for example, if you get a question right, you'll get a harder question next, if you get one wrong, you get an easier question, so since no one gets the same exam, they don't release prior tests like the LSAT does. Since LSAC releases all prior tests, it's impossible to administer the test every day, which means it's impossible to fit everyone into the Prometric sites with only a few administrations a year. Yes, I've thought a lot about this topic.

Agree, for this reason and many others.

[tomwatts]

They could do it the way the MCAT people do it, where you're given highlight and strikethrough tools. You could still mark up the passage and cross out answers on the screen that way. Oh, and there's a "mark" feature, too. They could also offer it on specific test dates and have more of them (pencil and paper MCAT had 2 test dates per year; CBT has 20+).

But I still think that would be very, very bad, especially if they made it adaptive (like the GMAT or GRE).

[2014]

I also get a lot of value out of crossing out answer choices I have ruled out. It is really irritating to have to write "A B C D E" on scratch paper over and over to cross them out.

Plus, LSAC would have to effectively produce 300+ versions of the test a year to hedge the risk of people getting the same test twice, which is impossible with the GRE and GMAT.

[doppelganger]

What they need is tests that use software sort of like MS Paint so that one can strike out wrong answers and underline and so forth, or computers with a physical pen attached and touch -screens. This would might minimize the stupid bubbling errors that sometimes occur.

I am sure that it would bring a host of new problems too, however.

[2014]

What if they had an Ipad like device there so that you could literally use like a stylus to underline on screen?

[Chimica]

What if they had an Ipad like device there so that you could literally use like a stylus to underline on screen?

I have a touch screen computer and I find it harder to mark up, go back, quickly check my bubbling (and even think) when I do the LSAT on my computer. If everyone did that, it would be a learned skill, but it would give an advantage to those who could practise on a touch screen device versus most of us with paper.

[robotclubmember]

What if they had an Ipad like device there so that you could literally use like a stylus to underline on screen?

We'd be paying a heck of a lot more to sit for the thing, that's for sure.

[Sandro]

wouldn't this require LSAC to create a shit ton more games/lr questions/RC passages? Think about the GRE - half the test is math where there are an infinite number of questions already available. half the verbal or more is just words/definitions, no work there really.

[flannelman]

no believe it or not this has always been this way and it is for the same reason as when the test started. LSAC actually expects people to do Logic games in there head. And there are people out there who do it that way. Over the years however it has been proven that diagramming is a better way to do it even vs the super geniuses. But the reason LSAC could care less about the amt of space they leave is for that reason alone.

Lolwut?

Directions: Each group of questions in this section is based on a set of conditions. In answering some of the questions, it may be useful to draw a rough diagram...

Sure doesn't sound like they "expect" people to do it in their head to me...

They write it may be useful to draw a rough diagram... seriously... thats what your basing this on. How many Logic games do you start and then think hmm I think I might use a rough diagram for THIS one. OR is it more likely that you use one for ALL-nearly ALL of them. To suggest that it may be useful to draw a rough diagram is to imply that it may not be. Which is not true at all. The mere suggestion of may be useful here is laughable and to me clearly shows where LSAC's head is at.

[suspicious android]

To suggest that it may be useful to draw a rough diagram is to imply that it may not be.

That's not what that sentence means. Messy interpretation like this may be the root cause of your LSAT frustration.

[Dr. Strangelove]

Meh.. I took the GMAT and really liked the CBT format.
However, I don't think the LSAT is as well designed for that (especially the Logic Games section.. but I know many people would probably not mind seeing that section taken off the exam altogether.)

[tomwatts]

Okay, just to reiterate, to destroy the myths:

The parallel here is not the GMAT (or GRE). The parallel here is the MCAT. The GMAT is a computer-adaptive test that was programmed a long time ago (a decade or more, I think? Before I was in test prep, anyway) and is as a result fairly crude in computer tools. The LSAT could go adaptive, but that would be a terrible idea. More likely would be something like the MCAT, which is a straight Computer-Based Test (CBT) not Computer-Adaptive Test (CAT).

The MCAT went to CBT in 2007, so it has a highlight tool (can mark up passages), a strikethrough tool (click on an answer choice and it gets crossed out), a mark tool (mark a question and then you can use a Review screen to go back and find all the questions you've marked), and scratch paper (not a noteboard like the GMAT). It's just like a pencil and paper (P&P) test, but on a computer screen instead of in a booklet.

Now, the MCAT is offered on 20-30 dates per year (the number keeps going up), as opposed to the GMAT, which is offered by appointment every day. That means that they don't need to have hundreds of test forms, just 20-30 in circulation at any given time (maybe less, under the assumption that even if there are only 10-15, people won't be able to predict which form they're going to get and can't get enough information from test-takers to know what's on each test form). AAMC (the people who make the MCAT) is really bad about releasing tests, so they only release them once every three or four years, but LSAC could be good about it (as they are now) and could continue to release three per year.

LSAC already has enough test forms handy (for international tests, in case of blizzard, for future domestic tests for the next several years) that they wouldn't have to write, well, any more test forms than they already have in order to make this work. AAMC wouldn't have done it if they had to write dozens of new MCATs; they just started using all the ones that they had already, and they might have slightly stepped up their rate of production, but probably not by very much.

So this is something that LSAC could do, without too much trouble. But I still think it would be bad.

(The above totally ignores the fact that LSAC investigated making the LSAT a CAT, not a straight CBT. Still, the computer tools could be made just as good if they made it a modern CAT, not an archaic CAT like the GMAT.)

[kkklick]

I think people are missing the point that LSAC will never administer the LSAT on a computer. End of story. Also, I would assume it is difficult to create LSAT exams given the similarities in question types and flaws, you can only re-word/come up with new ideas so many times.

[flannelman]

To suggest that it may be useful to draw a rough diagram is to imply that it may not be.

That's not what that sentence means. Messy interpretation like this may be the root cause of your LSAT frustration.

I see what your getting at and you may well be right! haha. However, Here we have a pretty well set standard that All will be better suited to a diagram and they imply a lower amount than the general standard all or nearly all. That is to say that what we interpret as a general standard is bunk and lsac thinks more often than is the case these thins can be done in ones head. Notably the times when it leaves no freggen space on the page. I rest my case.

[Curry]

I am in favor of having a written test after which you scan your test and have your bubble sheet graded instantly. Then you get a week to review, check for errors, etc in which you can email lsac.

The only difficulty becomes people who want to cancel.

[suspicious android]

I see what your getting at and you may well be right! haha. However, Here we have a pretty well set standard that All will be better suited to a diagram and they imply a lower amount than the general standard all or nearly all. That is to say that what we interpret as a general standard is bunk and lsac thinks more often than is the case these thins can be done in ones head. Notably the times when it leaves no freggen space on the page. I rest my case.

I am persuaded.

[northwood]

I am in favor of having a written test after which you scan your test and have your bubble sheet graded instantly. Then you get a week to review, check for errors, etc in which you can email lsac.

The only difficulty becomes people who want to cancel.

You could always give a 24 hour window to cancel. Say you take the test on monday. you have until 5pm tuesday to cancel. On wednesday morning you get your score. Then have a week to review.

[ksinghal]

I think people are missing the point that LSAC will never administer the LSAT on a computer. End of story. Also, I would assume it is difficult to create LSAT exams given the similarities in question types and flaws, you can only re-word/come up with new ideas so many times.

The following is a direct quote from the conclusion of the report cited above and located on LSAC.org:

In conclusion then, it seems that if, in the near future, LSAC chooses to administer the LSAT via a
computer, the majority of the testing population would not be adversely affected and additional features that
would make testing more convenient and comfortable for test takers could be added. As for general testing
features such as more testing dates and choice in time of day, these could be provided regardless of whether
the test is computer based.

[2Serious4Numbers]

If I had to read riddled basins on a computer screen and then answer corresponding questions i'd lose it.

[kkklick]

Oh snap. I still wouldn't write it on a computer, but I'm never writing it again anyways so I don't really care either way lol.

[BlueFeathers]

Absolutely NOT.

[Jack Smirks]

LSAC actually expects people to do Logic games in there head. And there are people out there who do it that way. Over the years however it has been proven that diagramming is a better way to do it even vs the super geniuses.

Dude you just outted yourself as one of the super geniuses.

[ren2011]

LSAC actually expects people to do Logic games in there head. And there are people out there who do it that way. Over the years however it has been proven that diagramming is a better way to do it even vs the super geniuses.

Dude you just outted yourself as one of the super geniuses.

Yes, yes he did.

[Curry]

LSAC actually expects people to do Logic games in there head. And there are people out there who do it that way. Over the years however it has been proven that diagramming is a better way to do it even vs the super geniuses.

Dude you just outted yourself as one of the super geniuses.

I'll miss you Naterj