LSAC changes its long-standing policy on "3x in 2 yrs" limit

User avatar
Jack Smirks
Posts: 1340
Joined: Sat May 15, 2010 5:35 am

Re: LSAC changes its long-standing policy on "3x in 2 yrs" limit

Postby Jack Smirks » Fri Jun 17, 2011 7:59 pm

Change the thread title to "LSAC Changes its Waiver Policy" and this thread might be accurate.

User avatar
incompetentia
Posts: 2307
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 2:57 pm

Re: LSAC changes its long-standing policy on "3x in 2 yrs" limit

Postby incompetentia » Fri Jun 17, 2011 9:09 pm

If you're treating the test that is going to determine what is likely your final step of your education as something that you can blow off three times and still be okay, then you need to step back.


I understand there are exceptions to this rule. No entity is going to take the time to make policy that takes into account all these exceptions, but I would argue that the waiver from them should still cover these.

User avatar
fatduck
Posts: 4186
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2010 10:16 pm

Re: LSAC changes its long-standing policy on "3x in 2 yrs" limit

Postby fatduck » Fri Jun 17, 2011 9:11 pm

you should just be able to submit your best PT score, using the honor system

User avatar
Cartman
Posts: 168
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2011 6:41 pm

Re: LSAC changes its long-standing policy on "3x in 2 yrs" limit

Postby Cartman » Fri Jun 17, 2011 9:43 pm

There's a lot of douchebaggery going on in this thread. Something that is common among a few of the elitist pricks that habit the site.

Look I myself couldn't imagine sitting for more than 3 tests, much less 3 itself, but I recognize that many students may not be as fortunate to have the luxury of being able to do well the first or second times.

3 should be enough, but it may not always be - so who the fuck cares if someone takes it more than 3? Is it any skin off your back? Or LSAC's, for that matter? Personally, I don't understand the policy in the first place. If a law school sees 4 or 5 takes and decides that this negatively reflects on the test takers ability, then that should be their prerogative. Why must LSAC become involved? If anything, you'd think that they wouldn't care how many tests the student takes - more retakes = more $$.

People standing on soapboxes are people standing on soapboxes.

User avatar
buckilaw
Posts: 840
Joined: Fri May 07, 2010 1:27 am

Re: LSAC changes its long-standing policy on "3x in 2 yrs" limit

Postby buckilaw » Fri Jun 17, 2011 9:50 pm

justbubbles wrote:
Bildungsroman wrote:Good. If someone can't get it right after 3 chances within two years they should probably give up.


We all have bad days. I took the test for the 2nd time.

What if I couldn't make it due to some unforeseeable circumstances?

I doubt LSAC would be sympathetic, given that how stingy they are with accommodations.

I wouldn't be surprised if some lawsuits against LSAC were initiated in the event someone was denied this rule. The LSAC cannot act as a gatekeeper to one's educational pursuit. This rule is bullsh*t to begin with.


Couple downsides to bringing suit against LSAC: 1. You look bad 2. Even if you win, you won't, you still need to ask LSAT to send your applications 3. I suspect LSAC may never receive your LORS if you go this route.

The only potential benefit I can see to bringing suit against LSAC is that a law school hopeful would become painfully aware of what a motion to dismiss is.

User avatar
fatduck
Posts: 4186
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2010 10:16 pm

Re: LSAC changes its long-standing policy on "3x in 2 yrs" limit

Postby fatduck » Fri Jun 17, 2011 9:55 pm

justbubbles wrote:The LSAC cannot act as a gatekeeper to one's educational pursuit. This rule is bullsh*t to begin with.

i wasn't able to find this in my copy of the constitution. is it somewhere obscure like the U.N. charter?

User avatar
Jeffort
Posts: 1897
Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2008 4:43 pm

Re: LSAC changes its long-standing policy on "3x in 2 yrs" limit

Postby Jeffort » Fri Jun 17, 2011 10:59 pm

CanadianWolf wrote:"...or if your score is otherwise not reported." = Does not necessarily include missed tests or absences, in my opinion. Is there any specific reference regarding missed tests or absences ? Thanks !

P.S. I agree that three sittings within a 2 year period is enough, but absences due to illness or traffic accidents & the like should not count, in my opinion.


There is nothing in the policy stating that pulling an absent counts against the 3 times rule. ABSENT hasn't counted against the limit before and nothing in the text of the new policy appears to have changed that.

The text: "You may not take the LSAT more than three times in any two-year period." If you didn't show up and check-in to take the test, you didn't 'take' the test that administration, instead you flaked out and DIDN'T take the test.

User avatar
lakers3peat
Posts: 493
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2010 7:10 pm

Re: LSAC changes its long-standing policy on "3x in 2 yrs" limit

Postby lakers3peat » Sat Jun 18, 2011 12:55 am

well I sure hope Jeffort is right because I registed for october but my uncle died so I never took it. I choked under pressure in December and I'm not feeling like I hit my goal after June so according to the OP, I'm shit out of luck? Hopefully Jeffort is right.

User avatar
WhatSarahSaid
Posts: 293
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 2:01 pm

Re: LSAC changes its long-standing policy on "3x in 2 yrs" limit

Postby WhatSarahSaid » Sat Jun 18, 2011 3:27 am

fatduck wrote:
justbubbles wrote:The LSAC cannot act as a gatekeeper to one's educational pursuit. This rule is bullsh*t to begin with.

i wasn't able to find this in my copy of the constitution. is it somewhere obscure like the U.N. charter?


http://pbskids.org/stantonanthony/bill_of_rights.html

SchopenhauerFTW
Posts: 1793
Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2010 10:22 pm

Re: LSAC changes its long-standing policy on "3x in 2 yrs" limit

Postby SchopenhauerFTW » Sat Jun 18, 2011 3:29 am

Bildungsroman wrote:Good. If someone can't get it right after 3 chances within two years they should probably give up.


:cry:

I'll never get my 170+ now.

User avatar
Bildungsroman
Posts: 5548
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 2:42 pm

Re: LSAC changes its long-standing policy on "3x in 2 yrs" limit

Postby Bildungsroman » Sat Jun 18, 2011 3:58 am

SchopenhauerFTW wrote:
Bildungsroman wrote:Good. If someone can't get it right after 3 chances within two years they should probably give up.


:cry:

I'll never get my 170+ now.

I'll give you an exemption from that statement.

JurisDoctorate
Posts: 224
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 5:22 am

Re: LSAC changes its long-standing policy on "3x in 2 yrs" limit

Postby JurisDoctorate » Sat Jun 18, 2011 10:28 am

"You may not take the LSAT more than three times in any two-year period. This policy applies even if you cancel your score or if your score is not otherwise reported."

Do you think registering for the LSAT (and then canceling) constitutes taking the LSAT?

User avatar
Gecko of Doom
Posts: 415
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 8:32 pm

Re: LSAC changes its long-standing policy on "3x in 2 yrs" limit

Postby Gecko of Doom » Sat Jun 18, 2011 11:45 am

buckilaw wrote:Couple downsides to bringing suit against LSAC: 1. You look bad 2. Even if you win, you won't, you still need to ask LSAT to send your applications 3. I suspect LSAC may never receive your LORS if you go this route.

The only potential benefit I can see to bringing suit against LSAC is that a law school hopeful would become painfully aware of what a motion to dismiss is.

I don't even get what grounds there would be to sue. I mean, it's not like LSAC is acting as a "gatekeeper" in that it keeps people from applying to law schools. People just might not have scores high enough to get into the ones they want. Suing because your LSAT score is too low? I don't see anyone taking that seriously.

User avatar
joebloe
Posts: 376
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2010 6:02 am

Re: LSAC changes its long-standing policy on "3x in 2 yrs" limit

Postby joebloe » Sat Jun 18, 2011 1:21 pm

The thing is, it's become pretty common knowledge that many if not most law schools will grant waivers to retake without even batting an eye. The effect is that LSAC's three-in-two rule becomes a paper tiger, which is simply unfair to those who haven't recognized this. So LSAC could either enhance enforcement or dispense with the rule entirely. Presumably, the limitation on retakes is necessary to maintain the integrity of the test process, so it seems pretty obvious what their choice would be.

User avatar
suspicious android
Posts: 938
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2010 4:54 pm

Re: LSAC changes its long-standing policy on "3x in 2 yrs" limit

Postby suspicious android » Sat Jun 18, 2011 1:24 pm

Interesting, but we have no idea how lenient they'll be with the waivers. Until then, it's just speculation, this might not change anything. For all we know "The guy next to me was tapping my pencil and it totally destroyed my concentration" might be enough still.

User avatar
Holly Golightly
Posts: 4618
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 10:30 am

Re: LSAC changes its long-standing policy on "3x in 2 yrs" limit

Postby Holly Golightly » Sat Jun 18, 2011 1:42 pm

Can I retake just for fun even though I'm already done with 1L?

slacker
Posts: 72
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2010 11:54 pm

Re: LSAC changes its long-standing policy on "3x in 2 yrs" limit

Postby slacker » Sat Jun 18, 2011 2:54 pm

Cartman wrote:There's a lot of douchebaggery going on in this thread. Something that is common among a few of the elitist pricks that habit the site.

Look I myself couldn't imagine sitting for more than 3 tests, much less 3 itself, but I recognize that many students may not be as fortunate to have the luxury of being able to do well the first or second times.

3 should be enough, but it may not always be - so who the fuck cares if someone takes it more than 3? Is it any skin off your back? Or LSAC's, for that matter? Personally, I don't understand the policy in the first place. If a law school sees 4 or 5 takes and decides that this negatively reflects on the test takers ability, then that should be their prerogative. Why must LSAC become involved? If anything, you'd think that they wouldn't care how many tests the student takes - more retakes = more $$.

People standing on soapboxes are people standing on soapboxes.


You can simulate the testing experience using all the released PTs if you want. So doing well the first or second time just comes down to preparation really. I agree with the rest of what you said though. There isn't any reason for a limit.

User avatar
joebloe
Posts: 376
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2010 6:02 am

Re: LSAC changes its long-standing policy on "3x in 2 yrs" limit

Postby joebloe » Sat Jun 18, 2011 5:59 pm

Cartman wrote:There's a lot of douchebaggery going on in this thread. Something that is common among a few of the elitist pricks that habit the site.

Look I myself couldn't imagine sitting for more than 3 tests, much less 3 itself, but I recognize that many students may not be as fortunate to have the luxury of being able to do well the first or second times.

3 should be enough, but it may not always be - so who the fuck cares if someone takes it more than 3? Is it any skin off your back? Or LSAC's, for that matter? Personally, I don't understand the policy in the first place. If a law school sees 4 or 5 takes and decides that this negatively reflects on the test takers ability, then that should be their prerogative. Why must LSAC become involved? If anything, you'd think that they wouldn't care how many tests the student takes - more retakes = more $$.

People standing on soapboxes are people standing on soapboxes.


I'm pretty sure the 3 in 2 rule has more to do with people with no intention of applying to law school taking the tests, rather than people who actually will apply to schools. That would certainly explain to me why schools have been so easy with the waivers up until now.

User avatar
runplaystudy
Posts: 37
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2011 1:05 pm

Re: LSAC changes its long-standing policy on "3x in 2 yrs" limit

Postby runplaystudy » Mon Jun 20, 2011 11:46 am

I totally agree that if you can't get it right within three tries you probably should just let it go...

At the same time, this is getting in the way of a test taker's future - the LSAC should NOT be the gatekeepers of entrance into law school to that extent. Besides, if someone wants to pay to take the test four times I don't see why they shouldn't be allowed to. It's their choice and it's their future, the LSAC has too much power as it is really.

User avatar
WhatSarahSaid
Posts: 293
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 2:01 pm

Re: LSAC changes its long-standing policy on "3x in 2 yrs" limit

Postby WhatSarahSaid » Mon Jun 20, 2011 12:20 pm

runplaystudy wrote:At the same time, this is getting in the way of a test taker's future - the LSAC should NOT be the gatekeepers of entrance into law school to that extent.


This point keeps coming up. Doesn't the LSAC write the test? Isn't that significantly more gatekeeper-y, or whatever, than just restricting people from taking it a fourth time?

Furthermore, why are people assuming that they'll readily deny testtakers?

User avatar
Ocean64
Posts: 135
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2011 5:53 pm

Re: LSAC changes its long-standing policy on "3x in 2 yrs" limit

Postby Ocean64 » Mon Jun 20, 2011 2:25 pm

i think i know... LSAC is trying to do is keep Robin Singh of TM from taking the test every other administration like he usually does lol

User avatar
NYC Law
Posts: 1569
Joined: Thu May 26, 2011 3:33 pm

Re: LSAC changes its long-standing policy on "3x in 2 yrs" limit

Postby NYC Law » Mon Jun 20, 2011 2:30 pm

Looks like a reasonable policy. If you don't like it then just wait an extra year and quit being a whiny bitch.

User avatar
fatduck
Posts: 4186
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2010 10:16 pm

Re: LSAC changes its long-standing policy on "3x in 2 yrs" limit

Postby fatduck » Mon Jun 20, 2011 2:31 pm

NYC Law wrote:quit being a whiny bitch.

you're asking too much

User avatar
KevinP
Posts: 1324
Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2009 8:56 pm

Re: LSAC changes its long-standing policy on "3x in 2 yrs" limit

Postby KevinP » Mon Jun 20, 2011 2:41 pm

Ocean64 wrote:i think i know... LSAC is trying to do is keep Robin Singh of TM from taking the test every other administration like he usually does lol


Lol!

User avatar
Jeffort
Posts: 1897
Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2008 4:43 pm

Re: LSAC changes its long-standing policy on "3x in 2 yrs" limit

Postby Jeffort » Mon Jun 20, 2011 5:41 pm

KevinP wrote:
Ocean64 wrote:i think i know... LSAC is trying to do is keep Robin Singh of TM from taking the test every other administration like he usually does lol


Lol!


If that's the case, then LSAC is REALLY slow. Last time Robin took it was 2003.




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: cherrygalore, Instrumental and 7 guests