wtrcoins3 wrote: haus wrote:
Tanicius wrote:>All of those disabilities seem like things that would limit her ability to succeed in law school and as a lawyer
No they don't. Especially no to the latter. In real life, see, people have offices, and in these offices, they can do things like close their door to the noises outside, put on music, and otherwise relax.
LSAT may correlate somewhat with performance in 1L, but the connection becomes weaker in later years of school, and I doubt that any real correlation can be shown between someone's overall career performance to their LSAT scores.
Which may be an argument to abandon the LSAT itself... but for now schools not knowing that she took the test under very
different conditions and constraints doesn't make sense IMO
I personally do not care if schools are notified about students receiving accommodations to the test, I just think that people get carried away with the supposed value of this exam. In a recent thread someone seemed shocked that a student with a 155 made it into YLS, with some crazy notion of how will they keep up? And here we have an argument that someone who as far as I know has not even taken the exam yet is doomed to be a bad student and bad future lawyer because they are asking for accommodations that will likely not amount to a hill of beans.
Yes, those people who want to get into a top school should take the exam seriously, because the majority of the legal education world allows themselves to be pushed around by a magazine that so few people in the real world care about that they stopped printing the thing years ago. This is already a silly position, but let's not go overboard and assign magical abilities to this test that it clearly does not posses.