LSAC settles LSAT Disability Lawsuit

Prepare for the LSAT or discuss it with others in this forum.
User avatar
Tanicius

Gold
Posts: 2971
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 12:54 am

Re: LSAC settles LSAT Disability Lawsuit

Postby Tanicius » Wed May 28, 2014 2:36 pm

Learn_Live_Hope wrote:
How do you know how bad their ADHD is?


That's the whole point of the different types of accommodations. There is no one-size fits all. Time extensions, for example, are rare, because LSAC has experts who look at the disability and the seriousness of the disability and make a judgment call about what kind accommodation is required. Double-time extensions in particular are almost never given.

This diagnosis is abused, and will continue to be abused if there is an incentive as in this case.


It's like you think that someone with money can just hop on over to a doctor, get a diagnosis for ADHD, and without having any demonstrable symptoms or issues with ADHD in the past just hit up LSAC with the diagnosis and, presto!, LSAC will just give the doctor all benefit of the doubt and the applicant gets a time extension, no questions asked. That's not how it works.
Last edited by Tanicius on Wed May 28, 2014 2:38 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Pneumonia

Gold
Posts: 1837
Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2012 3:05 pm

Re: LSAC settles LSAT Disability Lawsuit

Postby Pneumonia » Wed May 28, 2014 2:36 pm

It is frustrating how many people have commented in this thread after obviously either not reading it or ignoring the majority of it.

NYSprague

Silver
Posts: 830
Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2014 2:33 pm

Re: LSAC settles LSAT Disability Lawsuit

Postby NYSprague » Wed May 28, 2014 2:43 pm

There is absolutely no evidence that any standardized testing accommodations have been abused. It is all anecdotal. So everyone can relax, and I guess, feel secure in their own personal prejudices if it makes them feel better.

Luckily, DOJ is requiring LSAC to follow the best practices established by experts in the field instead of continuing down the illegal path they have been treading.

TLSNerd

New
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2014 12:04 pm

Re: LSAC settles LSAT Disability Lawsuit

Postby TLSNerd » Wed May 28, 2014 2:48 pm

People with ADHD should not be given extra time on the LSAT.

They won't be given extra time as practicing lawyers.

The LSAT should accurately measure a person's ability, relative to the ability of others.

Also (and this is unrelated to the points made above), the existence of ADHD is questionable. Did you know that 4th graders who are young for their grade are 50% more likely than the oldest third of their classmates to be prescribed stimulants for ADHD?
Source: http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/2 ... h-d-drugs/

Learn_Live_Hope

Silver
Posts: 1016
Joined: Mon Feb 17, 2014 9:33 pm

Re: LSAC settles LSAT Disability Lawsuit

Postby Learn_Live_Hope » Wed May 28, 2014 2:51 pm

..
Last edited by Learn_Live_Hope on Mon Oct 20, 2014 11:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Clyde Frog

Platinum
Posts: 8978
Joined: Sun May 26, 2013 2:27 am

Re: LSAC settles LSAT Disability Lawsuit

Postby Clyde Frog » Wed May 28, 2014 2:57 pm

For those that are required mandatory accommodation on the LSAT (those that got it on the SAT), will the extra time correspond exactly to the LSAT, for example they got 50% on the SAT so they are guaranteed 50% extra on the LSAT, or will the LSAC have discretion on how much extra time is given?

User avatar
Pneumonia

Gold
Posts: 1837
Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2012 3:05 pm

Re: LSAC settles LSAT Disability Lawsuit

Postby Pneumonia » Wed May 28, 2014 2:57 pm

Learn_Live_Hope wrote:
Pneumonia wrote:It is frustrating how many people have commented in this thread after obviously either not reading it or ignoring the majority of it.


Is this directed at me? It's ok if it is.

I admit, I haven't read the thread, however I really don't have an incentive to do so, because i i am not advocating against allowing disabled individuals accommodations by any means. I'm actually in favor of it due to strong belief in justice and equality for all. At the same time my belief in justice and equality made me question if other people might be disadvantaged as a result of some gaming the system. Both concerns came from equal motive-concern for justice, and equality... :wink:


Yes it was directed at you. You are obviously entitled to your opinion, but it is one that has been repeatedly shared and responded to earlier in this thread. Just a heads up for why you won't get that many replies. Also lol at this:
TLSNerd wrote:People with ADHD should not be given extra time on the LSAT.

They won't be given extra time as practicing lawyers.

The LSAT should accurately measure a person's ability, relative to the ability of others.

Also (and this is unrelated to the points made above), the existence of ADHD is questionable. Did you know that 4th graders who are young for their grade are 50% more likely than the oldest third of their classmates to be prescribed stimulants for ADHD?
Source: http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/2 ... h-d-drugs/

seriously did you just skip literally every post here and reply immediately after reading the title of this thread?

NYSprague

Silver
Posts: 830
Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2014 2:33 pm

Re: LSAC settles LSAT Disability Lawsuit

Postby NYSprague » Wed May 28, 2014 2:59 pm

Pneumonia wrote:It is frustrating how many people have commented in this thread after obviously either not reading it or ignoring the majority of it.


It was started by people who hadn't read or understood the consent agreement so the thread has been more of the same.

My personal bit of irony is that I feel very few people on this forum should go to law school. So it's weird to be advocating for improvement to LSAC. It has been eye opening as to the number of people worrying that a disabled person will unfairly outperform them. I expected outrage at LSAC not the response of some of the posters here.

Though, in line with your first point, I doubt many people read the facts of the complaints.
Last edited by NYSprague on Wed May 28, 2014 3:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.

NYSprague

Silver
Posts: 830
Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2014 2:33 pm

Re: LSAC settles LSAT Disability Lawsuit

Postby NYSprague » Wed May 28, 2014 3:00 pm

Clyde Frog wrote:For those that are required mandatory accommodation on the LSAT (those that got it on the SAT), will the extra time correspond exactly to the LSAT, for example they got 50% on the SAT so they are guaranteed 50% extra on the LSAT, or will the LSAC have discretion on how much extra time is given?


The consent agreement specifies that they have to get the same accommodation.

Edit to add: my opinion based on reading between the lines is that LSAC was so unreasonable that the government took a large chunk of decision making out of their discretion. Also, requiring extensive and expensive additional testing and reporting was discriminatory in and of itself. It also violated the specific regulations on examinations.
Last edited by NYSprague on Wed May 28, 2014 3:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
A. Nony Mouse

Diamond
Posts: 29317
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:51 am

Re: LSAC settles LSAT Disability Lawsuit

Postby A. Nony Mouse » Wed May 28, 2014 3:01 pm

TLSNerd wrote:People with ADHD should not be given extra time on the LSAT.

They won't be given extra time as practicing lawyers.

The LSAT should accurately measure a person's ability, relative to the ability of others.

OMG I am SO tired of people in this thread trotting out that tired inapt analogy (and clearly not reading any of the myriad responses made to the exact same point earlier in this thread). Practicing law is nothing like taking the LSAT. Don't judge someone's ability to complete lawyer tasks effectively with their ability to sit down and complete a multiple choice test in 35 minute segments. The LSAT measures test takers' ability to take a test, and has some not especially determinative correlation with law school grades. Those are really terrible proxies for ability to practice law.

I understand why people have some concerns about gaming the test (I don't share them, but I get why they're out there) for the test's own sake. But I can't stand the high-horsedness of assuming this has says anything meaningful about lawyering ability or the fate of the legal profession. If we're clutching our pearls about the effect these accommodations will have on the legal profession, go shut down Cooley and Thomas Jefferson School of Law - their grads seem way more likely to dilute the profession than a few test takers with ADHD.

User avatar
mollyp22@

New
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 2:42 pm

Re: LSAC settles LSAT Disability Lawsuit

Postby mollyp22@ » Wed May 28, 2014 3:08 pm

ADHD and other similar disabilities are things that can be overcome with time. When we live in a world where everyone is a victim this type of stuff is inevitable. Unless a person has a severe handicap that limits them from performing the test adequately, then giving someone extra time is ipso facto wrong. If a person can perform well (160's + ) with 38 minute sections as opposed to 35 minute sections, then there is no reason they can't do that with 35 minutes. Sorry they need an extra 20 seconds to regroup themselves every question because the bird out the window is distracting, that's something that must be dealt with on a personal basis, not an institutional forgiving basis.

NYSprague

Silver
Posts: 830
Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2014 2:33 pm

Re: LSAC settles LSAT Disability Lawsuit

Postby NYSprague » Wed May 28, 2014 3:12 pm

mollyp22@ wrote:ADHD and other similar disabilities are things that can be overcome with time. When we live in a world where everyone is a victim this type of stuff is inevitable. Unless a person has a severe handicap that limits them from performing the test adequately, then giving someone extra time is ipso facto wrong. If a person can perform well (160's + ) with 38 minute sections as opposed to 35 minute sections, then there is no reason they can't do that with 35 minutes. Sorry they need an extra 20 seconds to regroup themselves every question because the bird out the window is distracting, that's something that must be dealt with on a personal basis, not an institutional forgiving basis.


Yeah, actually, what you described is illegal and violates civil rights of test takers. If you were LSAC you would have the government tell you how to reform your process ASAP and tell you to open your wallet because you are going to be paying civil damages.
Last edited by NYSprague on Wed May 28, 2014 3:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.

TLSNerd

New
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2014 12:04 pm

Re: LSAC settles LSAT Disability Lawsuit

Postby TLSNerd » Wed May 28, 2014 3:12 pm

OMG I am SO tired of people in this thread trotting out that tired inapt analogy (and clearly not reading any of the myriad responses made to the exact same point earlier in this thread). Practicing law is nothing like taking the LSAT. Don't judge someone's ability to complete lawyer tasks effectively with their ability to sit down and complete a multiple choice test in 35 minute segments.


Practicing law is nothing like taking the LSAT? You see zero similarities? Zero talents/skills/abilities that would make someone both a good lawyer and a good LSAT taker? If you had to hire a partner for your firm today, you would look no differently at a candidate who scored a 150 and a candidate who scored a 180?

NYSprague

Silver
Posts: 830
Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2014 2:33 pm

Re: LSAC settles LSAT Disability Lawsuit

Postby NYSprague » Wed May 28, 2014 3:14 pm

TLSNerd wrote:
OMG I am SO tired of people in this thread trotting out that tired inapt analogy (and clearly not reading any of the myriad responses made to the exact same point earlier in this thread). Practicing law is nothing like taking the LSAT. Don't judge someone's ability to complete lawyer tasks effectively with their ability to sit down and complete a multiple choice test in 35 minute segments.


Practicing law is nothing like taking the LSAT? You see zero similarities? Zero talents/skills/abilities that would make someone both a good lawyer and a good LSAT taker? If you had to hire a partner for your firm today, you would look no differently at a candidate who scored a 150 than a candidate who scored a 180?

No. Making partner has nothing to do with your LSAT and you should disabuse yourself of the idea a high score means you will be successful and a low score means you are a failure.

User avatar
mollyp22@

New
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 2:42 pm

Re: LSAC settles LSAT Disability Lawsuit

Postby mollyp22@ » Wed May 28, 2014 3:15 pm

NYSprague wrote:
mollyp22@ wrote:ADHD and other similar disabilities are things that can be overcome with time. When we live in a world where everyone is a victim this type of stuff is inevitable. Unless a person has a severe handicap that limits them from performing the test adequately, then giving someone extra time is ipso facto wrong. If a person can perform well (160's + ) with 38 minute sections as opposed to 35 minute sections, then there is no reason they can't do that with 35 minutes. Sorry they need an extra 20 seconds to regroup themselves every question because the bird out the window is distracting, that's something that must be dealt with on a personal basis, not an institutional forgiving basis.


Yeah, actually, what you described is illegal and violates civil rights of test takers. If you were LSAC you would have the government tell you how to reform your process ASAP and tell you to open your wallet because you are going to be paying civil damages.


I'm not interested in arguing through your political correctness lenses. I'm a common sense folk and what I just said is common sense. Deal with it

TLSNerd

New
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2014 12:04 pm

Re: LSAC settles LSAT Disability Lawsuit

Postby TLSNerd » Wed May 28, 2014 3:19 pm

[/quote]No. Making partner has nothing to do with your LSAT and you should disabuse yourself of the idea a high score means you will be successful and a low score means you are a failure.[/quote]

If you had to bet all of your money on who would become the more successful lawyer, and your choices were someone who had scored a 120 and someone who had scored a 180, and you had no other information about the candidates, you'd flip a coin?

My point is that anon mouse was wrong when she/he said "Practicing law is nothing like taking the LSAT."

User avatar
Tanicius

Gold
Posts: 2971
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 12:54 am

Re: LSAC settles LSAT Disability Lawsuit

Postby Tanicius » Wed May 28, 2014 3:24 pm

NYSprague wrote:
mollyp22@ wrote:ADHD and other similar disabilities are things that can be overcome with time. When we live in a world where everyone is a victim this type of stuff is inevitable. Unless a person has a severe handicap that limits them from performing the test adequately, then giving someone extra time is ipso facto wrong. If a person can perform well (160's + ) with 38 minute sections as opposed to 35 minute sections, then there is no reason they can't do that with 35 minutes. Sorry they need an extra 20 seconds to regroup themselves every question because the bird out the window is distracting, that's something that must be dealt with on a personal basis, not an institutional forgiving basis.


Yeah, actually, what you described is illegal and violates civil rights of test takers. If you were LSAC you would have the government tell you how to reform your process ASAP and tell you to open your wallet because you are going to be paying civil damages.


They're a troll dude. They just changed their profile picture from one about Obama and waffles.

User avatar
A. Nony Mouse

Diamond
Posts: 29317
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:51 am

Re: LSAC settles LSAT Disability Lawsuit

Postby A. Nony Mouse » Wed May 28, 2014 3:25 pm

TLSNerd wrote:If you had to bet all of your money on who would become the more successful lawyer, and your choices were someone who had scored a 120 and someone who had scored a 180, and you had no other information about the candidates, you'd flip a coin?

My point is that anon mouse was wrong when she/he said "Practicing law is nothing like taking the LSAT."

I'm a practicing lawyer. I promise you my job is nothing like taking the LSAT. I certainly wouldn't ask a partner candidate for their LSAT because nothing would be more ludicrous than caring.

I also said "nothing like taking the LSAT." I didn't say it doesn't use any of the same skills. You just aren't demonstrating those skills on a multiple-choice test in 35 minutes.

User avatar
A. Nony Mouse

Diamond
Posts: 29317
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:51 am

Re: LSAC settles LSAT Disability Lawsuit

Postby A. Nony Mouse » Wed May 28, 2014 3:28 pm

Tanicius wrote:
NYSprague wrote:
mollyp22@ wrote:ADHD and other similar disabilities are things that can be overcome with time. When we live in a world where everyone is a victim this type of stuff is inevitable. Unless a person has a severe handicap that limits them from performing the test adequately, then giving someone extra time is ipso facto wrong. If a person can perform well (160's + ) with 38 minute sections as opposed to 35 minute sections, then there is no reason they can't do that with 35 minutes. Sorry they need an extra 20 seconds to regroup themselves every question because the bird out the window is distracting, that's something that must be dealt with on a personal basis, not an institutional forgiving basis.


Yeah, actually, what you described is illegal and violates civil rights of test takers. If you were LSAC you would have the government tell you how to reform your process ASAP and tell you to open your wallet because you are going to be paying civil damages.


They're a troll dude. They just changed their profile picture from one about Obama and waffles.

And this is absolutely correct. It's our current alt-troll back again. Well, gone again, until he tries again.

User avatar
Pneumonia

Gold
Posts: 1837
Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2012 3:05 pm

Re: LSAC settles LSAT Disability Lawsuit

Postby Pneumonia » Wed May 28, 2014 3:29 pm

TLSNerd wrote: No. Making partner has nothing to do with your LSAT and you should disabuse yourself of the idea a high score means you will be successful and a low score means you are a failure.

If you had to bet all of your money on who would become the more successful lawyer, and your choices were someone who had scored a 120 and someone who had scored a 180, and you had no other information about the candidates, you'd flip a coin?

My point is that anon mouse was wrong when she/he said "Practicing law is nothing like taking the LSAT."


No she wasn't. She's also a practicing lawyer so she would know. What do you practice? Logic games? Is that why you're arguing that the test has actual value? If so that is understandable, but it still doesn't make you right.

TLSNerd

New
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2014 12:04 pm

Re: LSAC settles LSAT Disability Lawsuit

Postby TLSNerd » Wed May 28, 2014 3:30 pm

A. Nony Mouse wrote:
TLSNerd wrote:If you had to bet all of your money on who would become the more successful lawyer, and your choices were someone who had scored a 120 and someone who had scored a 180, and you had no other information about the candidates, you'd flip a coin?

My point is that anon mouse was wrong when she/he said "Practicing law is nothing like taking the LSAT."

I'm a practicing lawyer. I promise you my job is nothing like taking the LSAT. I certainly wouldn't ask a partner candidate for their LSAT because nothing would be more ludicrous than caring.

I also said "nothing like taking the LSAT." I didn't say it doesn't use any of the same skills. You just aren't demonstrating those skills on a multiple-choice test in 35 minutes.


Reading comprehension is a skill. Maintaining focus is a skill.

NYSprague

Silver
Posts: 830
Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2014 2:33 pm

Re: LSAC settles LSAT Disability Lawsuit

Postby NYSprague » Wed May 28, 2014 3:31 pm

I always fall for that troll.

TLSNerd

New
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2014 12:04 pm

Re: LSAC settles LSAT Disability Lawsuit

Postby TLSNerd » Wed May 28, 2014 3:33 pm

Pneumonia wrote:
TLSNerd wrote: No. Making partner has nothing to do with your LSAT and you should disabuse yourself of the idea a high score means you will be successful and a low score means you are a failure.

If you had to bet all of your money on who would become the more successful lawyer, and your choices were someone who had scored a 120 and someone who had scored a 180, and you had no other information about the candidates, you'd flip a coin?

My point is that anon mouse was wrong when she/he said "Practicing law is nothing like taking the LSAT."


No she wasn't. She's also a practicing lawyer so she would know. What do you practice? Logic games? Is that why you're arguing that the test has actual value? If so that is understandable, but it still doesn't make you right.


It doesn't matter whether I think the test has value. Employers consistently select students from schools with high LSAT medians, thereby indicating that they think the test has value in predicting who will perform well in practice. Some of this value would be lost if some test takers were given extra time due to disabilities that would hamper them just as much in practice.

User avatar
bjsesq

Diamond
Posts: 13323
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2010 3:02 am

Re: LSAC settles LSAT Disability Lawsuit

Postby bjsesq » Wed May 28, 2014 3:33 pm

TLSNerd wrote:
A. Nony Mouse wrote:
TLSNerd wrote:If you had to bet all of your money on who would become the more successful lawyer, and your choices were someone who had scored a 120 and someone who had scored a 180, and you had no other information about the candidates, you'd flip a coin?

My point is that anon mouse was wrong when she/he said "Practicing law is nothing like taking the LSAT."

I'm a practicing lawyer. I promise you my job is nothing like taking the LSAT. I certainly wouldn't ask a partner candidate for their LSAT because nothing would be more ludicrous than caring.

I also said "nothing like taking the LSAT." I didn't say it doesn't use any of the same skills. You just aren't demonstrating those skills on a multiple-choice test in 35 minutes.


Reading comprehension is a skill. Maintaining focus is a skill.


As is pulling conclusions directly from your asshole, apparently.

User avatar
Pneumonia

Gold
Posts: 1837
Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2012 3:05 pm

Re: LSAC settles LSAT Disability Lawsuit

Postby Pneumonia » Wed May 28, 2014 3:35 pm

TLSNerd wrote:It doesn't matter whether I think the test has value. Employers consistently select students from schools with high LSAT medians, thereby indicating that they think the test has value in predicting who will perform well in practice. Some of this value would be lost if some test takers were given extra time due to disabilities that would hamper them just as much in practice.


Yeah that's exactly what firms do, look for the school's LSAT medians. Lol. corr/cause bro.



Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests