Blind man sues American Bar Association Forum

[splitmuch]

Give the test in electronic format and prevent anyone from bring scratch paper.

[09042014]

Give the test in electronic format and prevent anyone from bring scratch paper.

It's designed to be written. You'd have to redo the test. At least the LG.

[splitmuch]

Give the test in electronic format and prevent anyone from bring scratch paper.

It's designed to be written. You'd have to redo the test. At least the LG.

Its designed to use diagramming? Diagramming may be a tool that helps (and gives an unfair disadvantage to those who cannot) but its by no means necessary to answer the questions.

[09042014]

Give the test in electronic format and prevent anyone from bring scratch paper.

It's designed to be written. You'd have to redo the test. At least the LG.

Its designed to use diagramming? Diagramming may be a tool that helps (and gives an unfair disadvantage to those who cannot) but its by no means necessary to answer the questions.

It would significantly change the difficulty.

[kublaikahn]

Would the guy still need to prove harm? Not getting into Cooley is actually beneficial. What's he suing for -150k.

[Curry]

0ls.

[kublaikahn]

0ls.

0L-ish, but still funny, no?

[splitmuch]

0ls.

0L-ish, but still funny, no?

I thought it was funny, but im a 0L too.

[splitmuch]

Give the test in electronic format and prevent anyone from bring scratch paper.

It's designed to be written. You'd have to redo the test. At least the LG.

Its designed to use diagramming? Diagramming may be a tool that helps (and gives an unfair disadvantage to those who cannot) but its by no means necessary to answer the questions.

It would significantly change the difficulty.

But the scores are scaled so not as much. It would, though, test additional attributes that may or may not be related to law schooll performance.

[JusticeHarlan]

Would the guy still need to prove harm? Not getting into Cooley is actually beneficial. What's he suing for -150k.

He's not suing for money, at least in the initial complaint. He's seeking declaratory and injunctive relief: he wants the court to say the requirement of test violates the ADA, and to stop the ABA from mandating it for accreditation purposes.

[kublaikahn]

.

[JusticeHarlan]

So here's a provision they cite as being violated (paragraph 41 of the complaint (LinkRemoved)):

(a) General. Any private entity that offers examinations or courses related to applications, licensing, certification, or credentialing for secondary or postsecondary education, professional, or trade purposes shall offer such examinations or courses in a place and manner accessible to persons with disabilities or offer alternative accessible arrangements for such individuals.

Does that sound like they should be suing the ABA, or LSAC?

[3ThrowAway99]

IMO he should take a 2-LR/ 2-RC test.

LG while blind puts him at a disadvantage.

I think no games could give an unfair advantage (though I realize that with the games he may have an unfair disadvantage). If I had been able to take the test without logic games I'm pretty sure I would be at a different school right now (but I realize I didn't have the disadvantage he would have obviously, because I could look at any notes I made for the games). But logic games ('analytical reasoning' section) happened to be by far my worst section-- even after tons and tons of practice. I know that's not the case for a lot of people, and that there are some for whom the games is the easiest section. So I think it really just depends on an individual's strengths and weaknesses as to what may or may not help with section composition alterations (or omissions). The problem is that once the test is changed for one person it makes it harder to compare his or her score with others, even if they would be otherwise disadvantaged. Then again I really think some individual tests play to one person's strengths more than to another's, so I don't necessarily think the test is entirely objectively fair in some ideal sense in any case. But perhaps that is where retakes and study over a long period of time can help even any individual test and test-taker strength/weakness interactions (at least as far as individual administrations go).

[09042014]

IMO he should take a 2-LR/ 2-RC test.

LG while blind puts him at a disadvantage.

I think that could give an unfair advantage (though I realize that with it he may have an unfair disadvantage). If I had been able to take the test without logic games I'm pretty sure I would be at a different school right now. But logic games ('analytical reasoning' section) happened to be by far my worst section-- even after tons and tons of practice (and I realize I didn't have the disadvantage he would have, in that I could look at any notes I made for the games).

So the guy possibly gets a slight break. He's blind.

Also, maybe with vision he'd get a 0 in LG and he'd do worse than if he was able sighted.

[094320]

..

[Patriot1208]

IMO he should take a 2-LR/ 2-RC test.

LG while blind puts him at a disadvantage.

I think that could give an unfair advantage (though I realize that with it he may have an unfair disadvantage). If I had been able to take the test without logic games I'm pretty sure I would be at a different school right now. But logic games ('analytical reasoning' section) happened to be by far my worst section-- even after tons and tons of practice (and I realize I didn't have the disadvantage he would have, in that I could look at any notes I made for the games).

So the guy possibly gets a slight break. He's blind.
Also, maybe with vision he'd get a 0 in LG and he'd do worse than if he was able sighted.

LG is a lot of peoples best section, fuck reading and shit

[3ThrowAway99]

IMO he should take a 2-LR/ 2-RC test.

LG while blind puts him at a disadvantage.

I think that could give an unfair advantage (though I realize that with it he may have an unfair disadvantage). If I had been able to take the test without logic games I'm pretty sure I would be at a different school right now. But logic games ('analytical reasoning' section) happened to be by far my worst section-- even after tons and tons of practice (and I realize I didn't have the disadvantage he would have, in that I could look at any notes I made for the games).

So the guy possibly gets a slight break. He's blind.

Also, maybe with vision he'd get a 0 in LG and he'd do worse than if he was able sighted.

I edited my earlier post because it did come off one-sided I think..

[JusticeHarlan]

ETA: Alternatively, he could be given some absurd amount of time with the LG section.

There's an appendix to the complaint with a response letter from LSAC (they don't have the request it's in response to) that says, essentially, "you're requesting so much extra time, it's probably best for you to ask schools to waive the LSAT requirement."

That letter is from 1995 and not addressed to the plaintiff, however. So it seems someone, with some condition, requested what LSAC thought was an absurd amount of time, and was denied.

[Bill Cosby]

ETA: Alternatively, he could be given some absurd amount of time with the LG section.

There's an appendix to the complaint with a response letter from LSAC (they don't have the request it's in response to) that says, essentially, "you're requesting so much extra time, it's probably best for you to ask schools to waive the LSAT requirement."

That letter is from 1995 and not addressed to the plaintiff, however. So it seems someone, with some condition, requested what LSAC thought was an absurd amount of time, and was denied.

Does it state how much extra time they were requesting?

[bgdddymtty]

Diagramming may be a tool that helps . . . but its by no means necessary to answer the questions.

TITCR. And, as on the LSAT, the only credited response.

[JusticeHarlan]

ETA: Alternatively, he could be given some absurd amount of time with the LG section.

There's an appendix to the complaint with a response letter from LSAC (they don't have the request it's in response to) that says, essentially, "you're requesting so much extra time, it's probably best for you to ask schools to waive the LSAT requirement."

That letter is from 1995 and not addressed to the plaintiff, however. So it seems someone, with some condition, requested what LSAC thought was an absurd amount of time, and was denied.

Does it state how much extra time they were requesting?

Nope; again, all they included was a copy of a 1995 response from LSAC to a letter we don't have, stating that the request (which we don't have the specifics for) was so much that it was better for the applicant to request a waiver of the LSAT from law schools. That's about it.