Page 1 of 1

LSAC as a soft?

Posted: Sun Feb 24, 2013 3:33 am
by Dr. Dre
Would working at LSAC be a good soft to adcoms? Imagine being able to say you were responsible for designing the LSAT. Here is a job description on their website:
Test Specialist
Position Code: TS
Group: Test Development
Application Deadline: March 8, 2013
Primary Responsibilities
Responsibilities include helping to develop questions for the LSAT that are of high quality and are sensitive to the diversity of the LSAT population. The position requires the writing, review, and revision of questions that are designed to assess informal reasoning and deductive reasoning skills. Other duties may include participating in the review and development of informational and test preparation materials as well as participating in research related to the LSAT.
Qualifications
Some training in logic, a broad background in liberal arts, and precise and fluent use of Standard Written English are necessary. Experience in college teaching is desirable. Demonstrated organizational skills, the ability to work independently and collaboratively, and the ability to meet deadlines are required. Educational qualifications include an MA and doctoral-level work in philosophy, theoretical linguistics, classics, or some related discipline requiring strong reading, reasoning, and analytical skills. A PhD is preferred.
Salary: $65,000 per year or more depending on qualifications and experience. Benefits are highly competitive.
http://www.lsac.org/aboutlsac/employmen ... nities.asp

EDIT: would you even be allowed to take it?

Re: LSAC as a soft?

Posted: Sun Feb 24, 2013 3:56 am
by ManOfTheMinute
If you do well on the LSAT, its only cuz you worked to develop it.
If you don't do well on the LSAT, how dumb are you to have worked on the LSAT and still bombed it?

Thats of course assuming that you could take the LSAT...

Re: LSAC as a soft?

Posted: Sun Feb 24, 2013 5:23 am
by TripTrip
I don't even...

Re: LSAC as a soft?

Posted: Sun Feb 24, 2013 7:14 am
by Dr. Dre
ManOfTheMinute wrote:If you do well on the LSAT, its only cuz you worked to develop it.
If you don't do well on the LSAT, how dumb are you to have worked on the LSAT and still bombed it?

Thats of course assuming that you could take the LSAT...
how long did you study?

Re: LSAC as a soft?

Posted: Sun Feb 24, 2013 7:50 am
by banjo
The requirements for this job are probably better softs than the job itself.

Re: LSAC as a soft?

Posted: Sun Feb 24, 2013 4:24 pm
by PRgradBYU
banjo wrote:The requirements for this job are probably better softs than the job itself.

Re: LSAC as a soft?

Posted: Sun Feb 24, 2013 4:33 pm
by ManOfTheMinute
Dr. Dre wrote:
ManOfTheMinute wrote:If you do well on the LSAT, its only cuz you worked to develop it.
If you don't do well on the LSAT, how dumb are you to have worked on the LSAT and still bombed it?

Thats of course assuming that you could take the LSAT...
how long did you study?
A couple weeks, why?

Re: LSAC as a soft?

Posted: Sun Feb 24, 2013 7:32 pm
by Dr. Dre
ManOfTheMinute wrote:
Dr. Dre wrote:
ManOfTheMinute wrote:If you do well on the LSAT, its only cuz you worked to develop it.
If you don't do well on the LSAT, how dumb are you to have worked on the LSAT and still bombed it?

Thats of course assuming that you could take the LSAT...
how long did you study?
A couple weeks, why?
cause 173 is high for a couple of weeks.