JazzOne wrote:rcharter1978 wrote:A correlation without an explanation seems a little useless to me.
It's not useless. It tells us that there is a persistent overlap between the skills tested on the LSAT and those tested on the bar exam. What's useless is anecdotal evidence about people at your law school. My post was a reply to your comment that the "LSAT and bar are two DIFFERENT exams." Obviously, the contents of the exams differ, but it should be equally obvious that certain weaknesses (e.g., slow reading speed or poor logic skills) will be problematic on both exams.
I was also replying to your suggestion that, "If a person was accepted to law school and passed their classes then they should be allowed to take the bar." No one argued otherwise, so your point is a bit of a straw man. The actual argument in this thread is that law schools should not accept students with below-average LSAT scores. Whether we agree or disagree, the argument is not completely unreasonable since the existing research bears out a relationship between LSAT score and bar passage.
I didn't suggest that. Nor did I say that the LSAT and the bar are two different exams. I think you're referring to another poster.
However, I think the correlation without a cause is generally useless, because the reason why the correlation exists bears on whether or not schools should continue to take a risk on students with sub LSAT scores.
If the cause relates to just general intelligence than there is nothing that can be done, if the cause relates to a learnable skill set in taking standardized tests than schools may reasonably continue to take students with lower LSAT scores and work harder to teach them those skills so they are better prepared for the bar. Or start bar prep earlier for certain students.
JazzOne wrote:rcharter1978 wrote:I think it matters, because if it is simply a case of accepting people who aren't very bright into law school, and this is the reason for lower LSAT scores/bar passage rates....there is really nothing you can do that. You can't give people intelligence. But if its a matter of learning how to take a standardized test, how to "game" the test, getting prepared for the Bar, the way that students with higher LSAT scores prepped for the LSAT than schools may be able to do something about that.
It is definitely possible to teach low LSAT scorers how to improve their testing skills. I have helped many low LSAT scorers pass the bar exam in my state. However, most of my students took the bar exam several times before working with me and wasted many thousands of dollars on top of their law school expenses. Very few law schools are teaching bar review or testing strategies, so that raises the question of whether those schools are doing a disservice to their students and to the profession by admitting applicants who have little chance of passing the bar exam. None of those points is elitist. There is no "ivory tower BS" here. It's an academic debate based on research.
And this is the big question to me, and where I would want to see the data. If its not a matter of raw intelligence, than its a matter of something that can be taught. Skill in taking a standardized test, knowing how to study, working and developing those skills for the LSAT may have better prepared a student to do the same for the bar exam. In this case, than there are things the schools can do to ensure that IF they choose to accept students with a lower LSAT score that the student will be successful in taking the bar exam.
It sounds like....after working with you, these lower LSAT students had a great chance of passing the bar exam. So, if schools were to intervene BEFORE the bar exam with particular students they might be better served. Right now, I think there are a number of schools that have classes to prep students for the bar exam before they graduate....HOWEVER, those classes are only offered to remedial students. But if the LSAT is the indicator of bar passage, perhaps they should be offering these classes to students that were accepted with a lower LSAT score.
But, of course, this has to be something that the schools recognize in taking applicants with scores under 150. Its a brave new world with these students gaining acceptance to law school where they may not have before. Should the door be summarily closed to those students? I don't know. BUT I do think that a school that chooses to accept these students should: a) do some research to understand why the correlation between low LSAT scores and inability to pass the bar exists and b) be obligated to have early intervention programs for these students with low LSAT scores.
