a Forum

[Moxie]

Your legal career will be over before it starts. Don't ever do this.

+2.

Proctor's don't know what section you are supposed to be working in. The tests vary.

You're joking right? Why do you think the section numbers are plastered all over the page??

[WhatSarahSaid]

Proctor's don't know what section you are supposed to be working in. The tests vary.

Assuming a troll here. The sections will still be numbered 1-5, with everyone on the same number. In addition, as each PT demonstrates, the top of each page has symbols (like a black semicircle or a white box) that would make it obvious if you're on the wrong section, assuming your proctor is paying attention.

[JasonR]

If you get caught, you're fucked. They won't just give you a warning. You will get kicked out of the exam, the infraction will be permanently noted in your LSAC file, and you can kiss the possibility of admission to any decent law school goodbye forever. Just a small price to pay.

I think this is highly dependent on how "caught" you are, though. There's a big difference between another student claiming it and the proctor actually watching you do it for an extended period of time. I would think the consequences would vary with the degree of deniability that the proctor's report allowed for.

This is NOT the credited response. If a proctor sees you with your test booklet open to a passage you're not allowed to be working on, it doesn't matter at all how long it was going on for or what you were actually doing, you are violating a major rule. LSAC won't listen to any bullshit excuses: if you get caught with your book open to the wrong section, every law school you apply to will know that you were cheating, and if you think law schools will give two shits worth of attention to any explanation you try and provide then you're clearly not intelligent enough for law school. If one test-taker just claims to have observed another test-taker cheating then I doubt anything would happen to you, but the second its observed by the proctor any defense goes right out the window.

Proctor's don't know what section you are supposed to be working in. The tests vary.

Was that supposed to be a joke?

[d34d9823]

One thing I think hasn't been addressed here is whether cheating actually benefits you even if you get away with it. If you don't cheat, you'll get an LSAT that's reflective of your ability and go to a school with your intellectual peers. If you do, you will score higher than your ability would indicate and thus go to a school with people who are on average more intelligent. This would seem to hurt your chances of scoring well in your class. So, in the long run, cheating may not provide much of a benefit.

Also, anytime we have a thread like this, there are always like 50 people who are like "This is the most terrible idea EVARR." If that's what you think, awesome. I get the feeling, though, that people say that not from solid analysis, but from moral outrage that someone would do such a thing. If that's the case (and it's just my intuition here), then just come right out and say that, don't be all disingenuous.

I had a friend who misrepresented the chances of getting caught speeding on a particular road to me because he was morally opposed to speeding. When I found out, I despised him for it.

[bk1]

One thing I think hasn't been addressed here is whether cheating actually benefits you even if you get away with it. If you don't cheat, you'll get an LSAT that's reflective of your ability and go to a school with your intellectual peers. If you do, you will score higher than your ability would indicate and thus go to a school with people who are on average more intelligent. This would seem to hurt your chances of scoring well in your class. So, in the long run, cheating may not provide much of a benefit.

This seems like a horrible argument considering the weak correlation between LSAT and 1L grades. Even then, until you quantify the benefits of getting away with it (i.e. that doing it gets you into Yale and not doing gets you into GULC), it would be hard to assess whether this were even true.

Also, anytime we have a thread like this, there are always like 50 people who are like "This is the most terrible idea EVARR." If that's what you think, awesome. I get the feeling, though, that people say that not from solid analysis, but from moral outrage that someone would do such a thing. If that's the case (and it's just my intuition here), then just come right out and say that, don't be all disingenuous.

I had a friend who misrepresented the chances of getting caught speeding on a particular road to me because he was morally opposed to speeding. When I found out, I despised him for it.

I do agree there should be a separate distinction between the morality of the action and a cost/benefit analysis of it.

[honestabe84]

One thing I think hasn't been addressed here is whether cheating actually benefits you even if you get away with it. If you don't cheat, you'll get an LSAT that's reflective of your ability and go to a school with your intellectual peers. If you do, you will score higher than your ability would indicate and thus go to a school with people who are on average more intelligent. This would seem to hurt your chances of scoring well in your class. So, in the long run, cheating may not provide much of a benefit.

That's like saying that outstanding softs hurt you in the long run because you got accepted on something other than your numbers.

[d34d9823]

One thing I think hasn't been addressed here is whether cheating actually benefits you even if you get away with it. If you don't cheat, you'll get an LSAT that's reflective of your ability and go to a school with your intellectual peers. If you do, you will score higher than your ability would indicate and thus go to a school with people who are on average more intelligent. This would seem to hurt your chances of scoring well in your class. So, in the long run, cheating may not provide much of a benefit.

That's like saying that outstanding softs hurt you in the long run because you got accepted on something other than your numbers.

Eh, maybe I should have been clearer. Law schools have a system of evaluation that they feel identifies the best prospective students. Cheating the system of evaluation is hardly the same as being stronger in certain areas of it.

As far as the correlation goes, I remember seeing a coefficient of 0.45 for LSAT and 0.3 for GPA (someone correct me if I'm wrong). 0.45 is anything but weak. I analyze data for a living and almost never see a real world correlation that strong. I actually suspect that the "weak correlation" myth is perpetrated by people with low LSATs who would like to feel better about themselves.