Bubbling in answers after time is called..fair game? Forum

[Jeffort]

I think most people realize that it is 'wrong' or illegal, the question is whether or not it is fair game, just because something is illegal does not mean that it is not fair game.

Whether or not other people do it will affect your own score (as you will be graded compared to them) so if 99 people bubble in answers after the end of a section and get 1 out of those 3 questions right while you are the 1 person who does not do it and gets all 3 wrong your score is worse and theirs better.

Thus, in essence, you choosing to take the moral high ground in this will actually be NOT FAIR GAME, you being disadvantaged and it being unfair to you. Basically it's up to the LSAT proctors to check this and make sure it is fair game for everyone, not yourself.

This is wrong on several levels.

For starters, the bolded part of your post is incorrect. Your ethical and moral point of view is horribly scary. You hit the 'shouldn't be allowed to be a lawyer' trifecta by claiming people that don't do it are disadvantaged, that the rule is unfair to them and that it is not the responsibility of students to play fair and obey the rules.

Good luck since you'll need luck with your point of view and set of values and possibly need a good defense attorney in the future.

[Jeffort]

Speaking of cheating, there have to be people that get access to the test ahead of time and take it without any time constraints. When the reward could be HYS, the potential gain from cheating is too hard to ignore. How hard could it be to corrupt a proctor? If there are people willing to pay $10,000 to raise their score 5 points, then there are probably people willing to pay off proctors to get super high scores.

I really hope you are joking.

FYI, there are several well publicized cases of people that foolishly tried to accomplish things like this. They were promptly caught and prosecuted.

There is the guy that put notes with a $100 bill on the windshields of LSAC employees cars in the LSAC headquarters parking lot to try and bride somebody into selling him an advance copy of the test. The FBI and local police were called immediately and set up a sting operation. The moron met the undercover agents at a McDonalds and handed over a stack of cash. He was arrested on the spot and prosecuted.

There is the dude that ran out of the room with the test book at USC right after they were distributed. Proctors tried to stop him and he pulled a knife on one of them. He was apprehended at his apartment not long after and prosecuted.

There was also one where a ring of people took advantage of time zone differences and Txt messaging to send answers to others involved in the conspiracy that went to Hawaii to take the test in that time zone. They all got popped and prosecuted. This one might have been part of the knife wielding dude at USC that stole a test, I don't remember exactly, but there have been other cases of people caught doing the time zone shifting Txt messaging thing other than that one.

I'd have to dig up active links to the news articles again for the specific facts, but if memory serves, I'm pretty some of them got jail time and some of them were prosecuted in Federal criminal court. None of them were admitted to law school, instead they got a criminal record.

[tyro]

So half of the people who voted said that cheating on a standardized test is okay? People are probably just saying "yes" to be funny (I think?)

[Jeffort]

So half of the people who voted said that cheating on a standardized test is okay? People are probably just saying "yes" to be funny (I think?)

I wish. If a lot of students haven't actually been doing it or trying to figure out ways to get away with it, LSAC wouldn't have changed test day policy to students only being allowed to bring certain things into the test center in a clear ziplock bag. It didn't used to be that way, the policy was put in place relatively recently (roughly 3 years ago I think).

If you want to spend a couple of days reading about how much of an epidemic students cheating on tests has become, http://www.caveon.com/ has a bunch of links to news articles about various recent scandals.

[roranoa]

I have a question.

Let's say after the end of the section I realized that I marked two answer choices for one question by mistake (or got a pretty dark smudge on my answer sheet). Would it be okay to erase that extra marking or smudge later on?

Is there a rule against fiddling with the columns of the answer sheet that corresponds to each section after a particular section is over?

[Tom Joad]

So half of the people who voted said that cheating on a standardized test is okay? People are probably just saying "yes" to be funny (I think?)

I wish. If a lot of students haven't actually been doing it or trying to figure out ways to get away with it, LSAC wouldn't have changed test day policy to students only being allowed to bring certain things into the test center in a clear ziplock bag. It didn't used to be that way, the policy was put in place relatively recently (roughly 3 years ago I think).

If you want to spend a couple of days reading about how much of an epidemic students cheating on tests has become, http://www.caveon.com/ has a bunch of links to news articles about various recent scandals.

If you use a rational choice model, cheating makes a lot of sense for many applicants. Still not condoning it but when LSAC is trying to make the test secure they have to assume people will try to cheat.

[Jeffort]

I have a question.

Let's say after the end of the section I realized that I marked two answer choices for one question by mistake (or got a pretty dark smudge on my answer sheet). Would it be okay to erase that extra marking or smudge later on?

Is there a rule against fiddling with the columns of the answer sheet that corresponds to each section after a particular section is over?

It is against the rules. You are only allowed to do things in the section column during the time allotted for that section.

[roranoa]

I have a question.

Let's say after the end of the section I realized that I marked two answer choices for one question by mistake (or got a pretty dark smudge on my answer sheet). Would it be okay to erase that extra marking or smudge later on?

Is there a rule against fiddling with the columns of the answer sheet that corresponds to each section after a particular section is over?

It is against the rules. You are only allowed to do things in the section column during the time allotted for that section.

Hmmm...is there a written statement saying that? Cuz' that sounds absurd. I mean, not even allowing test takers to fix obvious mistakes? We're really not allowed to do this even when you're not referring back to the test material?

I can't believe it.

P.S:

There is a rule that says the following.

[Recording answers: All answers must be recorded on your answer sheet using a No. 2 or HB pencil. Answers recorded in the test book will not be scored. Do not make stray marks on your answer sheet or record answers in your test book. You will not be permitted time after the test to clean up your answer sheet or transfer answers from your test book to your answer sheet.]

But it says, after the TEST! Not after each section.

If there is a more specific regulatory item plz let us know.

[tyro]

I have a question.

Let's say after the end of the section I realized that I marked two answer choices for one question by mistake (or got a pretty dark smudge on my answer sheet). Would it be okay to erase that extra marking or smudge later on?

Is there a rule against fiddling with the columns of the answer sheet that corresponds to each section after a particular section is over?

No that is not okay. You can request to have your test manually scored by an expert if you feel that there was an obvious mistake like a smudged answer that couldn't be read by the Scantron system.

Anyway, I feel like LSAC should announce that they are installing cameras in all test center rooms to discourage this type of cheating.

[roranoa]

I have a question.

Let's say after the end of the section I realized that I marked two answer choices for one question by mistake (or got a pretty dark smudge on my answer sheet). Would it be okay to erase that extra marking or smudge later on?

Is there a rule against fiddling with the columns of the answer sheet that corresponds to each section after a particular section is over?

No that is not okay. You can request to have your test manually scored by an expert if you feel that there was an obvious mistake like a smudged answer that couldn't be read by the Scantron system.

Anyway, I feel like LSAC should announce that they are installing cameras in all test center rooms to discourage this type of cheating.

Where does it say that it's not okay? Or are you saying that because test takers can get their tests manually scored they shouldn't fiddle with the answer sheet?

[Jeffort]

So half of the people who voted said that cheating on a standardized test is okay? People are probably just saying "yes" to be funny (I think?)

I wish. If a lot of students haven't actually been doing it or trying to figure out ways to get away with it, LSAC wouldn't have changed test day policy to students only being allowed to bring certain things into the test center in a clear ziplock bag. It didn't used to be that way, the policy was put in place relatively recently (roughly 3 years ago I think).

If you want to spend a couple of days reading about how much of an epidemic students cheating on tests has become, http://www.caveon.com/ has a bunch of links to news articles about various recent scandals.

If you use a rational choice model, cheating makes a lot of sense for many applicants. Still not condoning it but when LSAC is trying to make the test secure they have to assume people will try to cheat.

Maybe for people that cannot earn good grades/scores based on merit, but in the big picture it doesn't make it a rational choice other than for the short-term selfish interests of the cheater.

Fortunately for honest students, the LSAT is a very cheat-proof test overall with the way it is designed and administered. Aside from Oceans 11 movie heists type of stuff, there are only two main ways to cheat on the LSAT that MIGHT unfairly boost a score a couple of extra points at most (~2-3 scaled points). If one puts in the time to figure them out and is capable of doing it without getting caught, they would also be able to score 170+ with far less effort.

The risk-reward ratio gives the cheating-intent/tempted student far less favorable odds of it being worth it than the odds of coming out ahead playing a gambling game like poker in a backroom that is fixed by the house/dealer/other players in on it. If caught, even if it is just working on/looking at/peeking at a different section in the test book during extra time at the end of another section if you finished early, your chances of getting accepted into a good law school are gone.

That makes trying to do it an irrational choice with the LSAT.

[tyro]

I have a question.

Let's say after the end of the section I realized that I marked two answer choices for one question by mistake (or got a pretty dark smudge on my answer sheet). Would it be okay to erase that extra marking or smudge later on?

Is there a rule against fiddling with the columns of the answer sheet that corresponds to each section after a particular section is over?

No that is not okay. You can request to have your test manually scored by an expert if you feel that there was an obvious mistake like a smudged answer that couldn't be read by the Scantron system.

Anyway, I feel like LSAC should announce that they are installing cameras in all test center rooms to discourage this type of cheating.

Where does it say that it's not okay? Or are you saying that because test takers can get their tests manually scored they shouldn't fiddle with the answer sheet?

It's made entirely clear by the proctors that no test taker is permitted to return to a previous section for any reason after time has been called. What don't you understand?

[Tom Joad]

So half of the people who voted said that cheating on a standardized test is okay? People are probably just saying "yes" to be funny (I think?)

I wish. If a lot of students haven't actually been doing it or trying to figure out ways to get away with it, LSAC wouldn't have changed test day policy to students only being allowed to bring certain things into the test center in a clear ziplock bag. It didn't used to be that way, the policy was put in place relatively recently (roughly 3 years ago I think).

If you want to spend a couple of days reading about how much of an epidemic students cheating on tests has become, http://www.caveon.com/ has a bunch of links to news articles about various recent scandals.

If you use a rational choice model, cheating makes a lot of sense for many applicants. Still not condoning it but when LSAC is trying to make the test secure they have to assume people will try to cheat.

Maybe for people that cannot earn good grades/scores based on merit, but in the big picture it doesn't make it a rational choice other than for the short-term selfish interests of the cheater.

Fortunately for honest students, the LSAT is a very cheat-proof test overall with the way it is designed and administered. Aside from Oceans 11 movie heists type of stuff, there are only two main ways to cheat on the LSAT that MIGHT unfairly boost a score a couple of extra points at most (~2-3 scaled points). If one puts in the time to figure them out and is capable of doing it without getting caught, they would also be able to score 170+ with far less effort.

The risk-reward ratio gives the cheating-intent/tempted student far less favorable odds of it being worth it than the odds of coming out ahead playing a gambling game like poker in a backroom that is fixed by the house/dealer/other players in on it. If caught, even if it is just working on/looking at/peeking at a different section in the test book during extra time at the end of another section if you finished early, your chances of getting accepted into a good law school are gone.

That makes trying to do it an irrational choice with the LSAT.

Well mainly I was talking about an Ocean's 11 type heist, but if you are an average test taker you aren't going to get a 170+ anyway, making getting into a top school nearly impossible anyway.

[Jeffort]

I have a question.

Let's say after the end of the section I realized that I marked two answer choices for one question by mistake (or got a pretty dark smudge on my answer sheet). Would it be okay to erase that extra marking or smudge later on?

Is there a rule against fiddling with the columns of the answer sheet that corresponds to each section after a particular section is over?

No that is not okay. You can request to have your test manually scored by an expert if you feel that there was an obvious mistake like a smudged answer that couldn't be read by the Scantron system.

Anyway, I feel like LSAC should announce that they are installing cameras in all test center rooms to discourage this type of cheating.

Where does it say that it's not okay? Or are you saying that because test takers can get their tests manually scored they shouldn't fiddle with the answer sheet?

Here:

http://www.lsac.org/JD/apply/misconduct ... rities.asp

Misconduct and Irregularities in the Admission Process

working on, marking, erasing, reading, or turning pages on sections of the LSAT during unauthorized times

That covers the columns of the answer sheet as well as the test book.

[roranoa]

I have a question.

Let's say after the end of the section I realized that I marked two answer choices for one question by mistake (or got a pretty dark smudge on my answer sheet). Would it be okay to erase that extra marking or smudge later on?

Is there a rule against fiddling with the columns of the answer sheet that corresponds to each section after a particular section is over?

No that is not okay. You can request to have your test manually scored by an expert if you feel that there was an obvious mistake like a smudged answer that couldn't be read by the Scantron system.

Anyway, I feel like LSAC should announce that they are installing cameras in all test center rooms to discourage this type of cheating.

Where does it say that it's not okay? Or are you saying that because test takers can get their tests manually scored they shouldn't fiddle with the answer sheet?

Here:

http://www.lsac.org/JD/apply/misconduct ... rities.asp

Misconduct and Irregularities in the Admission Process

working on, marking, erasing, reading, or turning pages on sections of the LSAT during unauthorized times

That covers the columns of the answer sheet as well as the test book.

Well done.

[bruss]

What's the consensus about bubbling when the proctor says pencils down? I believe that if I have two answers that I was not able to get to and I heard "pencils down" I would continue to bubble.

[ToTransferOrNot]

What's the consensus about bubbling when the proctor says pencils down? I believe that if I have two answers that I was not able to get to and I heard "pencils down" I would continue to bubble.

Then you would be violating the rules. Because, y'know, the proctors said pencils down.

It is fucking pathetic that there are people in this thread actually advocating for violating the LSAC rules/trying to find loopholes in the rules. So you're giving yourself a 1/4 chance on each question, with the penalty being (i) your itegrity and (ii) if you get caught, you will never be able to practice law (not only will you probably not get into any law school even if you get a 180 on a later test, but the board of bar examiners would be highly likely to ding you on Character & Fitness grounds).

Contrary to what is apparently popular belief, there are actually morals in this profession. Lawyers are cutthroat - but they're cutthroat within a set of rules. LAwyers who violate those rules (i.e., ethics rules, court rules, etc.) often lose their licenses. Zealously advocating for your client - searching for novel legal arguments, carefully tailoring responses to discovery, being coy in negotiations, etc - within a set of rules is different than advocating for your client outside of the rules and, in fact, going outside the rules is likely to be a disservice to your client. Better get used to it, or find another profession to go in to.

[Tom Joad]

What's the consensus about bubbling when the proctor says pencils down? I believe that if I have two answers that I was not able to get to and I heard "pencils down" I would continue to bubble.

Then you would be violating the rules. Because, y'know, the proctors said pencils down.

It is fucking pathetic that there are people in this thread actually advocating for violating the LSAC rules/trying to find loopholes in the rules. So you're giving yourself a 1/4 chance on each question, with the penalty being (i) your itegrity and (ii) if you get caught, you will never be able to practice law (not only will you probably not get into any law school even if you get a 180 on a later test, but the board of bar examiners would be highly likely to ding you on Character & Fitness grounds).

Contrary to what is apparently popular belief, there are actually morals in this profession. Lawyers are cutthroat - but they're cutthroat within a set of rules. LAwyers who violate those rules (i.e., ethics rules, court rules, etc.) often lose their licenses. Zealously advocating for your client - searching for novel legal arguments, carefully tailoring responses to discovery, being coy in negotiations, etc - within a set of rules is different than advocating for your client outside of the rules and, in fact, going outside the rules is likely to be a disservice to your client. Better get used to it, or find another profession to go in to.

Wasn't there a RC passage about ethical rules among medieval church lawyers, lol?

[174]

What's the consensus about bubbling when the proctor says pencils down? I believe that if I have two answers that I was not able to get to and I heard "pencils down" I would continue to bubble.

Then you would be violating the rules. Because, y'know, the proctors said pencils down.

It is fucking pathetic that there are people in this thread actually advocating for violating the LSAC rules/trying to find loopholes in the rules. So you're giving yourself a 1/4 chance on each question, with the penalty being (i) your itegrity and (ii) if you get caught, you will never be able to practice law (not only will you probably not get into any law school even if you get a 180 on a later test, but the board of bar examiners would be highly likely to ding you on Character & Fitness grounds).

Contrary to what is apparently popular belief, there are actually morals in this profession. Lawyers are cutthroat - but they're cutthroat within a set of rules. LAwyers who violate those rules (i.e., ethics rules, court rules, etc.) often lose their licenses. Zealously advocating for your client - searching for novel legal arguments, carefully tailoring responses to discovery, being coy in negotiations, etc - within a set of rules is different than advocating for your client outside of the rules and, in fact, going outside the rules is likely to be a disservice to your client. Better get used to it, or find another profession to go in to.

Lol. Just lol at this post.

[bruss]

What's the consensus about bubbling when the proctor says pencils down? I believe that if I have two answers that I was not able to get to and I heard "pencils down" I would continue to bubble.

Then you would be violating the rules. Because, y'know, the proctors said pencils down.

It is fucking pathetic that there are people in this thread actually advocating for violating the LSAC rules/trying to find loopholes in the rules. So you're giving yourself a 1/4 chance on each question, with the penalty being (i) your itegrity and (ii) if you get caught, you will never be able to practice law (not only will you probably not get into any law school even if you get a 180 on a later test, but the board of bar examiners would be highly likely to ding you on Character & Fitness grounds).

Contrary to what is apparently popular belief, there are actually morals in this profession. Lawyers are cutthroat - but they're cutthroat within a set of rules. LAwyers who violate those rules (i.e., ethics rules, court rules, etc.) often lose their licenses. Zealously advocating for your client - searching for novel legal arguments, carefully tailoring responses to discovery, being coy in negotiations, etc - within a set of rules is different than advocating for your client outside of the rules and, in fact, going outside the rules is likely to be a disservice to your client. Better get used to it, or find another profession to go in to.

hmmm I was under the impression that some lawyers try to find exceptions/ambiguities to/in the rules when their clients actions are contradictory to those rules. Should I really be punished because my mind cannot process the command of "Pencils down" fast enough? Do the rules of LSAC supersede the laws of Motion (my hand cant stop instantly)?

And I don't think any logical person believes that Lawyers do not have morals; everyone has morals.

[Jeffort]

What's the consensus about bubbling when the proctor says pencils down? I believe that if I have two answers that I was not able to get to and I heard "pencils down" I would continue to bubble.

Have fun dealing with LSAC about a misconduct report from a proctor if you get caught and written up in order to try to keep your CAS report clean.

Well done.

Ok. All I did was go four mouse clicks into the LSAC site, read and then copy and pasted the piece of text. It took less than two minutes to do all that and my cat was trying to lay down on the keyboard at the time.

You maybe lost one raw point because you made a mistake. Let it go. The LSAT is partially designed to test your attention to detail and withholds points when you make careless errors. That is one of the skills it is designed to measure that are reflected in achieved scores.

When I took the test there was an LR question towards the end of the section I was pretty sure I answered incorrectly due to a dumb mistake and wanted to switch my answer (to the one that turned out to be credited). Time ran out so I didn't have time to do it on the answer sheet even though I kept looking at that bubble in the column during the following sections. I probably could have easily gotten away with changing it but I didn't because I knew it wasn't the right thing to do. I 'Fck up, knew I did, accepted that and moved on.

Due to another careless mistake I also mis-bubbled the only question I got wrong in the LG section (section five, was getting tired) and it was question #1. That one was a dyslexic moment type of thing; brain thought one letter, hand bubbled in a different one. Those two mistakes plus one in RC that I wanted to change but ran out of time are what made it so I cannot say I got a 180 when I took the test. I'd rather have an honest score/grades I know I legitimately earned than inflated ones because I cheated. No matter how else life goes, at the very least, doing things that way makes it much easier to live free of a guilty conscience.

[seancris]

Suppose you have 3 questions left in a section when time is called that you didn't even get to or have a chance to bubble in a guess.

No chance. If you let that happen then you don't know what you're doing. Watch the clock, bubble the best answer and move on if you're taking too long on a question. You have 35 minutes so the idea that you wont "have a chance to bubble in a guess" is bs.

It's not fair game to bubble in answers, obv. It's cheating and if you get caught you get a misconduct notice.

And if you're thinking about bubbling in answers immediately after the proctor says pencils down, I remember a TLSer from the June exam posting that he got a misconduct notice for doing just that. Bubbling an answer in the two seconds after "pencils down" but before the alarm went off or vice versa.

No one should ever be in that situation anyway. Watch the clock and keep moving.

[Tom Joad]

The early morning crew is making the poll swing more morally correct. Those late night posters must be real bad apples.

[kwais]

What's the consensus about bubbling when the proctor says pencils down? I believe that if I have two answers that I was not able to get to and I heard "pencils down" I would continue to bubble.

Then you would be violating the rules. Because, y'know, the proctors said pencils down.

It is fucking pathetic that there are people in this thread actually advocating for violating the LSAC rules/trying to find loopholes in the rules. So you're giving yourself a 1/4 chance on each question, with the penalty being (i) your itegrity and (ii) if you get caught, you will never be able to practice law (not only will you probably not get into any law school even if you get a 180 on a later test, but the board of bar examiners would be highly likely to ding you on Character & Fitness grounds).

Contrary to what is apparently popular belief, there are actually morals in this profession. Lawyers are cutthroat - but they're cutthroat within a set of rules. LAwyers who violate those rules (i.e., ethics rules, court rules, etc.) often lose their licenses. Zealously advocating for your client - searching for novel legal arguments, carefully tailoring responses to discovery, being coy in negotiations, etc - within a set of rules is different than advocating for your client outside of the rules and, in fact, going outside the rules is likely to be a disservice to your client. Better get used to it, or find another profession to go in to.

omg. chill the fuck out. the moral outrage in this thread is gross. you guys sound like a bunch of Westboro baptists. If you can truly equate bubbling in a random blank bubble after time is called with a legal professional violation that causes someone to lose their license, then you have lost it. you too jeffort. take a deep breath and introduce a little sanity into your arguments.

[DoubleChecks]

When I took the test there was an LR question towards the end of the section I was pretty sure I answered incorrectly due to a dumb mistake and wanted to switch my answer (to the one that turned out to be credited). Time ran out so I didn't have time to do it on the answer sheet even though I kept looking at that bubble in the column during the following sections. I probably could have easily gotten away with changing it but I didn't because I knew it wasn't the right thing to do. I 'Fck up, knew I did, accepted that and moved on.

Due to another careless mistake I also mis-bubbled the only question I got wrong in the LG section (section five, was getting tired) and it was question #1. That one was a dyslexic moment type of thing; brain thought one letter, hand bubbled in a different one. Those two mistakes plus one in RC that I wanted to change but ran out of time are what made it so I cannot say I got a 180 when I took the test. I'd rather have an honest score/grades I know I legitimately earned than inflated ones because I cheated. No matter how else life goes, at the very least, doing things that way makes it much easier to live free of a guilty conscience.

Not saying I disagree with anything you said, but you do realize that it is much easier for you to have this point of view because of how high you already score right? Diminishing returns on higher LSAT scores. Like a millionaire saying he would not steal $10,000 lying on the table versus an average person...once again, not saying millionaire is wrong (in fact, he is right as stealing is wrong), but you recognize how much easier it is for the millionaire right?

My above comment also applies to the bolded statement, which, as you do at least indirectly acknowledge, is a point of view that varies from person to person.