Top Law Schools

.

If you had a drivers license what photo are you talking about? You don't need anything but a current DL.

Is this serious?

Damn.

Why didn't you just use your drivers license straight off, though?

jks289 wrote:If you had a drivers license what photo are you talking about? You don't need anything but a current DL.

The photo that we glue/tape onto our admission ticket.

I am a Canadian test-taker, so I'm not sure if American students have the same format.

Americans get fingerprinted instead. No photo for us, so probably no one south of the border will be able to be of much help.

scribelaw wrote:Is this serious?

Damn.

Why didn't you just use your drivers license straight off, though?

I showed them my DL, but they insisted that the photograph on my admission ticket was unacceptable because it "appeared as though it was a photocopy" After reasoning with them for about 10 minutes, I realized that they were too asinine to note the distinction between a photocopy and a black-and-white print, and decided to leave and file a complaint (I did not want to hold up the rest of the room and look foolish).

Lermontov wrote:Americans get fingerprinted instead. No photo for us, so probably no one south of the border will be able to be of much help.

Ah, I see. Thanks.

I see how this could be extremely frustrating. You may want to modify your point about having no other choice but to delay law school. You mentioned you have 2 recorded scores, so technically you could still apply and attend law school this year, just not with the score you would have liked. Just thought that might be something they'd bring up if they even gave you the time of day. Good luck.

So I had the same issue last year and the guy threatened to not let me write the test (NOT the kinda stress you want before an LSAT)... I had to get my mom to go home and get photos of me before the end of the test... Even though I had 5 pieces of photo ID.

The proctor told me why they require a real photo on photo paper... It has to do with a privacy law that forbids them from taking finger prints... So what LSAC does in Canada is forces students to take a passport photo and while they are taping/glueing it on, they end up getting their finger prints smudged all over the glossy photo paper... From there they can remove the thumbprints without breaking the law.

CREEPY EH?

They may intend to require a real photo on photo paper, but that is certainly not what the rules state on the admission ticket.

Here they are:

All candidates testing at a center in Canada MUST bring a photograph to the center. Attach a recent, clear photograph of yourself to the designated box on your LSAT Admission Ticket. (The photograph must have been taken within the last six months and must show only your face and shoulders. Laminated copies and photocopies of your photo are not acceptable.) These photographs will be retained by LSAC. Your photograph should not be larger than 5x5 cm or smaller than 3x3 cm. It must fit within the designated box on your LSAT Admission Ticket.
Glue or tape your photo to the ticket—do not use staples.


Now tell me if a monochrome print is prohibited? If you reason and say "well, yes, it says no photocopies are acceptable", then I'm afraid you'd be assuming, without justification, that any photograph that appears black-and-white is necessarily a photocopy, which is obviously ERRONEOUS.

"hey end up getting their finger prints smudged all over the glossy photo paper... From there they can remove the thumbprints without breaking the law."

This is false. There is no such conspiracy going on. A candian lawyer (I think) argued successfully that mandatory finger-printing was a breach of privacy, which is why Canadian test-takers are no longer required to have their finger prints taken. I assure you, LSAC does not hire a team of forensic scientists to do covert "detective work" and extract fingerprint off of photographs on admission stubs.

anmo wrote:I see how this could be extremely frustrating. You may want to modify your point about having no other choice but to delay law school. You mentioned you have 2 recorded scores, so technically you could still apply and attend law school this year, just not with the score you would have liked. Just thought that might be something they'd bring up if they even gave you the time of day. Good luck.

I only applied to one school, and my two scores are not sufficient for admittance. I was really banking on doing better this time, but since I was not allowed to sit for today's administration, it must be the case that I have no choice but to delay law school for another year (unless, of course, I'm granted the right to take a make-up examination).

I don't what the hell you're talking about, but I can tell you that in my testing center, there were only 4 people, all with different passports for ID's, and oddly enough all of us had different tickets. One person had the wrong room #, and another had a ticket that had one box for fingerprint as opposed to two. Very weird. Very sloppy.

febstriver wrote:They may intend to require a real photo on photo paper, but that is certainly not what the rules state on the admission ticket.

Here they are:

All candidates testing at a center in Canada MUST bring a photograph to the center. Attach a recent, clear photograph of yourself to the designated box on your LSAT Admission Ticket. (The photograph must have been taken within the last six months and must show only your face and shoulders. Laminated copies and photocopies of your photo are not acceptable.) These photographs will be retained by LSAC. Your photograph should not be larger than 5x5 cm or smaller than 3x3 cm. It must fit within the designated box on your LSAT Admission Ticket.
Glue or tape your photo to the ticket—do not use staples.


Now tell me if a monochrome print is prohibited? If you reason and say "well, yes, it says no photocopies are acceptable", then I'm afraid you'd be assuming, without justification, that any photograph that appears black-and-white is necessarily a photocopy, which is obviously ERRONEOUS.

"hey end up getting their finger prints smudged all over the glossy photo paper... From there they can remove the thumbprints without breaking the law."

This is false. There is no such conspiracy going on. A candian lawyer (I think) argued successfully that mandatory finger-printing was a breach of privacy, which is why Canadian test-takers are no longer required to have their finger prints taken. I assure you, LSAC does not hire a team of forensic scientists to do covert "detective work" and extract fingerprint off of photographs on admission stubs.

its pretty official coming from the head proctor ...
why else would they be so particular to deny the color photo printed (not photocopied) on regular paper, 12 photos my mom brought of me... reject all my photo ids, then force me to drive around downtown to have my passport photo taken?

You are kind of...conflating two things here.

The issue with my complaint is that NO RULE says that black-and-white prints are unacceptable, only that photocopies are not acceptable. Not all black-and-white photographs are photocopies, so you can see the problem with the rule capturing my case under its umbrella. If LSAC wanted to be more clear, they would have stated "only color, non-photocopied photographs are acceptable"

The second thing you were referring to, which I called "false", was your assertion that LSAC actively searches for latent remnants of finger prints on the photographs we stick onto our admission tickets. First, this would be illegal, since it was already ruled that LSAC is not allowed to take the prints of Canadian test-takers. Second, LSAC would not waste time or money on these sorts of shenanigans; its more conspiracy, if anything.

It sounds hard to believe, but so does them making me bring pencils in a ziplock bag.

It might be used in suspicious circumstances and would not be illegal for them to do.

I'm sort of glad that my country doesn't care about my privacy enough to ban taking fingerprints. Good luck OP.

AffirmativeFaction wrote:It sounds hard to believe, but so does them making me bring pencils in a ziplock bag.

It might be used in suspicious circumstances and would not be illegal for them to do.

I repeat: it was ruled (as in, what they do in court houses?) that LSAC is not allowed to take the finger prints of Canadian test-takers, so I can assure you that it would not put itself at risk by deliberately going against a legally stipulated rule. This is not akin to LSAC requiring its test-takers to put all items in a transparent zip-lock bag, which is a contractual provision that test-takers sign-on to, that is clear-as-day, and which LSAC has every right to enforce.

However, I find it amusing that LSAC would go to great lengths to specify the exact items we're allowed to include in our zip-lock bags (even the maximum amount of liquid in our water contains) but FAILS to be clear on the terms of our admission stub photographs.

I will update this thread once I recieve a response.

This was your fourth go-round on the LSAT?

scribelaw wrote:This was your fourth go-round on the LSAT?

Yes. One cancellation, two takes. Got permission by the law school to open up a fourth take. Pathetic, I know...but I'm a striver

febstriver wrote:

scribelaw wrote:This was your fourth go-round on the LSAT?

Yes. One cancellation, two takes. Got permission by the law school to open up a fourth take. Pathetic, I know...but I'm a striver

Well, a striver would probably study hard enough to do well the first time.

Seriously though, have you already sent out apps? I don't know about waiting another year on the theory that your score will improve dramatically on round 4. Besides, I have to think adcomms are going to be thinking, 'WTF?' with your report littered with LSAT administrations.

scribelaw wrote:

febstriver wrote:

scribelaw wrote:This was your fourth go-round on the LSAT?

Yes. One cancellation, two takes. Got permission by the law school to open up a fourth take. Pathetic, I know...but I'm a striver

Well, a striver would probably study hard enough to do well the first time.

Seriously though, have you already sent out apps? I don't know about waiting another year on the theory that your score will improve dramatically on round 4. Besides, I have to think adcomms are going to be thinking, 'WTF?' with your report littered with LSAT administrations.

Was consistently prepping in the mid/high 70's; first two takes were in the 50's (took them mostly cold; was misinformed about the learnability of the test), so you can imagine how disappointed I am in not being able to take today's examination on the basis of some rule that doesn't even exist.

The whole 'multiple scores raise red flags' business is somewhat over-rated, I think, except perhaps at HYSCNN. I'm not shooting that high; the school to which I'm applying only cares about the highest reportable score, and their median is in the low 160 range.

febstriver wrote:

scribelaw wrote:Is this serious?

Damn.

Why didn't you just use your drivers license straight off, though?

I showed them my DL, but they insisted that the photograph on my admission ticket was unacceptable because it "appeared as though it was a photocopy" After reasoning with them for about 10 minutes, I realized that they were too asinine to note the distinction between a photocopy and a black-and-white print, and decided to leave and file a complaint (I did not want to hold up the rest of the room and look foolish).

Honestly OP, looks like you really didn't want to take the test today. Looks evident that more is going on than you want to realize by your constant arguing in this thread, as well. I am not saying this to be argumentative or rude, either. I just want you to know what it looks like from the outside in the hopes that you can let it go. My advice...let it go. If you really wanted to take the test today and weren't scared of the outcome, you would have raised more of an argument at the test center. Regardless of the fact that you make a valid point, LSAC will not do anything about it, save refund your test fee. Good luck in your future.