Top Law Schools

Thoughts/Answers?

Because... if you were LSAC, could you concentrate on scoring tests when people are constantly calling you to cry about a logic game?

So they can mindfuck you.

Because there are a lot of them, they don't have scoring machines all over the country and they don't feel like paying to ship them quickly? That plus time to look at the results and consider all the frivolous complaints people make about the test is my guess. It's not even that long really.

bk187 wrote:So they can mindfuck you.

Deep mind fuck. I’m mind-fucking you right now.

jpSartre wrote:

bk187 wrote:So they can mindfuck you.

Deep mind fuck. I’m mind-fucking you right now.

Quality.

..

Because LSAC are sadistic fucks who have the power to torture applicants, and chose to exercise it.

CourierTwelve wrote:Because... if you were LSAC, could you concentrate on scoring tests when people are constantly calling you to cry about a logic game?

+1.

I would imagine that it takes something along the course of this: Mail all the documents and test from across America/the world...around 1 week.

Data processing...at least a couple days. 40,000 scantrons and 40,000 essays, all in different boxes. Imagine how long it takes to scan that photo of you in your 3rd grade play dressed as Helen Keller... now multiply that by 40,000 or so tests for each exam...

Then comes the data review process, which I imagine with computers is pretty quick now and days... They probably have pre-set score ranges due to experimental, so if the scores are falling in that range I imagine this could be done in a few minutes. Then comes the next couple days of reviewing stupid complaints, etc. and taking the cancellations out of the stack for the LSAT staff to laugh at and make jokes about.

Then I imagine LSAC begins their cheating review. They start weeding out individual tests that have anomalies (such as those where the student performs much stronger in a normal section over an experimental section). From there they have to start reviewing individual proctor notes and seating charts, and calling proctors to follow up on such cases. I imagine with a decent rate of students caught cheating or kicked out of the test for other reasons this could easily end up meaning that LSAC has to review hundreds of cases.

I would also venture to guess that they choose to wait until the LSAT is administered elsewhere in the world (which can be up to 20 days later in Australia & Asia), but I'm not exactly sure on that point...just a thought.

When you think about it, the fact that an organization is able to mail 40,000 tests across the world to one location, unpack them, scan them, calculate the curve, handle the appeals process, track down cheaters, process cancellations, etc. makes you wonder they can possibly even do this in 18 days!

I'm actually amazed they get them scored as fast as they do.

mst wrote:

CourierTwelve wrote:Because... if you were LSAC, could you concentrate on scoring tests when people are constantly calling you to cry about a logic game?

+1.

I would imagine that it takes something along the course of this: Mail all the documents and test from across America/the world...around 1 week.

Data processing...at least a couple days. 40,000 scantrons and 40,000 essays, all in different boxes. Imagine how long it takes to scan that photo of you in your 3rd grade play dressed as Helen Keller... now multiply that by 40,000 or so tests for each exam...

Then comes the data review process, which I imagine with computers is pretty quick now and days... They probably have pre-set score ranges due to experimental, so if the scores are falling in that range I imagine this could be done in a few minutes. Then comes the next couple days of reviewing stupid complaints, etc. and taking the cancellations out of the stack for the LSAT staff to laugh at and make jokes about.

Then I imagine LSAC begins their cheating review. They start weeding out individual tests that have anomalies (such as those where the student performs much stronger in a normal section over an experimental section). From there they have to start reviewing individual proctor notes and seating charts, and calling proctors to follow up on such cases. I imagine with a decent rate of students caught cheating or kicked out of the test for other reasons this could easily end up meaning that LSAC has to review hundreds of cases.

I would also venture to guess that they choose to wait until the LSAT is administered elsewhere in the world (which can be up to 20 days later in Australia & Asia), but I'm not exactly sure on that point...just a thought.

When you think about it, the fact that an organization is able to mail 40,000 tests across the world to one location, unpack them, scan them, calculate the curve, handle the appeals process, track down cheaters, process cancellations, etc. makes you wonder they can possibly even do this in 18 days!

amen...what I was never able to articulate put down beautifully in a forum post

mst wrote:

CourierTwelve wrote:Because... if you were LSAC, could you concentrate on scoring tests when people are constantly calling you to cry about a logic game?

+1.

I would imagine that it takes something along the course of this: Mail all the documents and test from across America/the world...around 1 week.

Data processing...at least a couple days. 40,000 scantrons and 40,000 essays, all in different boxes. Imagine how long it takes to scan that photo of you in your 3rd grade play dressed as Helen Keller... now multiply that by 40,000 or so tests for each exam...

Then comes the data review process, which I imagine with computers is pretty quick now and days... They probably have pre-set score ranges due to experimental, so if the scores are falling in that range I imagine this could be done in a few minutes. Then comes the next couple days of reviewing stupid complaints, etc. and taking the cancellations out of the stack for the LSAT staff to laugh at and make jokes about.

Then I imagine LSAC begins their cheating review. They start weeding out individual tests that have anomalies (such as those where the student performs much stronger in a normal section over an experimental section). From there they have to start reviewing individual proctor notes and seating charts, and calling proctors to follow up on such cases. I imagine with a decent rate of students caught cheating or kicked out of the test for other reasons this could easily end up meaning that LSAC has to review hundreds of cases.

I would also venture to guess that they choose to wait until the LSAT is administered elsewhere in the world (which can be up to 20 days later in Australia & Asia), but I'm not exactly sure on that point...just a thought.

When you think about it, the fact that an organization is able to mail 40,000 tests across the world to one location, unpack them, scan them, calculate the curve, handle the appeals process, track down cheaters, process cancellations, etc. makes you wonder they can possibly even do this in 18 days!

Makes sense. However, the GRE is given by computer several times a week year-round, and you get your score instantly after the last section ends. Why can't the LSAT work like this? I guess the LSAT is 10x times important than the GRE for admissions, so they have to be meticulous about checking out irregularities.

im_blue wrote: I guess the LSAT is 10x times important than the GRE for admissions, so they have to be meticulous about checking out irregularities.

Unless you are trying to go to grad school and not law school.

im_blue wrote:

mst wrote:

CourierTwelve wrote:Because... if you were LSAC, could you concentrate on scoring tests when people are constantly calling you to cry about a logic game?

+1.

I would imagine that it takes something along the course of this: Mail all the documents and test from across America/the world...around 1 week.

Data processing...at least a couple days. 40,000 scantrons and 40,000 essays, all in different boxes. Imagine how long it takes to scan that photo of you in your 3rd grade play dressed as Helen Keller... now multiply that by 40,000 or so tests for each exam...

Then comes the data review process, which I imagine with computers is pretty quick now and days... They probably have pre-set score ranges due to experimental, so if the scores are falling in that range I imagine this could be done in a few minutes. Then comes the next couple days of reviewing stupid complaints, etc. and taking the cancellations out of the stack for the LSAT staff to laugh at and make jokes about.

Then I imagine LSAC begins their cheating review. They start weeding out individual tests that have anomalies (such as those where the student performs much stronger in a normal section over an experimental section). From there they have to start reviewing individual proctor notes and seating charts, and calling proctors to follow up on such cases. I imagine with a decent rate of students caught cheating or kicked out of the test for other reasons this could easily end up meaning that LSAC has to review hundreds of cases.

I would also venture to guess that they choose to wait until the LSAT is administered elsewhere in the world (which can be up to 20 days later in Australia & Asia), but I'm not exactly sure on that point...just a thought.

When you think about it, the fact that an organization is able to mail 40,000 tests across the world to one location, unpack them, scan them, calculate the curve, handle the appeals process, track down cheaters, process cancellations, etc. makes you wonder they can possibly even do this in 18 days!

Makes sense. However, the GRE is given by computer several times a week year-round, and you get your score instantly after the last section ends. Why can't the LSAT work like this? I guess the LSAT is 10x times important than the GRE for admissions, so they have to be meticulous about checking out irregularities.

as in you take the GRE on a computer? if I had to take the LSAT on a computer I'd die. With all the reading and logic games, I don't think I could handle it.

im_blue wrote:

mst wrote:

CourierTwelve wrote:Because... if you were LSAC, could you concentrate on scoring tests when people are constantly calling you to cry about a logic game?

Makes sense. However, the GRE is given by computer several times a week year-round, and you get your score instantly after the last section ends. Why can't the LSAT work like this?

IMO the LSAT is an amazing test in that it accurately and thoroughly measures what is designed to measure: Ability to identify arguments, comprehend difficult reading passages, and make logical deductions. As a former teacher I know how hard it is to write a test that measures what you want it to and not other useless things.

I think it would be hard to move the LSAT to a computer, but I do think they could grade the tests faster if they change a few things about how the test is administered (for instance having more testing days or established testing centers.)

Definitely wouldn't mind them grading it faster .

I wondered why I couldn't just drop my scantron into a machine on my way out. It could at least give me my raw score.

England issues a knock-off of the LSAT, the LNAT, via computer. It's only 30 questions long though and contains only arguments and reading comprehension portions.

If the LSAT was shorter, the computer reading really wouldn't be so bad.

hoverin Ferb wrote:

im_blue wrote: I guess the LSAT is 10x times important than the GRE for admissions, so they have to be meticulous about checking out irregularities.

Unless you are trying to go to grad school and not law school.

The LSAT is 10x times more important for law school admissions than the GRE is for grad school. For grad school, it's roughly major GPA/LORs/UG prestige, then softs like research experience, publications, internships, work experience, then PS, then GRE. Many departments focus only on the reading or math section, more or less ignoring the others, and as long as you meet some minimum threshold, the exact score doesn't matter much. Also, the math section is so easy that many top science/engineering programs have median scores of 800.

There's a good deal of research that has been done over the last decade concerning moving the LSAT to computers, but issues still exist (possibly) concerning how certain minorities or groups are advantaged/disadvantaged by the use of computers, whether or not people could cheat more easily, etc. LSAC clearly recognizes the benefits but I think there's still just too many questions in the air for the switch to happen.

Personally, I would have a major issue trying to do logic games, highlight passages, circle key terms, read stuff, etc. Definitely is not a preferable method of testing for this kind of exam in my opinion. Others have stated the transition will probably happen in the future years, and I don't disagree. I still think there would be some delay in response time as LSAC would have to review questions, etc. and allow for score cancellations.

mst wrote:There's a good deal of research that has been done over the last decade concerning moving the LSAT to computers, but issues still exist (possibly) concerning how certain minorities or groups are advantaged/disadvantaged by the use of computers, whether or not people could cheat more easily, etc. LSAC clearly recognizes the benefits but I think there's still just too many questions in the air for the switch to happen.

Personally, I would have a major issue trying to do logic games, highlight passages, circle key terms, read stuff, etc. Definitely is not a preferable method of testing for this kind of exam in my opinion. Others have stated the transition will probably happen in the future years, and I don't disagree. I still think there would be some delay in response time as LSAC would have to review questions, etc. and allow for score cancellations.

One of the biggest advantages to computer testing is that the questions can be adaptive based on the test taker's strength. The first few questions are average difficulty, and then the difficulty of the following questions will get harder or easier based on the percentage of correct answers so far. This allows a strong scorer to not have to waste time answering easy questions, and vice versa. So a reliable score can be obtained with fewer questions total. The other advantage for strong test takers is that you can miss a lot of hard questions and still get a great score, because wrong answers are penalized according to difficulty.

im_blue wrote:

mst wrote:There's a good deal of research that has been done over the last decade concerning moving the LSAT to computers, but issues still exist (possibly) concerning how certain minorities or groups are advantaged/disadvantaged by the use of computers, whether or not people could cheat more easily, etc. LSAC clearly recognizes the benefits but I think there's still just too many questions in the air for the switch to happen.

Personally, I would have a major issue trying to do logic games, highlight passages, circle key terms, read stuff, etc. Definitely is not a preferable method of testing for this kind of exam in my opinion. Others have stated the transition will probably happen in the future years, and I don't disagree. I still think there would be some delay in response time as LSAC would have to review questions, etc. and allow for score cancellations.

One of the biggest advantages to computer testing is that the questions can be adaptive based on the test taker's strength. The first few questions are average difficulty, and then the difficulty of the following questions will get harder or easier based on the percentage of correct answers so far. This allows a strong scorer to not have to waste time answering easy questions, and vice versa. So a reliable score can be obtained with fewer questions total. The other advantage for strong test takers is that you can miss a lot of hard questions and still get a great score, because wrong answers are penalized according to difficulty.

This would never happen.

bk187 wrote:So they can mindfuck you.

+10000000

LSAC hates you.

LSACK