Top Law Schools

I just found out that LSAC provides accommodations for test takers with disabilities. A friend of mind was diagnosed with ADD 9 months ago, and I would like to know if it is possible for her to get 5 extra minutes for the October test even though she has never tested with accommodations before.

Absolutely no chance in hell.

9 months ago? People have trouble getting accommodations when they have carefully recorded data of ADD since middle school....9 months ago will have no shot at all whatsoever. You have a better chance of winning the lotto.

If the search function weren't disabled you'd be able to find some threads about how strict LSAC is on giving accommodations (spoiler alert: very strict).

Even if she could get accommodations (which is pretty difficult in itself), she shouldn't.

Helmholtz wrote:Even if she could get accommodations (which is pretty difficult in itself), she shouldn't.

What I'm curious is about is do people who actually get accommodations for ADD for the LSAT get any timing accommodations in Law School?

If they don't aren't they monumentally fucked for law school finals and hence their entire GPA? I've heard that law school exams are time intensive...

Well is 5 extra minutes even a big deal? You say that LSAC is strict with giving out accommodations, but what kind of accommodations are we talking about - sit/stand with a podium? (yes that is a real accommodation).

If she has a legit shrink write off on her condition, are you sure LSAC would frown so hard against a measly 5 minutes?

whymeohgodno wrote:

Helmholtz wrote:Even if she could get accommodations (which is pretty difficult in itself), she shouldn't.

What I'm curious is about is do people who actually get accommodations for ADD for the LSAT get any timing accommodations in Law School?

I could be wrong, but I think it's ADD/any other special situation be damned when it comes to law school exams.

iunno if 5min is "measly"

jdhopeful11 wrote:Well is 5 extra minutes even a big deal? You say that LSAC is strict with giving out accommodations, but what kind of accommodations are we talking about - sit/stand with a podium? (yes that is a real accommodation).

If she has a legit shrink write off on her condition, are you sure LSAC would frown so hard against a measly 5 minutes?

Are you kidding me? 5 minutes on each section? How is that NOT a big deal?

And if having a shrink write off on her conditions was all it took to get 5 minutes extra time, do you think there would be a single person who wouldn't be getting 5 minutes extra time?

Do you know how easy it is to fake ADD? It's a joke, I know a few people who did it just so they can sell adderall to college kids during finals week.

jdhopeful11 wrote:Well is 5 extra minutes even a big deal? You say that LSAC is strict with giving out accommodations, but what kind of accommodations are we talking about - sit/stand with a podium? (yes that is a real accommodation).

If she has a legit shrink write off on her condition, are you sure LSAC would frown so hard against a measly 5 minutes?

The law schools can see that special accommodations were given. There isn't exactly a stampede to gobble up all the LSAT takers who were given more time than everybody else.

She probably doesn't "need" the accommodations because she is a brilliant student, but that doesn't take away from the fact that she does indeed have a learning disability, and that she can benefit from the accommodations. Hey she didn't make the rules, right? I mean, what's next? We tell AA's to hide their race when applying to law schools if they score over a 170? Never! Work every angle guys, it's hard enough out there, let alone for somebody with a disability.

jdhopeful11 wrote:She probably doesn't "need" the accommodations because she is a brilliant student, but that doesn't take away from the fact that she does indeed have a learning disability, and that she can benefit from the accommodations. Hey she didn't make the rules, right? I mean, what's next? We tell AA's to hide their race when applying to law schools if they score over a 170? Never! Work every angle guys, it's hard enough out there, let alone for somebody with a disability.

Right. You might consider ADD a disability but except in the most severe of cases, it's more like a minor handicap.

This thread will end well, I'm sure.

Helmholtz wrote:

jdhopeful11 wrote:Well is 5 extra minutes even a big deal? You say that LSAC is strict with giving out accommodations, but what kind of accommodations are we talking about - sit/stand with a podium? (yes that is a real accommodation).

If she has a legit shrink write off on her condition, are you sure LSAC would frown so hard against a measly 5 minutes?

The law schools can see that special accommodations were given. There isn't exactly a stampede to gobble up all the LSAT takers who were given more time than everybody else.

Yea but there is a stampede for law schools to report high LSAT scores too. Numbers are numbers. If a person screws up in UG and has a crappy gpa but good excuse for it, most law schools won't care because it comes down to the numbers. I don't see how this is any different if she has established herself competent in all other areas.

whymeohgodno wrote:

jdhopeful11 wrote:She probably doesn't "need" the accommodations because she is a brilliant student, but that doesn't take away from the fact that she does indeed have a learning disability, and that she can benefit from the accommodations. Hey she didn't make the rules, right? I mean, what's next? We tell AA's to hide their race when applying to law schools if they score over a 170? Never! Work every angle guys, it's hard enough out there, let alone for somebody with a disability.

Right. You might consider ADD a disability but except in the most severe of cases, it's more like a minor handicap.

I don't consider it anything. As a matter of fact, my opinion doesn't matter, neither does yours. ADD is a legitimately recognized condition in the world of science. I didn't write the rules bub.

jdhopeful11 wrote:Numbers is numbers.

I'm trying to wrap my head around whether this is grammatically correct. I'm leaning towards "no" though I can see the opposing argument.

vanwinkle wrote:

jdhopeful11 wrote:Numbers is numbers.

I'm trying to wrap my head around whether this is grammatically correct. I'm leaning towards "no" though I can see the opposing argument.

I fixed before you made that post. We are all entitled to a mulligan in this thread.

jdhopeful11 wrote:

whymeohgodno wrote:

jdhopeful11 wrote:She probably doesn't "need" the accommodations because she is a brilliant student, but that doesn't take away from the fact that she does indeed have a learning disability, and that she can benefit from the accommodations. Hey she didn't make the rules, right? I mean, what's next? We tell AA's to hide their race when applying to law schools if they score over a 170? Never! Work every angle guys, it's hard enough out there, let alone for somebody with a disability.

Right. You might consider ADD a disability but except in the most severe of cases, it's more like a minor handicap.

I don't consider it anything. As a matter of fact, my opinion doesn't matter, neither does yours. ADD is a legitimately recognized condition in the world of science. I didn't write the rules bub.

Yes you didn't write the rules. So don't try to change the rules.

The rules clearly have a set policy on timing accommodations. Too bad your friend doesn't meet them.

boo hoo.

Do rules only matter when it supports you? lulz.

Anyway, what if we were talking 2 or 3 minutes?

It may take a few pages, but from past observations of this user I'm going to go ahead and register a provisional IBTL.

This is the clincher of why accommodations would hurt more than help in some cases:

Additional Considerations

Candidates who seek additional test time on scored sections of the test should pay particular attention to the following:

* If you receive additional test time as an accommodation for your condition, LSAC will send a statement with your Credential Assembly Service (CAS) or LSAT Law School Reports advising that your score(s) should be interpreted with great sensitivity and flexibility.
* Scores earned with additional test time are reported individually and will not be averaged with standard-time scores or other nonstandard-time scores.
* Percentile ranks of nonstandard-time scores are not available and will not be reported.

jdhopeful11 wrote:

Helmholtz wrote:

jdhopeful11 wrote:Well is 5 extra minutes even a big deal? You say that LSAC is strict with giving out accommodations, but what kind of accommodations are we talking about - sit/stand with a podium? (yes that is a real accommodation).

If she has a legit shrink write off on her condition, are you sure LSAC would frown so hard against a measly 5 minutes?

The law schools can see that special accommodations were given. There isn't exactly a stampede to gobble up all the LSAT takers who were given more time than everybody else.

Yea but there is a stampede for law schools to report high LSAT scores too. Numbers are numbers. If a person screws up in UG and has a crappy gpa but good excuse for it, most law schools won't care because it comes down to the numbers. I don't see how this is any different if she has established herself competent in all other areas.

no

You're not even worth responding to. 97% sure this is a troll attempt.

Helmholtz wrote:

jdhopeful11 wrote:

Helmholtz wrote:

jdhopeful11 wrote:Well is 5 extra minutes even a big deal? You say that LSAC is strict with giving out accommodations, but what kind of accommodations are we talking about - sit/stand with a podium? (yes that is a real accommodation).

If she has a legit shrink write off on her condition, are you sure LSAC would frown so hard against a measly 5 minutes?

The law schools can see that special accommodations were given. There isn't exactly a stampede to gobble up all the LSAT takers who were given more time than everybody else.

Yea but there is a stampede for law schools to report high LSAT scores too. Numbers are numbers. If a person screws up in UG and has a crappy gpa but good excuse for it, most law schools won't care because it comes down to the numbers. I don't see how this is any different if she has established herself competent in all other areas.

no

You're not even worth responding to. 97% sure this is a troll attempt.

You just did. It's all about the numbers, don't forget boss.

jdhopeful11 wrote: You just did. It's all about the numbers, don't forget boss.

LSAC is notorious for being extremely strict about giving out extra time. They were even sued a few times for not accommodating disabilities much more serious than ADD.

Also, I might be wrong about this but I don't think law schools report LSAT scores with accommodations.

KevinP wrote:

jdhopeful11 wrote: You just did. It's all about the numbers, don't forget boss.

LSAC is notorious for being extremely strict about giving out extra time. They were even sued a few times for not accommodating disabilities much more serious than ADD.

Also, I might be wrong about this but I don't think law schools report LSAT scores with accommodations.

Can you believe that sit/stand with a podium is an actual accommodation?? What impairment could you possibly have that you must take the LSAT using a podium?