Can LSAC some day impose a "lifetime limit" on LSAT retakes? Forum

[justbubbles]

Please go back and read my posts. I have stated clearly and expressly as to how many times I have taken the test and as to why I have authored this thread.

[suits00]

.

[justbubbles]

LOL, I am not trolling or flaming.

Anyway, like I said, there I am quite certain that I will not take the test again (twice was bad enough and I am scarred for life), but what troubles me is - that I only have one more shot, in case I want to take it again (3rd time). Or I wait 2+ years.

Cheers

[suits00]

LOL, I am not trolling or flaming.

Anyway, like I said, there I am quite certain that I will not take the test again (twice was bad enough and I am scarred for life), but what troubles me is - that I only have one more shot, in case I want to take it again (3rd time). Or I wait 2+ years.

Cheers

You have a great score--you will be fine.

[johansantana21]

LSAT is an easy test, if you require more than 3 shots at it you are doing something wrong.

[PDaddy]

The current limit already effectively deters most of those people who repeatedly "fail" at the test - if there's a such thing - from applying to law school. Statistically, the LSAT weeds out almost 1/3 of would-be applicants in any given year.

Secondly, there's too much money to be made by the LSAC from the exams and reports, as well as the products and services it markets, and too much money for law schools to make from applications.

Thirdly, there are moral reasons not to impose on applicants too stiff of a limit: Several people have gone multiple cycles without gaining admission to law school, only to finally break through on the test with a good score, get into good law schools, perform well while there, and go on to successful careers. Some people suffer from uncontrollable anxiety that necessitates opportunities for retakes, and the sooner they can re-take after failure, the better. Why should they be penalized because they suffer from what amounts to a hereditary problem?

Consider this as well: it is difficult to stay "warm" for months on end after taking the LSAT or any other standardized exam. From that perspective, three times in two years seems like an appropriate limit.

Statistics say that most applicants eventually get into law school if they don't get in on their first or second attempts. In reality, most American law schools provide good enough educations for students to gain the necessary skills to be effective lawyers, whether they actually get recruited into good-paying jobs right out of law school or not.

Do we not live in the land of opportunity? I think the current limit is about right. It affords a good amount of good opportunity without overkill.

[20121109]

The funny thing is no one has to take the LSAT once, and anyone can take the LSAT as many times as they like; they just have to wait for the clock to start on the new 2 year period. The problem here is that once you take the LSAT, you can't exactly fail it and even the lowest scores will open doors to some god awful schools. People take the LSAT repeatedly in order to raise their score to gain admission into better schools. Saying that there is a basic right to have unlimited chances to gain admission into better schools is nothing short of absurd, and screams entitlement. We all can't attend top law schools. If you can't meet the standards of a certain school after 3 takes in 2 years, lower your expectations or wait it out until you can take it again.

I agree with most of your post - except the highlighted part. I will have to respectfully disagree.

That would be akin to saying, "Candidate X was rejected 10x for the same job at Company Y, therefore Candidate X shouldn't apply for the same job at Company Y for the 11th time!".

That's what's absurd. Unless the company (or schools, the ABA, etc. in this case) has stipulated that, one is free to take the test as many times as they want.

Going back to my example about those seeking accommodations, LSAC acted as "judge, jury and executioner" and routinely denied those that LSAC felt was undeserving of accommodations. In order to remedy LSAC's discriminatory ways, thankfully, reasoned, rational and informed members of the judiciary sided with those being discriminated against and ordered LSAC to amend their discriminatory polices.

I don't see how LSAC acts in a discriminatory way if it subjects everyone applying to law school to the same rules.

Also, your analogy is inapposite. I'm talking about the period before Candidate X even applies to Company Y, not the actual application process. Though there are some people who may never raise their score on the LSAT regardless of how many chances they get, there are others who will eventually raise their score after a mass amount of takes, thereby making them "more qualified" for better schools. However, allowing people to take the LSAT as many times as they please will also diminish the value of LSAT as an objective measure, and schools need a way to weed out applicants.

In other words, Candidate X can apply to Company Y for the 11th, 12th, 13th time and so on...but Candidate X can only get the opportunity to prove his worth to Company Y at certain times in a 2 year period, just like all the other candidates. If X fails to do so, Company Y will weed him out. X should instead, apply to Company Z, Company Y's uglier, and less prestigious step-sister.

[Jeffort]

LOL, I am not trolling or flaming.

Anyway, like I said, there I am quite certain that I will not take the test again (twice was bad enough and I am scarred for life), but what troubles me is - that I only have one more shot, in case I want to take it again (3rd time). Or I wait 2+ years.

If taking the LSAT twice scarred you for life, law school final exams, especially the first semester of 1L round of them will probably not treat you well.

They may push you over the edge in a way that causes the 'men in white coats' to show up, grab you, give you a neat jacket to wear (and put it on whether you want to wear it or not) and then take you somewhere special to chill out for a while.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wNFMPhKIZXg

FYI, depending on the law school and your class schedule you could end up with two three-four hour finals on the same day and you don't have the option to retake final exams.