LSAC sued for refusing 2x time to guy w/ OCD, depression... Forum

[LSAT Blog]

and anxiety.

From the complaint (PDF) (via ABA Journal):

The plaintiff has well-documented, disabling neurological, emotional and learning disabilities. Despite his disabilities, he has a record of outstanding academic achievement, both undergraduate and graduate, in well-regarded, competitive educational institutions. His disabilities have been accommodated with a grant of 100 percent additional time (double time) on examinations by his current educational institution and by major testing services other than the Law School Admission Council. His treating psychiatrist, former treating psychologist and consulting neuropsychologists, among others, have recommended that he receive the same double time accommodation for the LSAT, without which he will be unable to perform in a way that reflects his knowledge and preparation. The Law School Admission Council has refused to grant more than 50 percent additional time, which has already been shown to be insufficient, and has failed to give any explanation for rejecting the recommendations of highly qualified clinicians...

Nathan sat for the December 2010 LSAT with 50% additional time, as approved by LSAC, despite his preparation experience suggesting that it was not adequate time...Nathan was unable to finish a significant portion of the test and was forced to select answers randomly for the unfinished portion...This experience confirmed for Nathan that time and a half was not a sufficient accommodation... Dr. Leimkuhler supported diagnoses of ADHD, Anxiety Disorder, Obsessive Compulsive Disorder and Dysthymic Disorder. He also found that Nathan met diagnostic criteria for learning disorders involving nonverbal processing, reading speed, production of written output and mathematics. Dr. Leimkuhler reported some measures falling in the 1st percentile or less and others falling in the 99th percentile...With respect to time, Dr. Leimkuhler concluded that “Nathan requires double time on all standardized tests, with extra corresponding break times.” ...After receiving Dr. Leimkuhler’s report, Nathan appealed the LSAT’s decision approving time and a half. He requested double time on all sections for a future LSAT examination.

In letters dated January 19, 2011 and January 26, 2011 the LSAC denied Nathan’s request for double time and confirmed its earlier decision to grant Nathan time and a half for the February 2011 LSAT examination. The LSAC gave no reason for rejecting the request.

Related:

In October, LSAC granted double-time to a test-taker with ADD: http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 6&t=167667
LSAC has denied extra time to moms who wanted to pump breastmilk: http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 6&t=167563

[lawyerwannabe]

I sympathize with this person as well as any other person who suffers from mental illness. However, just because he is unable to finish the test in 1.5 times the normal amount of time allotted does not mean that this amount of time is not fair. Most people who take the LSAT are unable to finish every section of the test without guessing on some answer choices. Thus, I do not think that figuring out the amount of time necessary to answer every question is appropriate otherwise you are potentially giving him an advantage beyond his disability.

[Ludo!]

Is it PhilosopherKing?

[Mr. Pancakes]

Is it PhilosopherKing?

[vpintz]

Is it PhilosopherKing?

dat assburgers

[dresden doll]

I must be the only person on this entire site who doesn't think she'd have benefitted from extra time.

But, seriously, why do people assume that having lots of extra time will be super helpful? I could see someone getting a few extra questions right, but I'd be shocked if a 150 jumped to 175 just because he was given X extra hours to complete the test.

Law school exams, otoh, are a totally different beast.

[rinkrat19]

I must be the only person on this entire site who doesn't think she'd have benefitted from extra time.

But, seriously, why do people assume that having lots of extra time will be super helpful? I could see someone getting a few extra questions right, but I'd be shocked if a 150 jumped to 175 just because he was given X extra hours to complete the test.

Law school exams, otoh, are a totally different beast.

+1
Once I learned how to diagram LG efficiently, time ceased to be any sort of a factor for me. Either I was getting a question right or I wasn't; double time wouldn't have changed my answers any.

[Mr. Pancakes]

Having extra time for RC would be huge.

[stillwater]

I understand the arguments for extra-time, but the same issues that require extra-time will likely be a handicap in the profession. I don't think I have a right to participate in the 100meter in the Olympics with a 50m headstart. And, yes, extra-time would be a huge advantage for RC.

[dresden doll]

Having extra time for RC would be huge.

I really think that people who are lacking in the RC department in particular don't tend to benefit a ton from extra time. I won't claim that they wouldn't do better at all; I just question the idea that those gains would be massive.

TBF, having considered the issue further, I wil concede that there are certain LGs where the extra time would be great since you could just plug in all the answer choices until you found the one that fit.

[shifty_eyed]

Having extra time for RC would be huge.

I really think that people who are lacking in the RC department in particular don't tend to benefit a ton from extra time. I won't claim that they wouldn't do better at all; I just question the idea that those gains would be massive.

TBF, having considered the issue further, I wil concede that there are certain LGs where the extra time would be great since you could just plug in all the answer choices until you found the one that fit.

I agree. I found I actually do better when I speed up because overanalyzing tends hurt rather than help on RC. I imagine this is the case for most.

[Mr. Pancakes]

Having extra time for RC would be huge.

I really think that people who are lacking in the RC department in particular don't tend to benefit a ton from extra time. I won't claim that they wouldn't do better at all; I just question the idea that those gains would be massive.

TBF, having considered the issue further, I wil concede that there are certain LGs where the extra time would be great since you could just plug in all the answer choices until you found the one that fit.

I can only speak for myself, but most of my errors are because I read the material too fast. I would do some weird things for 5 extra minutes.

[princeR]

On RC I would NEVER miss a question with extra time, those damn fetch questions I would nail every time.

While I understand the problems for this guy, I mean, this much extra time is insane. In the article it states how he "had to guess on the remaining questions"... dude, that's what makes this test difficult, without the time aspect of it I believe people could SIGNIFICANTLY raise their scores. Maybe not on LR to a huge degree, but for sure on LG/RC.

[Alexp1206]

It doesnt matter if they get all the time in the world and score a 180*... that asterisk next to their score will render it fairly worthless anyway. In addition, in the legal profession you don't get to bill 2x the hours because you have "learning disabilities" and require more time to read. Law school exams will eat this person alive.

[pixleprincess]

I gave myself extra time on some practice tests just to see what my issues were, and I consistently scored 3-6 points higher with just an extra 5 minutes on the games section. And the diff between a 168 and a 172 is substantial. I just couldn't do the games "properly" i just couldn't. I only mention this because any tiny bit extra time can be crucial. And affect performance in a major way.

Also- I thought about applying for extra time for a diagnosed issue. One that has nothing to do with my games performance, nothing. Honestly, I performed as well as I would have if I were 100% able bodied so I'm ok with it, but I didn't apply for the extra time because of that dreaded asterix. So in the end I think I scored within my potential, any extra time I might have received wouldn't have compensated for a disability but just give me time to slug through a couple games via process of elimination or subbing in choices, testing.

[lsatprepguy]

This post probably sounds close-minded, but it really isn't meant to be. I completely understand the need for accommodations for certain students. With that said:

I have never understood the purpose of them in the grand scheme of things. While I am no position to judge whether this person should be granted these accommodations, it seems irrelevant because those same accommodations will more than likely not be made in law school and certainly will not be made in the legal profession.

If someone requires 2x time to reason out the problems on the LSAT, then it seems reasonable to assume that they will need more time to complete the tasks of their legal job. Who is going to hire someone that is going to take 2x as long to do something?

[iowalum]

This post probably sounds close-minded, but it really isn't meant to be. I completely understand the need for accommodations for certain students. With that said:

I have never understood the purpose of them in the grand scheme of things. While I am no position to judge whether this person should be granted these accommodations, it seems irrelevant because those same accommodations will more than likely not be made in law school and certainly will not be made in the legal profession.

If someone requires 2x time to reason out the problems on the LSAT, then it seems reasonable to assume that they will need more time to complete the tasks of their legal job. Who is going to hire someone that is going to take 2x as long to do something?

Agreed. Honestly, I think these accommodations are little misleading and unfair to the student involved. These students will likely not have those kinds of accommodations in law school and definitely not later in life, so why put them in a situation that will make it difficult for them to succeed? I recognize that everyone has a right to pursue whatever career they want, but this is a false representation of how they will be accommodated in law school.

[JoeMo]

This post probably sounds close-minded, but it really isn't meant to be. I completely understand the need for accommodations for certain students. With that said:

I have never understood the purpose of them in the grand scheme of things. While I am no position to judge whether this person should be granted these accommodations, it seems irrelevant because those same accommodations will more than likely not be made in law school and certainly will not be made in the legal profession.

If someone requires 2x time to reason out the problems on the LSAT, then it seems reasonable to assume that they will need more time to complete the tasks of their legal job. Who is going to hire someone that is going to take 2x as long to do something?

Agreed. Honestly, I think these accommodations are little misleading and unfair to the student involved. These students will likely not have those kinds of accommodations in law school and definitely not later in life, so why put them in a situation that will make it difficult for them to succeed? I recognize that everyone has a right to pursue whatever career they want, but this is a false representation of how they will be accommodated in law school.

LSAC is damned if they do and damned if they don't. On the one hand, as you mentioned it is misleading to the student involved because they won't benefit from the same accommodations in real life. However, every time LSAC turns someone down (hyperbole) it becomes a lawsuit. I think this is a case of "everyone wins" where you can't tell anyone they're not cut out for something because they were always told they could do whatever they wanted.

Not passing judgment but I just think some of these people would be better served without the accommodations and being forced to face the realities of the real world (not the MTV one).

[Micdiddy]

Having extra time for RC would be huge.

I really think that people who are lacking in the RC department in particular don't tend to benefit a ton from extra time. I won't claim that they wouldn't do better at all; I just question the idea that those gains would be massive.

TBF, having considered the issue further, I wil concede that there are certain LGs where the extra time would be great since you could just plug in all the answer choices until you found the one that fit.

Really? I may be doing something wrong then. I feel like with more time I could probably get every RC question right. I usually miss 1-3 questions and when I review them I easily find the right answers right there in the passage within a minute or two, but didn't look the first time because I felt pressed for time.

I understand I could fix this flaw without extra time, just by using it more wisely, but I also contend with 1.5 or double time my RC scores would vastly, vadtly improve.

More time on LG or LR won't help me much though.

[Micdiddy]

This post probably sounds close-minded, but it really isn't meant to be. I completely understand the need for accommodations for certain students. With that said:

I have never understood the purpose of them in the grand scheme of things. While I am no position to judge whether this person should be granted these accommodations, it seems irrelevant because those same accommodations will more than likely not be made in law school and certainly will not be made in the legal profession.

If someone requires 2x time to reason out the problems on the LSAT, then it seems reasonable to assume that they will need more time to complete the tasks of their legal job. Who is going to hire someone that is going to take 2x as long to do something?

Agreed. Honestly, I think these accommodations are little misleading and unfair to the student involved. These students will likely not have those kinds of accommodations in law school and definitely not later in life, so why put them in a situation that will make it difficult for them to succeed? I recognize that everyone has a right to pursue whatever career they want, but this is a false representation of how they will be accommodated in law school.

LSAC is damned if they do and damned if they don't. On the one hand, as you mentioned it is misleading to the student involved because they won't benefit from the same accommodations in real life. However, every time LSAC turns someone down (hyperbole) it becomes a lawsuit. I think this is a case of "everyone wins" where you can't tell anyone they're not cut out for something because they were always told they could do whatever they wanted.

Not passing judgment but I just think some of these people would be better served without the accommodations and being forced to face the realities of the real world (not the MTV one).

Though I agree with your sentiment, I'm not sure it fully applies much in today's society, where ample accommodation is given in almost every field of work, and businesses as well can be sued if they don't accommodate someone with special needs like this.

Therefore, by being lawsuit fodder, they are preparing him for the real world better than any other option, as he will likely get his way or sue for the rest of his life.

[nancykaplan15]

I know many students with disabilities and time is an essential factor for their success. Who cares if he gets 100% time and does it really matter that he gets an asterisk on his score?? Somewhere in his application there must be some information on his disabilities. Let the guy try to be successful and a positive role model.

[iowalum]

I know many students with disabilities and time is an essential factor for their success. Who cares if he gets 100% time and does it really matter that he gets an asterisk on his score?? Somewhere in his application there must be some information on his disabilities. Let the guy try to be successful and a positive role model.

I agree with this, but what is he going to do during actual law school exams? Most law schools don't give extra time and the extra LSAT accommodations seem to be a false illusion.

[LSAT Blog]

I know many students with disabilities and time is an essential factor for their success. Who cares if he gets 100% time and does it really matter that he gets an asterisk on his score?? Somewhere in his application there must be some information on his disabilities. Let the guy try to be successful and a positive role model.

I agree with this, but what is he going to do during actual law school exams? Most law schools don't give extra time and the extra LSAT accommodations seem to be a false illusion.

His current law school (unnamed, in Massachusetts, lower-ranked than Fordham, accepted him with an asterisked 150 and 151) gives him double-time for exams.

Of course, it may be that wherever he transfers won't grant extra time, but he seems to have lots of documentation, precedents, etc. supporting some kind of need for accommodations, which is why he got 50% extra time without a lawsuit.

[lawyerwannabe]

Out of genuine curiosity, how does something like getting double time help you in the long-run? A law firm is (probably?) not going to hire someone who can literally only do half the work of someone else in the same amount of time. It just isn't good business and is unprofitable. In the end, we are all curtailed somewhat by the level of intelligence and abilities we were born with and, unfortunately, these deficiencies are not always able to be corrected or improved.

[JoeMo]

Out of genuine curiosity, how does something like getting double time help you in the long-run? A law firm is (probably?) not going to hire someone who can literally only do half the work of someone else in the same amount of time. It just isn't good business and is unprofitable.

Not hiring someone on that basis would violate the ADA since they have a documented disability.