Heat is on for law school test

Feds add to pressure to make the LSAT more accessible to the disabled.

, The National Law Journal

   | 4 Comments

The California Department of Fair Employment and Housing and the U.S. Department of Justice have filed suit on behalf of 22 would-be LSAT takers, alleging that the Law School Admission Council's accommodations process violates the Americans With Disabilities Act.

This content has been archived. It is available exclusively through our partner LexisNexis®.

To view this content, please continue to Lexis Advance®.

Continue to Lexis Advance®

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber? Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via Lexis Advance®. This includes content from the National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at customercare@alm.com

Originally appeared in print as Pressure mounts on test council

What's being said

  • Diane

    I would not necessarily want additional time to take the test---it's brutal enough....but law schools should not lean so much on the score of the test as a factor to admit someone. Some people truly do have a passion to practice law and help the common people (and I'm not taking about a public advocate or legal aid) and are very capable of practicing law & could be a successful law school graduate and attorney; but because an LSAT score does not meet a certain level, that applicant is not even considered at all. The law schools could sometimes take other factors into consideration and not simply rely on a score. Sure the score is a start but should not completely cause someone to not even have a chance.

  • Brian

    I am not speaking against accommodations, but I am left wondering if, in this instance, they are a good idea - I also wonder why my reasons weren't touched upon in this article... not really, it has to go to PC liberal bias. Anyhow, citing the two professions that the article specifically mentioned as the hardest of which to obtain accommodations in testing, Law and Medicine, has anyone considered that doctors and lawyers are client advocates in often life and death situations? A doctor has to be on-call and mobile to properly care for his/her patients, and a lawyer has to be on-call and mobile to properly perform her/his function of advocacy. Time is a crucial element in medicine and law (two professions that intersect constantly) and if that is put aside, the integrity of the given profession is at risk. Moreover, frequent stress and pressure are the only guaranteed aspects of either profession. I'll grant you, in either profession, the client most often does the choosing, but that is becoming less and less the case as the world speeds round. One does not choose their emergency room doctor, nor does one choose their court appointed attorney. And who's to say where any given tester's passions, the odds, caprice or happenstance will lead them. The fear would be that a handicapped person's inclinations could be built on a foundation of sand, as a lot of disabled people get allowances by default, having little to do with them personally, let alone their skill-set - if you'll forgive the term, a token employee. Shoot, look at the Govt. if you need examples. These things draw a focal question into view, should default limitations be put on handicapped individuals to which areas of the professions they are allowed to practice, or should the playing-field be equal so as to ensure that the most capable, handicapped or not, prevail, for the benefit of the general health and welfare?

  • James Q

    Being denied admission to law school is a gift.

  • IG

    Here's a thought, LSAC--just design a test that doesn't include arbitrary time limits. Psychologists have already established that logical reasoning skills have nothing to do with a person's ability to answer questions quickly, so there's really no point in having a test like the LSAT where time limits can so drastically affect someone's score. In practice, lawyers are rarely, if ever, under the same time pressure to answer questions as they are when taking the LSAT or a law school exam.

    Rather than trying to defend against perceived cheaters, the powers that be should simply design a test where getting extra time provides no advantage.

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Preparing comment abuse report for Article #1202575623627

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.