The Fable of the Timed and Flagged LSAT: Do Law School Admissions Committees Want the Tortoise or the Hare?

Abstract

This article questions whether the strict time limitations for taking the LSAT conflict with law school admissions committees' goals of measuring an applicant's aptitude and predicting who will be good law students or who will be good lawyers. Strictly timed tests, as gate keepers to the legal profession, emphasize test takers' speed, to the detriment of more valuable qualities such as perseverance, accuracy, and care.

The article also questions whether the practice of flagging LSAT test scores of law school applicants with disabilities, is discriminatory. The practice of flagging LSAT scores of test takers with disabilities should end, as it has ended for most standardized tests, including the SAT, ACT, GRE, GMAT, and TOEFL. Flagging LSAT scores of test takers with disabilities stigmatizes law school applicants in the admissions process and is contrary to the goal of federal law in placing test takers with disabilities on equal footing by assessing their abilities, rather than their disabilities.

Keywords: LSAT, law school, admission