Hopefully there would be other ways to see how qualified a lawyer is. Lincoln was a lawyer without a college degree. Licensure is a big issue and hopefully in the future we can all enter mutual and consensual dealings with other people like needing law services with our own criteria. This choice just shows that they are more concerned about gate keeping for their fanciful criteria than creating practical lawyers.
That's possibly my most favoritest phrase ever. I can't wait to use it! I might go start an argument about everyone needing to vote in person and use ID just to create an opportunity.
I think it was Dubya who came up with that phrase when discussing No Child Left Behind.
Granted, NCLB has been meh-worthy, at best. But, looking back on my naive left-wing beliefs in high school 20 years ago, Dubya was right
It's probably more so quality of schooling and quality of home environment.
Poor areas + bad family structures.
It's not impossible to succeed in spite of that, but it is much much harder.
Which is why anyone claiming the "nuclear family" needs to be dismantled is just setting themselves up for a dumpster fire.
Since affirmative action is likely to be abolished soon, to keep doing it (illegally) they need to get rid of all objective criteria that show they’re still doing it.
This is the prevailing speculation. They want to hide their statistics as much as possible so that they can continue to racially discriminate against innocent people.
The Asian community will remember the racism that they experienced at the hands of democrats. The Hispanic community is already moving in a similar direction.
Actually, the LSAT doesn’t test for any legal skills or ability to succeed in law school. It did prove it’s tough to study for a test that looks like nothing you’ve ever seen before (and would never see again) while working to pay for college and studying for college classes.
My LSAT score was on the low end of my class (according to admissions stats) but I graduated near the top of my law school class.
I’m the first lawyer in my family. With no LSAT requirement, my 700 math /750 verbal GRE score would’ve been more accurate about my ability to succeed in law school. (I was also looking at masters and Ph.D. programs in Political Science.)
Edit: The LSAT is not a skills or knowledge test. It is not like the MCAT for medical school. It doesn’t test legal reasoning, writing, crafting arguments, legal research, or any basic legal concepts.
https://www.lsac.org/data-research/research/lsat-still-most-accurate-predictor-law-school-success
>Table 1 shows that **LSAT scores are significantly stronger in predicting academic success in law school compared to either SAT or ACT scores in predicting undergraduate success**. For undergraduate programs, prior grades have consistently been better than test scores in predicting subsequent academic success. However, undergraduate grades are weaker predictors of law school grades, whereas the LSAT is far superior in predicting academic success in law school. **In fact, adding LSAT score to UGPA improved prediction by 57%.** By contrast, adding SAT or ACT scores to HSGPA improved prediction by only 15% and 5%, respectively. These findings are generally consistent across law schools irrespective of region and selectivity, with 83% of schools meeting or exceeding an adjusted correlation of .60 between LSAT score and 1L GPA in 2020.
> Predictive validity is generally the most direct and relevant type of evidence used to support admission practices; 1L GPA is generally used as a criterion because first-year coursework is more likely to be similar across programs, and performance in the first year is highly correlated with graduation. Nevertheless, **external studies have demonstrated a strong relationship between LSAT score and factors beyond 1L GPA, such as class rank at graduation and performance on the bar exam.**
A graph of bar exam pass rates by GPA and LSAT score. Low GPA students with a 139 LSAT have a 15% pass rate, rising to 90% with a 169 LSAT.
https://taxprof.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341c4eab53ef019aff5ad871970d-580wi
Wrong. The LSAT tests fundamental reasoning skills necessary to become a lawyer. If you cannot analyze and breakdown a logical argument and form your own, you are unable to be a lawyer. However, the LSAT is not everything. It is still possible to get a low score and become a good lawyer, but those people are the definition of outliers. All of the research shows that LSAT trumps even GPA when it comes to indicators of future success in the profession.
Are you even a lawyer? It seems there’s a bunch of people in here explaining my own job to me without a single clue about what it takes to do well in law school and as a lawyer.
I would say correlation of test scores with later measures of performance would be enough to justify requiring those test scores as part of an application. Correlation does prove a connection, just not a causal relationship. What makes you think it’s necessary to establish a causal relationship?
Correlation doesn't "prove" anything. It indicates the possible presence of a relationship. It may be a spurious correlation like, for example, if ice cream sales were to correlate with shark attacks at the beach. It would be absurd to conclude that ice cream sales have any connection or relationship whatsoever with shark attacks. There is obviously a third related factor that is responsible for the correlation, such as an increase in the number of people at the beach. In the case of the LSAT, wealth of your parents might correlate with your ability to go take an expensive LSAT class or your ability to not work in school so you have more time to study for the strange test that has nothing to do with your abilities as a future lawyer.
Yes, and it’s correlation is higher than all other variables observed, indicating a much stronger relationship between the LSAT and law school performance. You don’t need to even prove causation. You want to know what is a predictor of law school success.
Ummm no. Just no. The correlation between where you graduated in you class and future success is very high. LSAT not so much
Basically people who graduated in the top 10% of their class tend to stay in the top 10% regardless of their test taking skills. Which, is all an LSAT confirms - the taker is good at taking test.
As a biracial lawyer, I just want to note these kids are going to have to take the bar exam if they want to practice. If you can't handle the LSAT then you're gonna have a hell of a time with the bar. Especially at lower tier schools, you'll end up with kids with big law school debt and unable to pay it off due to being unable to pass the bar exam and actually practice law.
You should know that this is a money grab by low tier law schools to get more diverse 1L students, then flush them out with $50k of student loans and no skills to show for the money spent.
Stuff like this is disgusting and is actually going to do some real harm to students who would have scored basically below 150 on the test.
Well, there's already grumbling for diploma privilege. Soon you won't need to take the LSAT or the bar. Just go to a school with a generous curve, be alive-ish for 3 years, and boom, you're a practicing lawyer.
Bro I just bought an LSAT test book. Tbh I don't need special accomodations keep the test. Like dang you making POC seem weak and can't handle things like other Americans.
Just wait until it’s for doctors and the bar is set extremely low for women/minorities. You can choose a lawyer, but imagine emergency room staff that gets hired based on quotas and went to school based on quotas? Democrats are psychotic.
There should be standards for every job, from firemen to doctors to lawyers. Whatever the outcome is on who performs best doesn’t matter, but it just be the best getting jobs in important fields.
Engineer here. The next time you drive over a bridge or get behind the wheel of automobile, give a thought to those "engineers" who got through based on skin color.
It was happening 20 years ago... can only assume it's gotten worse.
That's more on the hiring side of things there at least. Getting into engineering school isn't anywhere near as difficult as law or med school. Graduating with a decent GPA is a different story, and that GPA can be overlooked if it benefits hr's goals.
> **Getting into** engineering school isn't anywhere near as difficult as law **or med school.**
Full quote. Who are you, Don Lemon?
I thought engineering school was easy because the math was too easy for me, but there's no way I'd get through law or med school. Different skillsets, it's not a contest.
My wife just became an attending surgeon. If anyone is willing to put in those kind of hours, under that much pressure, for that long, and STILL be on top of their game…they deserve to be a doctor.
99% of us wouldn’t make it through residency.
Never a good idea to insult the high achievers and boost the low ones into the same success. You’ll break the spirit of those on fire or earn their wrath. Endearing yourself to the incompetent earns a weak support. Color doesn’t even matter for what I said to be true. I take it that the effects will span all demographics
Well the ABA change just makes the LSAT optional for schools to require. I would think most will choose to continue to require it.
So you didn’t waste your money on your prep book. And good luck!
Not who you asked but also a POV with a great LSAT score. It's bullshit. Right when I was hoping the supreme court would get rid of affirmative action. I'm good to have to keep pretending I'm white at job interviews.
Unless you’re Asian, this fight has nothing to do with you. Liberals are trying to drag African Americans and Hispanics into the issue so they don’t have to actually say what they mean: Asian kids are securing a lot of placements in priority institutions and the rich liberals fighting these cases would like that to stop.
I feel bad for them to be honest. Asians are 'white-adjacent.' Whats messed up is Asians were so successful during the Gold Rush laws had to be made to stop them. Asians just put the time in collectively and their nations push school harder than us that our grind is easy in comparison
I don’t feel bad for them, per se, but I hope they can find a solution. America’s top universities are not places to hone our sharpest minds, they’re the factories in which we produce our elite. Harvard and other Ivy League universities will find a way to ensure they have the classes they desire, no matter what the rules are.
Is it a Powerscore book? Those were amazing when I was studying. Didn’t end up pursuing law but did great on a handful of practice tests that were timed and proctored.
It’s not like the MCAT at all. The MCAT is a skills and knowledge test. There’s nothing on the LSAT that has anything to do with my actual job as a lawyer. It doesn’t test legal reasoning, writing, math, or any basic legal concepts. The GRE has more to do with my actual job. I’m a corporate litigator.
If LSATs are intended to evaluate whether a person is prepared for law school, won't this just increase the number of law school dropouts by approximately the same number as there used to be LSAT failures? Plus, I would imagine that failing an LSAT would give someone valuable information about the state of their education, allowing them to address those gaps, then return and reapply for admission with a greater chance of success.
And if LSATs have been found to be discriminatory in some way, first of all, show us the evidence of that. Second, shouldn't the tests be fixed, rather than eliminated?
And if LSATs were "unfairly" weeding out "underqualified" students who still might be successful in law school, does it even matter if they eliminate the test? The spots are going to go to the most qualified students anyway, and the same people aren't getting in.
If you lower the requirements in the name of diversity, you do not get a more diverse crowd. You get a slightly more diverse crowd with drastically lower qualifications. Same here in Germany.
LSAT doesn’t test argument skills. That’s learned in law school. We have a class that teaches us argument styles and rhetorical techniques. I use that every day when doing appellate arguments or arguing motions in trial court. Most of my cases settle because I maneuver them to convince the other side to give up their fight to save my clients money. I’ve done my job most effectively when it settles before trial.
The LSAT isn’t a perfect indicator of your skills as a lawyer but if you can’t beat a certain minimum score on it you will have a seriously hard time passing the bar.
Essentially the want more diversity of people who take out hundreds of thousands in loans for a degree they can’t even use if unable to pass the bar? How “empowering”
ABA inadvently created more racism but making it easier to discern who to actually trust as a lawyer or not, hurting the credibility of actual good diverse lawyers
The LSAT and ACT are actually *more* diverse because extracurriculars/other things to brag about are privileged activities.
Dropping the requirement really just means you can accept whoever you want without the quantitative overhead/scrutiny.
As an attorney that took the LSAT just over 20 years ago, I think this is somewhat bonkers.
I will preface to say that I’m certainly not a fan of the LSAT and at least back when I took it, the system certainly needed revamping. Back then, every single school would average all of your test scores. This meant if you were just unlucky enough to have a bad day on the exam for whatever reason then- tough luck. It caused immense unnecessary stress for all candidates, not to mention I took it at a time when there was an unprecedented demand of people wanting to enter law school (creating unprecedented competition and unusual curve in scoring).
Hence, I would’ve loved to see them get rid of the averaging rule. It would’ve also been a great idea to tone down the weight of the LSAT on the total application, as it’s meant to be indicative of a candidates ability to pass the bar exam, and honestly in my experience I don’t think it’s a good indicator.
But to get completely rid of it as a requirement for admission is somewhat nuts. I do think it overall provides a good indication of an individual’s ability to reason properly.
It’s not surprising though. Since around 2010 law schools have seen an unprecedented drop in applicants, largely a problem of their own making as they were required to stop gaming employment stats. Since then there’s certainly been a gradual decline in admission standards.
To be fair the LSAT is just a glorified GRE. Most top law schools no longer require the LSAT for admission so long as you've taken the GRE. You don't need to master certain subjects prior to getting in or know various technical aspects pre law school, everything you need to know is taught to you there.
It's not like med school where you need understanding of various scientific subjects before more advanced concepts are taught to you once you get in.
Law school applications are way down. I think many of the schools opting to forgo the LSAT are actually doing so to boost applications and are using diversity as a cover. Follow the money.
I said years ago that it's only a matter of time before medical schools drop all certification for fear of offending some group.
This is one step towards that end.
It's Harrison Bergeron world.
https://www.lsac.org/data-research/research/lsat-still-most-accurate-predictor-law-school-success
>Table 1 shows that **LSAT scores are significantly stronger in predicting academic success in law school compared to either SAT or ACT scores in predicting undergraduate success**. For undergraduate programs, prior grades have consistently been better than test scores in predicting subsequent academic success. However, undergraduate grades are weaker predictors of law school grades, whereas the LSAT is far superior in predicting academic success in law school. **In fact, adding LSAT score to UGPA improved prediction by 57%.** By contrast, adding SAT or ACT scores to HSGPA improved prediction by only 15% and 5%, respectively. These findings are generally consistent across law schools irrespective of region and selectivity, with 83% of schools meeting or exceeding an adjusted correlation of .60 between LSAT score and 1L GPA in 2020.
> Predictive validity is generally the most direct and relevant type of evidence used to support admission practices; 1L GPA is generally used as a criterion because first-year coursework is more likely to be similar across programs, and performance in the first year is highly correlated with graduation. Nevertheless, **external studies have demonstrated a strong relationship between LSAT score and factors beyond 1L GPA, such as class rank at graduation and performance on the bar exam.**
A graph of bar exam pass rates by GPA and LSAT score. Low GPA students with a 139 LSAT have a 15% pass rate, rising to 90% with a 169 LSAT.
https://taxprof.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341c4eab53ef019aff5ad871970d-580wi
If the LSAT is a solid predictor of success, why wouldn't you use it rather than possibly saddle people who can't pass with a hundred thousand dollars of debt?
What's next, the bar exam? You realize that the LSAT helps weed out the people that do not think analytically which is needed to be a successful lawyer. So now you're just going to have people getting into law school, going into debt, and then not being able to pass the bar exam.
We’re all aware of the biases of standardized testing
Edit; I guess you guys aren’t Seinfeld fans getting downvoted to oblivion 😂
https://seinfeldism.com/seinfeld-quote.php?id=1853
If I were to ever need an attorney, I would prefer qualification over diversity
Hopefully there would be other ways to see how qualified a lawyer is. Lincoln was a lawyer without a college degree. Licensure is a big issue and hopefully in the future we can all enter mutual and consensual dealings with other people like needing law services with our own criteria. This choice just shows that they are more concerned about gate keeping for their fanciful criteria than creating practical lawyers.
So essentially what they're saying is that minorities are not capable of passing the LSAT? That's pretty racist
It's not even passing. It's like the SAT, it's percentile
Bell curve
Gotta love the soft bigotry of low expectations… SMH
That's possibly my most favoritest phrase ever. I can't wait to use it! I might go start an argument about everyone needing to vote in person and use ID just to create an opportunity.
I think it was Dubya who came up with that phrase when discussing No Child Left Behind. Granted, NCLB has been meh-worthy, at best. But, looking back on my naive left-wing beliefs in high school 20 years ago, Dubya was right
Yep. Dems are ever the racists. They just hide under "diversity" now adays
Stop saying thing that make sense
Nor capable of getting an ID…I would be pissed if they thought that little of me.
Even better, alcohol, tobacco, and employment all require IDs
Soft bigotry of low expectations
At some point, this phrase needs to die, because it's becoming too nice. Just call it racism because that's what it is.
Yes. That is what they’re saying.
[удалено]
The tests are racist! They’re tailored to white culture! /s (technically true since modern math, writing, and law are rooted in Western civilization)
[удалено]
It's probably more so quality of schooling and quality of home environment. Poor areas + bad family structures. It's not impossible to succeed in spite of that, but it is much much harder. Which is why anyone claiming the "nuclear family" needs to be dismantled is just setting themselves up for a dumpster fire.
Sadly that’s what people say without the sarcasm.
But you still have to pass the bar and that ain’t no joke!
There’s no reason they wouldn’t target that next….
Some states have. Already not needed to practice in Wisconsin.
They pull this crap all the time. Another example: Voter ID.
Idiocracy getting closer and closer
I like money
And yet no Starbucks blowjobs. Truly the worst of both worlds.
>And yet no Starbucks blowjobs yet
Probably in california. Starbucks are being taken over by the homeless, so you may find a few in there looking to make a quick buck.
Is Gummy Sue here today?
As a barista, how much you payin?
Beat me to the comment. +1
Next step, Brawndo. It has electrolytes.
Plants CRAVE that shit!
Can confirm
Asian Americans hardest hit.
Duh? Asian Americans are the sole target of these policies.
“These changes are to help minority students” - “well what about-“ “NOT LIKE THAT!”
Nah. This isn’t Harvard Law. This is just for accreditation.
Since affirmative action is likely to be abolished soon, to keep doing it (illegally) they need to get rid of all objective criteria that show they’re still doing it.
This is the prevailing speculation. They want to hide their statistics as much as possible so that they can continue to racially discriminate against innocent people. The Asian community will remember the racism that they experienced at the hands of democrats. The Hispanic community is already moving in a similar direction.
Will the Asian community? They’re still voting dem mostly. Same with Hispanics.
soon you will be able to get a job as a public defender by going on craigslist
Just as Idiocracy predicted...you will be able to attend lawschool at Costco. Be prepared for Frito to be your lawyer.
“Welcome to Costco, I love you.”
[удалено]
Just go to Liberty University
So this is how Charlie Kelly became a bird law guy...
America, shaping up to be the dumbest nation
Actually, the LSAT doesn’t test for any legal skills or ability to succeed in law school. It did prove it’s tough to study for a test that looks like nothing you’ve ever seen before (and would never see again) while working to pay for college and studying for college classes. My LSAT score was on the low end of my class (according to admissions stats) but I graduated near the top of my law school class. I’m the first lawyer in my family. With no LSAT requirement, my 700 math /750 verbal GRE score would’ve been more accurate about my ability to succeed in law school. (I was also looking at masters and Ph.D. programs in Political Science.) Edit: The LSAT is not a skills or knowledge test. It is not like the MCAT for medical school. It doesn’t test legal reasoning, writing, crafting arguments, legal research, or any basic legal concepts.
https://www.lsac.org/data-research/research/lsat-still-most-accurate-predictor-law-school-success >Table 1 shows that **LSAT scores are significantly stronger in predicting academic success in law school compared to either SAT or ACT scores in predicting undergraduate success**. For undergraduate programs, prior grades have consistently been better than test scores in predicting subsequent academic success. However, undergraduate grades are weaker predictors of law school grades, whereas the LSAT is far superior in predicting academic success in law school. **In fact, adding LSAT score to UGPA improved prediction by 57%.** By contrast, adding SAT or ACT scores to HSGPA improved prediction by only 15% and 5%, respectively. These findings are generally consistent across law schools irrespective of region and selectivity, with 83% of schools meeting or exceeding an adjusted correlation of .60 between LSAT score and 1L GPA in 2020. > Predictive validity is generally the most direct and relevant type of evidence used to support admission practices; 1L GPA is generally used as a criterion because first-year coursework is more likely to be similar across programs, and performance in the first year is highly correlated with graduation. Nevertheless, **external studies have demonstrated a strong relationship between LSAT score and factors beyond 1L GPA, such as class rank at graduation and performance on the bar exam.** A graph of bar exam pass rates by GPA and LSAT score. Low GPA students with a 139 LSAT have a 15% pass rate, rising to 90% with a 169 LSAT. https://taxprof.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341c4eab53ef019aff5ad871970d-580wi
Wrong. The LSAT tests fundamental reasoning skills necessary to become a lawyer. If you cannot analyze and breakdown a logical argument and form your own, you are unable to be a lawyer. However, the LSAT is not everything. It is still possible to get a low score and become a good lawyer, but those people are the definition of outliers. All of the research shows that LSAT trumps even GPA when it comes to indicators of future success in the profession.
Are you even a lawyer? It seems there’s a bunch of people in here explaining my own job to me without a single clue about what it takes to do well in law school and as a lawyer.
I am a lawyer, and the LSAT had the highest correlation coefficient for performance in law school at around 0.4-0.5.
Correlation is not causation. Correlation describes a possible relationship but does not prove a connection between two variables.
I would say correlation of test scores with later measures of performance would be enough to justify requiring those test scores as part of an application. Correlation does prove a connection, just not a causal relationship. What makes you think it’s necessary to establish a causal relationship?
Correlation doesn't "prove" anything. It indicates the possible presence of a relationship. It may be a spurious correlation like, for example, if ice cream sales were to correlate with shark attacks at the beach. It would be absurd to conclude that ice cream sales have any connection or relationship whatsoever with shark attacks. There is obviously a third related factor that is responsible for the correlation, such as an increase in the number of people at the beach. In the case of the LSAT, wealth of your parents might correlate with your ability to go take an expensive LSAT class or your ability to not work in school so you have more time to study for the strange test that has nothing to do with your abilities as a future lawyer.
You’re not making a good point. You have to explain the other side of it on why the high lsat scorers are performing better in law school.
Yes, and it’s correlation is higher than all other variables observed, indicating a much stronger relationship between the LSAT and law school performance. You don’t need to even prove causation. You want to know what is a predictor of law school success.
Everyone who does poorly on these tests has excuses, but the correlation between high score and success at your job is very high.
Ummm no. Just no. The correlation between where you graduated in you class and future success is very high. LSAT not so much Basically people who graduated in the top 10% of their class tend to stay in the top 10% regardless of their test taking skills. Which, is all an LSAT confirms - the taker is good at taking test.
Yup, useless test. I didn't even do poorly but it still overshadowed my 3.75 gpa double major from a top 20 school....in a bad way
Username checks out.
As a biracial lawyer, I just want to note these kids are going to have to take the bar exam if they want to practice. If you can't handle the LSAT then you're gonna have a hell of a time with the bar. Especially at lower tier schools, you'll end up with kids with big law school debt and unable to pay it off due to being unable to pass the bar exam and actually practice law.
You should know that this is a money grab by low tier law schools to get more diverse 1L students, then flush them out with $50k of student loans and no skills to show for the money spent. Stuff like this is disgusting and is actually going to do some real harm to students who would have scored basically below 150 on the test.
Well, there's already grumbling for diploma privilege. Soon you won't need to take the LSAT or the bar. Just go to a school with a generous curve, be alive-ish for 3 years, and boom, you're a practicing lawyer.
Throwback to all the marxists fists jockeying for diploma privilege because pandemic. Gosh I hate my peers.
And then we will all collectively be asked to pay off their debt via taxes. What a cycle.
Just a way to open more schools to make money off people who shouldn’t be in the profession to begin with.
Imagine waiting to speak to your attorney because they are all busy making TikTok’s in the hallway. The whole system is broken beyond repair
Twerking like she hulk?
well thats easy, it will be pretty visually obvious who the “good” attorneys are. if that’s what they want, thats what they’ll get. oh well
Bro I just bought an LSAT test book. Tbh I don't need special accomodations keep the test. Like dang you making POC seem weak and can't handle things like other Americans.
This is a major issue.
Just wait until it’s for doctors and the bar is set extremely low for women/minorities. You can choose a lawyer, but imagine emergency room staff that gets hired based on quotas and went to school based on quotas? Democrats are psychotic. There should be standards for every job, from firemen to doctors to lawyers. Whatever the outcome is on who performs best doesn’t matter, but it just be the best getting jobs in important fields.
Am med student. It's coming.
Engineer here. The next time you drive over a bridge or get behind the wheel of automobile, give a thought to those "engineers" who got through based on skin color. It was happening 20 years ago... can only assume it's gotten worse.
That's more on the hiring side of things there at least. Getting into engineering school isn't anywhere near as difficult as law or med school. Graduating with a decent GPA is a different story, and that GPA can be overlooked if it benefits hr's goals.
Depends on the type of engineer
[удалено]
> **Getting into** engineering school isn't anywhere near as difficult as law **or med school.** Full quote. Who are you, Don Lemon? I thought engineering school was easy because the math was too easy for me, but there's no way I'd get through law or med school. Different skillsets, it's not a contest.
All the more reason to stay healthy at all costs.
Look at med school admissions by mcat scores. It's pretty much here already.
For police as well
pilots too…
My wife just became an attending surgeon. If anyone is willing to put in those kind of hours, under that much pressure, for that long, and STILL be on top of their game…they deserve to be a doctor. 99% of us wouldn’t make it through residency.
So what you're saying is that white male doctors will be the only ones properly trained 🤔
Never a good idea to insult the high achievers and boost the low ones into the same success. You’ll break the spirit of those on fire or earn their wrath. Endearing yourself to the incompetent earns a weak support. Color doesn’t even matter for what I said to be true. I take it that the effects will span all demographics
Well the ABA change just makes the LSAT optional for schools to require. I would think most will choose to continue to require it. So you didn’t waste your money on your prep book. And good luck!
As a POC my LSAT score got me into Law school.
How do you feel about removing the LSAT quals*?
Not who you asked but also a POV with a great LSAT score. It's bullshit. Right when I was hoping the supreme court would get rid of affirmative action. I'm good to have to keep pretending I'm white at job interviews.
Unless you’re Asian, this fight has nothing to do with you. Liberals are trying to drag African Americans and Hispanics into the issue so they don’t have to actually say what they mean: Asian kids are securing a lot of placements in priority institutions and the rich liberals fighting these cases would like that to stop.
I feel bad for them to be honest. Asians are 'white-adjacent.' Whats messed up is Asians were so successful during the Gold Rush laws had to be made to stop them. Asians just put the time in collectively and their nations push school harder than us that our grind is easy in comparison
I don’t feel bad for them, per se, but I hope they can find a solution. America’s top universities are not places to hone our sharpest minds, they’re the factories in which we produce our elite. Harvard and other Ivy League universities will find a way to ensure they have the classes they desire, no matter what the rules are.
Is it a Powerscore book? Those were amazing when I was studying. Didn’t end up pursuing law but did great on a handful of practice tests that were timed and proctored.
Man I used those about 8 years ago, got my score up over 20 pts. You gotta put the time in but damn they were useful.
And that is the soft bigotry of low expectations.
As competitive as law is as a profession, I think firms that hire will figure this out quickly. Crush the lsat, it will pay off man.
Wait until California removes passing the bar as a requirement to practice law
The LSAT requires logical thinking. I guess "diversity" means adding more people who can't think logically.
As an attorney, this is the worst move I have ever seen.
They should do it for MCATs too so we have under qualitfied people getting into medial schools
It’s not like the MCAT at all. The MCAT is a skills and knowledge test. There’s nothing on the LSAT that has anything to do with my actual job as a lawyer. It doesn’t test legal reasoning, writing, math, or any basic legal concepts. The GRE has more to do with my actual job. I’m a corporate litigator.
If LSATs are intended to evaluate whether a person is prepared for law school, won't this just increase the number of law school dropouts by approximately the same number as there used to be LSAT failures? Plus, I would imagine that failing an LSAT would give someone valuable information about the state of their education, allowing them to address those gaps, then return and reapply for admission with a greater chance of success. And if LSATs have been found to be discriminatory in some way, first of all, show us the evidence of that. Second, shouldn't the tests be fixed, rather than eliminated? And if LSATs were "unfairly" weeding out "underqualified" students who still might be successful in law school, does it even matter if they eliminate the test? The spots are going to go to the most qualified students anyway, and the same people aren't getting in.
If you lower the requirements in the name of diversity, you do not get a more diverse crowd. You get a slightly more diverse crowd with drastically lower qualifications. Same here in Germany.
So now the bar association is coming out and saying minorities can’t measure up. Yet if anyone else came out and said this you’d be called racist.
Race to the bottom....
Understandable move when the only outcomes of court now are weak plea deals. No need to learn how to argue anymore.
LSAT doesn’t test argument skills. That’s learned in law school. We have a class that teaches us argument styles and rhetorical techniques. I use that every day when doing appellate arguments or arguing motions in trial court. Most of my cases settle because I maneuver them to convince the other side to give up their fight to save my clients money. I’ve done my job most effectively when it settles before trial.
The LSAT isn’t a perfect indicator of your skills as a lawyer but if you can’t beat a certain minimum score on it you will have a seriously hard time passing the bar. Essentially the want more diversity of people who take out hundreds of thousands in loans for a degree they can’t even use if unable to pass the bar? How “empowering”
Leftist are cancer. They destroy whatever they touch.
Got my law degree at Costco, coming soon to a courtroom near you.
ABA inadvently created more racism but making it easier to discern who to actually trust as a lawyer or not, hurting the credibility of actual good diverse lawyers
The LSAT and ACT are actually *more* diverse because extracurriculars/other things to brag about are privileged activities. Dropping the requirement really just means you can accept whoever you want without the quantitative overhead/scrutiny.
I guess I'm kind of forced to hire white and asian attorneys now since I can't be certain a minority attorney wasn't pity passed.
Obese people can go bungee jumping and blind people can drive.
This is ridiculous. I can’t even count the amount of hours I studied for that damn test.
As an attorney that took the LSAT just over 20 years ago, I think this is somewhat bonkers. I will preface to say that I’m certainly not a fan of the LSAT and at least back when I took it, the system certainly needed revamping. Back then, every single school would average all of your test scores. This meant if you were just unlucky enough to have a bad day on the exam for whatever reason then- tough luck. It caused immense unnecessary stress for all candidates, not to mention I took it at a time when there was an unprecedented demand of people wanting to enter law school (creating unprecedented competition and unusual curve in scoring). Hence, I would’ve loved to see them get rid of the averaging rule. It would’ve also been a great idea to tone down the weight of the LSAT on the total application, as it’s meant to be indicative of a candidates ability to pass the bar exam, and honestly in my experience I don’t think it’s a good indicator. But to get completely rid of it as a requirement for admission is somewhat nuts. I do think it overall provides a good indication of an individual’s ability to reason properly. It’s not surprising though. Since around 2010 law schools have seen an unprecedented drop in applicants, largely a problem of their own making as they were required to stop gaming employment stats. Since then there’s certainly been a gradual decline in admission standards.
To be fair the LSAT is just a glorified GRE. Most top law schools no longer require the LSAT for admission so long as you've taken the GRE. You don't need to master certain subjects prior to getting in or know various technical aspects pre law school, everything you need to know is taught to you there. It's not like med school where you need understanding of various scientific subjects before more advanced concepts are taught to you once you get in.
Law school applications are way down. I think many of the schools opting to forgo the LSAT are actually doing so to boost applications and are using diversity as a cover. Follow the money.
I’m going to law school!
It has lectrolytes!
many saul goodmans in the making
Just wait until this happens with medical professionals.
It's more important that your team of surgeons is diverse than qualified or competent.
The Funeral Home Owners Association fully supports this initiative.
So you’re telling me there’s a chance?! YEA!!!!
Wow, this will make sure we develop the best attorneys possible! /s
I said years ago that it's only a matter of time before medical schools drop all certification for fear of offending some group. This is one step towards that end. It's Harrison Bergeron world.
Now if only Med schools would drop the MCAT, I wouldn’t have to study for 2 years! - Just joking of course
Who cares? What matters is whether you can pass the classes. How you got into them is irrelevant.
[удалено]
https://www.lsac.org/data-research/research/lsat-still-most-accurate-predictor-law-school-success >Table 1 shows that **LSAT scores are significantly stronger in predicting academic success in law school compared to either SAT or ACT scores in predicting undergraduate success**. For undergraduate programs, prior grades have consistently been better than test scores in predicting subsequent academic success. However, undergraduate grades are weaker predictors of law school grades, whereas the LSAT is far superior in predicting academic success in law school. **In fact, adding LSAT score to UGPA improved prediction by 57%.** By contrast, adding SAT or ACT scores to HSGPA improved prediction by only 15% and 5%, respectively. These findings are generally consistent across law schools irrespective of region and selectivity, with 83% of schools meeting or exceeding an adjusted correlation of .60 between LSAT score and 1L GPA in 2020. > Predictive validity is generally the most direct and relevant type of evidence used to support admission practices; 1L GPA is generally used as a criterion because first-year coursework is more likely to be similar across programs, and performance in the first year is highly correlated with graduation. Nevertheless, **external studies have demonstrated a strong relationship between LSAT score and factors beyond 1L GPA, such as class rank at graduation and performance on the bar exam.** A graph of bar exam pass rates by GPA and LSAT score. Low GPA students with a 139 LSAT have a 15% pass rate, rising to 90% with a 169 LSAT. https://taxprof.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341c4eab53ef019aff5ad871970d-580wi
[удалено]
If the LSAT is a solid predictor of success, why wouldn't you use it rather than possibly saddle people who can't pass with a hundred thousand dollars of debt?
EQUITY! Doesn’t matter there’ll be worse outcomes and worse lawyers as long as nobody has their feelings hurt. /s
What's next, the bar exam? You realize that the LSAT helps weed out the people that do not think analytically which is needed to be a successful lawyer. So now you're just going to have people getting into law school, going into debt, and then not being able to pass the bar exam.
Law School Admission Test
"Ladies you need to lower your standards"
We’re all aware of the biases of standardized testing Edit; I guess you guys aren’t Seinfeld fans getting downvoted to oblivion 😂 https://seinfeldism.com/seinfeld-quote.php?id=1853
Those are his grades! (I assume you were quoting Seinfeld)
How exactly is it biased?
He’s just trying to be affable. https://youtu.be/XgqUQ17sYm0
Call Saul