Jump to content
Tagger

LSAC reintroducing limits on LSAT retakes after July

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

According to this photo, LSAC is planning to reintroduce limits on LSAT retakes after the July 2019 exam:

  • Perfect score test registration ban (i.e., if you score a 180, you'll be banned from registering for the LSAT again)
  • Maximums of 3 LSAT takes in one year, 5 takes in 5 years, and 7 takes lifetime. 
Edited by Tagger
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s surprising that no one in the forum seems to care it very much. 😅

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In at least some instances this could lead to unfairness (I'm thinking more of the lifetime bans).

Let's say someone gets a perfect score and goes to a Canadian law school. Then 15 years later, they're moving to US to a state where it makes more sense to go to law school again. The law school requires LSAT but won't accept 15-year-old scores. So, too bad because LSAC won't let them write again?

Or, someone over 5 years tries, doesn't do well. Then 10 or 15 years later in a better place mentally and family wise, they want to reapply, they only get two more attempts?

In both these instances, it's not like the information from the test is fresh in their mind.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm surprised LSAC is imposing this limit on the LSAT. For awhile their policies seemed to move towards getting as many people to take the LSAT as often as possible, presumably to get more $$$.

I think 3 per year and 5 in 5 years is fair. I don't see how someone's score could drastically improve if it hasn't already within 5 takes. A student would just have to be more prepared when taking the test and be sure that they're scoring within their target before taking the actual thing.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, epeeist said:

In at least some instances this could lead to unfairness (I'm thinking more of the lifetime bans).

Let's say someone gets a perfect score and goes to a Canadian law school. Then 15 years later, they're moving to US to a state where it makes more sense to go to law school again. The law school requires LSAT but won't accept 15-year-old scores. So, too bad because LSAC won't let them write again?

Or, someone over 5 years tries, doesn't do well. Then 10 or 15 years later in a better place mentally and family wise, they want to reapply, they only get two more attempts?

In both these instances, it's not like the information from the test is fresh in their mind.

I agree with your first scenario as that wouldn't be fair for the applicant. I wonder what the reasoning would be behind the perfect score lifetime ban.

In the second scenario, I still think it's fair. You've taken the test 5 times already and presumably know what it entails and what you need to do to get a high score, even if it was 5+ years ago. Two additional retakes should be enough. I took the LSAT in 2012 in my last year of undergrad. I wasn't in the best place mentally and my score reflected that. I put my law school plans on hold and chose to pursue another career. When I decided to take it again six years later, I knew how much I needed to put in and where I needed to be in terms of my practice tests to achieve my target score.

Edit: browsing reddit, there is word on the proverbial street that you can appeal the limit/ban so the individual in scenario 1 could possibly take it again and do another JD in the States. Seems like a one-off situation, though.

Edited by Aschenbach

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wanna meet the person who scored 180 and decided to write the LSAT again. Must have an interesting life story. 

  • Like 6
  • Haha 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, shawniebear said:

I wanna meet the person who scored 180 and decided to write the LSAT again. Must have an interesting life story. 

Perhaps some renowned LSAT instructors like JY Ping of 7Sage? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, shawniebear said:

I wanna meet the person who scored 180 and decided to write the LSAT again. Must have an interesting life story. 

It has to be an Ivan Drago situation. "I will break you."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, KhalilMack said:

It has to be an Ivan Drago situation. "I will break you."

If he dies, he dies

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These are not aimed at legit students, they are aimed at people who work for pro-testing companies that train students who are writing the test to prove competency to their customers, etc.

Someone who has been teaching LSAT for a decade is much more likely to hit 180, than someone who is good on lsat but took a 3-6 months of study.

 

I don't see a reason for someone to take 4 lsats in a year or 5 in 5 years, when scores are good for 5 years and you aren't going to be raising your score substantially just by taking more test to a certain point.

 

The only people who'd need to realistically take more than 3 test in a year are instructors who want to give that information to their students.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Aschenbach said:

I agree with your first scenario as that wouldn't be fair for the applicant. I wonder what the reasoning would be behind the perfect score lifetime ban.

In the second scenario, I still think it's fair. You've taken the test 5 times already and presumably know what it entails and what you need to do to get a high score, even if it was 5+ years ago. Two additional retakes should be enough. I took the LSAT in 2012 in my last year of undergrad. I wasn't in the best place mentally and my score reflected that. I put my law school plans on hold and chose to pursue another career. When I decided to take it again six years later, I knew how much I needed to put in and where I needed to be in terms of my practice tests to achieve my target score.

Edit: browsing reddit, there is word on the proverbial street that you can appeal the limit/ban so the individual in scenario 1 could possibly take it again and do another JD in the States. Seems like a one-off situation, though.

Like @Iyaiaey said at least years ago I think they disliked some (or one) person writing repeatedly getting perfect scores and advertising that fact.

But, I'm not so sure I agree with them that being a tutor is invalid. I'm a volunteer tutor through LSO for those rewriting the bar admission course. If I were allowed to take the exam for pedagogical purposes, it would make me a better tutor, and I would probably have comments on how some questions could be written more clearly (though I wouldn't of course be telling students about specific questions!). Yes, being an LSAT tutor by contrast is for money, but does that make it invalid? Is anyone who uses an LSAT tutor a cheater? Because unless you think they are, what's wrong with such a tutor wanting to become better?

I went to law school with at least one person who was retired (in their 60s or 70s) and there were other less mature, but still mature, students. I really don't see how a lifetime ban makes sense if someone has spent decades, literally, since the last time they wrote. I could easily come up with other examples (undiagnosed learning disability when first wrote, etc.).

That you say there is an appeal process makes it better, but LSAC has been notorious for being not very helpful for people with disabilities, e.g. repeated litigation involving blind test-takers. So I'm skeptical they'd be appropriately fair re other bases for wanting to write as an exception to the usual limits.

On the other end, though, allowing 3 takes in one year seems excessive to me. So I see it as too harsh at the lifetime end (and maybe even at the 5 in 5 years end), especially when they're fine with someone using up 3 takes in one year.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Even as a tutor, you don't need to sit an official test to know the exam well. They disclose at least 3 new LSATs every year and for undisclosed tests, you can't take the questions home anyway. I don't see how, as a tutor and for pedagogical purposes, sitting repeated real tests would give you any advantage that a simulated test wouldn't. I think that @Iyaiaey is implying some tutors take real exams to signal potential students that they can get repeatedly high scores and/or to gain insightful knowledge of trends for future LSATs (eg. more miscellaneous logic games).

To me the issue isn't that the limit is unreasonable, it's that the appeal process needs to be revised. Many other entrance exams have limits on how many times you can take them. The MCAT has a similar limit, and for accountants you can only take the CFE 3 times before you strike out. Seven total takes seems like a lot, even if you had unusual circumstances the first time you took it which didn't accurately reflect your abilities.

 

Edited by Aschenbach
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Aschenbach said:

Even as a tutor, you don't need to sit an official test to know the exam well. They disclose at least 3 new LSATs every year and for undisclosed tests, you can't take the questions home anyway. I don't see how as a tutor sitting repeated real tests would give you any advantage that a simulated test wouldn't. I think that @Iyaiaey is implying some tutors take real exams to signal potential students that they can get repeatedly high scores and/or to gain insightful knowledge of trends for future LSATs (eg. more miscellaneous logic games).

To me the issue isn't that the limit is unreasonable, it's that the appeal process needs to be revised. Many other entrance exams have limits on how many times you can take them. The MCAT has a similar limit, and for accountants you can only take the CFE 3 times before you strike out. Seven total takes seems like a lot, even if you had unusual circumstances the first time you took it which didn't accurately reflect your abilities.

 

Different for LSAT versus bar ads, yes, because of available tests. Though with only one experimental section, wouldn't limiting repeat takers to disclosed test sittings obviate most of the concern about spotting trends? That is, anything that could be spotted would be from disclosure anyway?

If the concern is people learning more or seeing trends, that's a reason for short-term limits (annually or 5 years), not lifetime limits.

A professional exam like CFE is very different from an exam to see, will you even be allowed to study (I do have concerns with 3x limit for a profession also, but that's a different discussion).

Also, I've encountered people who've never written a multiple-choice test in their life - literally, in their entire life including elementary school. Others who suffer extreme test anxiety and repeated attempts to desensitize them might be appropriate (I'm not a professional in that area, I'm saying possibly). The purpose of the LSAT is to help assess, will this person do well in law school. I don't see how lifetime limits serve that function (I agree with shorter-term limits, though as noted I think the 3 per year is too generous, 5 in 5 years seems not unreasonable).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess my original point was that a lifetime limit of 7 attempts seems fair in that the vast majority of people won't need more than that and for those who do because of legitimate reasons, they could always appeal. However, maybe you're right in that it's better to do away with the lifetime limit and just have short-term limits. If someone wants to take the LSAT more than 7 times then all the power to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems that the count only begins after July 2019 is that correct? I’m looking at the second last bullet in the picture!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, epeeist said:

In at least some instances this could lead to unfairness (I'm thinking more of the lifetime bans).

Let's say someone gets a perfect score and goes to a Canadian law school. Then 15 years later, they're moving to US to a state where it makes more sense to go to law school again. The law school requires LSAT but won't accept 15-year-old scores. So, too bad because LSAC won't let them write again?

Or, someone over 5 years tries, doesn't do well. Then 10 or 15 years later in a better place mentally and family wise, they want to reapply, they only get two more attempts?

In both these instances, it's not like the information from the test is fresh in their mind.

"Appeals possible given extenuating circumstances". Pays to read.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"That you say there is an appeal process makes it better, but LSAC has been notorious for being not very helpful for people with disabilities, e.g. repeated litigation involving blind test-takers. So I'm skeptical they'd be appropriately fair re other bases for wanting to write as an exception to the usual limits." [emphasis added]

Reading comprehension is important in life generally, not just for the LSAT.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My limit is a post less than half a page. I skipped the others. Your original complaint also made no reference to the appeals process while you went off and did your usual shtick of coming up with stupid hypotheticals to derail threads. The answer to your ludicrous hypotheticals remains the same. There's an appeals process. If that's not good enough, tough cookie for the person who failed 5 times, then only had *holy shit* still two more times to attempt it, or this mythical person who scored a 180, wasted their time in law school, then went back to law school (???) 15 years later in a state that won't waive the application requirements for an LSAT if not let them take the bar outright, and can't convince LSAC to let them write again.

I can see why you're a libertarian, because you craft the stupidest scenarios possible in an effort to say "regulation bad".

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys, does the count begin AFTER July 2019? Since I took an LSAT in September 2018, and again in January 2019, do I now have two more attempts for 2019, and 5 more total? Or starting at July 2019 everyone's slate is wiped clean and we all start from zero? I wish they were more specific. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • Yes. There is a 'tryout' process, or at least there was (new) last year, but it is very easy. We had to read a journal article, answer some questions about it, and perform some citations work pursuant to the McGill Guide (legal citation guide) within a couple of days. It actually takes longer than you might think, but not long. Around 45 people made it on to law review, they wouldn't tell us how many 'tried out'. 
    • So you’re saying you didn’t work your ass off to get into university, maintain a high GPA, pass the LSAT, get into law school, maintain good grades in law school, kill articling interviews, work yourself to the grindstone during articling, pass the bar, and now you’re where you are? this whole “white privilege” discussion is total bullshit and nonsense. I don’t understand the guilt people have for being successful. And you shouldn’t be guilty for your parents having worked that hard to provide a good life for you as I’m sure you will for your kids. 
    • Maybe in some positions, but definitely not in others, including mine.  Unless I have court, I schedule whatever I want and do whatever I please. As long as the hours are there, no one cares. 
    • Work. I love having a schedule that I cannot miss for any reason and getting paid to adhere to it and work on practical, real-life matters. I love having that sense of direction too, as well as just knowing that no matter how small the task I'm working on is, it is still meaningful. I learn a lot more too and retain it far better. I want to wake up in the morning and get started on my day, whereas when I'm in school I constantly yearn for the weekend. I feel a lot more anxiety in school... I get a bit of anxiety at work too, but I think the stability and meaningfulness make it a lot easier to deal with. Getting paid and not having to worry about how I am going to pay the bills is also an added bonus, but I would probably prefer school if it was structurally more similar to a work environment and things were taught in a more hands-on, practical matter.
    • We did actually get an email from the Parkdale intensive back in March, i.e. after the clinic recruit, informing students that they still had unfilled spots so I actually got the sense that it wasn't a very popular clinic, for whatever reason. 
×
×
  • Create New...