LSAC settles LSAT Disability Lawsuit Forum
- Mullens
- Posts: 1138
- Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2013 1:34 am
LSAC settles LSAT Disability Lawsuit
http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2014/05/20/law ... y-lawsuit/
Of note: "LSAC will no longer flag test takers who receive extended time."
Game-changer?
Of note: "LSAC will no longer flag test takers who receive extended time."
Game-changer?
- LSAT Hacks (Graeme)
- Posts: 371
- Joined: Wed May 30, 2012 9:18 pm
Re: LSAC settles LSAT Disability Lawsuit
Depends how restrictive they are about accommodations. So far they've been extremely restrictive. 6,000 over five years is a drop in the bucket.Mullens wrote:http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2014/05/20/law ... y-lawsuit/
Of note: "LSAC will no longer flag test takers who receive extended time."
Game-changer?
If future lawsuits force them to give more accommodations, that may change. The LSAT is a much more time sensitive test than the SAT. Many SAT questions can't be answered even with infinite time, if you lack the knowledge. Whereas almost everyone reports +10 points or more on the LSAT if they take extra time.
I'm most familiar with the SAT, where I've heard many stories of rich students gaming the system by bribing psychologists for a diagnosis.
That said, the current accommodations process is apparently very onerous, and that's hard on those with legitimate disabilities. I don't know what the correct solution is.
- ScottRiqui
- Posts: 3633
- Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 8:09 pm
Re: LSAC settles LSAT Disability Lawsuit
That's ~6,000 who were party to the lawsuit for supposedly being *denied* special accommodations. Do we have any idea how many testers do receive special accommodations each cycle?Graeme (Hacking the LSAT) wrote:Depends how restrictive they are about accommodations. So far they've been extremely restrictive. 6,000 over five years is a drop in the bucket.Mullens wrote:http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2014/05/20/law ... y-lawsuit/
Of note: "LSAC will no longer flag test takers who receive extended time."
Game-changer?
- papercut
- Posts: 1446
- Joined: Sat Dec 01, 2012 6:48 pm
Re: LSAC settles LSAT Disability Lawsuit
I wonder how this will affect bar passage rates.
- LSAT Hacks (Graeme)
- Posts: 371
- Joined: Wed May 30, 2012 9:18 pm
Re: LSAC settles LSAT Disability Lawsuit
Oops, good catch. I think we actually both failed at reading comprehension. The article seems to be saying that 6,000 is the number who SOUGHT accommodations. So that's both those who were accepted and those who were denied. The article isn't very clear, but I think that's what they're saying.ScottRiqui wrote:That's ~6,000 who were party to the lawsuit for supposedly being *denied* special accommodations. Do we have any idea how many testers do receive special accommodations each cycle?Graeme (Hacking the LSAT) wrote:Depends how restrictive they are about accommodations. So far they've been extremely restrictive. 6,000 over five years is a drop in the bucket.Mullens wrote:http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2014/05/20/law ... y-lawsuit/
Of note: "LSAC will no longer flag test takers who receive extended time."
Game-changer?
Those who were accepted still had a grievance: schools were being informed they received extra time. (And thus schools knew they had a disability)
So: not many receive accommodation currently. Something less than 6,000.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
- cotiger
- Posts: 1648
- Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2013 11:49 pm
Re: LSAC settles LSAT Disability Lawsuit
They can kiss that high predictive validity goodbye.
This is such bullshit. But sadly not surprising.
This is such bullshit. But sadly not surprising.
- ScottRiqui
- Posts: 3633
- Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 8:09 pm
Re: LSAC settles LSAT Disability Lawsuit
You're right - after reading the article again, I'm not sure how many of the ~6,000 people were actually denied, and how many were suing because of the "asterisk" next to their scores.Graeme (Hacking the LSAT) wrote:Oops, good catch. I think we actually both failed at reading comprehension. The article seems to be saying that 6,000 is the number who SOUGHT accommodations. So that's both those who were accepted and those who were denied. The article isn't very clear, but I think that's what they're saying.ScottRiqui wrote:That's ~6,000 who were party to the lawsuit for supposedly being *denied* special accommodations. Do we have any idea how many testers do receive special accommodations each cycle?Graeme (Hacking the LSAT) wrote:Depends how restrictive they are about accommodations. So far they've been extremely restrictive. 6,000 over five years is a drop in the bucket.Mullens wrote:http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2014/05/20/law ... y-lawsuit/
Of note: "LSAC will no longer flag test takers who receive extended time."
Game-changer?
Those who were accepted still had a grievance: schools were being informed they received extra time. (And thus schools knew they had a disability)
So: not many receive accommodation currently. Something less than 6,000.
- LSAT Hacks (Graeme)
- Posts: 371
- Joined: Wed May 30, 2012 9:18 pm
Re: LSAC settles LSAT Disability Lawsuit
Crikey. Look at this:
-----------
"Under its settlement with the government today, LSAT moves past Powell, lowering its standards for offering students up to double the time for the test. Now they will be granted the extra time if they got that accommodation on any other post-graduate test. "
http://www.forbes.com/sites/danielfishe ... tion-date/
-----------
Official source says LSAT agrees to:
* streamline its evaluation of requests for testing accommodations by automatically granting most testing accommodations that a candidate can show s/he has previously received for a standardized exam related to post-secondary admissions (such as the SAT, ACT or GED, among others); and
http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2014/May/14-crt-536.html
------------
This is big news. If it's as described, this could be the death of the LSAT as a fair test. I've heard SAT accommodation practices are very shoddy. Students of mine from private schools have said rich parents will bribe or lean on psychologists for a diagnosis.
This isn't such a big deal on the SAT, as extra time is not much advantage if you don't know math, grammar and vocabulary. But on the LSAT extra time is a HUGE advantage.
So huge that if this is really as stated, then I expect large numbers of people to follow this path:
Find a lenient or bribe friendly psychologist for diagnosis --> Sign up for the SAT (again) and request accomodations and 50% extra time --> Get the automatic accomodation on the LSAT
Probably costs less than a prep course. Does anyone know if SAT accommodations bribery is common? I'm not American, so this aspect of things is only second hand for me.
-----------
"Under its settlement with the government today, LSAT moves past Powell, lowering its standards for offering students up to double the time for the test. Now they will be granted the extra time if they got that accommodation on any other post-graduate test. "
http://www.forbes.com/sites/danielfishe ... tion-date/
-----------
Official source says LSAT agrees to:
* streamline its evaluation of requests for testing accommodations by automatically granting most testing accommodations that a candidate can show s/he has previously received for a standardized exam related to post-secondary admissions (such as the SAT, ACT or GED, among others); and
http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2014/May/14-crt-536.html
------------
This is big news. If it's as described, this could be the death of the LSAT as a fair test. I've heard SAT accommodation practices are very shoddy. Students of mine from private schools have said rich parents will bribe or lean on psychologists for a diagnosis.
This isn't such a big deal on the SAT, as extra time is not much advantage if you don't know math, grammar and vocabulary. But on the LSAT extra time is a HUGE advantage.
So huge that if this is really as stated, then I expect large numbers of people to follow this path:
Find a lenient or bribe friendly psychologist for diagnosis --> Sign up for the SAT (again) and request accomodations and 50% extra time --> Get the automatic accomodation on the LSAT
Probably costs less than a prep course. Does anyone know if SAT accommodations bribery is common? I'm not American, so this aspect of things is only second hand for me.
- papercut
- Posts: 1446
- Joined: Sat Dec 01, 2012 6:48 pm
Re: LSAC settles LSAT Disability Lawsuit
cotiger wrote:They can kiss that high predictive validity goodbye.
This is such bullshit. But sadly not surprising.
-
- Posts: 830
- Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2014 2:33 pm
Re: LSAC settles LSAT Disability Lawsuit
Didn't they settle because they violated federal law in the ADA? I mean, they have to comply with the law so I don't know why anyone would be upset.
I recall posts on here where people who had long standing disabilities were denied accommodations.
Maybe if they had been more reasonable, this would have been avoided.
I recall posts on here where people who had long standing disabilities were denied accommodations.
Maybe if they had been more reasonable, this would have been avoided.
Last edited by NYSprague on Tue May 20, 2014 9:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- papercut
- Posts: 1446
- Joined: Sat Dec 01, 2012 6:48 pm
Re: LSAC settles LSAT Disability Lawsuit
I don't think flagging is that clear cut in the law.NYSprague wrote:Didn't they settle because they violated federal law in the ADA? I mean, they have to comply with the law so I don't know why anyone would be upset.
- njdevils2626
- Posts: 536
- Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:53 pm
Re: LSAC settles LSAT Disability Lawsuit
papercut wrote:cotiger wrote:They can kiss that high predictive validity goodbye.
This is such bullshit. But sadly not surprising.
-
- Posts: 830
- Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2014 2:33 pm
Re: LSAC settles LSAT Disability Lawsuit
I don't know the law. I assumed it was privacy. That people need to self-identify as disabled to the schools.papercut wrote:I don't think flagging is that clear cut in the law.NYSprague wrote:Didn't they settle because they violated federal law in the ADA? I mean, they have to comply with the law so I don't know why anyone would be upset.
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- LSAT Hacks (Graeme)
- Posts: 371
- Joined: Wed May 30, 2012 9:18 pm
Re: LSAC settles LSAT Disability Lawsuit
I agree that LSAC seemed pretty unreasonable towards the disabled. However, according to this article, they believed they were following an agreement they made with the DOJ.NYSprague wrote:Didn't they settle because they violated federal law in the ADA? I mean, they have to comply with the law so I don't know why anyone would be upset.
I recall posts on here where people who had long standing disabilities were denied accommodations.
Maybe if they had been more reasonable, this would have been avoided.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/danielfishe ... tion-date/
The LSAC did not lose in court, or agree that they violated the agreement. Instead, they settled to avoid a costly lawsuit.
-
- Posts: 830
- Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2014 2:33 pm
Re: LSAC settles LSAT Disability Lawsuit
I understand what settlement means. I didnt know about the whole consent decree, but it looks like LSAC was wrong. They do have a pretty cushy gig going, so settling makes senseGraeme (Hacking the LSAT) wrote:I agree that LSAC seemed pretty unreasonable towards the disabled. However, according to this article, they believed they were following an agreement they made with the DOJ.NYSprague wrote:Didn't they settle because they violated federal law in the ADA? I mean, they have to comply with the law so I don't know why anyone would be upset.
I recall posts on here where people who had long standing disabilities were denied accommodations.
Maybe if they had been more reasonable, this would have been avoided.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/danielfishe ... tion-date/
The LSAC did not lose in court, or agree that they violated the agreement. Instead, they settled to avoid a costly lawsuit.
Does this go into effect starting in June?
- papercut
- Posts: 1446
- Joined: Sat Dec 01, 2012 6:48 pm
Re: LSAC settles LSAT Disability Lawsuit
What do you mean LSAC was wrong?NYSprague wrote:I understand what settlement means. I didnt know about the whole consent decree, but it looks like LSAC was wrong. They do have a pretty cushy gig going, so settling makes senseGraeme (Hacking the LSAT) wrote:I agree that LSAC seemed pretty unreasonable towards the disabled. However, according to this article, they believed they were following an agreement they made with the DOJ.NYSprague wrote:Didn't they settle because they violated federal law in the ADA? I mean, they have to comply with the law so I don't know why anyone would be upset.
I recall posts on here where people who had long standing disabilities were denied accommodations.
Maybe if they had been more reasonable, this would have been avoided.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/danielfishe ... tion-date/
The LSAC did not lose in court, or agree that they violated the agreement. Instead, they settled to avoid a costly lawsuit.
Does this go into effect starting in June?
- cotiger
- Posts: 1648
- Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2013 11:49 pm
Re: LSAC settles LSAT Disability Lawsuit
Will schools eventually be forced to offer extra time with no flagging too?
What's the reasoning for requiring this on entrance exams but not in the schools themselves?
What's the reasoning for requiring this on entrance exams but not in the schools themselves?
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
- bombaysippin
- Posts: 1977
- Joined: Fri Mar 22, 2013 3:11 pm
Re: LSAC settles LSAT Disability Lawsuit
So schools can still rob students that don't score at median or above.cotiger wrote:Will schools eventually be forced to offer extra time with no flagging too?
What's the reasoning for requiring this on entrance exams but not in the schools themselves?
-
- Posts: 830
- Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2014 2:33 pm
Re: LSAC settles LSAT Disability Lawsuit
papercut wrote:What do you mean LSAC was wrong?NYSprague wrote:I understand what settlement means. I didnt know about the whole consent decree, but it looks like LSAC was wrong. They do have a pretty cushy gig going, so settling makes senseGraeme (Hacking the LSAT) wrote:I agree that LSAC seemed pretty unreasonable towards the disabled. However, according to this article, they believed they were following an agreement they made with the DOJ.NYSprague wrote:Didn't they settle because they violated federal law in the ADA? I mean, they have to comply with the law so I don't know why anyone would be upset.
I recall posts on here where people who had long standing disabilities were denied accommodations.
Maybe if they had been more reasonable, this would have been avoided.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/danielfishe ... tion-date/
The LSAC did not lose in court, or agree that they violated the agreement. Instead, they settled to avoid a costly lawsuit.
Does this go into effect starting in June?
I mean they were wrong in being so harsh in granting extended time for people who really needed it. I know they are worried about a costly lawsuit, but they may also have been uninterested in explaining their decision making as to when accommodations were granted. giving up flagging doesn't impact them at all.
I'm sorry I worked all night and am not really focused on this. Maybe I will look at it again if I have something to add.
- papercut
- Posts: 1446
- Joined: Sat Dec 01, 2012 6:48 pm
Re: LSAC settles LSAT Disability Lawsuit
I disagree. With accommodation and no flagging the LSAT loses predictive validity.giving up flagging doesn't impact them at all.
- cotiger
- Posts: 1648
- Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2013 11:49 pm
Re: LSAC settles LSAT Disability Lawsuit
Flagging's the biggie. That's what restricts the people who take extra time to those who really need it.papercut wrote:I disagree. With accommodation and no flagging the LSAT loses predictive validity.giving up flagging doesn't impact them at all.
Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.
Register now, it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- LSAT Hacks (Graeme)
- Posts: 371
- Joined: Wed May 30, 2012 9:18 pm
Re: LSAC settles LSAT Disability Lawsuit
papercut wrote:I disagree. With accommodation and no flagging the LSAT loses predictive validity.giving up flagging doesn't impact them at all.
This is my worry. I have had several SAT students who didn't even bother seeking extra time (ADHD and other similar diagnoses). It wasn't a big issue for them. Extra time on the SAT is useful, but not essential. Those students would definitely seek extra time on the LSAT if it were easy to get.papercut wrote:I disagree. With accommodation and no flagging the LSAT loses predictive validity.giving up flagging doesn't impact them at all.
Whereas on the LSAT it can make almost anyone break 170. There will be thousands of people seeking accommodation for relatively minor issues, given the states to acquiring it. I also expect there will be people weaselling their way into false diagnoses.
I'm very, very surprised the LSAC agreed to automatically follow the standards set by other tests.
- LSAT Hacks (Graeme)
- Posts: 371
- Joined: Wed May 30, 2012 9:18 pm
Re: LSAC settles LSAT Disability Lawsuit
Though this article indicates there may not be that much to worry about. The college board has apparently gotten more stringent with accommodations requests after they were forced to remove flagging on SAT scores.
https://www.applerouth.com/blog/2006/04 ... t-and-act/
They found that the population granted accommodations clustered around extreme lows and extreme highs. The LSAC is likewise very, very good at standardizing tests. If they detect anomalies, I expect they'll work with DOJ to make the system sensible. After all, we do want people with legitimate disabilities to get accommodations.
https://www.applerouth.com/blog/2006/04 ... t-and-act/
They found that the population granted accommodations clustered around extreme lows and extreme highs. The LSAC is likewise very, very good at standardizing tests. If they detect anomalies, I expect they'll work with DOJ to make the system sensible. After all, we do want people with legitimate disabilities to get accommodations.
- ScottRiqui
- Posts: 3633
- Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 8:09 pm
Re: LSAC settles LSAT Disability Lawsuit
In and of itself, I'm not sure how I feel about getting rid of flagging. In the case of an accommodated/flagged score, what was the "right" way for schools to consider it for admissions purposes? Give it less weight than an unflagged score? Give it the same weight as an unflagged score? Ignore it completely?
If the "right" thing was to assume that the accommodations given were appropriate to the disability, then why were scores ever flagged in the first place?
If the "right" thing was to assume that the accommodations given were appropriate to the disability, then why were scores ever flagged in the first place?
- papercut
- Posts: 1446
- Joined: Sat Dec 01, 2012 6:48 pm
Re: LSAC settles LSAT Disability Lawsuit
I don't think we know enough about cognitive performance to say that double the time or whatever is appropriate to disability X.ScottRiqui wrote:In and of itself, I'm not sure how I feel about getting rid of flagging. In the case of an accommodated/flagged score, what was the "right" way for schools to consider it for admissions purposes? Give it less weight than an unflagged score? Give it the same weight as an unflagged score? Ignore it completely?
If the "right" thing was to assume that the accommodations given were appropriate to the disability, then why were scores ever flagged in the first place?
This is why it's important to keep the testing conditions the same.
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login