LSAC settles LSAT Disability Lawsuit Forum

[NYSprague]

The agreement is permanent. The DOJ monitoring lasts 4 years.
Though I'm sure it can be changed as needed with court approval.

Where did you find this? The relevant part of the decree seems to say that although the practice of flagging scores is gone forever, the decree (and not just the monitoring) has a term of four years:

Term Of This Decree. This Decree shall become effective as of the date that it is entered by the Court and shall remain in effect for four (4) years from that date. However, LSAC’s agreement to discontinue score annotations as stated in Paragraph 9 shall continue in perpetuity beyond the term of this Decree, absent agreement of the United States and the DFEH. The Court shall retain continuing and exclusive jurisdiction for the duration of the Decree to enforce the terms of the Decree. The United States, the DFEH, and/or LSAC may apply to the Court for such further orders as may be necessary for, or consistent with, the enforcement of this Decree.

I remembered it wrong. I think there is something about following best practices after the committee determines them- that is what I was thinking of, in addition to the flagging.

[MistakenGenius]

Post removed.

[NYSprague]

Has there been any update on when the consent decree will go into the court records (ie: effective date)?

Not that I've seen other than the posts in this thread.

[NYSprague]

Just saw that the consent decree posted on the Ada.gov site was updated as of May 30- but it isn't black lined so I don't know what changed.

The judge still hasn't signed at least on the posted consent order unless I missed it in skimming.

I can't see any major change but I don't recall the language precisely and it is too hard to parse while skimming on my phone.

[BillsFan9907]

Just saw that the consent decree posted on the Ada.gov site was updated as of May 30- but it isn't black lined so I don't know what changed.

The judge still hasn't signed at least on the posted consent order unless I missed it in skimming.

I can't see any major change but I don't recall the language precisely and it is too hard to parse while skimming on my phone.

Scroll to the bottom. There is a stamp from Judge Edward M. Chen dated May 29:



ORDER AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION

IT IS SO ORDERED, and LSAC is accordingly permanently enjoined from all forms of the practice of annotating score reports of candidates who receive the testing accommodation of extended test time due to disability, and, for candidates applying to law school after entry of this Order, LSAC shall henceforth provide the same information on test score reports for all candidates for whom score reports are provided, this 29th day of May, 2014.


I can only assume that the consent decree in total was approved as well, not just the flagging issue.

[NYSprague]

Just saw that the consent decree posted on the Ada.gov site was updated as of May 30- but it isn't black lined so I don't know what changed.

The judge still hasn't signed at least on the posted consent order unless I missed it in skimming.

I can't see any major change but I don't recall the language precisely and it is too hard to parse while skimming on my phone.

Scroll to the bottom. There is a stamp from Judge Edward M. Chen dated May 29:



ORDER AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION

IT IS SO ORDERED, and LSAC is accordingly permanently enjoined from all forms of the practice of annotating score reports of candidates who receive the testing accommodation of extended test time due to disability, and, for candidates applying to law school after entry of this Order, LSAC shall henceforth provide the same information on test score reports for all candidates for whom score reports are provided, this 29th day of May, 2014.


I can only assume that the consent decree in total was approved as well, not just the flagging issue.

Yes, the entire decree. Thanks for this, trying to scroll through it quickly on my phone wasn't working.

[BillsFan9907]

I asked them this:


1. for how long are results from the required tests (NDRT etc...) considered valid?
2. How long ago can one have received accommodations on a post-secondary test such as the SAT in order to receive similar accommodations on the LSAT?


This is the answer I received:

LSAC will be posting new accommodation request forms and updated policies by the end of June. If you are seeking accommodations based on a mental or cognitive impairment you may submit testing conducted within five years of the date of your request.

-----------------------------

It doesn't look like they addressed the SAT question. I would be amazed if they tried to put a time limit on it. It's clear there is no time limit as the whole issue of prior accommodation is covered in 5a. It would be an incredibly egregious violation of the consent agree.

[Onomatopoeia]

The floodgates have opened

[NYSprague]

I asked them this:


1. for how long are results from the required tests (NDRT etc...) considered valid?
2. How long ago can one have received accommodations on a post-secondary test such as the SAT in order to receive similar accommodations on the LSAT?


This is the answer I received:

LSAC will be posting new accommodation request forms and updated policies by the end of June. If you are seeking accommodations based on a mental or cognitive impairment you may submit testing conducted within five years of the date of your request.

-----------------------------

It doesn't look like they addressed the SAT question. I would be amazed if they tried to put a time limit on it. It's clear there is no time limit as the whole issue of prior accommodation is covered in 5a. It would be an incredibly egregious violation of the consent agree.

Yes, I noticed threading updated the site yet, even with the language that was specified in the consent decree.

The language as to use of previous scores is specific as well. I guess we will need to see at the end of the month what they are going to say.

If you have applied before, you can apply again and be considered under the new rules.

[Clyde Frog]

I asked them this:


1. for how long are results from the required tests (NDRT etc...) considered valid?
2. How long ago can one have received accommodations on a post-secondary test such as the SAT in order to receive similar accommodations on the LSAT?


This is the answer I received:

LSAC will be posting new accommodation request forms and updated policies by the end of June. If you are seeking accommodations based on a mental or cognitive impairment you may submit testing conducted within five years of the date of your request.

-----------------------------

It doesn't look like they addressed the SAT question. I would be amazed if they tried to put a time limit on it. It's clear there is no time limit as the whole issue of prior accommodation is covered in 5a. It would be an incredibly egregious violation of the consent agree.

You had accommodations in 1980. Don't you think that a reevaluation might be needed?

[A. Nony Mouse]

You had accommodations in 1980. Don't you think that a reevaluation might be needed?

I think his earlier "accommodations in 1980" comment was a hypothetical.

[Clyde Frog]

You had accommodations in 1980. Don't you think that a reevaluation might be needed?

I think his earlier "accommodations in 1980" comment was a hypothetical.

I couldn't really tell. Regardless, one would think that they would place restrictions on this sort of thing from happening.

[haroldton86]

Are they still going to require an RC diag

[A. Nony Mouse]

Are they still going to require an RC diag

What does this mean?

[haroldton86]

Are they still going to require an RC diag

What does this mean?

http://www.lsac.org/docs/default-source ... eninfo.pdf

To request accommodations based on a Cognitive/Psychological impairment, please provide all of the following:

"comprehensive aptitude and achievement testing. The achievement testing must include a timed reading comprehension
measure. The NDRT may not be substituted for a diagnostic battery; it should be administered as a timed measure as part of
comprehensive achievement testing."

[NYSprague]

The consent decree is fairly clear as to what is required for people who had past accommodations and are requesting the same accommodations.


Important:LSAC hasn't updated any part of the website so you can't rely on what is there now.

The specifics of the best practices have to be determined but many of the principles have been set out, including the weight to be given to existing documentation. The LSAC cannot attempt to determine disability diagnosis as they did previously.

Maybe someone should contact the DOJ attorneys and ask them these questions?

[BillsFan9907]

Buddy of mine with brain injuries from Afghanistan just got accommodations based solely on SAT accommodations nearly a decade old. They literally gave it to him 3 days after he applied using the old candidate form. He just sent the candidate form with all the extraneous stuff crossed out, a letter referencing section 5a and his accommodation approval letter from the college board.

So now, the big question is whether or not there will be de facto flagging. If schools are given your answer sheet, they will see that you only had 4 sections. Likewise, if they are given an item response report, they will see that there are no gaps whereas there is one a regular test because one section (the experimental is omitted).

[NYSprague]

Buddy of mine with brain injuries from Afghanistan just got accommodations based solely on SAT accommodations nearly a decade old. They literally gave it to him 3 days after he applied using the old candidate form. He just sent the candidate form with all the extraneous stuff crossed out, a letter referencing section 5a and his accommodation approval letter from the college board.

So now, the big question is whether or not there will be de facto flagging. If schools are given your answer sheet, they will see that you only had 4 sections. Likewise, if they are given an item response report, they will see that there are no gaps whereas there is one a regular test because one section (the experimental is omitted).

Maybe ask Spivey what schools see. I would think that any kind of flagging is an issue.

[BillsFan9907]

Buddy of mine with brain injuries from Afghanistan just got accommodations based solely on SAT accommodations nearly a decade old. They literally gave it to him 3 days after he applied using the old candidate form. He just sent the candidate form with all the extraneous stuff crossed out, a letter referencing section 5a and his accommodation approval letter from the college board.

So now, the big question is whether or not there will be de facto flagging. If schools are given your answer sheet, they will see that you only had 4 sections. Likewise, if they are given an item response report, they will see that there are no gaps whereas there is one a regular test because one section (the experimental is omitted).

Maybe ask Spivey what schools see. I would think that any kind of flagging is an issue.

Good idea. I will throw it to Spivey. There is obviously a difference between explicit and implicit flagging.

[NYSprague]

Buddy of mine with brain injuries from Afghanistan just got accommodations based solely on SAT accommodations nearly a decade old. They literally gave it to him 3 days after he applied using the old candidate form. He just sent the candidate form with all the extraneous stuff crossed out, a letter referencing section 5a and his accommodation approval letter from the college board.

So now, the big question is whether or not there will be de facto flagging. If schools are given your answer sheet, they will see that you only had 4 sections. Likewise, if they are given an item response report, they will see that there are no gaps whereas there is one a regular test because one section (the experimental is omitted).

Maybe ask Spivey what schools see. I would think that any kind of flagging is an issue.

Good idea. I will throw it to Spivey. There is obviously a difference between explicit and implicit flagging.

I read the DOJ documents a while ago. There are a number of arguments against flagging. The most compelling one (to me) is that flagging an entrance exam of a disabled person is in itself a discriminatory act. I would be surprised of justice left any evidence of flagging in place.

If the accommodations were obvious from the docs the school gets, why would LSAC have flagged the scores at all?

[BillsFan9907]

Good point. Well if the schools did get all the stuff we get, one would still need to use a bit of intuition in the abscence of flagging. For example they would see there was no percentile score and could draw the relevant conclusion. I wouldn't say it'd obvious, but it can be discerned by seeing some oddities.

[BillsFan9907]

BTW is there anyone here who got accommodations? We can get a definitive answer regarding the writing sample - if its the same as the non accommodated test.

[HaroldLee1982]

Aren't they going to be de-facto flagged anyways with the lack of a percentile score? Anyways, what effect will this have on splitters?

[NYSprague]

Aren't they going to be de-facto flagged anyways with the lack of a percentile score? Anyways, what effect will this have on splitters?

The assumption is that either everyone will get a percentile score or no one will.
The effect is that more people will have scores that reflect their ability. I'm not sure what you mean. The number of people with accommodations is a tiny percentage of takers.

[HaroldLee1982]

Aren't they going to be de-facto flagged anyways with the lack of a percentile score? Anyways, what effect will this have on splitters?

The assumption is that either everyone will get a percentile score or no one will.
The effect is that more people will have scores that reflect their ability. I'm not sure what you mean. The number of people with accommodations is a tiny percentage of takers.

Hmm, interesting. So LSAC will have to modify their policy regarding percentile score reporting ? It is pretty clearly a de-facto flag if you think about it.
I guess what I was trying to get at is whether this will lower the predictive validity of the LSAT, and whether law schools will value GPA and "softs" over LSAT now..