Implication of more schools taking multiple standardized test? Forum

[usaorbust]

Spivey recently tweeted this:
"Breaking! ABA working on plan to allow for other standardized tests (read GRE) not likely to into effect until 2018-2019 cycle, if approved".

I am interested to know what people think of the implications of this potential change. Do you think the LSAT will be the primary test taken by individuals? Will the GRE or other tests be used to increase GPA medians, or would the USNWR (though not useful for employment numbers) have to change the standards for rankings due to the increase of taking multiple tests and thus shake up the rankings drastically?

[Mikey]

I think the LSAT will still be superior to say the GRE, because my own thoughts are that they will still take in most students who have the LSAT and take in a limited amount of people without it.

Pure speculation though

[dj9i27]

splitter death tho? because time to pack it up if so.

[Npret]

I think people wanting to apply to schools taking the GRE after this change would be crazy to not take the GRE first and apply if they do well. Don't take the LSAT unless and until you have to do so.

Of course reporting requirements are going to change as well.

[180pedia]

splitter death tho? because time to pack it up if so.

I dunno... it could make high LSATs rarer, but it remains to be seen how this change influences rankings regarding the LSAT.

[somedeadman]

Why is there such a sudden push to allow the gre? Just so schools can admit exclusively high gpa students?

[Voyager]

Why is there such a sudden push to allow the gre? Just so schools can admit exclusively high gpa students?

It gives Harvard a way to accept lower performing students without impacting their school ranking because only the LSAT score is figured into rank, currently.

[somedeadman]

Why is there such a sudden push to allow the gre? Just so schools can admit exclusively high gpa students?

It gives Harvard a way to accept lower performing students without impacting their school ranking because only the LSAT score is figured into rank, currently.

But if the ABA lets every school do that, as spivey's tweet implies, wouldn't that give every school the opportunity to game the rankings?

[Npret]

Why is there such a sudden push to allow the gre? Just so schools can admit exclusively high gpa students?

It gives Harvard a way to accept lower performing students without impacting their school ranking because only the LSAT score is figured into rank, currently.

You think Harvard is worried about their rank? They have people here paying sticker over full scholarships to Chicago.

What I think is that they are not happy with the classes they are getting but they won't or can't admit solely on the basis of GPA, recommendation and resume. I feel that they see the LSAT is not such a required predictor of success as people here seem to think it is and that they see the GRE is able to perform the same function but allow them to get the classes that they want

[Npret]

Why is there such a sudden push to allow the gre? Just so schools can admit exclusively high gpa students?

It gives Harvard a way to accept lower performing students without impacting their school ranking because only the LSAT score is figured into rank, currently.

But if the ABA lets every school do that, as spivey's tweet implies, wouldn't that give every school the opportunity to game the rankings?

It isn't just gaming the rankings. I'm sure the reporting requirement will also change. It's that the LSAT isn't as necessary to admit students as people want to assume it is.

[somedeadman]

Why is there such a sudden push to allow the gre? Just so schools can admit exclusively high gpa students?

It gives Harvard a way to accept lower performing students without impacting their school ranking because only the LSAT score is figured into rank, currently.

But if the ABA lets every school do that, as spivey's tweet implies, wouldn't that give every school the opportunity to game the rankings?

It isn't just gaming the rankings. I'm sure the reporting requirement will also change. It's that the LSAT isn't as necessary to admit students as people want to assume it is.

All I'm gonna say is, I'm glad I'm going now and not later

[somedeadman]

Why is there such a sudden push to allow the gre? Just so schools can admit exclusively high gpa students?

It gives Harvard a way to accept lower performing students without impacting their school ranking because only the LSAT score is figured into rank, currently.

You think Harvard is worried about their rank? They have people here paying sticker over full scholarships to Chicago.

What I think is that they are not happy with the classes they are getting but they won't or can't admit solely on the basis of GPA, recommendation and resume. I feel that they see the LSAT is not such a required predictor of success as people here seem to think it is and that they see the GRE is able to perform the same function but allow them to get the classes that they want

To be fair, what's your basis for assuming they aren't happy with the applicants they are getting?

[Npret]

Why is there such a sudden push to allow the gre? Just so schools can admit exclusively high gpa students?

It gives Harvard a way to accept lower performing students without impacting their school ranking because only the LSAT score is figured into rank, currently.

You think Harvard is worried about their rank? They have people here paying sticker over full scholarships to Chicago.

What I think is that they are not happy with the classes they are getting but they won't or can't admit solely on the basis of GPA, recommendation and resume. I feel that they see the LSAT is not such a required predictor of success as people here seem to think it is and that they see the GRE is able to perform the same function but allow them to get the classes that they want

To be fair, what's your basis for assuming they aren't happy with the applicants they are getting?

1. Why would they change if they were happy?
2. Their own statement talked about the LSAT being a disadvantage for certain students. They mentioned the cost of prep and the advantage it gives some students, etc.

I said, or meant to say, they are unhappy with their admitted class or unhappy they can't admit some students they want to admit because of the LSAT.

[somedeadman]

Why is there such a sudden push to allow the gre? Just so schools can admit exclusively high gpa students?

It gives Harvard a way to accept lower performing students without impacting their school ranking because only the LSAT score is figured into rank, currently.

You think Harvard is worried about their rank? They have people here paying sticker over full scholarships to Chicago.

What I think is that they are not happy with the classes they are getting but they won't or can't admit solely on the basis of GPA, recommendation and resume. I feel that they see the LSAT is not such a required predictor of success as people here seem to think it is and that they see the GRE is able to perform the same function but allow them to get the classes that they want

To be fair, what's your basis for assuming they aren't happy with the applicants they are getting?

1. Why would they change if they were happy?
2. Their own statement talked about the LSAT being a disadvantage for certain students. They mentioned the cost of prep and the advantage it gives some students, etc.

I said, or meant to say, they are unhappy with their admitted class or unhappy they can't admit some students they want to admit because of the LSAT.

1. It could very well be something else, whether that is gaming the ranks to catch up with Stanford and Yale, or something else no one has yet to mention.
2. That could be the case, but if they want to make Harvard more accessible, why not address it in a meaningful way by making tuition cuts?

[Milksteak]

Why assume that a change in the ranking system would not shortly follow schools shifting to taking GRE? If enough schools did it, why would US News stick with the LSAT metric?

[AJordan]

splitter death tho? because time to pack it up if so.

I think a 99% LSAT is still going to be something law schools want. Just look at a supply/demand thing. Obv more competition hurts everyone but GPAs are going to be a dime a dozen as are GREs. High LSAT scores are still going to be rare and perhaps even moreso. If that number is still getting reported it's still going to be desirable. It might hurt the 168-170 camp but I imagine the 173+ crew will still be sitting pretty. At the very least that number is still giving them a reason to look at the rest of your app as a splitter and, constructed well, you're still going to be quite competitive.

There is a hypothetical world here where people stop peppering that LSAT preparation and switch to GRE while the first year especially of combined LSAT/GRE numbers reported is still a bit of a mixed bag. No school is going to take all GRE applicants. If those LSAT taker numbers are substantially reduced this especially bodes well for high LSAT scorers. We'll see. Can't know until it happens. Change is slow. I'm in a very similar boat and I'm not giving up. I think adcoms will still want me.

[Npret]

Why is there such a sudden push to allow the gre? Just so schools can admit exclusively high gpa students?

It gives Harvard a way to accept lower performing students without impacting their school ranking because only the LSAT score is figured into rank, currently.

You think Harvard is worried about their rank? They have people here paying sticker over full scholarships to Chicago.

What I think is that they are not happy with the classes they are getting but they won't or can't admit solely on the basis of GPA, recommendation and resume. I feel that they see the LSAT is not such a required predictor of success as people here seem to think it is and that they see the GRE is able to perform the same function but allow them to get the classes that they want

To be fair, what's your basis for assuming they aren't happy with the applicants they are getting?

1. Why would they change if they were happy?
2. Their own statement talked about the LSAT being a disadvantage for certain students. They mentioned the cost of prep and the advantage it gives some students, etc.

I said, or meant to say, they are unhappy with their admitted class or unhappy they can't admit some students they want to admit because of the LSAT.

1. It could very well be something else, whether that is gaming the ranks to catch up with Stanford and Yale, or something else no one has yet to mention.
2. That could be the case, but if they want to make Harvard more accessible, why not address it in a meaningful way by making tuition cuts?

Because these people aren't being admitted. Cheaper tuition doesn't solve that problem.
I'm not going to engage with the idiotic idea Harvard decided to do this to "game" the rankings to beat Yale and Stanford. You realize the reporting requirements will change too? GRE isn't reported now because it isn't relevant. Once it becomes relevant, it will need to be reported within a year or two.

[somedeadman]

Why is there such a sudden push to allow the gre? Just so schools can admit exclusively high gpa students?

It gives Harvard a way to accept lower performing students without impacting their school ranking because only the LSAT score is figured into rank, currently.

You think Harvard is worried about their rank? They have people here paying sticker over full scholarships to Chicago.

What I think is that they are not happy with the classes they are getting but they won't or can't admit solely on the basis of GPA, recommendation and resume. I feel that they see the LSAT is not such a required predictor of success as people here seem to think it is and that they see the GRE is able to perform the same function but allow them to get the classes that they want

To be fair, what's your basis for assuming they aren't happy with the applicants they are getting?

1. Why would they change if they were happy?
2. Their own statement talked about the LSAT being a disadvantage for certain students. They mentioned the cost of prep and the advantage it gives some students, etc.

I said, or meant to say, they are unhappy with their admitted class or unhappy they can't admit some students they want to admit because of the LSAT.

1. It could very well be something else, whether that is gaming the ranks to catch up with Stanford and Yale, or something else no one has yet to mention.
2. That could be the case, but if they want to make Harvard more accessible, why not address it in a meaningful way by making tuition cuts?

Because these people aren't being admitted. Cheaper tuition doesn't solve that problem.
I'm not going to engage with the idiotic idea Harvard decided to do this to "game" the rankings to beat Yale and Stanford. You realize the reporting requirements will change too? GRE isn't reported now because it isn't relevant. Once it becomes relevant, it will need to be reported within a year or two.

Edit - not worth it

[dj9i27]

splitter death tho? because time to pack it up if so.

I think a 99% LSAT is still going to be something law schools want. Just look at a supply/demand thing. Obv more competition hurts everyone but GPAs are going to be a dime a dozen as are GREs. High LSAT scores are still going to be rare and perhaps even moreso. If that number is still getting reported it's still going to be desirable. It might hurt the 168-170 camp but I imagine the 173+ crew will still be sitting pretty. At the very least that number is still giving them a reason to look at the rest of your app as a splitter and, constructed well, you're still going to be quite competitive.

There is a hypothetical world here where people stop peppering that LSAT preparation and switch to GRE while the first year especially of combined LSAT/GRE numbers reported is still a bit of a mixed bag. No school is going to take all GRE applicants. If those LSAT taker numbers are substantially reduced this especially bodes well for high LSAT scorers. We'll see. Can't know until it happens. Change is slow. I'm in a very similar boat and I'm not giving up. I think adcoms will still want me.

It could mean the end of splitters getting high scholarships (3.5-3.3 ranges) as well tho. If they have someone with a 4.0/170(gre) and then a 3.8 /174lsat the need for those 3.4/178s will somewhat diminish. It could go either way so I don't know how to feel.

[Npret]

FYI: here's Harvard's statement:

Starting in the fall of 2017, Harvard Law School will allow applicants to submit either the Graduate Record Examination (GRE) or the Law School Admissions Test (LSAT) to be considered for admission to its three-year J.D. program.

The pilot program to accept the GRE is part of a wider strategy at Harvard Law School to expand access to legal education for students in the United States and internationally. The GRE is offered frequently throughout the year and in numerous locations around the world. Many prospective law school applicants take the GRE as they consider graduate school options. The Law School’s decision to accept the GRE will alleviate the financial burden on applicants who would otherwise be required to prepare and pay for an additional test.

The change is supported by an HLS study, designed in 2016 and completed earlier this year, examining, on an anonymized basis, the GRE scores of current and former HLS students who took both the GRE and the LSAT. In accordance with American Bar Association (ABA) Standards for Legal Education, the aim of the study was to determine whether the GRE is a valid predictor of first-year academic performance in law school. The statistical study showed that the GRE is an equally valid predictor of first-year grades.

“Harvard Law School is continually working to eliminate barriers as we search for the most talented candidates for law and leadership,” said HLS Dean Martha Minow. “For many students, preparing for and taking both the GRE and the LSAT is unaffordable. All students benefit when we can diversify our community in terms of academic background, country of origin, and financial circumstances. Also, given the promise of the revolutions in biology, computer science, and engineering, law needs students with science, technology, engineering and math backgrounds. For these students, international students, multidisciplinary scholars, and joint-degree students, the GRE is a familiar and accessible test, and using it is a great way to reach candidates not only for law school, but for tackling the issues and opportunities society will be facing.”

In recent years, the Law School has taken other such steps, including: conducting interviews via Skype; eliminating the requirement for a “seat deposit” for accepted students; and launching a deferred-admissions pilot program to encourage and accept applications from Harvard College juniors who commit to two years of post-collegiate work experience prior to starting law school.

Jessica Soban, associate dean for Admissions and Strategic Initiatives, said, “We believe the admissions process should be reflective of the values of the Law School more broadly, and that means experimentation and innovation. Each admissions cycle, we evaluate the changing landscape for top talent and determine how we can continue to attract the best students to the field of law.”

The ABA is currently reviewing possible changes to rules governing which tests law schools may use in making admissions decisions.

Minow said, “We look forward to working with the American Bar Association on finding the most effective ways to encourage the best students to enter the legal profession.”

https://today.law.harvard.edu/gre/

[dm1683]

What it means is that LS admissions is going to become more like UG admissions, with a focus on grades and softs and how much volunteering you did and all that. Oh, and whether you went to a prestigious undergrad or not.

Bottom line: top law school classes are going to get even more elitist and privileged than they are right now.

[Npret]

What it means is that LS admissions is going to become more like UG admissions, with a focus on grades and softs and how much volunteering you did and all that. Oh, and whether you went to a prestigious undergrad or not.

Bottom line: top law school classes are going to get even more elitist and privileged than they are right now.

You are saying this because you assume everyone will ace the GRE so it becomes a meaningless factor in admissions? It's interesting that the GRE is just as predictive of 1L success as the LSAT.

[dj9i27]

What it means is that LS admissions is going to become more like UG admissions, with a focus on grades and softs and how much volunteering you did and all that. Oh, and whether you went to a prestigious undergrad or not.

Bottom line: top law school classes are going to get even more elitist and privileged than they are right now.

You are saying this because you assume everyone will ace the GRE so it becomes a meaningless factor in admissions? It's interesting that the GRE is just as predictive of 1L success as the LSAT.

Just going to input. Studied for the GRE maybe 1.5 months while a senior and scored in the 99%. Wayyyyyyyy easier than the LSAT and I didn't see how it would assist with law very much other than proving you are in fact literate.

[Alexandros]

What it means is that LS admissions is going to become more like UG admissions, with a focus on grades and softs and how much volunteering you did and all that. Oh, and whether you went to a prestigious undergrad or not.

Bottom line: top law school classes are going to get even more elitist and privileged than they are right now.

+1
Ughhhh.


Also I think highest two scores for the GRE are 99%ile, and below is 98%ile? Whereas for the LSAT, 173 is 99%ile (or close to) and 180 is 99.97%ile. Perfect GRE =/= perfect LSAT in terms of percentiles. As it is now, there's a big difference between a 173 and a 180.

[Npret]

What it means is that LS admissions is going to become more like UG admissions, with a focus on grades and softs and how much volunteering you did and all that. Oh, and whether you went to a prestigious undergrad or not.

Bottom line: top law school classes are going to get even more elitist and privileged than they are right now.

You are saying this because you assume everyone will ace the GRE so it becomes a meaningless factor in admissions? It's interesting that the GRE is just as predictive of 1L success as the LSAT.

Just going to input. Studied for the GRE maybe 1.5 months while a senior and scored in the 99%. Wayyyyyyyy easier than the LSAT and I didn't see how it would assist with law very much other than proving you are in fact literate.

The GRE does as good a job as the LSAT at predicting law school success. They must have had a way to distinguish among GRE scores. Or maybe everyone had perfect scores.
I thought applicants would be glad to get rid of the LSAT but you guys aren't and I don't really understand why.
I'm looking forward to seeing what happens with this change.