Category Archives: LSAT may become optional

The ABA is reconsidering whether the LSAT should be required.

Evidence that @Official_LSAT is making changes to better compete with #GRE

For some I have been arguing that the days of the “LSAT Monopoly” are coming to an end. Over the last decade there has been discussion about whether the LSAT should be required at all AND/OR whether the GRE should be used as a substitute for the LSAT. I have discussed this in numerous posts which include:

– “American Bar Association Considers Whether The LSAT Should Be Required”

– “The GRE As A Possible Substitute For The LSAT”

– “The GRE Joins The LSAT As An Objective and Reliable Admissions Test”

– “The Revolution Is Beginning: Forget the #LSAT. This Law School Will Accept Your #GRE Scores.”

In any case, it appears that the Law School Admission Council has accepted that it will have to compete with the GRE.

The evidence includes:

For those who don’t believe in free markets and competition, this is your answer.

Toronto Mastering The LSAT Preparation Courses

John Richardson – Mastering The LSAT  – Toronto, Canada – 416 410 7737

Put 30 Years of LSAT Teaching Experience and Law School Admissions Consulting To Work For You!

The only complete LSAT and Law School Application Course!

New Law School Preview Program – Everything you need to know about law school and how to succeed!


Who: John Richardson – Author: Law School Bound and Mastering The LSAT (of the bar of Ontario)

Where: University of Toronto – St. Michael’s College

When: Multiple start dates – Courses starting on any of:  November 16, 23, 30

Continue reading →

The GRE as a possible substitute for the LSAT

4. If either the ABA or the law schools continue to require a “valid and reliable  admission test” what test or tests should  be required? Should  the LSAT be the only game in town?

The general requirement of a “valid and reliable admission test” is not a specific requirement  to  use  the LSAT.  (It is true that the ABA rules require a law school to demonstrate that another test is valid and reliable.) I predict  that there will be  competitors to the LSAT– and it is high time. Continue reading →

Will the law schools continue to use an “optional LSAT”?

3. If  the requirement of a “valid and reliable admission test”  is discontinued, will the law schools  continue to require a “valid and reliable  admission test” in their  own admissions process?

The answer will be determined over  time. Even without an ABA mandated LSAT  requirement, I believe  the law schools will  continue to use it or another admission test. What will not be a requirement for the law schools will still be a requirement for law school applicants.

My reasons include the following: Continue reading →

Is the LSAT a “valid and reliable admission test”?

2. Is the LSAT a “valid and reliable admission test”?

Is the LSAT an accurate measure of what it purports  to  measure? LSAT takes the position that LSAT scores do correlate with law school performance.

“The LSAT, like any admission test, is not a perfect predictor of law school performance. The predictive power of an admission test is limited by many factors, such as the complexity of the skills the test is designed to measure and the unmeasurable factors that can affect students’ performances, such as motivation, physical and mental health, or work and family responsibilities. In spite of these factors, the LSAT compares very favorably with admission tests used in other graduate and professional fields of study. For more details on this subject, go to LSAT Scores as Predictors of Law School Performance (PDF).”
http://www.lsac.org/JD/LSAT/LSAT-score.asp”

http://www.lsac.org/JD/pdfs/LSAT-Score-Predictors-of-Performance.pdf Continue reading →

Should law schools be required to use the LSAT?

1. Should  law schools  be required to use a “valid and reliable admissions test”?

In attempting to answer this question, it makes sense to consider:

–       any stated rationale from the ABA for why a test should be required;
–       whether the law schools use the test in a manner  that is consistent
with that stated (or any other relevant) rationale;
–       whether that rationale  is justifiable

The Admission Test Requirement – The Stated Rationale

The ABA requires that a law school  use a “valid  and reliable admission test”.  It does not  require that the law school consider the scores and doesn’t prescribe how  the scores  should be used. S 503 is  evidence that, from the perspective of the ABA, that the purpose  of  requiring a “valid and reliable admissions test” is to: Continue reading →

The LSAT, Law School Admission, and Role The LSAT Plays in Law School Admission

The LSAT, Law School Admission, and Role The LSAT Plays in Law School Admission

– John Richardson, Toronto Canada

The LSAT  is required by almost every law school in the United States and Canada. (It is interesting that the law schools in Michigan, Illinois and Alabama have not required the LSAT in certain circumstances. It is unclear how this is consistent with the ABA
rules.)

Let’s begin with some sentiment  from the mainstream media:

“Yet it’s well-known among law school applicants that many Canadian schools sort their applications into piles by LSAT score and simply axe off those below a certain percentile. How many brilliant future lawyers are lost below that line, who, for one reason or another, simply can’t handle the LSAT?

It seems to me that there’s some room here for a Canadian law school to set itself apart by announcing a new, more holistic approach to admissions by waiving the LSAT requirement and perhaps doing something like having admissions interviews, which no Canadian law school does, instead, on top of using references and personal statements and extra-curriculars and undergraduate performance. If not for a whole
entering class, then perhaps schools could set aside a certain portion of first-year seats for applicants that do not require the LSAT, like the University of Michigan law school did in 2008. Continue reading →