Subscription pricing
What do you guys think of this?
[Admin Edit] LSAC's tweet and LSAC's announcement:
https://twitter.com/Official_LSAT/status/864501182202556416
http://www.lsac.org/jd/announcements-and-news
"Starting with the September 2017 LSAT, there will no longer be any limitations on the number of times a test taker can take the LSAT in a two-year period. LSAC has revised this policy as part of its planning for additional administrations of the LSAT. We will provide more information about the LSAT schedule in the coming weeks."
8
83 comments
@gregoryalexanderdevine723 said:
:cry: (/3(/p)
You and SweetTort were my first LSAT-buddies... I'm getting emotional now.
He will always be Frank Underwood to me!
Haha FACTS! Someone not too long ago had his old Frank avatar and I got excited thinking it was him lol.
I wonder how he is doing..
@6400 said:
@zachweisenbarger992 said:
@gregoryalexanderdevine723 said:
@zachweisenbarger992 said:
Yeah, if they start averaging, I'm more than fucked.
I would think if they do eventually start averaging again, it would be a way off into the future. I also think schools will fight that as much as they can so they can keep their rankings. I would't worry too much about this. It would suck though, haha. I'm so paranoid I'm refusing to take this test until I'm hitting 180s like SweetTort ;)
Yeah, hopefully they don't average or else I'll most likely not be going to a top school.
Live, Love, SweetTort (3(/p)
:disappointed: SweetTort: the rubber band ball that stole our hearts. We hardly knew ye.
@zachweisenbarger992 said:
@gregoryalexanderdevine723 said:
@zachweisenbarger992 said:
Yeah, if they start averaging, I'm more than fucked.
I would think if they do eventually start averaging again, it would be a way off into the future. I also think schools will fight that as much as they can so they can keep their rankings. I would't worry too much about this. It would suck though, haha. I'm so paranoid I'm refusing to take this test until I'm hitting 180s like SweetTort ;)
Yeah, hopefully they don't average or else I'll most likely not be going to a top school.
Live, Love, SweetTort (3(/p)
:cry: (/3(/p)
You and SweetTort were my first LSAT-buddies... I'm getting emotional now.
He will always be Frank Underwood to me!
@6400 said:
Yeah, hopefully they don't average or else I'll most likely not be going to a top school.
Live, Love, SweetTort (3(/p)
:disappointed: SweetTort: the rubber band ball that stole our hearts. We hardly knew ye.
I spoke to him frequently in PMs. He's a great guy tbh, just very neurotic lol
Long Live The Tort
@zachweisenbarger992 said:
@gregoryalexanderdevine723 said:
@zachweisenbarger992 said:
Yeah, if they start averaging, I'm more than fucked.
I would think if they do eventually start averaging again, it would be a way off into the future. I also think schools will fight that as much as they can so they can keep their rankings. I would't worry too much about this. It would suck though, haha. I'm so paranoid I'm refusing to take this test until I'm hitting 180s like SweetTort ;)
Yeah, hopefully they don't average or else I'll most likely not be going to a top school.
Live, Love, SweetTort (3(/p)
:disappointed: SweetTort: the rubber band ball that stole our hearts. We hardly knew ye.
@gregoryalexanderdevine723 said:
@zachweisenbarger992 said:
Yeah, if they start averaging, I'm more than fucked.
I would think if they do eventually start averaging again, it would be a way off into the future. I also think schools will fight that as much as they can so they can keep their rankings. I would't worry too much about this. It would suck though, haha. I'm so paranoid I'm refusing to take this test until I'm hitting 180s like SweetTort ;)
Yeah, hopefully they don't average or else I'll most likely not be going to a top school.
Live, Love, SweetTort (3(/p)
Yeah, that's what I meant. For me, it'd have huge implications. My high score is 170. My average is 165. Those early mistakes would suddenly become very, very meaningful if they start averaging.
@zachweisenbarger992 said:
Yeah, if they start averaging, I'm more than fucked.
I would think if they do eventually start averaging again, it would be a way off into the future. I also think schools will fight that as much as they can so they can keep their rankings. I would't worry too much about this. It would suck though, haha. I'm so paranoid I'm refusing to take this test until I'm hitting 180s like SweetTort ;)
Yeah, if they start averaging, I'm more than fucked.
@jkatz1488955 said:
@tristandesinor505 reading again. Sounds like he is saying that USNWR could respond to unlimited takes by incorporating the average of a candidate's scores into their rankings. Doing so would have a major effect on for any retakers because admissions councils would suddenly care A LOT more.
ahh gotcha; that makes sense.
I don't know when it's dated but here's a summary list of top law school policies involving multiple scores. Many already state they consider your entire LSAT history while others only consider your highest. Imo, do your best the first time, try again if necessary, but just because it's an option doesn't mean you should take advantage of the unlimited tries.
https://www.velocitylsat.com/resources/law-school-multiple-lsat-score-policies
@tristandesinor505 reading again. Sounds like he is saying that USNWR could respond to unlimited takes by incorporating the average of a candidate's scores into their rankings. Doing so would have a major effect on for any retakers because admissions councils would suddenly care A LOT more.
@jkatz1488955 said:
@jhaldy10325
I'd be really concerned with the potential to switch from high score to average.
what do you mean by this?
Same question ....
@jhaldy10325
I'd be really concerned with the potential to switch from high score to average.
what do you mean by this?
Schools will continue to be primarily concerned with maintaining/increasing their rankings. The real question is, will USNews change their metrics? This would fundamentally affect the foundations of this consideration, and if I were just starting out, I'd be really concerned with the potential to switch from high score to average. For now, I think the traditional policy holds: Don't take until you're ready.
These changes like accepting the GRE and giving more opportunities to take the LSAT, with no limitations on the number of takes no less, seem to indicate that law school is becoming a lot more like business and trade schools. I think this'll encourage older people to apply and will put more pressure on people to have work experience before law school.
@tristandesinor505 said:
Can anyone think of any negatives to this option? -- is taking the LSAT 'too many' times detrimental? And what would admissions folks consider as 'too many'?
It would depend on the school and how they react to it. This along with the LSAC upping tests per year from 4 to 6 probably will cause some issues with some of them. Redoing is one thing but I don't think any school would want someone who takes it 4 or 5 times within a year until they get a score they like over someone who only took it once or twice.
@tristandesinor505 said:
Can anyone think of any negatives to this option? -- is taking the LSAT 'too many' times detrimental? And what would admissions folks consider as 'too many'?
It's hard to answer because I'm not sure how this new rule will change how they look at multiple LSAT scores. Previously, under the old rule even if most schools didn't average tests they still considered them. Especially the top schools. So I would guess it is still better to have one high score rather than multiple scores. At the end of the day, I don't think you'll ever be at too much of a disadvantage from multiple retakes.
@tristandesinor505 said:
Can anyone think of any negatives to this option? -- is taking the LSAT 'too many' times detrimental? And what would admissions folks consider as 'too many'?
I think there is really no telling what negatives can result from this change until we see how admissions committees react to it. If they don't care, then applicants will go on as they have and if they have multiple scores then adcomms will care about your highest. If they do care, there's the possibility of them holding it over an applicant somehow. But I feel like if U.S. News doesn't really make schools report all scores, then adcomms most likely won't give a crap.
Can anyone think of any negatives to this option? -- is taking the LSAT 'too many' times detrimental? And what would admissions folks consider as 'too many'?
I totally agree with the benefits from it! @gregoryalexanderdevine723
@zachweisenbarger992 It sure would sway me to study for the LSAT.
I wonder how it will affect this cycle. Maybe more people that are less ready (aka- lower scorers) will try and take it. Nevertheless, it's very interesting!
@tatianacook99 said:
What would be a reason for this change?
I would guess to be more competitive with other tests like the GRE/GMAT. Financial incentives probably played a large role, too.
Either way, I'm happy to see LSAC making changes that make the test better!
@tatianacook99 said:
What would be a reason for this change?
Possibly the fact that some schools have started to accept the GRE. LSAC probably fears losing business by people opting out of taking the LSAT and just taking the GRE
What would be a reason for this change?
@6400 said:
Spivey just posted on Twitter that starting in 2018-2019 the LSAT will be offered 6 times a year
Feel free to make a new thread about this! :)
@slcaldwell82590749 said:
Coming from someone who was close to the threshold this is great news. My first two takes I received the same score (154) and never really pushed myself to study hard. My next take was going to be my final opportunity (I still hope it is!), but this allows room for error should something happen on the 3rd attempt.
Yeah (3. I really love unlimited takes for this reason as well. It now just becomes about scoring your potential and that opportunity is not limited by number of takes.(/p)