Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- 33.4K All Categories
- 28.1K LSAT
- 17K General
- 5.2K Logical Reasoning
- 1.4K Reading Comprehension
- 1.7K Logic Games
- 70 Podcasts
- 193 Webinars
- 12 Scholarships
- 194 Test Center Reviews
- 2.2K Study Groups
- 111 Study Guides/Cheat Sheets
- 2.5K Specific LSAT Dates
- 29 November 2024 LSAT
- 18 October 2024 LSAT
- 9 September 2024 LSAT
- 38 August 2024 LSAT
- 28 June 2024 LSAT
- 4 April 2024 LSAT
- 11 February 2024 LSAT
- 22 January 2024 LSAT
- 38 November 2023 LSAT
- 43 October 2023 LSAT
- 14 September 2023 LSAT
- 38 August 2023 LSAT
- 27 June 2023 LSAT
- 30 Sage Advice
- 5K Not LSAT
- 4K Law School Admissions
- 13 Law School Explained
- 10 Forum Rules
- 636 Technical Problems
- 286 Off-topic
Accommodation/extra time, so unfair
SedationNeeded
Free Trial Member
I have seen a few posts here and on other forums about accommodation, didn't think much about them back then. But now as the July exam is within 2 weeks I have just found out what it really means: it means if you can prove yourself to be disabled/with learning disability/ADHD and whatnot, you get extra time in most cases. I learned about this from a friend who said, without awareness that I am studying for the lsat, that he would do fine because his parents got him a doctor's note so he could receive accommodations for the SAT, and guess what, for the LSAT as well.
It makes me really hurt and depressed, thinking about the many difficulties, intellectually and financially, that I had to overcame to prepare for this exam. I do not regret spending 1000+hours to master the logic and skills required for the LSAT, nor do I have anything against people with real disabilities, like if they are blind or deaf or have an IQ of 80. But for some others I have to admit that their actions seem seriously questionable.
Funny I thought this is a standardized exam. Does anyone think the same?
- Is it fair to grant accommodation to people for ambiguous excuses such as learning disability?289 votes
- Yes, and such applicants do not have to report this to the law schools. (Current Policy)55.02%
- Yes, but those receiving that benefit should disclose it22.49%
- Heck no22.49%
Comments
It doesn't really matter if it's wholly fair. LSAC would rather give some people accommodations that don't truly need them than face massive lawsuits. Don't expect anything to change. Control what you can control.
Thank you for sharing this background information! I am also taking the July exam and will try my best. And yes, the best strategy now is to stop worrying about things that we cannot control. Good luck everybody!
@aibohm The polling question you have presented is already leading in the way in which it is phrased as you state "for ambiguous excuses". While your friend may have very well given you a bad impression of people with learning disabilities, there a plenty of people who have a learning disability that affects their ability to focus, read, and comprehend at the same speed as others who do not possess a learning disability. Learning disabilities are well studied and defined and are not as "ambiguous" as your friend let you believe, to have your learning disability recognized often takes multiple tests and observations by certified professions. While I can understand your frustration (studying and taking the LSAT is challenging), I encourage you to compare yourself less to others and just strive for your personal best. Getting hung up on whether having accommodation for people with learning disabilities is unfair will only distract yourself from your true goal of staying focused and succeeding in law school. I wish you all the luck on your LSAT (if you have not taken it yet) and law school journey.
As someone who is receiving accommodations for the LSAT and has for tests in undergrad, I will not try to take offense at your question and accompanying poll. What I would first say is that you should walk a mile in someone's shoes who struggles in ways you cannot understand. If in fact you have mentally and intellectually struggled then perhaps you should seek out accommodations for yourself. The vast majority of us have struggled not just in preparation for the LSAT but also throughout the entirety of our education and have well-documented evidence encompasses an enormous time span. This is not the college admission scandal where wealthy parents are paying astronomical amounts of money to have their child admitted. You, as someone who is taking the LSAT in hopes of becoming an attorney, a cornerstone of our legal system should always hold the presumption of innocence.
Personally, I provided over 20 pages of documentation in order to be approved and find the assertion or rather presumption that LSAC approves applicants out of litigation avoidance is appalling. You have no idea what it is like to be pulled away from your classmates to be tested alone because it is not just a sufficient but necessary condition for your success, or being made fun of by your classmates for being different. Would you ask a man in a wheelchair riding on the bus to get up so you could have his seat?
LSAC clearly defines what is necessary in order to be approved for accommodations and I would encourage you to read and then discern whether the grounds are "ambiguous". Further, familiarize yourself about what constitutes a disability and thank your lucky stars it is not something you are afflicted with. Lastly, look up HIPAA laws and why they were designed to protect an individuals health information. Having a disability is a health issue and I suppose as someone who gets additional time we are to surrounder another legal right because it is upsetting or "unfair".
Your glaring immaturity is second only to your ignorance.
Is it true that some people can find a way to receive accommodations despite not actually needing them? Probably. Does that make accommodations wholly unfair? No. Are you the judge of what constitutes as a “real disability”? Absolutely not.
@"Pride Only Hurts" merci beaucoup for reminding me of this. While I was only talking about the group of people that fit into your category of "probably", it is true others seem to be justified in their demands. Still I am talking about those that are evidently disabled, not those who simply spent a few thousand dollars to ask a doctor to pronounce them ADHD, etc. Does buying an expert witness make you a stronger case in the court of justice? No. As for how much you have paid for it, how difficult it is to hide it, none of these matters.
Again, if you think you are a bit disadvantaged, but not in a profound way that prohibits you to read or hear or breathe, just in a way that makes you want that extra 50% to 100% time so bad, do it. But do know that though this is not illegal, it is morally wrong. No need to add that everyone has their problems but not everyone is without principles. Stop believing that you are actually smarter than who you are, and top thinking that you are entitled to be more successful so much that you could demand everyone else to give up their fair chances to compensate for your incompetencies.
I know this would probably be ignored and those who thought they have hacked the system would still continue doing what they are doing. If anyone wanted to be like them, a few google searches have provided me with this link, thought it could be helpful:
http://thebrainclinic.com/assessment-options/extended-time-standardized-tests/lsat/
between 2014-2017 the number of students granted accommodation had exceeded 3,000 and that number has grown 400%. This could be you.
I remember a time when people were not blind to injustice, je me souviens.
“Stop believing that you are actually smarter than who you are, or you are entitled to be more successful so much that you could demand everyone else to give up their fair chances to compensate for your incompetencies.”
Not sure who this is directed at but go ahead and make this your mantra every time you sit down and study.
"...their actions seem questionable..." Sounds like what some cops say before shooting someone in the back 9 times.
And, like, how? How are "their actions questionable..."? Being diagnosed with a disability "they" likely did not ask for you?
You have no way of knowing who "paid thousands of dollars to ask a doctor to pronounce them ADHD" vs someone whom "paid thousands of dollars" to be diagnosed with ADHD - or any other disability -for that matter. Judas priest.
If you want to accurately diagnose disabilities take the MCAT. Otherwise, maybe mind your own business. Just a thought.
At the end of the day, what must be considered is the net harm. The percentage of individuals applying and getting approved for accommodations is minimal. Of those, sure a few probably do get through who really do not need them, thus unfairly taking a seat or two at any given school. But what about every student who needs them to perform, who can certainly become an extraordinary lawyer, but cannot perform on a standardized test do their brain not being, well, 'standard'.
For my entire life, I was always the 'smart' kid, I was moved up a grade, aced everything, etc, but in my sophomore year of high-school, I sustained a serious concussion. I missed six weeks of classes and returned slowly, but every day was this painful exercise in simply completing basic tasks. Re-reading math problems five times because my short term memory was all but destroyed, staring at a jumbled mix of words hoping to make some sense of it, misreading instructions, and so forth. It felt like my identity had been ripped away, and every minute of that year was difficult. Ultimately, I received accommodations for the remainder of the semester, which allowed me to preform to my fullest abilities. It was not a matter of me being less intelligent, it was simply that I needed additional time to prove my intelligence. Luckily my symptoms gradually lessened and by the fall I was able to complete my studies normally.
Those few months ingrained in me such empathy for individuals who struggle like that every day. I it was debilitating, and agonizing. As for the LSAT it all boils down to a proportionate balancing of salutary and deleterious effects. If for every ten students who need accommodations, one takes the exam and benefits disproportionately, it is not the end of the world. Your opinion is callous, lacking basic compassion, and fosters an environment when individuals with invisible struggles are cast away even further.
I think you need to grow up a little.
@SedationNeeded
Given your user name, I would be inclined to think you know a thing or two about things that alter the mind. However, in making that presumption I would be following your lead and faulty thought process that everyone who gets accommodations spend thousands of dollars to effecuate a doctor breaking his hypocratic oath. (Your wording was pronounce, do docter's really pronounce or diagnosis?) I do not claim to be smarter than anyone else nor does it appear responders have either. To be quite frank your response laden with french interjections and pretentious verbage is the only example I have seen on 7Sage of someone trying to demean and belittle others. This has in my experience been a very warm, welcoming and considerate community.
You make a lot of sweeping statements that gives rise to the question of who not only thinks they are smarter than everyone else but are also morally superior? Are you the second coming of Christ and redeemer who gets to judge our moral fortitude and the guiding principle we use to operate our life? I am not sure what world you live in and by virtue of your experiences would suggest that a witness can be "bought". This is the real world and to insinuate such a scenario is to insult all working attorneys who we hope to join in the pursuit of law. I worked in the legal profession and I can attest to the fact that the attorneys to which I reported would never sacrifice being disbarred for the sake of winning a case.
This is not about entitlement, asking someone to sacrifice their "fair chances" to compensate for anyone's inadequacies. Reflecting on your statement reminds me of what could have been a bad chapter in Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged. Since we are sharing web pages versus case law please take a moment to review: http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/collectivism.html
In closing, I looked at the website you referenced and it clearly states the necessity of medical and (childhood) development history, as well as school records dating from grammar school through high school. Goodness. Kudos to me for have forethought in grammar school to feign a disability so that one day I could get extra time on the LSAT.
Your post encompasses logical reasoning errors from A-Z and an incoherent reading comprehension passage to boot. Hey, we're all just minions just trying to stay afloat in your pond of intellectual superiority. As such, I shall return to my world of incompetency, moral deprivation and principle deficient life. I am just a single mother that will feel achieved if I can EARN a 156 and ultimately do child advocacy work. Hopefully on this path you find passion and someone lesser than yourself that you feel compelled to fight for.
I hope moderators shut this post down and the originator of this post has learned proper decorum when using a public forum.
If I was hiring a lawyer, I would certainly prefer one that didn't need to have accommodations to get to where they are because they are mentally disabled. Are people that request accommodations for the LSAT going to request accommodations for law school exams, for the bar exam, and eventually their clients when a deadline is set?
If you become a lawyer, are you going to request that your clients give you accommodations as well?
That's not what I said. Their current position on accommodations is the most legally tenable one. The current system is fair - the only way in which it may seem unfair is insofar as some people likely do abuse it and then leave a bad taste in the mouths of people not getting any. Their position is to grant accommodations to those with an appropriate amount of documentation of a condition that would merit accommodations rather than do anything to make it seem like some people are getting an easier test by potentially faking a condition by doing something such as flagging scores (which I think is what they previously did and got sued for), even though there are likely SOME privileged applicants gaming the system. Hence my above post.
BUT, the cheating is the fault of the bad people who're doing that, not LSAC, and it'll probably/hopefully catch up to them anyway. The only way flagging them would make sense is if you were to take the position of punishing everyone getting accommodations as though everyone is abusing the system even though it's probably a pretty small percentage. They have simply decided not to try to have any part in the business of deciding who is legitimate and who isn't out of the people who have documentation. Some people will abuse the system - that doesn't mean I think that you are, or that all people who're getting them are. I apologize if I made you feel that way. I probably could've written a little more in my initial post to explain how their previous position was wrong/resulted in a big lawsuit and why the current one makes the most sense and shouldn't lead to any litigation.
If you had actually read my post, I will not be receiving accommodations for the LSAT, nor did I use them for more than a semester.
That being said, the real world provides far greater leniency to play with deadlines than an exam. Maybe someone stays late, maybe someone plans their schedule so as to accommodate how long any given task may take them.
Troll post. Everyone should ignore. Some people are insecure and have to post this kind of stuff to make them feel better about themselves by arguing anonymously with people on the internet. I’ve seen this same story posted on Reddit too. Either author gets a kick out of riling up the forums or they actually believe accommodations are an “injustice.” Either way, arguing with them isn’t going to do anyone any good. Don’t feed the troll.
@ExcludedMiddle
Really, no harm. I wasn't aware of LSAT accommodations until the disabiliity coordinator at my university made me aware and helped me begin the process. The fact that the system is being scammed is frustrating to me as well. I apologize if my comment was harsh, it was more directed at the initial post and how sophomoric the poll was.
@blljhnsn35
Here's a simple "accommodation" attorneys use with a varied amount of frequency it's called
"Motion for Continuance". Law schools and state bar exams both have disability accommodations for those that qualify.
@drbrown2
Great advice. Guilty but will rehabilitate by no longer feeding the troll.
@OP Life isn't fair and the wealthy/well off will always find a way to game the system. Welcome to America and being an adult. Don't let someone else's shitty game mess up your groove. They can't game their way into a good personal statement or having diversity.
Actually, a good personal statement can indeed be bought, diversity, not so much, but some have tried.
How hard for you. I was born with the following learning disabilities: Non-Verbal learning disorder, Auditory Processing Disorder, and Disgraphia. In addition I have dspraxia and sensory integration disorder too. I have to study 3 to 5 times harder compared to everyone else, in addition, my hand-eye coordination is very weak making something like logic games even harder too. I also have a physical condition that causes my insides to cause me incredible levels of pain with no warning. If not for my double the amount of time I would not have a chance to enter law school. You do not know how LUCKY YOU ARE, everything is hard for me, incredibly so, and I am tired of people like you who don't know how blessed they are whining. I wish I didn't need the extra time, but I do. I can from the sensory integration disorder have little feeling on my left side, on my right my sense of weight is off. Live a day in someone with a learning disorders shoes and tell them how lucky they have it. I think you have more to work on then just the lsat, something far more important. I'll make you a deal, if can cut my life to 10 years from and cure me of my disabilities I'll gladly take it, why? Because my LDs and other disabilities have had me face relentless discrimination, marginalization, isolation in my society. My life has been so painful and your kind of posts infuriate me beyond measure. But if you just want to switch? Sure. I'd love to not have fragments of my memory seem to fade away with no warning for a day. Love not to feel knives twisting in my insides. Like to know what it's like to be treated like a human being with rights and respect. My life has been incredibly painful and frankly miserable so yes I do dam well deserve double the amount of time. Believe me though I wish I wasn't damaged, I do every single day, wish I could be privileged enough to make have the audacity to even think that such a post is remotely appropriate.
I am normally a rather understanding person when it comes to people of different opinions, but I suggest you educate yourself and grow up. I wish I had it as hard as you have it, but that's life. But clearly you felt the need to vent on here. I hope you never face any actual challenges in life, not sure how someone so privileged could deal with them.
Saying a learning disability is "ambiguous" is probably one of the biggest insult you can give to those who actually have one, and yourself. It shows that you are so privileged that you think learning disabilities are not valid and those who have it don't deserve accommodations to help them truly reflect their abilities on the LSAT. Your post just made everyone with a learning disability or any other disability that can't be seem by the eye harder. This is the equivalent of saying those on a wheelchair don't deserve to use a ramp. A learning disability is a disability. ADHD is a disability. Yes, they may be on medication that other may just use to boost their focus; but without it, those with ADHD actually struggle to function, while privileged jerks like you can go on just fine. Just because you can't see it doesn't mean it isn't a hurdle that impacts people who have such a disability everyday. Your post infuriates me.
"Human progress isn't measured by industry. It's measured by the value you place on a life. An unimportant life, a life without privilege. The boy who died on the river, that boy's value is your value. That's what defines an age, that's what defines a species."
Doctor Who
I myself was born deaf (prelingual) and have used a cochlear implant since I was 18 months old. It sits over my right ear, and I have worn a cochlear implant nearly every day of my life since then. When I was young, I was behind in speech and reading (both stemming from my challenges using a cochlear implant). I remember being pulled out of classrooms to work with speech paths down the hall. In short, my life has been affected tremendously from my deafness, a few negative, but many positive.
To this day, I have a difficult time communicating with people who have accents, with people over the phone, and even with people who speak differently, such as young children still learning their ABCs and elderly folk who draw out their words slowly.
I recently found out that I qualify for some accommodations on the LSAT, but it does not include extra time (one that seems to be the source of conversation on this thread). I have absolutely no problem at all with someone telling me their frustrations with this issue, as I see it as a chance to educate others about my cochlear implant and deafness, as well as my experiences with the Deaf Community. My disability does not define me in any way, but I define it in absolutely every way.
I wish I could tell everyone this (whether you have a disability or not): stop being a victim, and make the best of it. If you have a disability, please educate others about it. If you don't have a disability, go meet someone who does, they just might inspire you
Happy studying to all! Feel free to chat with me anytime, and I'll tell you more about my story if you'd like!
It is designed to be fair.
Having ADHD on its own is really not that bad.
When you combine it with other learning disabilities, like processing issues, dyslexia, anxiety etc., alongside ADHD, that is when you really need the accomodations.
If everyone with a diagnosis could just simply get accomodations, it wouldn't be fair to those with really bad disabilities.
I was given extra time for my exam, but I literally would never even be able to score above 150ish without it, even if I mastered everything, just because reading takes me FOREVER. My entire life I have had to put in 3X the effort everyone else puts in. I spent every single weekend and weekday of my undergrad at the library trying to keep up with a reduced courseload. I had a horrible time. I truly did not have the standard university experience and my GPA wasn't even that high.
What is really unfair, in my opinion, is that some people, like myself, are born with lots of disabilities that make studying hell. What is also unfair, is that some people are born with pysical disabilities, or develop life-threatening conditions (ex: cancer); they don't get the same opportunities we have to actually work to fullfill out goals/aspirations.
Just remember that those getting extra time have to put in a LOT more time, effort, and energy behind the scenes and are already at a huge disadvantage.
What your friend did was not fair, or maybe they have more issues than they let on to, but life is not always fair. I know its a hard pill to swallow. I am not trying to be mean and I understand where you are coming from. I really do. Always remind yourself that it could be worse or you will never be satisfied.
Don't harp on this, it'll eat you alive. Just do your best, I am confident that you can do well, nevertheless!
Ok. Let's say you're a Public Defender and you have a case set for Jury Trial. You request a continuance because you need more time to prepare for trial due to your mental disability. You might get away with it once or twice, and you can try sugar coating it with other actual legitimate reasons, but you're not going to be able to pull that shit all the time. Eventually judges and prosecutors are going to catch on. And it's not fair to the client who could be facing potential consequences like prison, loss of their job if convicted, etc. It's a client based profession.
There's a recent trend of people wanting to let others know how victimized they are. Tough shit. As the OP mentioned, there's been a huge jump in the number of people receiving accommodations. Quit fabricating excuses for yourself and actually put in the work for it.
Please don't feed the troll. It's waste of electricity.
@blljhnsn35
News flash. Public defenders represent indigent individuals which equals little to no job. You're so well-versed in how the court systems runs that being an attorney will be a piece of cake for you. However, you might want to temper your god complex when you go before the bench. Silly me. You are so enlighted that recent trends suggest upon passing the bar you will perform as the Judge and Jury. Not to mention, in your altered version of life prosecutors get to be the State Disciplinary Board of Attorneys. My prediction is partners will be falling all over themselves to get direction from the new associate. Narcissistic much?
@Lemongrab
You are so right.
@Wouldratherbefishing @Lolo1996 @AustinTexas
Faith is seeing light with your heart when all your eyes see is blindness. May your Jedi force be with you on test day and always keep the faith.
My spouse has an honest-to-god learning disability. It is correctable, but growing up, they didn't catch it until he was well into high school. Since reading and writing is pretty hard set by your teens, he still has issues sometimes. Not to a ridiculous level, but he has to take a little more time to overcome it. It's people like him for whom the accommodations were created.
Is it fair that he gets more time when he is slower due to no fault of his own? I think so. It evens the playing field. Assuming he were interested in law school, anyway.
Are there going to be people who abuse this? You bet. No system is full-proof. There are abuses in all things (food stamps, disability, accommodations, etc). But, to borrow from Voltaire,“It is better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer.” I would rather accept some abuses than to shut out a lot of great potential lawyers who need the extra time on the test through no fault of their own. Besides.. while they may be able to get more time on the test, it doesn't necessarily mean they will do that great. There are some things money can't do for you, like take the actual test or do your finals.
https://www.eeoc.gov/facts/accommodations-attorneys.html
I am sure this information is in the other replies but the opportunity for accommodations are required to meets the standards set by the Americans with Disabilities Act. Odd that you wouldn't know this already..
.Every syllabus I've seen in college for as long as I can remember has a section that covers this.
https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/504faq.html
Accommodations may be essential for some. However, disclosure of accommodations should be mandatory. The most difficult part of the LSAT is the 35 minute time restriction placed on each section. Any test without these 35 minute restrictions is simply not the LSAT. Also, how on earth is it possible to decide exactly how much extra time is appropriate? In some cases, people may not be given the appropriate amount of extra time. In other cases, the extra time awarded will be much more than what is appropriate. An extra 5 minutes on each section would increase my score by more than 10 points, I have tested this multiple times. My problem here is not with the accommodations, it is that a law school has no way to differentiate between myself and someone who had twice as long as I did to take the "same" test.
“Excuses”?? Perhaps an individual with a debilitating “excuse” may see it a bit differently.
Hi, HairyTurtle.
I would strongly disagree with part of your assertion, that is, "The most difficult part of the LSAT is the 35 minute time restriction placed on each section." For you, this assertion may hold true. For some others, this is a weak argument. Also, what if the test taker, who, for example, hypothetically speaking, is entitled to 70 minutes but spends the first 25 minutes having an anxiety attack, during which he has not yet started the exam?
I do not have time to undermine some other parts of your explanations but wanted to step up to the plate to attempt to wreck part of your explanation because it is blatantly absurd and, to put it bluntly with good taste and propriety, somewhat premature.
It's trivial.