I don't think vaccine usage will be that widespread at that point. Even if cases are somewhat under control, I doubt there will be in-person tests again until we are at a point where cases are really driven into the ground and there is widespread vaccine usage. Everyone is just abundantly cautious at this point
i also don't think in-person tests will be likely for june/august, for the reasons @noonawoon pointed out.
furthermore, there aren't yet major criticisms of the flex exams from the law school admissions or other people. unless there're lawsuits or other major concerns regarding the flex exams, i think this will be the norm for a while.
I agree with both @noonawoon and @"LOWERCASE EVERYTHING", but I'll add my opinion that if flex continues on as long as we're expecting, we should expect (or at least not be suprised by) some changes.
They've already started straying from the "middle of the road" type content. We can see this in the increased variation of section difficulty levels, that October shredder game, and the two rule sub questions in one section for November. My guess is that they're becoming more comfortable increasing the range of material (pool of sections drawn from for each test has also increased, though its not linear) as they accumulate more data.
By several accounts scoring has jumped. I think it's possible this is due in part to the flex format, and if this is true, with more data could come a "norming" of scoring scales.
LSAC's bank of vetted experimental sections is not unlimited. At some point, and I'm not informed enough to say what that point is, they are going to have to start running experimentals again.
Comments
I don't think vaccine usage will be that widespread at that point. Even if cases are somewhat under control, I doubt there will be in-person tests again until we are at a point where cases are really driven into the ground and there is widespread vaccine usage. Everyone is just abundantly cautious at this point
i also don't think in-person tests will be likely for june/august, for the reasons @noonawoon pointed out.
furthermore, there aren't yet major criticisms of the flex exams from the law school admissions or other people. unless there're lawsuits or other major concerns regarding the flex exams, i think this will be the norm for a while.
I agree with both @noonawoon and @"LOWERCASE EVERYTHING", but I'll add my opinion that if flex continues on as long as we're expecting, we should expect (or at least not be suprised by) some changes.
They've already started straying from the "middle of the road" type content. We can see this in the increased variation of section difficulty levels, that October shredder game, and the two rule sub questions in one section for November. My guess is that they're becoming more comfortable increasing the range of material (pool of sections drawn from for each test has also increased, though its not linear) as they accumulate more data.
By several accounts scoring has jumped. I think it's possible this is due in part to the flex format, and if this is true, with more data could come a "norming" of scoring scales.
LSAC's bank of vetted experimental sections is not unlimited. At some point, and I'm not informed enough to say what that point is, they are going to have to start running experimentals again.