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
Related Discussions
8 Likes
[Confirmed] Unlimited LSAT takes!
What do you guys think of this?
[Admin Edit] LSAC's tweet and LSAC's announcement:
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."
Comments
Is this true? Couldn't find any other info about this on the web (yet).
Although I think it is positive development for test takers overall, I feel like the 3-times-in-2-years rule also serves to motivate many people. Additionally, I still think it won't be viewed favorably by most schools to retake more than a reasonable number of times.
However, for some people I'm sure this is a game-changer.
I wonder if this is another move to encourage more people to go to law school on a broad scale (just the like the recent Harvard-accepting-the-GRE-in-lieu-of-LSAT) development?
Someone on TLS apparently called LSAC regarding an issue and they had additional told them about this as well. Spivey is a trusted source though.
hmm? I don't see an issue with this. Enrollment must be down?? I'm just rambling off something with not much thought but I think if the majority of schools take your highest score vs. your combined score or last score I don't think this will be much of an issue for them, but who knows?? If nothing else, LSAC stands to benefit because we already see so many ppl testing before they're ready thus needing retakes. That's $180 a pop!
Ayeee Mikey!
I think it's cool and should have always been this way. That said, I don't see it changing much. Most people will still study for 3 months and refuse to retake when they don't hit there scores so they can apply ASAP. Also, god knows how admissions people will look at 4 takes or whatever.
It's still pretty cool and perhaps a sign that the digital test is coming sooner than we thought.
Any thoughts on what this means for admissions? Hopefully they don't revert to looking at all of your scores..
AGREED! My take-away: I still take the test when I'm ready, but have a backup even if something goes wrong 2 takes in a row.
I think knowing that you can retake again no matter what takes a bit of stress off of you. Like for me... I JUST switched from June to September because I wanted more time to study for higher 170+ confidence since it would've been my third take. Probably would've yolo'd June if I had known this prior to switching lol
This was my initial thought. For the GRE's you can choose which test to send to schools. That would a true game changer. Without that I see this as mostly benefitting LSAC. Still good though.
Wow. I want see an official statement from LSAC...
Oh I hope so too. Plus I want LSAC to allow us to erase bad scores and only keep the best one!
Great point and good decision! Push it back to December and take with me
Yeah, I agree with that.
.... That was the one thing that I've always hated about the LSAT; that you can't choose which test scores to send in.
Here is their tweet:
Well that's interesting. Would have come in handy for me, lol.
Mmmm it doesn't really affect me. I'd still wait to take it when I'm ready.
+1. The real news will come in when they announce which scores you'd like to submit to schools. To me this just means more opportunity for LSAC to take your money haha.
So does this tip the preference slightly in favor of canceling your score if you're uncertain of the results?
Hmm given that most law schools still expect you to take the lsat only once or else avg the scores, I don't view this as a game changer. It is a different story, however, if lsac were to allow us to only send the best score.
I don't think anywhere averages your scores. I think I've only heard of yale really looking at multiple takes negatively, and that's only because they can do whatever they want.
@Mellow_Z really? Has the policy changed recently? Even like 5 years back that seemed to be the dominant practice
Yep, law schools don't adhere to this anymore. They may look at previous scores, but only Yale is known to average scores out. I think a large reason has to do with the number of applicants decreasing. That's why nowadays you'll see schools take applications way after their deadline.
Does this apply to people who used up all their takes for 2016 LSAT examinations?
The reason they don't care, is because the lower scores don't get reported. If the ABA required schools to report every score a student registered, then they would heavily prefer 1x test takers, because the lower scores would lower their 25/50/75% rankings.
I would say it lowers the requirement for LSAT takers.Yet, multiple taking is not encouraged. For top law schools, they will know if they know you take many times. Generally, I will say it's a good news.
I googled this recently. There's a great article out there that quotes all of the T14 policies on this. I think it's safe to say that most places do not average but that there is a possibility that multiple scores will be taken into consideration. What that means specifically no one can really say. I can see arguments going both ways in admissions committee into what this could potentially reveal of a candidate. Still, no incentive at all to average.
Why would it lower requirements? If anything it will raise them. I think that you will see more people achieve the 155-165 range (or some arbitrary number in this range), making the T40 schools (excluding T13) more selective and have a higher expectation of LSAT score for admittance.
@Mellow_Z I would say the decrease of applicants make LSAC made this move. Law schools have more same range(150-160s) candidates.Maybe they will look other factors(like PS) as well. I wouldn't say the score will increase for admission OR increase much. All in all, I would say it's a positive sign in the future. And some institutions have offer free LSAT preparation.
^Yeah seriously. That would be amazing.
One interesting point here: Spivey Consulting has news FASTER than LSAC:)
I still think 4 takes wouldn't look very good regardless...
Wow. Like the others, I'm curious about the potential ramifications.
@JustDoIt yeah i want to agree with that as well. But if our highest score continues to be the only one reported in the admissions figures, then why should school's care how many times you took it?
If you take the LSAT many times, Adcoms may (rightly or wrongly) wonder about your ability to pass the bar on your first attempt (which they also report on later down the line). This worry would probably only be applicable if you came up with many "low" scores in a row, though.
Ah I see! That makes sense.
Doesn't this seem like somewhat of a desperate move? If so, I hope that can make the next couple LSAT's a bit easier
I know there are people who called LSAC so I'm sure it's official, but LSAC should get its Twitter account verified if they are making such an important announcement on Twitter!
I'm worried as someone who is planning to take the LSAT a 3rd time on September. Will this mean that schools will potentially go back to considering all previous LSAT scores instead of just looking at the highest one? I hope not...
Sadly I don't think they're popular enough, but I completely agree.
I wouldn't worry about too many schools changing their policy. Schools do technically consider all scores anyway, even if they don't average the scores, they still look at them. All things being equal, it is always going to better to have one high LSAT score on record. So I don't think the new LSAT rule will change this.
It's possible LSAC may also make the LSAT more challenging to have people take the test multiple times. Really unsure how to feel about this change.
@kombucha Not sure about the difficulty since the motivation seems to increase the LSAT takers.
@"Alex Divine" Agree your point that admission officers prefer one or twice LSATs takings with high score.
Now that's a scary thought! You never know, especially if they'd have financial incentive to do so.
+1. I suspect there might be short-term gains in terms of profits, but making it more difficult could have negative effects in the long-run in terms of test taker turn out. If increasing the number of LSAT test takers is a legitimate objective, can't really see why they'd make it harder than it already is. Then again, can never really say.
They already consider all scores. Say someone took the LSAT 5 times over a 3 year span.. if they went 150-155-157-161-165, what that shows is that they might have difficulty passing the bar on the first try. Bar passage rates are something that law schools are ranked off of, so this is an important factor to them.
@Mellow_Z You point of Bar pass rate is catchy. I listened to podcast The Law School Toolbox Podcast last night and Nathan Fox(another prep course founder) talked about using GRE in law admission will attract students whose are not serious about law school. And there's a trend in low Bar pass rate in California(the host said). So if you get low LSAT, you will probably get hard time in bar exam.
From what I have heard from my circle of friends who are lawyers.. your ability to score high on the LSAT on the first time and your ability to pass the Bar are not comparable. I have friends who did excellent on the LSAT and did not pass the bar on the first time and vice versa. The tests are totally different and testing on completely different "subjects" (considering the LSAT does not really stick to one subject). I mean there's a possibility that the admissions may look at your multiple scores and question your success on the bar but like someone said earlier you can take the LSAT multiple times in a span of a couple years anyways.
I think this is an interesting development. Personally, I think it is a way of increasing the number of test takers. It also allows LSAC to increase the amount of money they receive from said test takers. That said, I still think it is better to have fewer LSAT scores on your record with the top score being taken by schools.
I went to an event last night that was hosted by TestMasters, it was a flawed reasoning seminar and the instructor talked about how the top schools are desperate to increase enrollment because applicants are really down.
@sweetsecret Long time no see. Great to know top law schools are DESPERATE(hopefully it includes T14-T30 as well) Anyway,it's a buyer market now.
I've heard the same thing. I also saw someone mention that the CA numbers are so low because the number of takers from non-accredited universities is higher than any other state. I don't recall where I saw this though, and don't know if there is any merit to that statement.
Has anyone noticed they announced this on the exact last day to postpone the June LSAT without withdrawing? Lol maybe I'm reading too much into it
I wonder what this means for students with LSAC fee waivers.