Legal News

To LSAT or Not to LSAT: That Is the Question

By Brian Harris

By Jaime Bochet
Of the Legal Staff

There?s been a bit of a ruckus raised lately over the possibility of a world without the LSAT. According to an article published recently by The National Law Journal, a Legal affiliate, an ABA panel tasked with reviewing law school accreditation standards is considering ?dropping the rule that law schools require J.D. applicants to take a ?valid and reliable admission test,?? i.e. the LSAT.

The NLJ article goes on to explain, ?Much of the committee's LSAT debate has focused on the proper role of the ABA in the regulation of law school admissions, said Loyola University Chicago School of Law Dean David Yellen, who sits on the standards review committee.?

Now, this doesn?t necessarily mean all law schools would drop the LSAT as an admissions requirement ? far from it. But Vivia Chen, who writes The Careerist blog on LawJobs.com, another Legal affiliate, is horrified by the possibilities.

?I fear that schools that don?t require the extra hurdle of the LSAT will attract even more applicants (probably some very weak ones, who shouldn?t be in law school in the first place) -- and that the cycle of bad schools and jobless graduates will escalate,? Chen writes.

Chen?s worry seems to be that once the LSAT requirement is waived, newly opened and lower-end law schools will accept just about anybody; those ?unqualified? aspiring attorneys would then receive a mediocre education and proceed to glut the market, dragging down the national standard of practice. Apocalypse follows shortly thereafter.

But let?s back up. It will still be up to each individual law school to decide what students it will accept, and many might choose to continue requiring applicants take the test. In fact -- and Chen concedes this -- the NLJ article states that ABA committee members "believe that most schools would continue to require the LSAT, in part because it is the most reliable way to measure applicants against each other and make merit-based financial aid decisions."

As for fears about accepting those who ?shouldn?t be in law school in the first place,? I have a feeling there are already plenty of those.

So tell me, readers, what is your take on this? Is the LSAT an unnecessary, expensive hurdle for otherwise able aspiring lawyers, or is it still relevant as a tool to weed out those who would be better off in another career? Comment below or e-mail me.

Full post as published by The Legal Intelligencer Blog on January 19, 2011 (boomark / email).