[blindlaw] text of LSAC's letter to accompany non-standard LSAT administration

Tue May 19 15:47:25 UTC 2009

Hi,

I would disagree that there's not a difference between the LSAC's time limit
and time limits that exist in the real world. Also, as someone else pointed
out, in "the real world," we are often not restricted to using inferior
tools to get the job done. (Certainly, we are on occasion. But for many
law-related tasks, we are able to use the technology and methods that work
best for us.) The LSAC doesn't even let a blind person choose his or her own
reader! That is far from realistic. Those of us who took Braille tests had
to be approved for this accommodation before we could see practice tests
that we could access, whereas sighted people can download a practice test
from LSAC's web site without even registering to take the test. Again, this
is not realistic. 

I think that many schools assume that if you get a particularly good score,
it likely wasn't solely the result of a little extra time on the test. That
seemed to be my experience. I believe my LSAT score actually was an asset on
my application, since I did pretty well on the test. 

And finally, in none of my "real-world" jobs (including summer
associateships with firms and a legal aid agency) have I ever had to request
the same accommodations I needed for the LSAT.

Best,

Angie

-----Original Message-----
From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On
Behalf Of Craig R. Anderson
Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2009 10:38 AM
To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List
Subject: Re: [blindlaw] text of LSAC's letter to accompany non-standard LSAT
administration

You refer to the normal time limit for completing the LSAT as an arbitrary
standard established with sighted examinees in mind.  However there's not a
dime's worth of difference between this time limit and any of the other
deadlines  which suffuse both the legal business and the rest of the real
world.  You suggest that in this context a blind person is entitled to
demand relaxation of these deadlines because they reflect standards designed
for  the inherently more capable sighted population -- standards that are
too high for the blind to be expected to meet.  If that's what you're
saying, I disagree.

Craig
----- Bill Spiry <bspiry at comcast.net> wrote:
> I've been watching this post closely as I will be taking the LSAT in June.
> Frankly, concerns regarding what the LSAC communicates to the school
> regarding test accommodations, I'd be much more concerned about attending
> any program that would be biased against an applicant with a disability
> based on the fact that he or she has received accommodation on the LSAT.
> Such an inclination for discriminatory bias by a school would not bode
well
> for what you could expect as a student in that program and your chances
for
> success would be in question.  If you've got a need for accommodation to
be
> successful, don't try to hide that fact until you're already in the mix...
> that is a pretty effective way to set yourself up to fail.  
>    
> As to one of the posters who suggest that asking for additional time to
> complete the LSAT as an accommodation somehow equates to an admission that
> you are less capable than others who are not blind...  is absolutely
> preposterous.  Success is about outcomes and the quality of those
outcomes,
> not whether you can prove that you can meet some arbitrary time standard
> designed only with sighted test takers in mind.  
> Obviously we cannot expect to have unlimited time to accomplish a task in
> the real world, there are deadlines and time related needs that we must
> satisfy.  but most folks with a disability who are capable of functioning
in
> the real world also understand that there is more than one way to "skin a
> cat" and that using the resources we need to level the playing field is
part
> of that.  We learn to play to our strengths and fight the battle on our
> terms as much as possible.  I've learned that lesson well out in the real
> professional world over the past 20 years.  The LSAT is one of those
> battlefields that we have no choice but to face. Based on the practice and
> training I've been going through of late on this, it's also pretty clear
> that trying to survive that fight based on rules created with sighted
> examinees in mind would be academic suicide.  We're not in this to earn
some
> bloody badge of courage for fighting the fight with our hands tied and
with
> a blindfold on, we're in this to apply the capabilities we know we must
have
> to successfully  achieve a law degree and function as a professional in
the
> real world.  
> 
> Blindness is different for everyone and we all got to where we are on
> different paths with different approaches.  I agree that there are
probably
> plenty of blind people out there who did not get adequate training in the
> skills of blindness and who are not ready to face the rigors of law
school..
> by my take that is not much different than all the non-disabled kids out
> there who fall between the cracks educationally and are at least equally
> unprepared for the real world.    That is another battle.  The point is
that
> just because a blind person hasn't learned Braille or some of the other
"by
> the book" skills of blindness, and has learned to use some other
> accommodations and compensating skills to get the job done, it sure as
hell
> doesn't equate to failure... and having to take additional time for the
LSAT
> due to blindness or another disability sure as hell doesn't mean that
person
> is less capable of succeeding as a law student.  Use the accommodations
for
> the LSAT, don't try to hide that fact, and focus on succeeding.
> 
> Bill
> 
> ----Original Message-----
> From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On
> Behalf Of T. Joseph Carter
> Sent: Monday, May 18, 2009 1:16 AM
> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] text of LSAC's letter to accompany non-standard
> LSATadministration
> 
> I don't see that as entirely practical.
> 
> The test is visually biased and the stakes could not possibly be 
> higher.  If you want to take a gamble like that, knowing that the 
> test is designed for you to fail without the accommodation because it 
> depends upon visual processing skills, you go right ahead.
> 
> One of the skills I think people entering college have often failed 
> to learn is knowing what they can honestly accomplish.  Many believe 
> they cannot do things that they can and will do.  Some believe they 
> can do things they cannot.
> 
> I can already hear the response of, "How will you know until you 
> try?"  My answer is that a test that determines whether or not you 
> are deemed worthy of a particular career is not the time to be 
> experimenting.  If you know you can do it with the accommodation, but 
> don't know if you could do it without, take the accommodation for the 
> LSAT.  It's an artificial environment with artificial rules and an 
> artificial result.  Accommodations used therein have little bearing 
> on the "real world".
> 
> Unless any of you have had major cases hinge upon how many gumballs 
> fit into a given shaped container or the other silliness I've seen on 
> practice exams.
> 
> Joseph
> 
> 
> On Sun, May 17, 2009 at 08:03:24PM -0700, ckrugman at sbcglobal.net wrote:
> > It would almost be better for a blind to take the test without the extra

> > time accommodations if it is at all possible.
> > Chuck
> > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stephanie Enyart" 
> > <stephanie_enyart at yahoo.com>
> > To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
> > Sent: Saturday, May 16, 2009 11:36 PM
> > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] text of LSAC's letter to accompany non-standard

> > LSATadministration
> >
> >
> >> Hello all,
> >> Since Haben asked about the type of communication that will accompany
any
> >> non-standard test (any test taken with extended time due to a
disability)
> >> here is a copy of what the LSAC sends with the score report to law  
> >> schools:
> >>
> >> "Dear Colleague:
> >> This candidate took a __fill in test date___ LSAT under nonstandard
> timing
> >> conditions in order to accommodate his or her disability. The
nonstandard
> >> test this candidate received was administered on or about the same test

> >> date
> >> as the corresponding standard administration.
> >> Because this candidate's score was earned under nonstandard timing
> >> conditions, it is important to note that the degree of comparability of

> >> this
> >> score to scores earned under standard conditions cannot be determined.
> The
> >> LSAC's Cautionary Policies Concerning LSAT Scores and Related Services
> >> explain:
> >> LSAC has no data to demonstrate that scores earned under accommodated
> >> conditions have the same meaning as scores earned under standard  
> >> conditions.
> >> Because the LSAT has not been validated in its various accommodated
> forms,
> >> accommodated tests are identified as nonstandard, and an individual's  
> >> scores
> >> from accommodated tests are not averaged with scores from tests taken  
> >> under
> >> standard conditions. The fact that accommodations were granted for the

> >> LSAT
> >> should not be dispositive evidence that accommodations should be
granted
> >> once a test taker becomes a student. The accommodation needed for a  
> >> one-day
> >> multiple choice test may be different from those needed for law school
> >> course work and examinations."
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org]
On
> >> Behalf Of Haben Girma
> >> Sent: Friday, May 15, 2009 9:39 AM
> >> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List
> >> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] LSAT Accommodations?
> >>
> >>
> >> Is there a fact sheet out there that reveals what percentage of a
> >> university's student body is disabled?
> >>
> >> Haben
> >>
> >> James Pepper wrote:
> >>> They probably do that, I know that one of thee Coolge entrance exams
> does
> >>> it, but I am not sure if it is the SAT or the ACT but they inform the
> >>> schools eactly which devices were used to take the test.  I think it
is
> >> both
> >>> of them.  This is how colleges can know who is disabled and who is not
> >>> without actually asking the student if they are disabled or not.  It
is
> a
> >>> great way to get around the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.
> >>> And this is good for colleges that do not have a high percentage of
> >> students
> >>> who are disabled because they will most certainly accept you once they
> >>> realize you are disabled, to satisfy their requirements to not be
> >> considered
> >>> discriminatory.  But your chances of graduating from that situation 
> >>> is not
> >>> as good as a college that accepts the disabled on a regular basis.  Of
> >>> course state schools are more likely to handle the disabled with
> respect,
> >>> since they are more in tune with the consequences of discriminiation. 
> >>> But
> >>> if you are competing with a lot of other disabled students to get into
a
> >>> college that is a good college for the blind, then you will probably
be
> >>> judged on your abilities based on being disabled and not the general
> >>> population.  Because they will probably only admit a certain amount of
> >>> students who are disabled as the disabled tend to cost the university
a
> >> lot
> >>> more than non disabled.
> >>>
> >>> Since most people do not know they are doing this type of profiling,
> they
> >>> have gotten away with it since 1973.
> >>>
> >>> You all are lawyers, can you stop this nonsense because colleges
accept
> >> the
> >>> blind and disabled in proportion to their numbers in the population,
but
> >>> they don't graduate them in any proportion to the numbers they accept.
> >>>
> >>> James Pepper
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> blindlaw mailing list
> >>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> >>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> >> blindlaw:
> >>>
> >>
>
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/habnkid%40aol.com
> >>>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> blindlaw mailing list
> >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> >> blindlaw:
> >>
>
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stephanie_enyart%4
> >> 0yahoo.com
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> blindlaw mailing list
> >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for  
> >> blindlaw:
>   
> >>
>
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglob
> al.net 
> >> 
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > blindlaw mailing list
> > blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> blindlaw:
> >
>
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/carter.tjoseph%40g
> mail.com
> 
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> blindlaw:
>
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/bspiry%40comcast.n
> et
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
blindlaw:
>
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/mar.cra%40comcast.
net

_______________________________________________
blindlaw mailing list
blindlaw at nfbnet.org
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
blindlaw:
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/angie.matney%40gma
il.com