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

Wed May 20 07:17:47 UTC 2009

I took it back in the 70's and as I recall there was reading comprehension 
and analysis of materials and some logic and math. At that time if there 
were diagrams for sighted test takers they were omitted. I don't recall 
exact details.
Chuck
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Angie Matney" <angie.matney at gmail.com>
To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2009 10:19 PM
Subject: Re: [blindlaw] text of LSAC's letter toaccompany non-standard LSAT 
administration


> Hi Chuck,
>
> Can you tell us what the format of the LSAT was when you took it? I heard 
> it
> changed at some point in the 90s. Do you know if this is true?
>
> Re: Why the LSAT and legal work are not equivalent: See my last post.
>
> Best,
>
> Angie
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On
> Behalf Of ckrugman at sbcglobal.net
> Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2009 12:48 AM
> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] text of LSAC's letter to accompany non-standard 
> LSAT
> administration
>
> I would have to agree. I am not aware of too many judges that would give
> blind lawyers extra time to prepare for court, nor does the calendaring
> deadlines or statute of limitations allow for extra time when filing
> paperwork if a blind lawyer is one of the litigants.
> Chuck
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Craig R. Anderson" <mar.cra at comcast.net>
> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2009 7:38 AM
> 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/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/angie.matney%40gma
> il.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%40sbcglobal.net