[blindlaw] Blind Would-Be Law Student Says Test Discriminates, NPR Morning Edition, June 15, 2011

Sat Jun 18 01:52:47 UTC 2011

Somebody had better sue.

-------------------------------------------
Daniel K. Beitz
Wienner & Gould, P.C.
950 University Dr., Ste. 350
Rochester, MI  48307
Phone:  (248) 841-9405
Fax:  (248) 652-2729
dbeitz at wiennergould.com
This email transmission and any documents, files or previous email messages
attached
to it may contain confidential information that is legally privileged.  If
you are
not the intended recipient or the individual responsible for delivering this
email
to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure,
copying,
or distribution or use of any of the information contained herein or
attached to
this email is strictly prohibited.  Should you receive this communication in
error,
please notify us immediately by replying to the sender of this email or by
telephoning
us at (248) 841-9400.

-----Original Message-----
From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On
Behalf Of Ross Doerr
Sent: Friday, June 17, 2011 8:36 PM
To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List
Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Blind Would-Be Law Student Says Test Discriminates,
NPR Morning Edition, June 15, 2011

I am appalled to hear this story.

Twenty seven years ago when I began my trek to go to law school the LSAS
refused accommodations for me that were, in any realistic sense, worth
while. I won't bore those on this list with my tale of woe with the LSAS,
but I will say that I had to take the test more than once and my scores were
flagged with the warning that the score may not be valid because I'd been
provided with a testing accommodation, and went on to take the GRE and the
Master's program exam just to get test scores that would not say, up front,
that I was a bad bet because I'd taken the LSAT with an accommodation.

Why on earth is the LSAS still being permitted to get away with this?

I've been practicing law since 1990 in two states with a pretty good record
as an on-my-feet litigator and have proven myself in Administrative
settings, state courts on almost all levels and in Federal court. I'm blind,
and I think I've proven that the LSAS was just plain wrong with their out
dated disability testing policy.

I was rejected 10 times in my efforts to go to law school here in New
England for exactly the same reason that Mr. Binno complains of.

I was accepted into the University of Santa Clara School of law under their
special appointments program, a program that may, or may not be in effect
there any longer. But I can tell you that, at the time, Santa Clara was very
near the top of the ratings that were then put out by the Gourrman report. 
IF memory serves me correctly, it was rated 12th in the nation at the time. 
IT is one of two Jesuit law schools (the other one being Georgetown) and I
am very proud that they not only accepted me, but gave me a top notch legal
education.

 They saw me as a good student who worked hard. Not as an LSAT score.

In contrast, back when I was trying to get a decent score on the LSAT - I
clearly recall being asked what I really had problems with in testing. My
response was two fold - first, a bit of additional time to take the LSAT
because it simply takes longer to read out loud than it does to read to
yourself - and questions that depend upon visual ability, involving colors,
graphs and diagrams, were simply unfair and almost impossible to deal with
as a blind individual.

Second, when the LSAS  is communicating with me, handwritten letters in
pencil simply defeat my adaptive technology, so if possible, could they
please send me letters that are typewritten or on audio tape.

They responded to me by postcard, handwritten in pencil.

After the subsequent passage of the Americans With Disabilities Act and
passage of enough time for the testing services to "catch up" with reality -
I am stunned to hear that this prehistoric mentality continues to exist in
professional testing services.

 In my opinion, and it is only one man's opinion, it is the LSAS that needs
to be brought up short here and the ABA should be doing it.

As a practicing attorney, I want to know why it is that individuals as well
as businesses will do what normal, thinking people know to be legally,
morally and fundamentally correct right after they have been snarled into a
corner and ordered to do so by a Federal Judge, and not one minute before?

 In all my years of practice, I have never once seen a state or Federal law
that prohibits logical reasoning, independent thought or common sense. The
LSAS is not prohibited from modernizing its testing procedures relative to
applicants with a disability of any sort, not just blindness.

By the way, are law schools nationwide warned that the LSAS administers a
test that is inaccurate for a known percentage of those tested with it? 
Somehow, I think not.

Some things have improved though - for example, the days when lawyers ask me
questions during a job interview like:

"Did you take the real bar exam, or one of those tests for handicapped
people?"

 And

"Have you learned how to use a telephone yet?"

Are no longer asked. And yes, those are both real questions that I have been
asked in job interviews over past years. I'm sure others on this list have
been asked some that are just as bad or worse.

But then again, the unemployment rate among qualified lawyers with a visual
impairment is still disgraceful in a profession that is supposed to pride
itself on equality and justice.

To again state my opinion, the ABA should be on the LSAS about their testing
policy in this situation.

This issue represents an embarrassment to the ABA, and a long standing
problem that should have been hanged and buried a very long time ago.

Ross A. Doerr Esquire

Admitted to Practice in

Maine and New Hampshire

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Nightingale, Noel" <Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov>
To: <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2011 1:19 PM
Subject: [blindlaw] Blind Would-Be Law Student Says Test Discriminates, NPR 
Morning Edition, June 15, 2011

>
> Link:
>
http://www.npr.org/2011/06/15/137179261/blind-law-student-claims-discriminat
ion-in-testing
>
> Text:
> Blind Would-Be Law Student Says Test Discriminates
> by Quinn Klinefelter
> June 15, 2011
> Morning Edition
> Transcript
>
> William Archie/Detroit Free Press
>
> Attorney Richard Bernstein (left) and Angelo Binno walk through the law 
> office of The Bernstein Law Firm in Farmington Hills, Mich., on May 24. 
> Binno, who is legally blind, is suing the American Bar Association, saying

> its standards don't accommodate blind law school applicants.
>
> June 15, 2011 from WDET
> A prospective law school student in Michigan is suing the American Bar 
> Association over a case he argues is truly a matter of blind justice. The 
> student says he is being denied access to top-tier law schools because of 
> a test he says no one who's blind could possibly pass.
>
> The Law School Admission Test, commonly known as the LSAT, typically 
> features more than a dozen questions where test takers are strongly 
> encouraged to draw out a written diagram to solve the problem.
>
> Law school hopeful Angelo Binno was born blind and has overcome many 
> obstacles. But, the 28-year-old says, he could not overcome the low test 
> scores he kept getting when taking the LSAT. And, because of those scores,

> he was rejected by the three law schools he applied to.
>
> "I can't work any harder. I can't study any harder. I can't figure it out,

> because I can't draw out a diagram like a sighted person can to figure out

> the answers to these questions," Binno says.
>
> Binno is no slouch. He graduated from his high school a year early, had an

> internship at a law firm after graduating and speaks three languages. He 
> also worked for the Department of Homeland Security before funding 
> cutbacks led to a layoff.
>
> But Binno says he was stymied in his attempt to become a lawyer because 
> the American Bar Association requires law schools to use a "valid and 
> reliable" admissions test. Only the LSAT qualifies.
>
> "The ABA is supposed to be standing up for justice," he says. "What are 
> they standing for in this situation? I'm not saying that I should receive 
> an automatic entrance into law school. All I'm saying is, give me a level 
> playing field," he says.
>
> Binno turned to a sympathetic friend for help.
>
> Attorney Richard Bernstein is blind, but he says he received a waiver to 
> enter law school 15 years ago. Shortly thereafter, the ABA revised its 
> standards and, Bernstein claims, threatened to penalize schools that gave 
> too many waivers or did not use the LSAT.
>
> Now, Bernstein is suing the ABA, arguing that the LSAT violates the 
> Americans with Disabilities Act.
>
> "They are basically forcing U.S. law schools to break federal law by 
> requiring applicants to take an illegal exam. The Americans with 
> Disabilities Act is very clear about this," Bernstein says. "It is illegal

> to require someone to take an exam which, on its face, is discriminatory."
>
> In a written statement, the ABA says it requires universities it accredits

> to conform to federal law, and that accommodations are made for people 
> with disabilities.
>
> Those who have judged law school applications, like Wayne State University

> Professor David Moss, say some universities do accept students with low 
> LSAT scores. But, Moss says, the company creating the LSAT directs that 
> tests given with special accommodations - like those granted to blind 
> students - should not be given the same weight as regular LSATs.
>
> "They've got this flag on it that screams out, 'Beware of this test 
> result, it could be dangerous to your health,'" Moss says.
>
> Schools are concerned it might damage their rankings - and prestige - in 
> the annual ratings by U.S. News and World Report.
>
> Donald Polden, dean of Santa Clara University Law School, leads an ABA 
> committee reviewing accreditation standards. He says the ABA does grant 
> some schools exemptions from using the LSAT, but top-tier programs don't 
> want to risk their rankings.
>
> "The stories are legend about a five- or six-position swing in a school 
> has caused the loss of jobs of administrators or students to flee for 
> other law schools," he says.
>
> Polden says many on his committee think the ABA should eliminate the use 
> of the LSAT as a prerequisite to enter any law school.
>
> In the meantime, Angelo Binno waits for his day in court - not as the 
> attorney he hopes he'll eventually become, but as a plaintiff arguing that

> his disability should not prevent him from reaching the top ranks of his 
> chosen profession.
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/rumpole%40roadrunn
er.com
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 10.0.1382 / Virus Database: 1513/3707 - Release Date: 06/16/11
> 

_______________________________________________
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/dbeitz%40wiennergo
uld.com