Following up on my previous posts (links below): Vivia Chen (Bloomberg Law), Killing the LSAT in the Name of Diversity Won’t Cure the Problem:
You have to wonder if the cure is worse than the disease.
This spring, the American Bar Association made an eye-popping proposal. In April, its strategic review committee, which accredits law schools, issued a memo directing “the elimination of the requirement that law schools use a valid and reliable admission test though law schools of course remain free to require a test if they wish.”
Oh, the proverbial slippery slope. In 2021, after years of resistance, the ABA finally gave the green light for law schools to substitute the LSAT with the GRE. And now it’s axing all testing requirements for law school admission.
Has the ABA gone wild? And for what purpose?
Although not explicitly stated, the proposal is aimed at fixing the dearth of diversity in the profession. …
[W]hat concerns me about eliminating the LSAT is that it suggests that minority students might lack the chops for entry into the profession. Though anti-testers will likely argue that the LSAT and other standardized tests are freighted with social/economic baggage—and that’s undoubtedly true—isn’t it also possible to read it as throwing in the towel that students of color can master the art of the test?
Prior TaxProf Blog coverage:
- So Far, Public Comments Largely Support ABA Proposal To Make Law School Admission Tests Optional (June 22, 2022)
- Inside Higher Ed, The ABA Proposes Eliminating Standardized Tests For Law School Admissions (June 16, 2022)
- Newsweek, In Defense Of The LSAT (May 28, 2022)
- Wall Street Journal, ABA Council Votes 20-1 To Advance Proposal Permitting Law Schools To Go Test Optional. What Are The Implications Of Admitting Students Who Don’t Take The LSAT Or GRE? (May 23, 2022)
- New York Times, ABA May Eliminate Standardized Tests For Law School Admissions (May 7, 2022)
- Inside Higher Ed, Do Law Schools Use The LSAT To Limit Black Enrollment? (Apr. 17, 2019)