Mere months after the Law School Admission Test ditched paper and went digital, another big shakeup could be in the works.

The organization that designs the test has said it may overhaul the analytical reasoning portion of the admissions exam—better known as the logic games—as part of a settlement with two blind aspiring lawyers who alleged that the section, which relies heavily on diagrams, is discriminatory against the visually impaired.

A joint statement released this week by the Law School Admission Council and attorneys for the blind plaintiffs says that within four years, the logic games section in its current format will no longer be on the LSAT and that the council is now researching "alternative ways to assess analytical reasoning skills."

But the joint statement—and subsequent comments from both parties—also has sown confusion among LSAT watchers about what, exactly, will happen with the logic games. Jason Turkish, an attorney with disability law firm Nyman Turkish who represented plaintiffs Angelo Binno and Shelesha Taylor, said in an interview Wednesday that the settlement ensures changes on the test for all takers.

"The negotiated agreement says that the result is that everyone—not just people with disabilities—will be able to take a test that does not have the current [analytical reasoning] section, which does not have those questions."

But the council Tuesday evening sent an email to law schools and LSAT prep providers that appeared to walk back the idea that changes are certain. "Should there be any significant changes to format, extensive research and developed, followed by several stages of pilot testing and data analysis would be required to ensure the continued validity, reliability, an fairness of the test," the email read. "Therefore, it is too early in the process to speculate on how the test will evolve as a result of our ongoing research."

In the meantime, the LSAT will continue to test analytical reasoning, it continued. A council spokeswoman said that the confidential nature of the settlement means that the parties are limited in what they can say publicly about the situation.

Binno is almost fully blind and initially asked the council to waive the analytical portion of the LSAT in 2011. The council denied that request, but approved several other accommodations. Binno initially sued the American Bar Association for requiring law schools to use the LSAT in admissions, but a federal judge in Michigan dismissed the case. Binno filed suit again in 2017, this time against the council, alleging that the analytical reasoning section of the LSAT violates the Americans with Disabilities Act. The settlement allows the parties to avoid a lengthy litigation, according to the joint statement.

"Diversity and equal opportunity are vital in legal education and the legal profession," said council president Kellye Testy. "To help promote those goals, [the council] is committed to ensuring that disabled individuals can take our exam in an accessible place and manner, that the LSAT is fair for all test takers, and that we support everyone interested in pursuing law school."

Many in the LSAT prep community initially thought the settlement meant logic games would go away completely, said Dave Killoran, chief executive officer of PowerScore Test Preparation. But they are now struggling to understand what the settlement will mean for the future of the exam.

"In the test prep community, I've seen a wide range of responses," Killoran said Wednesday. "The first response was dismay. Everybody loves logic games because it's a section that's easy for us to teach, in general. Students can make great improvements. As things got muddier, I saw anger about, 'Why is this unclear?'"

The logic games section is without a doubt the most polarizing of the LSAT's three sections. (The sections are analytical reasoning, logical reasoning and reading comprehension.) The logic games questions typically ask takers to put variables into a sequence or group them in different ways, and takers usually use scratch paper to diagram their answers. Logic games have been on the LSAT since 1982.

"It's a very unique kind of question within the standardized testing world," Turkish said. "It's not testing aptitude. It's not a knowledge-based question. It's testing a uniquely visual skill, and it closed the door for a lot of applicants like Angelo. Now there's a path forward where that door is going to open again."

LSAT takers tend to either love or hate the logic games section, depending on how well they do on that section, said several LSAT prep providers. They also agreed that the logic games section is the easiest to master with practice.

"Once you get the hang of them, they can be the most fun section," said Steve Schwartz, an LSAT tutor who also blogs about the test. "And I think they are also the most teachable on the exam, because they are mathematical in nature. It's the easiest section to master and get a perfect score on with time. But obviously, if someone has a visual impairment, that changes everything."

Schwartz said that if the council opts to eliminate the logic games section altogether, it could decide to add another section of logical reasoning and incorporate more questions focused on deductive reasoning. Or it could come up with an entirely new section.

For now, Killoran said he's reserving judgment on what the future holds for the LSAT.

"I think right now, people have over-committed to the idea that logic games will change," he said. "They might change. They might change a little—maybe they'll change a lot. Maybe they will even go away. But the people who make the test haven't said anything definitive, and they're the ones in control."