At-Home LSAT Set to Debut Next Month Amid COVID-19 Pandemic
The April LSAT is canceled. But for the first time ever, aspiring lawyers will be able to take the admissions exam at home, on their own computers.
April 07, 2020 at 09:46 PM
4 minute read
Aspiring law students will be able to take the Law School Admission Test at home next month.
The Law School Admission Council, which administers the LSAT, announced late Tuesday that the April 25 LSAT is canceled due to the coronavirus pandemic but that a pared-down version of the test would be available to test takers on their own computers in late May.
It's a remarkable turn of events for an admissions exam that only switched to digital delivery less than a year ago.
"We are working hard amid this crisis to create new ways for you to take the LSAT and get your score in a timely manner because we know how important it is to you and to fairness and integrity in law school admission, which advances access and equity in legal education," reads the council's statement announcing the at-home option. "We appreciate your patience and flexibility as we all work through this extraordinary situation together."
The cancellation of the April LSAT was not unexpected—the council canceled the March administration and said it would make a determination about whether it was possible to move forward with this month's test by April 10. But ongoing restrictions on travel and gatherings made giving the exam in mere weeks impossible, the council wrote.
More surprising is the council's move to deliver an at-home exam in little more than a month. The council said it was working on a remote option when it canceled the March test, but some LSAT watchers were skeptical that it would be able to roll that out quickly. (The LSAT's competitor on the law school admissions market, the GRE, began offering an at-home option last month.)
"Creating a version of the LSAT that aspiring lawyers can take from the safety of their own homes is a win for test takers, many of whom had their admissions timelines disrupted because of COVID-19-related test cancellations in April," said Jeff Thomas, the executive director of admissions programs at Kaplan Test Prep. "This makes an uncertain and stressful situation a lot more manageable."
The at-home test, dubbed LSAT-Flex, will have three 35-minute scored sections as opposed to the traditional five, which includes one unscored section. It should take about two hours to complete under the standard time allowance. Scores will still be delivered in the traditional 120 to 180 range.
The council has yet to announce the exact date of the LSAT-Flex, but said it will be given in the second half of May. The final date will be announced no later than April 17. LSAT-Flex will be "remote proctored," meaning that test takers will be monitored by the cameras and microphones in their computers and those video and audio feeds will be recorded for further review.
The May test is open to those who registered for the now-canceled April exam. Those who were slated to take the March LSAT were automatically registered for the April exam.
"We will continue to monitor the COVID-19 pandemic closely and will make other LSAT-Flex test dates available this spring and summer if the situation warrants," reads the council's announcement. "We plan to resume the in-person LSAT once conditions allow, in strict accordance with public health authorities and using all necessary health and safety measures."
Steve Schwartz, chief executive officer of test prep provider LSAT Unplugged, said that subsequent waves of the coronavirus could make it difficult to return to the in-person administration of the LSAT in the short- to medium-terms.
"Given the COVID-19 situation, I suspect there will be several LSAT-Flex administrations," he said. "And the more that there are, the more this becomes the new 'normal.'"
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'No Evidence'?: Big Law Firms Defend Academic Publishers in EDNY Antitrust Case
3 minute readLaw Firms Are Turning to Online Training Platforms as Apprenticeship Model Falters
'Substantive Deficiencies': Judge Grants Big Law Motion Dismissing Ivy League Price-Fixing Claims
3 minute readClass Action Lawsuit Targets 40 Private Colleges and Universities Over Alleged Price-Fixing
3 minute read- With Return to Offices Still Uncertain, Big Law Shifts From When to How
- 'Rolling With the Punches': Litigators Use Creativity to Manage Their Cases Without Jury Trials on Tap
- From Canceled to 'Business as Usual,' Law Firms Go Their Own Way on Summer Associate Programs
- In a First, Indiana Will Hold 1-Day, Online Bar Exam in July
- Summer of Our Discontent: Big Law Associate Programs Get Major Overhaul
Trending Stories
- 1Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 2Election 2024: Nationwide Judicial Races and Ballot Measures to Watch
- 3Guarantees Are Back, Whether Law Firms Want to Talk About Them or Not
- 4How I Made Practice Group Chair: 'If You Love What You Do and Put the Time and Effort Into It, You Will Excel,' Says Lisa Saul of Forde & O'Meara
- 5Abbott, Mead Johnson Win Defense Verdict Over Preemie Infant Formula
- 6How Much Does the Frequency of Retirement Withdrawals Matter?
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250