Online LSAT Makes Its Debut—With a Few Glitches
About 10,000 aspiring attorneys are taking the LSAT Flex at home this week, which was developed in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.
May 19, 2020 at 01:19 PM
5 minute read
Thousands of aspiring attorneys took the Law School Admission Test from the comfort of home Monday—marking a first for the entrance exam.
The debut of the pared-down, online version of the LSAT—dubbed LSAT Flex—was not without technical glitches, however. Some test takers reported waiting an hour or more for an online proctor to give them access to the exam, while a few were mistakenly told by proctors that they could not use scratch paper during the test.
But overall, the Law School Admission Council is upbeat about the rollout of the online exam, which continued Tuesday, said president Kellye Testy. About 10,000 people are taking LSAT Flex this week.
"I think it has been going very well," Testy said. "We like to focus on the candidate perspective in this. I know it's always hard to be first, and any time you're first, there will be a few people who have issues. And we're learning from that. But overall, I think we had a good day."
The council fast-tracked the development of LSAT Flex after canceling its March and April in-person exams amid the COVID-19 pandemic. (The council has since also canceled the in-person June test and is offering a second round of the LSAT-Flex on June 14. It has not yet determined whether July's test will be in-person or online.)
The council announced LSAT Flex in early April, once it was clear that public health concerns would render large, in-person gatherings impossible in late spring and early summer. Those summer test dates are the final opportunities for people who plan to apply for a seat in law school in the fall.
"In three month's time, we have moved incredibly quickly to make sure we meet this emergency need," Testy said. "My heart is always with the candidates. I want them to know we are there for them and we're going to stick with them through this."
The council has now rolled out two entirely new versions of the LSAT in less than a year. The LSAT was a pencil-and-paper exam up until July 2019, when it began transitioning to a digital format that's given in person on tablet computers. The digital exam also faced some early hiccups—namely connectivity issues and tablets that had not been fully charged. But the council has largely worked out the kinks over subsequent administrations.
The LSAT Flex is a shorter version of the traditional LSAT, taken over about two hours instead of the typical four hours, which includes administrative tasks and breaks. The online version has three 35-minute sections, each of which are scored. The traditional LSAT has five 35-minute sections, only four of which are scored. (The LSAT Flex eliminates one of the two logical reasoning sections and does not include breaks.)
Most of criticism leveled by early LSAT Flex takers on the popular online forum discussion Reddit was directed toward the online proctors, which were supplied by ProctorU—a third-party test security vendor. ProctorU provides live proctors who monitor test takers through the cameras and microphones of each taker's computer. ProctorU also uses artificial intelligence and humans to review recorded video from those computers to catch cheating. But some Reddit users said their proctors were an hour or more late to log them into the test, leaving them hanging at an already stressful time.
Testy confirmed that a small number of LSAT Flex takers Monday experienced delays in getting connected to a proctor—a lag time caused in part by test takers reading and signing the LSAT's certifying statement, which is a commitment to ethics that most online tests don't include. The extra time takers took with the certifying statement created a small backlog with proctors for those scheduled to take the LSAT Flex later in the day, Testy said.
And confusion over whether scratch paper was allowed also hampered some test takers, said Steve Schwartz, chief executive officer of test prep provider LSAT Unplugged. Access to scratch paper is especially important during the logic games portion of the test, he added. That problem arose with just a handful of proctors who did not understand the rules—use of scratch paper is uncommon with remotely proctored exams—and has since been clarified, according to Testy.
"I don't want to be too hard on [the council] since they're doing their best and this is just the first Flex administration, but there's been quite a bit of miscommunication between [the council] and ProctorU about what's allowed vs. what's not," Schwartz said.
But some early LSAT Flex takers on Reddit said they didn't experience any glitches during the Monday test. Dave Killoran, chief executive officer of PowerScore Test Preparation, said the overall experience of most takers was positive despite some technical issues.
"It's hard to tell at what rate some of these problems occurred, and of course those affected were quite vocal about their problems," Killoran said. "That said, I felt the test day went better than expected on most fronts, and we didn't see any widespread catastrophic system failures. Assuming they improve things today given the learning curve, this could turn out quite successful for [the council.]"
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 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 AllUniversity of Chicago Accused of Evicting Student for Attending Gaza-Israel Protest
3 minute readSanctioned Penn Law Professor Amy Wax Sues University, Alleging Discrimination
5 minute readThe Met Hires GC of Elite University as Next Legal Chief
Trending Stories
- 1Lawyers: Meet Your New Partner
- 2What Will It Mean in California if New Federal Anti-SLAPP Legislation Passes?
- 3Longtime AOC Director Glenn Grant to Step Down, Assignment Judge to Take Over
- 4Elon Musk’s Tesla Pay Case Stokes Chatter Between Lawyers and Clients
- 5Courts Demonstrate Growing Willingness to Sanction Courtroom Misuse of AI
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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