Tag Archive: lsat test-takers

/ /

LSAT Test Day Horror Stories

Over the years, I’ve had lots of experience with the LSAT. It’s been an uncomfortably large part of my life, even. As prep for the October LSAT really gets into swing, here are some true stories about what you’re all looking forward to: LSAT test day. Make of them what you will.

1. What does it mean to pass the LSAT?

Our first story comes from one of my own experiences taking the LSAT. After keeping us outside for an hour waiting for a fax from LSAC that never came, the proctors finally seated us in a big law school lecture hall. While going through the test day instructions, one proctor repeatedly said that they were being strict only because they needed to follow the rules, and “we really hope you all pass.” Again and again, “we really hope you pass,” while every single test taker in the room pulled an eye muscle from rolling them too hard.

/ / / / / / /

Will the September LSAT Continue the Forgiving Curve Trend?

Curves. What a pointy, harsh, angular world it would be without them. And we can also thank them for their help boosting our scaled scores on the LSAT year after year. Recently, however, the LSAT seems to be reaching new heights on the Curvaceous Scale. The December LSAT had a -14 curve for a score of 170, and the June LSAT curve was -13.

Can we expect further blossoming of this trend, or is it soon to deflate?

While it would be a logical fallacy to assume a future outcome on the basis of past performance, we can entertain ourselves with speculation all we like. First, a little background on LSAT curve statistics.

/ / / /

LSAC’s Disability Discrimination Settlement: What it Means

We wrote at the beginning of the year about how, due to a ruling by California courts, LSAC could no longer disclose which scores were taken under accommodated testing conditions. The catch was that the ruling only applied to LSAT test-takers in California.

Well, sound the trumpets and ring the bells, because that’s no longer the case. LSAC settled with the U.S. Department of Justice, agreeing to fork over $7.73 million (no wonder it costs so much for simple changes like switching testing centers!) and to stop flagging the LSAT scores of test-takers who received extra time.

On the one hand, it’s a policy change that makes sense. The point of allowing test-takers with ADHD to take the test with extra time was to level the playing field, and if those LSAT scores are flagged, it’s not at all clear whether the playing field was actually leveled.

/ / / / / / / / / / /

What the Recent Increase in LSAT Test-Takers Really Means

About 200 more people sat for the February LSAT in 2014 than for the February 2013 LSAT. What does this mean? Are law school application numbers on their way to recovery? Probably. Will law school admissions become more completive? Yup.

Here’s a closer look at the ramifications of the recent increase in LSAT test-takers:

The Legal Market Is Improving

The legal profession, like most others, hasn’t been doing so hot since the 2007 financial crisis. Law firm hiring fell, as did real salaries. Many college graduates responded by not taking the LSAT, and not applying to law school.

However, things are getting better.

/ / / / / / /

Logical Reasonings / 3.17.14

A) The news is spreading about the recent increase in LSAT test-takers. Wall Street Journal.

B) Meanwhile, deans are still scrambling with their placement in the US News and World Report law school rankings. Boston Business Journal.

C) For some students, all that matters is how much money they’ll make after graduation from law school. List list is for them. Above the Law.

D) Excited for March Madness? Not as much as the lawyer who’s suing the NCAA. ESPN.

E) A “Shamrock Shake” rattled Los Angeles this morning — and no one felt it more than the news anchors. DIgg.

/ / / / / / / / / / / /

Logical Reasonings / 3.13.14

A) Just another friendly reminder that Blueprint LSAT Prep launched a brand new website with one-of-a-kind free resources. Blueprint LSAT Prep.

B) Folks are still talking about this week’s new US News and World Report law school rankings. Wall Street Journal.

C) The 1.1% increase in February LSAT test-takers is also making headlines. Above the Law.

D) Authorities have identified the drunk driver who killed two people at SXSW. CNN.

E) If your mom is on Facebook, you’ll definitely get these GIFs. Huffington Post.

/ / / / / / / / /

LSAT Test-Taker Numbers Up For First Time Since 2010

Blueprint LSAT Prep’s new website wasn’t the only big news of the day.

Today LSAC updated its LSAT test-taker data, and the number of February LSAT test-takers was 19,499 — up 1.1% from last year. LSAT administrations for the year were down 6.2%, but the rise in February LSAT test-takers was the first increase since the June 2010 LSAT. For those counting at home, that breaks a streak of 14 straight LSAT administrations in decline.

Here’s the complete LSAC chart:

/ / / / / /

Logical Reasonings / 1.14.14

A) LSAC can’t notify law schools of an LSAT test-taker’s disability, says a California appeals court. San Francisco Gate.

B) Bar exam? Iowa doesn’t need any stinking bar exam. Des Moines Register.

C) Getting into law school is always a special occasion. Especially for Mahesh Vara. The Bolton News.

D) Another state has seen its same-sex marriage ban deemed unconstitutional by a federal judge. This time it’s Oklahoma. USA Today.

E) Meet the man who hasn’t bathed in 60 years. And please bring him some deodorant. Pop Dust.

/ / / / / / / / /

2013 December LSAT Test-Taker Numbers Down 6.2 Percent

LSAC has released the stats for 2013 December LSAT test-takers, and – surprise, surprise – the number of people taking the LSAT is down yet again. This is the 14th straight LSAT to have a decline in test-takers compared to previous years, but whereas last December’s numbers were down by 15.6%, this year’s numbers are “only” down by 6.2%.

Blueprint LSAT Prep’s very own Matt Shinners analyzed this downward trend back in November, after the October LSAT numbers were released, and concluded that the reduction in test-takers was a good thing for everyone involved. He posited that law schools will need to either reduce their class sizes or start accepting applicants with lower GPA and LSAT numbers.

/ / / / / / / / / /

October LSAT Test-Takers Down 11%: What Does it all Mean?

We here at Blueprint LSAT Prep are shocked (SHOCKED!) to find that, yet again, the number of LSAT test-takers is down. Way down: 11% since last year, and 45% since the high of 2009. According to Law.com (and this handy chart provided by LSAC), this makes it 13 straight administrations with a decline in LSAT test-takers.

To put some numbers on it (and not just percents), 60,746 people took the 2009 October LSAT. That’s more than twice as many students as there were legal positions available (2.28 times as many, to be exact). This year, that number is down to 33,673 – or only 1.4 times as many LSAT test-takers as available legal positions! We call that progress, readers.

But what does it mean?