Law Schools

LSAC Is Backing Off Arizona Law School, For Now

Another development in the ongoing fight between LSAC and Arizona Law School.

By  
on

Test fail“Fight? What fight? We’re not fighting.” No that isn’t the response of an 8-year-old whose mother is demanding to know what’s going on up there, but a summary of the Law School Admissions Council’s latest response to Arizona Law School.

You may recall Arizona Law decided to allow students to apply to their law school who have only taken the GRE, not the LSAT. While they couch the decision in the lofty language of increasing diversity and experiments, it’s also quite clear that expanding the number of applicants is a key consideration for the move. Seats in law schools aren’t going to fill themselves, and if there aren’t enough people willing to take the LSAT, then perhaps convincing GRE takers that law school debt is really worth it fills that gap.

LSAC, which administers the LSAT, did not take too kindly to this move by Arizona Law. Citing bylaws which require member schools have “substantially all” of their students take the LSAT, LSAC sent a letter to Arizona Law which included what many interpreted as a threat to kick Arizona out of the council. That move would cut the school off from applicant data and the universal law school application process. In response, the majority of law school deans rallied around Arizona Law, sending a letter critical of the LSAC.

Now LSAC has responded, and they’d like everyone to believe it is all just a big misunderstanding… though they still want students to take the LSAT:

It is unfortunate that our recent inquiry about Arizona Law’s admission policies was misunderstood and characterized as a threat to the school and an obstacle to innovation and experimentation in legal education. This was not our intent. Simply put, this inquiry is not about the GRE or any other standardized tests. Rather, LSAC’s bylaws require member schools to meet and maintain certain membership eligibility criteria. We believe our invitation to Arizona Law to provide input was appropriate and necessary, given reports that Arizona Law no longer requires that any of its applicants take the LSAT, which on its face is in violation of our bylaw provision that member schools require that substantially all of their applicants take the LSAT.

But as the Wall Street Journal reports, the LSAC and Arizona Law still aren’t close on the fundamental question of the LSAT’s role in law school admission:

Arizona Law Dean Marc Miller said Monday that the school appreciates LSAC’s decision not to exclude it from membership, but that there’s still a larger question out there about the role of standardized testing in law school admissions.

He says: “Even more fundamentally the right question for legal education and the profession is how to we bring in the best and most diverse student bodies to learn the law and serve the needs of society. That is a conversation we will now continue with LSAC, the ABA Section on Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar, and with colleagues throughout the country.”

Sponsored

A conversation is probably great, and a real move to increase diversity in law schools would be welcomed. But it’s best not to put too much faith in the GRE as the way to solve these larger issues.

LSAT Maker Backs Away from Showdown With Arizona Law over GRE [Wall Street Journal Law Blog]
Earlier: Arizona Law Picked A Fight With A Big Dog
Law School Deans Fight Back Against The Tyranny Of The LSAT

Sponsored

Topics

, , , , ,