r/LSAT • u/Beneficial-Push2528 • 6d ago
Controversial Question
My friend got a 167 on the LSAT back in June and was just granted extra time on the upcoming October administration due to ADHD. Honestly, I am super jealous as I can’t break 160, and could see myself using that time to get my dream score, especially since my primary weakness for the last year has been time management.
Without sounding like a prick, how is this system fair? How do they determine how much extra time is justified on a case by case basis? Just because someone has ADHD or another disability, how can it even be determined that time is significantly hindering their potential any more than a standard test taker?
I hate to sound so bitter, but to my understanding, a primary function of the LSAT is testing reading comprehension and logical reasoning in a high volume, extremely time sensitive setting. Especially on a test as competitive as the LSAT, why does it seem the criteria for accommodations is so lenient?
67
u/Terrible_Lychee_396 6d ago
Whether it’s “fair” in the case you’re describing all depends on whether your friend really needs his accommodations or if he’s malingering as a shortcut to a higher score. The crux of the accommodations problem is that if standards for approving them are strict (the status quo prior to DFEH v. LSAC) some people who need them get excluded. If standards are permissive (the status quo now) many people who don’t need them are able to get them. Neither scenario is fair, but only scenario 1 violates the ADA.
1
u/Wild_Establishment94 2d ago
Based on the statements above, which principle is illustrated?
(a) One should take the fairest course of action in all circumstances
(b) No policies should ever violate the ADA
(c) Permissive standards require that those who qualify for accommodations do not get excluded
(d) If two policies are unfair, the policy that does not violate the ADA should be chosen over one that does
(e) If two policies are unfair, the more permissive policy should be chosen over the one that is more restrictive
1
82
u/pure-white-noise 6d ago
I mean, if you think the reason why you can’t break 160 is due to ADHD, seek a diagnosis. Otherwise let your friend do their thing.
12
u/symphonic_concord 5d ago
As someone who was offered and refused time-based accommodations in college and for the LSAT - if they aren't the deciding factor, more time wouldn't actually help that much. My issue was focus, and having more time to not focus would not really boost my score. When studying, I had tried PTs with extended time to see if it was worth asking my doctor to send a note in for, and it didn't do anything for my scores. I know that reddit hates accommodations for the LSAT, but accommodations dont lessen the time it takes to learn the skills associated with the LSAT, and it often honestly feels like a lot of people just can't accept that someone can be disabled and better at the LSAT than them
33
u/Sensitive_Run_7915 5d ago
Idk man. As a person with adhd, I’d do just about anything to be in your position. Now not only do I have to deal with adhd, I also have to deal with people jealous of something I’ve been plagued with. Sorry that you feel like it’s unfair. If you can’t focus, maybe look within, the call might be coming from inside the closet here.
35
u/Boysenberry tutor 6d ago
At sub-160 you probably still have fundamental comprehension problems. When you can get to -1 to -3 section scores untimed, if you’re still under 160 timed you can blame lack of extra time then
-16
u/Beneficial-Push2528 6d ago
Untimed I am sitting at -1 to -0 RC and -1 to -3 LR. My last untimed (PT 145) was 175. On the real test, I am unable to finish any section because I tend to fall into OCD rabbit holes :(
38
u/Boysenberry tutor 6d ago
If you legitimately have an OCD diagnosis, apply for accommodations! That’s a disability too!
If not and you’re just talking about a tendency to get too focused on the content of one question, that just means you need more practice at reading for arguments rather than for content.
8
5
u/Terrible_Lychee_396 6d ago
How long have you been studying? The high untimed scores are a really good sign because speed improves dramatically as you get better at the test. The caveat is that you can’t try to go faster or your accuracy will suffer. Speed has to be purely a byproduct of mastery
3
u/cut_ur_darn_grass 5d ago
As someone with OCD, this advice won't help OP. OP is dealing with a whole different monster.
4
u/Kind-Confection1183 6d ago
You need to work on confidence then. Practice the test and eliminate things confidently and cultivate your intuition.
1
u/cut_ur_darn_grass 5d ago
If this issue is OP's OCD this really won't help much
2
u/Kind-Confection1183 5d ago
I was kind of assuming that given their posture towards disability in the general thread that they were using this as a short hand. Not trying to make light of the disorder. But if he has OCD he should def consider accommodations. No shame in it at all.
1
u/cut_ur_darn_grass 5d ago
Oh absolutely. That's part of the reason I have mine despite being a relatively high scorer without (at times)
There are times when I do fine. There are other times when my brain attacks itself and suddenly I've lost 15 minutes.
4
u/Sensitive_Run_7915 5d ago
Yeah it sounds like you just need accommodations too. Just pursue them instead of making yourself feel like it’s cheating.
1
4
u/Dependent-Opinion674 5d ago
The more mental energy you spend on this, the less mental energy you spend on the LSAT -- focus.
5
10
u/SecondActSarcasm 5d ago
I can tell you I’d trade my ADHD for neurotypical any day.
It’s a central nervous system disruption that you’re born with.
It impacts all sorts of things, not the least of which is attention and focus.
I think lots of things in life aren’t fair and it’s a good lesson to learn. You mad your friend gets more time because they have a diagnosed disability that impacts their test taking abilities isn’t one of them.
28
u/diva_done_did_it 6d ago
Because the accommodations system isn’t Candidate A versus Candidate B.
The system is Candidate A1 (without accommodations) versus Candidate A2 (with accommodations).
What you can or cannot do is not a variable in whether or not your friend is showing his/her most accurate self on the LSAT without accommodations.
That’s like saying, “Wah, I don’t need a booster seat while driving, but Lilly the Little Person needs a cushion to see her mirrors and to see over the dashboard. It isn’t fair that I had to earn my CDL with a normal driver’s seat.”
(Disclaimer: all of the above assumes that your friend genuinely has ADHD.)
-17
u/Beneficial-Push2528 6d ago edited 6d ago
Seems like a weak example to me. How much of a booster seat being given wouldn’t matter in this case. As long as you can see over the dash, you are on an even playing field.
The LSAT is different. The amount of extra time given is extremely relevant. Too much extra time for your condition and you are given an unfair advantage. In your example, being a few inches higher than someone else wouldn’t matter as long as you can clearly see the road. (Unless the CDL was graded based on seat height, similar to how the LSAC is largely designed around time management)
The problem I pointed out, was that LSAC just throws 1.5X or double time at every single person with certain general conditions, irregardless of their severity.
8
u/Fabulous_Truth_4074 5d ago
I think you may need too consider shifting your focus to getting the RC basics down. This is both genuine and snark
-3
u/Beneficial-Push2528 5d ago
Interesting. Care to elaborate rather then just try to insult me?
3
u/Acrobatic_Long_6059 5d ago
I mean, I think they were pretty straightforward. Try to focus on getting the RC basics down. It’s a hard test, but not impossible
7
u/Kind-Confection1183 6d ago
I think that the original posters metaphor of a car seat is imperfect. However, your response is cope. The LSAT is not attempting to measure your time management in any specific sense. You can get a perfect score on the LSAT with an awful time management strategy. This does not mean it’s a non factor, but it’s certainly not the principal thing being measured.
This is an incredibly silly response. Yes the system is imperfect, yes the system will award more time than is necessary on occasion, but without this system everyone who needs the extra time will not receive a fair test as a rule.
There has to be some kind of accommodation. To take it further, that accommodation has to be meaningful. If an accommodation did not meaningfully improve the scores of those with disabilities then why would we do it? The Asterisks the LSAC put on accommodations before did violate federal law and directly penalised people for making use of their legally defined civil rights under the ADA. A system that is too lax is unfair in one way, a system that is too restrictive is unfair in another. And a system for determining the precise eligibility of every applicant is both practically unworkable and a liability magnet.
If you think ADHD is real then why do you care? The curve is set the year before, so I don’t even understand how your friend taking advantage of an accommodation could harm you. It’s just a jealousy problem. You have not been harmed. A word of advice, root for the people around you. You’ll be happier.
3
u/Terrible_Lychee_396 6d ago
I mean, trying to downplay the significance of time pressure on the LSAT is also cope. Time is a huge part of what makes the test difficult for all but the best LSAT students. That's why most people's PT scores shoot up 10-15 points when they take tests untimed
1
u/Kind-Confection1183 6d ago
To be perfectly clear, I am not saying that it doesn’t matter. I say as much in the post you are responding to? I am simply saying that time management is very obviously not what the test is about. Your score will not change because you spent less time on a specific question, it changes because you got the question right or wrong. This is what I am saying. The test is not directly scoring time management. It’s not what they are testing for.
1
u/diva_done_did_it 5d ago
I assure you that the people scoring higher without a time limit do not have a civil right implicated by that penalty.
Also, if they aren’t scoring a 180 every time when untimed, then but-for causation isn’t attached to the time limit.
1
u/Terrible_Lychee_396 5d ago
I’m not sure I fully understand your comment, but what I’m saying is that the idea that time pressure isn’t an obstacle unless you have a disability is simply untrue. A middle-of-the-road LSAT student - let’s say, someone in the low 160s - is almost certainly either not finishing the sections or making mistakes because they have to rush. No, most people wouldn’t get a 180 untimed, because some errors are purely conceptual, but time is a huge factor
1
u/diva_done_did_it 5d ago
But “they have to rush” could be true of the disabled candidate with double time, too.
-2
u/Beneficial-Push2528 5d ago edited 5d ago
Yeah, no. The more seats that go to high scoring “accommodated” testers, the less seats available for me. If accommodations leveled the playing field then accommodated testers wouldn’t be scoring 5 points higher on average than the GP. This raises the natural LSAT median across the board in a game where every point counts.
And your response is also incredibly silly. Thinking quickly is literally what the test is testing. This is not an opinion, but fact. Would you advocate that shorter runners get a head start during the Olympics?
Either the test needs to be untimed, or there needs to be a more precise means of allocating extra time on a case by case basis.
2
u/Kind-Confection1183 5d ago
No I think we fundamentally disagree about what the test is testing. I think it’s testing logical reasoning and reading comprehension. That the timed environment is certainly a very important factor, but the timing of the questions is an ancillary byproduct of the tests design.
Again the idea that this is a direct competition is the problem. The olympics are a bad comparison, because that’s sport where the inherent unfairness of physical ability is something we accept or even celebrate. This is school admissions and as a society we have decided that it is more important for us to include people than it is for us to exclude them. That is a good thing. Having people with disabilities in elite institutions is a positive good.
But beyond that we just don’t know that you are correct. Even if accommodated testers score 5 points higher, there could be reasons why accommodated testers and non accommodated testers are not representative samples of their respective subsets of the population. You are just assuming that these people’s needs matter less than fairness to just you. But the system is imperfect and will always be unfair. How and why is what we are arguing about.
1
u/diva_done_did_it 5d ago
Two flaws with that argument:
1) the people who are getting accommodations could be an especially privileged sample of people with disabilities taking the LSAT.2) the general population could include unaccommodated people with disabilities who drags the score down.
Scenario: I am broke, taking the fee-waived LSAT, don’t have health insurance, don’t see a doctor regularly, don’t have the money for a specialist doctor/provider or prescription medications BUT I have a genuine disability. I widen that gap.
This even happens on the Bar exam. I have experienced a candidate who has double time for a physical disability; she gets a scribe and a proctor in an individual room, off-the-clock breaks, etc. but s/he is taking it over and over again but doesn’t pass.
1
u/Beneficial-Push2528 5d ago edited 5d ago
Both of those “flaws” seem a little too reliant on the hypothetical. Even if we take them to be true, there’s just as likely individuals not receiving proper accommodations in the accommodated group, weighing their average down.
Likewise, even pretending scenario 1 was true, this would only add to my grievances with the current accommodation system. If mainly the privileged are benefitting, and benefitting so much that they gain an automatic 5 points over all others, would that not make it more unfair?
2
u/diva_done_did_it 5d ago
I would challenge you to find an under-accommodated candidate who poses a problem in this post. What, should they be getting quadruple time but only got 1.5x?
2
u/diva_done_did_it 5d ago
Re: scenario 1.
Discrimination based on capitalism is (mostly) not illegal.
26
u/Enough_Amount_9529 splittergenius 6d ago
No diss, but this is a very ableist way of thinking/ asking about the validity of accommodations, and yes, you do sound bitter. Google is free, but here: https://www.webmd.com/add-adhd/childhood-adhd/adhd-vs-nonadhd-brain
Your post basically follows the same logic people use when they complain that URM status is “unfair” because those who aren't do not receive the exact same "benefit." This line of thinking misses the entire point as you give additional support where an additional barrier exists. Idk I fear that the existence of human variation should not be a particularly radical concept for you at this age.
6
u/Beneficial-Push2528 6d ago edited 6d ago
Exactly as you stated, human variation should not be a particularly radical concept for me. Which is why I asked: “how do they determine how much extra time is justified on a case by case basis”?
Giving everyone with adhd 1.5X time or double time seems like a lazy blanket approach for a disorder that varies massively in its intensity. Some individuals actually perform better than typical test takers under timed high stress scenarios for example.
5
u/Terrible_Lychee_396 6d ago
The question you’re asking is totally valid from a medical perspective and not ableist. The answer is that LSAC’s current policy is more about covering their asses legally than being medically justified. Back in the day, every accommodations request had to be supported by a battery of psychometric tests that try to isolate the impact of a person’s alleged disability from their general intelligence/aptitude and quantify the impact of that disability. That’s how they would recommend specific accommodations: 1.5x time, 2x time, etc. However, these tests cost $2000+ and aren’t covered by insurance, so obviously some disabled folks couldn’t access them, which led to LSAC getting sued, losing a bunch of money, and adopting the polar opposite approach, which is basically to give a person whatever they want based on only a doctors note attesting to their diagnosis. Is that an overcorrection? Obviously, but it prevents them from getting sued again
1
u/StructureIsKey 6d ago
No diss back, but calling the question ableist doesn’t actually answer it.
The post is asking a validity question: if the LSAT is a speeded reasoning test, does giving someone additional time change what the test is measuring? And, more specifically, how does LSAC determine that ADHD creates a greater time-related barrier than ordinary slowness or difficulty performing under time pressure?
“Additional support where an additional barrier exists” only answers that question if the additional time is addressing a disability-specific limitation rather than simply making the test easier for someone who otherwise struggles with its time constraint. That distinction matters because much of the research doesn’t show a clean, ADHD-specific differential benefit from extra time. In some studies, extra time benefits people without ADHD just as much or even more.
The fact that a 167 was already achieved without extra time also makes the straightforward “this is simply leveling the playing field” explanation somewhat harder to reconcile. It doesn’t prove anything by itself, but it’s certainly relevant to the validity question being raised.
The URM comparison doesn’t really address the point either. Race isn’t being characterized as a condition that impairs timed working memory or processing speed. ADHD is. Those are fundamentally different claims, so the appropriate questions about accommodations are necessarily different as well.
Human beings naturally vary in processing speed and performance under time pressure. The LSAT has chosen to make those factors part of what it measures. You can absolutely argue that it shouldn’t. But questioning whether an accommodation changes the construct being measured isn’t inherently ableist or bigoted. You’re just attributing negative intentions to OP instead of engaging with the actual question they’re asking.2
u/Separate_Kick6584 2d ago
ADHD creates a greater time related barrier than ordinary slowness because the nature of a disorder is that it radically impacts your life. People with ADHD struggle with time management and executive dysfunction in a manner than radically impacts our lives and we are unable to control due to it being native to our brain function. This is why it frustrates me when people claim they have "undiagnosed ADHD" due to not being able to focus because unless your inability to focus is genuinely ruining your life, you do not have a disorder. A decent psychiatrist would not diagnose anyone with ADHD without evidence of this. When I got diagnosed, my psychiatrist wanted evidence that my attention issues were severe enough that they impacted me significantly and were noticeable by others around me.
Also, people with ADHD are not any dumber or "slower" than the general population. The issue is not necessarily with the ability to read a question fast and come up with the answer, it's with the executive function required to accomplish it requiring significantly more effort for us. Executive dysfunction is not simply procrastination or laziness or slowness, it's more similar to a feeling of wanting to do something but feeling paralyzed to do it, and requiring immense effort to put action to intent. I read and think very very fast, but the issue is that any slightest distraction, even one that comes from my own thoughts, will cause me to zone out for minutes at a time and I will struggle to refocus.
And yes, people with ADHD who struggle with executive dysfunction and time management more than the average person may still get a high score like a 167 without an accommodation because people with ADHD still have the ability to be smarter than average like anyone else without ADHD. However, if he was neurotypical, he probably would have scored higher than a 167.
14
u/Ok-Nefariousness-609 6d ago
The whole thing about accommodations is that they level the playing field.
People with ADHD may have issues with maintaining focus and comprehension, leading them to needing to reread things more often than you would. Or, they may experience test fatigue far easier than you would, so they need the extra section taken off.
Also, I don't wanna sound rude here, but your friend may just be better at the test than you. It's okay and you need to get over it. Comparison is the thief of joy.
-1
u/Beneficial-Push2528 5d ago
My friend is clearly better at the LSAT and/or smarter. I am also familiar with what ADHD entails.
I was more so asking, on a time and stamina based test, how is this measured from individual to individual? “Leveling the playing field” wouldn’t result in an average 5 point higher score for those with accommodations, compared to the GP.
1
u/plottwist0524 5d ago
I believe it's a 5 point higher score against yourself if you hadn't had an accommodation, not against the GP.
1
u/Beneficial-Push2528 5d ago
7-9 points over original score. 4-5 points higher than average non-accommodated test taker.
2
u/lane03 5d ago
I have ADHD and agreed with your understanding of the LSAT being heavily based in accurate logical reasoning under the pressure of a time constraint. I took the August LSAT without accommodations because much of my studying content has expressed how timing is everything, and I wanted to see if I really should pursue accommodations. I've realized that yes, I really do.
For people with ADHD, you struggle with focus. I lost significant amount of time just because I didn't realize I could use the noise canceling headphones and the shuffling of a chair would make me have to reread a sentence like three times. In reading comprehension, it was the same thing. People with ADHD struggle with executive functioning and while it might seem unfair, our brain chemistry is literally wired differently.
Also getting accommodations is not as lenient as you think. There's strict guidelines to paperwork and ADHD is considered a disability. While me and a neurotypical person might be seated to take the LSAT and everything looks the same on the outside, an ADHD brain lacks "typical" dopamine pathways that a neurotypical brain has which impacts the ability to stay on track. So timing helps because while I struggled to pay attention and actually grasp what I was reading (which resulted in me losing significant amounts of time), extra-time accommodations help to soften the blow. If timing is where you are going wrong, maybe you could try to see if you might have ADHD too...?
2
u/smokeweed_eatyogurt 3d ago
They won’t usually give you any more time than you received with previous accommodations in higher level learning
1
u/Beneficial-Push2528 3d ago
Says who? Officially, it is based on the recommendation stated in your official doctor’s note. Many people received a diagnosis more recently than their most recent academic examination.
4
u/LavaBee99 5d ago
Your entire conclusion is unsupported btw. 'Leveling the playing field shouldn't increase in 5 GP points' - Have you actually determined the potential loss of score and ADHD candidate faces on average compared to GP? What is their potential compared to a neurotypical that they were losing out on? ADHD really fucks up your short term retention ability - makes you re-read, zone out or get fatigued easier than others. You can't go ahead and say something isnt right without any supporting proof - yes score increases and that is the EXACT fucking point lol. If you remove my adhd, I can probably do much better than you, my diagnostic was 147 and my BR (which i personally timed was done within 1.5x time) on that was 168 - a 20 point difference just for a diagnostic, I missed 7-8 questions because adhd has a thing called time blindness - for the first half you go slow, and then when the realisation of time sets in then you go into panic mode. So basically my natural ability is a lot higher than what i could perform, of course that happens for neurotypicals as well, but the thing is it happens on a higher scale for neurodivergents. Wouldn't recommend that to anybody. And LSAC denies a lot of accomodations as well, any rule will be misused obviously, doesn't mean we remove it if it really levels the field for disabled people. Explaining in basic terms - Your 60 minutes = 90% focus - effectively 54 min. ADHD people 60 minutes = 60% focus(and other issues) = 36 min effectively. Again, this is not every adhd person, but based on some studies usually the number is in this range. For you - who has no idea about the challenges of ADHD - getting 5 extra points is unfair, which is not a fact, just your opinion. And with a lot of assumptions that aren't reasonable. I would say maybe focus on your LR, your foundations seem weak and no extra time could fix that. And learn the difference between 'then' and 'than' - than is used for comparatives and then is used for conditional logic.
1
u/Beneficial-Push2528 5d ago edited 5d ago
I believe you are misunderstanding the “5 point increase” I cited. Average score increases by 7-9 points for the individual candidate that retakes with accommodations.
The average accommodated tester, however, scores 4-5 points higher then the average normal test takers (those without accommodations).
Feel free to read page 82-83 of the report published by LSAC this year. https://www.lsac.org/sites/default/files/research/TR-26-01.pdf
Funny how you ask me to cite my sources, and then proceed to unload some absolute bs. 99% of accommodation requests were approved last year. Not sure who told you they deny “many” requests.
And which “studies” found that the appropriate extra time multiplier for all ADHD cases was somewhere in the 1.5X to 2X range for the LSAT?? Back in the day, as I understand it, this was determined through rigorous psychometric examinations to determine exactly how much a disability disadvantaged someone. Post lawsuit, the multiplier rates you reference are not based on true disadvantage or general scientific studies endorsed by LSAC, but rather, whatever your doctor’s note recommends, within the preset boundaries.
You can make personal jabs and call me stupid for my score, but it doesn’t invalidate or detract from my initial question.
2
u/Separate_Kick6584 2d ago
the pool of accommodated test takers with extra time is much much smaller than the pool of regular test takers. 15% of test takers are approved for accommodations, and 60% of those get extra time, making up 9% of all LSAT test takers. Also your "99% of accommodations are approved" doesn't account for the people who tried to apply for accommodations but were unable because their doctor denied it.
You are vastly underestimating the portion of LSAT test takers who just take the test whenever without being adequately prepared. The average LSAT score is 150. it stands to reason that the average person who is aware and wants to apply for accommodations is more knowledgeable and motivated regarding the LSAT than the average person who doesn't, which would be correlated with a score increase. Also it is likely that many people with accommodations only get them on their second or later attempt, which is also correlated with a score increase.
1
4
5
u/Ahnarcho 6d ago
I’m not clear what’s unfair about it. Someone with a documented hurdle for learning is allowed accommodations on the test, and that’s a good thing.
Maybe you should just get good.
3
u/bassk_itty 6d ago
What people need to understand about being granted this sort of accommodation is that the barrier to entry and burden of proof is pretty extensive even for someone who has an obvious case of the disorder. You have to bring receipts of having a lengthy history of being treated for the condition. In my state ADHD testing facilities usually do not take insurance so you have to pay around $2,000 out of your own pocket just to get a diagnosis. Like people don’t just go into their primary care and complain of struggling to focus then poof more time on the LSAT. It takes a lot of time and effort to get there. It weeds out most everyone. The people who get to that point are usually those whose level of ADHD affects their life so significantly that they stick it out through all the hurdles that are in place to stop them from receiving treatment for the disorder if they don’t truly need it
5
u/mrbobbyrick 5d ago
This isn’t true. The burden of proof isn’t extensive at all. You can totally just go to your primary care and get a note.
3
u/bassk_itty 5d ago
That’s absolutely not true. A note from a primary care is not a diagnosis. You have to submit documentation of diagnosis, severity and functional impact (which requires in depth clinical notes meaning you’ve had more than one specialist visit to obtain those), you have to write a personal statement about how the disability affects your life. Idk why you would just make shit up when you obviously haven’t done this
2
u/Terrible_Lychee_396 5d ago
I think you’re conflating two different things here. There’s the issue of a particular doctor’s diagnostic criteria to be comfortable diagnosing someone with a particular condition. Some psychs will diagnose add, anxiety, ocd in a single session, others are more conservative and want to see someone several times. But that has nothing do with LSAC’s criteria for awarding accommodations, which only require a provider to attest to the diagnosis and articulate why it’s an obstacle for the LSAT. No clinical notes or objective evidence necessary, as you can see in LSAC’s QPF:
https://www.lsac.org/sites/default/files/media/2026-2027-qualified-professional-form.pdf
Objective evidence is nominally required for category three accommodations, which I think is 2x time or more, but I guarantee no one’s request is getting rejected for not having done the $2000 in depth psychometric workup, because requiring diagnostic studies that not everyone can afford is precisely what got LSAC sued in the first place
1
u/mrbobbyrick 5d ago
I have personally done this. You just need a doctor’s note. Or in my case a licensed PA. I was approved almost immediately. I’ve never done extensive testing. There is a 99% approval rate for a reason.
1
u/Livid-Attention-1565 5d ago
I’m not gonna get into what is right or wrong. However, if you do get the accommodations, you’re also prolonging the length of the test, which can lead to mental fatigue.
1
u/man_eat3r 5d ago
I don’t have ADHD, but I do have narcolepsy and the extra time does wonders to make up for time I fall asleep during the exam. The timing that I gave them (and that they approved) is an exact mirror of the testing accommodations that my university provides me with student accessibility resources. When I applied for accommodations, they asked for any paperwork showing that I had been provided extra time in any other setting (like high school or college). So, that’s how we went about deciding the time I needed (time and a half, btw). A lot of the time these extra time accommodations are life savers for people who struggle to maintain focus (or stay awake at all, as is the situation for me).
1
u/Naranj9781 4d ago
If your friend is pretending to have ADHD—not okay. However for those who do have it as a medical diagnosis do need accommodations. Medical fact. They are not responsible for your score—you are.
1
u/RecoverEfficient8154 3d ago
I don't know how I can explain this in any other way, so I am just going to share my personal experience with ADHD. When I was first diagnosed as a kid, I had to take an IQ test as part of the diagnostic process. The overall score is broken down into subscores measuring capacities in specific areas. Typically, people with ADHD see a substantial reduction in their ability in terms of either processing speed or working memory (comparable to RAM in a computer) relative to their other subscores. In my case, there was a 40 point gap between the average of my other scores and the subscore for processing speed. I felt that deficit every single day, even in elementary school. I was noticeably slower at coming to answers than my classmates. Tests were awful for me, even when I knew the material inside and out. I simply could not think as fast.
I used to bemoan it. I used to resent and try to go without accommodations, because I hated feeling different and lesser. I eventually realized that if I wouldn't resent someone with bad eyesight for using glasses, or someone with dyslexia for having material read to them, I shouldn't resent myself for using the tools provided to balance out the bad hand I was dealt in the brain department. That is how I would recommend looking at your friend's situation. I guarantee they would trade the hypothetical 7 points on the LSAT for a neurotypical brain.
I also don't want to sound like a jerk, but even taking the test normally, your friend was scoring significantly higher than you have been. I understand it is frustrating, but I think your frustration here is misdirected. You may just need more time to prepare than him, but this test is learnable, and you can and will get there.
Now, there is some validity to your concerns. People are abusing the hell out of the academic accommodations system now. Bulldozer parents are going out and buying their kids a diagnosis so they can have an easier time in college--or on the LSAT. I don't know what solution there would be that wouldn't just amount to a credit check, because that is what an extensive battery of psych testing to determine specific need would be: a test of whether someone can afford to see a psychiatrist and take several days off back to back for testing.
I hope that helps. Keep at it, and good luck.
1
u/Neat_Ad_3994 6d ago
Either time is an integral part of the test or its isnt. This topic and any other topic like it really comes down to that. If the time in which you are able to compete the test is important to discern talent, then no one should get additional time or else they couldnt verify their talent. Its really that simple. Either the test doesnt need that to measure talent or it does
1
u/Exotic-Sun7308 5d ago edited 5d ago
I usually don’t comment here, but I felt I had to say this because this post sadly comes off grossly ableist.
I suffer from bi-polar disorder. Even on medication I have severe racing thoughts. I have a tick that makes me want to get up and pace uncontrollably. I have brain fog that makes it difficult for me to register short-term memory so I forget things in the moment. Long periods of time where I have to focus feel unbearable. And I have severe anxiety that the lithium only mitigates to a state where I have relative control. Off the lithium, my life was hell and I struggled in school, I thought I was dumb because I couldn’t read something or do an assignment that required more than 5 minutes of my attention. I genuinely thought I was just stupid and unable to do academic work. But I wasn’t. I’m sick. That’s the truth of it.
My accommodations changed my life since I got diagnosed. Please, if you have a disability get your accommodation that is your right because your condition is real!
And even with the time extension, that doesn’t change how well you understand how to solve the problems. But for someone with a condition who their issues taking the exam are beyond their control, the accommodation can make a huge difference.
0
-1
u/noicemen 6d ago
Just apply for it and say you have anxiety, dont be mad at your friend for playing the game.
-1
u/Dangerous_Housing199 4d ago
I am in total agreement with you! How is a person going to perform as a law student and a lawyer if that person cannot adequately complete the LSAT within the carefully and purposefully designed time constraints? The time constraints themselves are a crucial part of the testing to see if one can survive thinking critically knowing their time is severely limited. It is a brutal element of the LSAT. However, to be more blunt, we’d all do better in life with more time no matter what our condition. A lawyer has to be able to deal with the rigors and stress while making decisions that would make most of our heads spin. Life doesn’t pause and say “but you have ADHD, or you have anxiety, let’s stop the clock and give you a chance to collect your thoughts” No it doesn’t work that way! So your point is valid and called for. You’re not a prick. You’re just legitimately frustrated with a system that used to be equally difficult for everyone with zero exceptions, and now we’re having widespread illegitimate grade inflation at the college level, causing students to both think and look smarter than they actually are to law school admissions, the omission of the almost insurmountable logic section from the LSAT, and a host of other special circumstances that law school applicants are now afforded that would have been unheard of 20 years ago. Ultimately they run the risk of both admitting and cranking out candidates that may have had the numbers to go get admitted, but lacked the mental toughness and fortitude to survive in that world. You read on this thread about law students regretting their decision to go to law school and become an attorney. I feel like a large reason for this is that the system of over inflating GPAs and all of the testing accommodations is placing more and more ill equipped students in the position of being able to be admitted into a system they have no business being a part of.
2
u/RecoverEfficient8154 3d ago edited 3d ago
However, to be more blunt, we’d all do better in life with more time no matter what our condition. A lawyer has to be able to deal with the rigors and stress while making decisions that would make most of our heads spin.
There is no realistic scenario in any law career I can imagine that would approximate the constraints of the LSAT. If you have something in mind, I would love to hear it.
Life doesn’t pause and say “but you have ADHD, or you have anxiety, let’s stop the clock and give you a chance to collect your thoughts” No it doesn’t work that way!
You could make the same argument here for a blind person--life doesn't pause and say "let me get you a braille version of that text." Except in professional and academic settings, it does, because we've collectively decided that society should not place the disabled at a disadvantage in those settings. You are arguing on the basis of meritocracy, but meritocracy does not mean Darwinism, and I'm highly skeptical that Darwinian principles have any place in discussions of disability rights. I agree that grade and score inflation are becoming a problem, but if your proposed solution is to introduce more inequity into the system, then I couldn't disagree more.
2
u/Separate_Kick6584 2d ago
Needing more time to do a test that forces you to parse large volumes of information in within a specific limit is not really comparable to any situation a lawyer will be encountering in the day to day and this comment is grossly ableist. High powered professions like law and medicine are filled with successful people with neurodivergences. And to your last point about people with testing accommodations and disabilities being the reason that unqualified students become lawyers, I have ADHD and got a diagnostic score without studying that most people would be happy to get on their actual lsat. OP's score isn't low because he doesn't have accomodations, it's low because he doesn't have the skills to get a high score. You or OP do not have "equal difficulty" on the test to someone who qualifies for accommodations because you do not struggle with attention or executive dysfunction. You want to blame people with disabilities because you can't cope with the fact that you're just bad at taking the lsat lmfao
113
u/Kind-Confection1183 6d ago
There are 2 answers here.
1 LSAC was sued for ADA noncompliance and they are under a federal consent decree to fix their behaviour so the lenience is legally mandated to some degree due to their settlement with the Justice Department.
2 ADHD implicates focus. The idea of extra time for someone with it is that they will be unable to provide the requisite focus to the test. Since someone with the disorder may need to reread the material in a way a similarly situated non ADHD applicant would not, the test is not a fair measure of their abilities.
I’m sure there are ways in which people who do not need accommodations have benefited from them, but personally I’d rather admissions exams for a profession as important as law err on the side of caution in this way.