Imagine a world where there’s no LSAT [Show Summary]

With talk of testing becoming an optional step when applying to law school, LSAT expert Steve Schwartz, discusses how test optionality would change admissions. What would it mean for applicants? Should applicants still plan to take the test?

Interview with Steve Schwartz, Founder and CEO of LSAT Unplugged [Show Notes]

Welcome to the 477th episode of Admissions Straight Talk. Thanks for joining me. Before we meet our guest, I'd like to highlight the featured resource for today's show. It is Accepted’s Law School Admissions Quiz. Are you ready to apply to your dream law school? Are you competitive at your target programs? Accepted's Law School Admissions Quiz can give you a quick reality check. Just go to accepted.com/law-quiz, complete the quiz, and you'll not only get an assessment of your chances but actionable tips on how to improve your qualifications. Plus, it's all free. 

hbspt.cta.load(58291, 'c5572014-0b54-4e12-acd9-91a66e31a013', {});

Our guest today is Steve Schwartz of the LSAT Blog and the LSAT Unplugged podcast and YouTube channel, which we're going to link to from the show notes at accepted.com/477. Steve graduated from Columbia University in 2008. In high school and college, he tutored students in a variety of subjects and also helped prep test takers for standardized tests, including the LSAT. However, he really began to focus on the LSAT when he was applying to law school. He founded the LSAT Blog in 2008 and never looked back. Today, 14 years later, he has helped thousands master the LSAT, get into law school, and sometimes secure scholarships worth tens of thousands of dollars. 

Linda: Today, we're discussing a possible LSAT-optional world. Can you give us context for something that a few years ago neither of us would've imagined possible? [2:25]

Steve: It is quite a surprise. The general trend has been for more and more of higher education to go test-optional. We've seen this in a number of undergraduate institutions, but at the graduate level, they seem to rely quite a bit more on standardized tests. Overall, I think some of this comes from the fact that there's a lot of grade inflation in colleges and universities. If everyone has a high GPA, then how are schools going to distinguish between different applicants? I think that's part of the reason for the change.

Linda: I certainly agree with you. I think that the focus on the test score increased because the GPA was a less valuable signal.

Steve: That's why they say that they might need exams like the LSAT for admissions purposes, but at the same time, there are concerns around the equity involved in members of different groups having different test scores and concerns over access. These two issues - on the one hand, grade inflation and on the other hand, issues of access - are seemingly at odds with each other. That poses a problem and a debate that all of higher ed is trying to untangle.

hbspt.cta.load(58291, 'f5545361-1ed4-49ea-b537-3ac1931c8064', {});

Linda: We’ve also seen really different trends. The undergrad world has really embraced test-optionality. A few weeks ago, MIT, which embraced test-optionality as a whole, suddenly announced the undergraduate school will be requiring a test once again because they felt it actually enhanced access and equity. Obviously, nobody in undergraduate or graduate levels wants to admit people who aren't going to succeed. 

At this point in time, what do you think LSAC is going to do? What actually is the issue? Is it schools making a choice? Is it LSAC imposing a policy? [5:05]

Steve: That's a fantastic question. Just to backpedal a little bit, you mentioned COVID and how schools were going test-optional. Because of the American Bar Association's requirement that law schools use a valid and reliable admission test like the LSAT, law schools could not do that in March 2020 when the pandemic hit North America.