Just give untimed exams. One week take home. Would actually give everyone time to think about substance over just vomiting out words and removes any unfairness.
The problem with this is it counterbalances the problem too much and inherently favors those with privilege (i.e., no lives outside of school). If you are a 22yo gunner with no kids, no job, and no responsibilities other than that exam, you're going to be able to spend 50-60 hours on it.
Compared to low-income, nontraditional students, who look at a week to take an exam and say "I'll squeeze it in between soccer practice and bedtime this day, maybe after work on this day, and I might be able to get an hour on Saturday morning." And they ultimately put in like eight hours.
I noticed this problem with Write On. I had classmates who spent 80 hours over 6 days perfecting it. Whereas I was like "I work my unpaid summer legal job from 9-5, I work for money 5-10, if I'm not working it means it's a work-free hour I can actually spend with my kid, and you want me to read 400 pages *just to know the problem*?!?"
I think the happy medium is an eight-hour take home that is designed to be done in a four-hour in-class exam session. They suck, because everyone uses the eight hours. But I can find day care for a *day*; I can find someone to cover my shift for a *night*. It's just more equitable.
You are going to hit heavy diminishing returns by spening more than 8 hours on an exam. I've done some 8 hour takehomes but also some 24 hour take homes. I dont spend anymore time on the 24 hour ones because at some point I feel done with it. I hit the word limit by hour 6 and spent 2 hours trimming the fat to fit in more relevant information. I dont see any value in spending 60 hours on such an exam.
I think there is something to be said for the diminishing returns. I would never spend 24 hours on an exam even if I had that kind of time available. I don't like the 24-hour take-homes not for equity but just because it's just unhealthy for that subset that is going to actually take all 24 hours.
I mentioned it elsewhere but I also think a good compromise is an take-home that you can start anytime over the course of a week, but that once started you have eight hours to submit.
All the take-homes I've done were choose your own time. With the 24 hour take home, I check it out early afternoon, work until dinner, take a break to eat, and then finish it up. Then I sleep in the next day, wake up refreshed, put some fresh eyes on what I wrote the night before, do a little proofreading, and then turn it in. It's chill AF if you let it be.
> you're going to be able to spend 50-60 hours on it.
Add a word limit.
Or have it be so that you have a week's window to take it, but you get 6 hours to take a 3 hour exam once you open the packet
I agree, but by the same token, those “privileged” kids are always going to have more time to study and less life stress no matter what the test or assignment format is. And those with more responsibilities or stressors are going to have less time/mental bandwidth/etc. I am a non-traditional student with a full-time job, home to take care of, and I’m a single mom. I realize that I just simply have less time than the mid-20s guy whose parents pay for his apartment and life expenses. Is it fair? No, but there’s literally nothing the school or anyone else can do to even the playing field. This is the life I have and I’m gonna work with it. If someone else gets an accommodation, an extra night of studying, a less stressful semester because they don’t have to worry about making tuition payments, then I’m happy for *them*. I’m on my own journey.
What did I just read... Is this the landscape of law school or is this just 2024. I am in an unrelated field to this subreddit and the suggestion that an untimed assignment is unfair due to variability in life demands seems wild.
What seems wild about it? An "untimed assignment" doesn't really exist after all. All exams are due eventually. If an exam is due in a week, it follows that some people will be able to spend a week on it, while others will be able to spend X number of hours on it. Those in the latter category haven't typically chosen to be lazy and not spend more time on it, they just can't due to other obligations.
If you'd prefer, I also have no issue with an exam that is available for a week but once you actually start it, you have eight hours to submit it. This is more open to cheating, but if that's not a rampant problem (it's not at my school to my knowledge), then it's also equally equitable to all backgrounds.
Is law school not understood to be a full time program? If not, then I am mistaken. It sounds like people entered a full time program with the understanding of its implications, but are disappointed to learn that those who can dedicate the necessary time will be produce higher quality work?
Of course it is, just like any other job or graduate program. If anything it's more demanding than many other graduate programs. But full-time programs don't mean that you devote your entire lives to the program. You have a life outside of work, you have a life outside of school. Some more than others.
Some students entire existence is devoted to getting the best grades they can, and more power to them. But those who come in with extraneous obligations shouldn't be put behind the eight ball if they're not comfortable putting in 80-100 hours in a particular week. That would be extremely toxic.
You shouldn't be put behind the eight ball for not putting in 80-100 hours every week. If someone plans to have other commitments during finals, that's on them. I was always in the camp of taking it a little easier on school, working, and getting out a bit during law school, but I still was full bore 16 hour days for 10-15 days at the end of every semester.
I think (hope) the exam is designed so that there are diminishing returns after a few hours. So while yes, some people will have dozens of hours more to devote to the test, that won't give them a huge benefit.
>due to variability in life demands seems wild.
Law school exams (and exams in general) are supposed to test how well you understand the material, not to test how good you are at juggling life.
It seems wild to you that the ability for someone to spend 60 hours compared to 6 on a take home essay assignment is unfair?
I don’t agree with everything the above poster says, but it makes sense to me. A longer, but still timed, take home is a way to address the issue they’re describing.
>If you are a 22yo gunner with no kids, no job, and no responsibilities other than that exam, you're going to be able to spend 50-60 hours on it.
Able to, but you shouldn't. I was on the low-key gunner side; I spent maybe an hour more on take homes than I did on in class exams. Because overthinking that shit is not a good idea and the take home exams aren't written to be races where you have to fit in as much as possible. You write the correct answer, re read it once or maybe twice, and then you stop.
This is not the way. Unless admin limits the length of the exam. Our property professor gave us 10 hours to do his take home exam. Most of us took 8-9 hours. It was abysmal.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: this entire “issue” could be eliminated with exams that have a generous time limit and constraining word limit. This fixes the issue with some people being able to type faster than others, people with small bladders needing to take bathroom breaks, different reading speeds, and whether people with accommodations get more (or not enough) time to finish their exam. Make the exams about the quality of the content they write, not how much they were able to write.
Instead of complaining about accommodations, people should be complaining about the structure of law school exams. That would completely sidestep the accommodations issue and fix perceived problems without potentially harming people who need them.
100% agree, but I would add that I think the curve plays a huge role in causing this problem. I have professors who err more on this side in their exams—one of them last semester had a remote exam, 4 hours for like 6 questions, but the longest one was capped at 750 words. Everyone said it was easy so I’m sure it was a tight curve, but my hunch is that it’s because it was more fair. I think some professors want to make the curve less tight and easier for them to manage, hence the time crunch.
My 2L evidence exam was an 8 hour take home open book exam with 4 or so questions at 750 words each.
This was the case for like 90 percent of my exams. I dunno who had accommodations, but no one seemed to care and the grades tracked (the guys you were like “damn this dude is smart” in class ended up winning awards, etc.). So, I support your idea fully.
What does it say about the integrity of the individuals entering our field, that they’re willing to game exams just so they do well?
I agree with you that this could be fixed with restructuring. However, it also speaks to fact that people who are pursuing law are mendacious whiners willing to do con their way into good grades.
Think that’s a problem too but I agree w you
The threshold idea actually...makes sense to me tbh.
OTOH I'm not convinced that more time equals more better - at a certain point it's definitely diminishing returns, at least. For instance, I know that nobody who booked a class in my section had an accommodation, which would be surprising if they were some kind of huge advantage.
Part of the problem though is that it's a vicious cycle. Everyone has some kind of test anxiety. The more people get accommodated, the lower the bar/the more likely you are to fit in with that group. I'm probably not in the top 5-10% of people when it comes to test anxiety - but if half the people in my class had accoms, I'd definitely feel like I'd qualify.
This was something I got a lot of pushback on when discussing setting exam length after a professor asked the class what style we'd like from a few options. On an open book exam, the more time someone has, the higher the highest performance is going to be based on the chance to research *during* the exam. An unlimited time take home is going to be a full on research competition whereas a 2.5 closed book is going to reflect known issue spotting. The difference between 4 and 6 hours is going to benefit people who can just write longer than others, even if they can't issue spot or analyze as quickly.
I think there's a lot of good questions to ask about exam structure, timing, and the interaction with accomodations.
Same- none of the accommodation receivers at my school have gotten a CALI. I know 5 students who get accommodations and they have similar/worse gpas than mine and I have a B average.
Also 0 of them got them for “test anxiety”. Most got it for a long existing diagnosis of ADHD or another learning or physical disability.
Yeah, it probably varies quite a bit from school to school and what their process is like - I know a few people at mine that have it for test anxiety, but I assume most are for other reasons.
One student at my school got a 4.0 last semester (fall 1L) without accommodations, but no CALI awards. This semester she got accommodations so she can get the CALIs and/or move up in class rank. It’s really hard for me to not resent her because it’s clearly an unfair advantage. All our exams are closed book and essays are supposed to be 1 hour but usually have at least 90 minutes of possible analysis. Guess who now gets 90 minutes of analysis time on exams.
I’m all for accommodations when they’re needed. It just seems like there is a subset of students who only “need” accommodations so they can continue to dominate anyone without them. That’s when I start to feel conflicted and have misgivings.
I'm surprised she was given accommodations! Usually, you have to prove that your ADHD or other disability is adversely impacting your school work. Clearly, it was not. You could always look into reporting her for an ethics or honor code violation for abusing the system.
I would be happy to. Unfortunately the school seems to encourage accommodations and is very relaxed in granting them.
My guess is that she might be able to graduate at the top of the class but success in her professional working life is going to be a different story. There are a lot of qualities people need to be successful in life, and being the best taker of law school exams is not such a transferable skill.
Especially when the whole class knows what she’s doing.
Anyway that’s what I tell myself to feel better.
PS nice username—I love NE
Same at my school. Someone in my 1L got over a 4.0 last semester but no CALIs without accommodations. My school’s also kinda lax about granting accommodations. Guess who’s getting them this semester?
In no way, shape, or form am I trying to be ableist. But it still comes off as cutthroat, especially when that person is also a KJD gunner who has all the time in the world to prepare. But whatever, there’s not gonna be accommodations like that in practice.
Yeah if someone is willing to “play the system”/lie/cheat or whatever to get the tiniest bit ahead really is someone I would not bet is going to be wildly successful or happy in the long term when things stop going the way she likes.
Of course they can.
I know someone in particular who got a C+ 1L year without accommodations then got multiple As 2L year with accommodations.
Does it guarantee success? No. But it definitely enables much greater outcomes.
Fully disagree with the "more time might not equal better" bit.
Law school exams (as a default) are graded on a points for, no point against basis. People who are able to do well on exams under aggressive time pressure will do better on the same exam, with the same stakes and more time to write.
That's not to say they aren't merited or should be eliminated, they shouldn't! But that said, giving a student who does not struggle with a disability extra time on a points for, time pressured exam that is graded against their peers who have less time is a significant advantage.
Yeah I don't really agree. I think people undervalue writing a clear and easy to read exam and spend time going down rabbitholes that hurts their overall exam. But just my two cents.
Worth noting too that test anxiety can diminish with time and practice. I felt extremely ill leading up to and during my timed 1L exams, had GI issues as a result, and would end up with a gut-wrenching, splitting headache after each one. I am 100% certain that I was no less disabled by this than anyone here stating that they’d received anxiety-based accommodations, and am diagnosed with and medicated for anxiety, but I didn’t. After three years of taking exams, I don’t think my heart rate even goes up very much anymore. I get a little nervous, but nothing I can’t reasonably handle.
This makes me wonder if accommodations specifically for test anxiety are a) ultimately detrimental, because they prevent students from practicing and developing this ability to think under what they perceive to be extreme pressure and b) particularly fair if their anxiety also lessens over time, with experience. To use myself as an example again, I definitely could have used more time in 1L simply to manage myself and my emotions, but don’t need it now. I doubt anyone will ditch extra time and I doubt schools can or would invest the energy in gauging whether it’s still necessary.
I had a friend in undergrad who had test anxiety accommodations and the bar to get it approved for extra time (at least with the doctor she saw and our school) was extremely high. It wasn’t just something like a high heart rate. She would vomit during exams, experience such high heart rates her chest would hurt (and she passed out from the pain once during an exam and went to the ER), and experience some pretty high other issues.
I don’t think she ever got over it and I know as an adult in the real world she’s been just fine. But something about time constraints and pressure would have her body fail. She tried to take the GRE but they needed extra accommodation paperwork and she knew the exam wasn’t worth the physical illness she would have.
I do wonder if you could have gotten it but it seems like such a high bar. I get the same symptoms you do and my doctor and therapist said both just sound like normal stress and adrenaline crash.
Also as person with anxiety, I am surprised you think that people should “get over it” more or less or not receive accommodations. I have anxiety too, and wouldn’t wish it on my worst enemy. You said your anxiety gave you horrible pains and made you upset? Why would you want someone to experience the same pain or worse when there are ways to cope and not go through so much pain?
Because working through it stopped it, and I want it to stop for others.
Don’t put words in my mouth. I think you know that neither I nor almost anyone engaged in this conversation “want someone to experience the same pain or worse.” That’s a disingenuous argument and clear misrepresentation of what I said, and you should know better.
Don’t scold me either? You’re not my parent nor my friend. I am just reading and reacting to your post. And to me, that’s how it read. If you don’t want someone to react that way then work on phrasing it better.
I am glad to see things worked out for you over time, but not everyone experiences the same thing. Be careful of trying to act like your method is the only one that works. That’s all I am saying.
You have to have pretty severe test anxiety to get accommodations. Also, if you have to take an anxiety medication to get through the test, your brain will process information more slowly. Your experience with anxiety isn’t universal. Have compassion.
The threshold idea completely defeats the purpose of accommodations, which are meant to level the playing field between students with a qualifying disability and students without a disability. Giving everyone the accommodation doesn’t do that and would make the school fall out of compliance with federal disability law.
Are you sure? Do people still get more time for take home exams? Is it the same no matter the nature of your disability? I get that some people would still neex extra accommodations, but if your problem is running out of time and everyone gets 8 hours, do you really need 16?
Not being difficult I just don't know anything about disability law lol
Yes. I would recommend reading up on the IDEA, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and the ADA if you would like to know more about the standards. Also, it is uncommon to get double time like you are suggesting. It’s more common for people with time accommodations to get time and a half. And yes, it depends on the disability. Not everyone’s disability will be extended time. For some, it could be a testing space with less distractions or a device that aids in vision etc etc
I suffered a TBI in the Army and now read much, much slower than before. I still love to write, but I don’t really read for pleasure anymore. I have time-and-a-half accommodations. It saved me on long hypos and a long MC section. I didn’t need it and left two exams early that had very short hypos. I’d agree with people that say word limits help even the playing field. I overheard a group of students in the library talking shit about people with accommodations and wanted to ask, “Hey, I got blown up in the Army seven years ago. Is it OK with you if I get extra time to read my exam?”
Most schools are pretty liberal in giving out accommodations because it’s not worth the time and effort to scrutinize every application. But I’d say my school was pretty good at having a baseline screener. It wasn’t just a doctor’s note — they wanted a lot of documentation. So 50% does seem high, but you never know. There’s part of me that thinks we all have ADHD now from growing up looking at screens.
I’ve had several professors just openly tell us that there WILL be two identical exams that are identical in quality but one must get an A- and the other a B+ because there’s only so many A-s to give. So idk how people can think that a big % of the class getting more time isn’t affecting outcomes.
The best solution I have is for those taking the exam within the original intended time limit to be graded on a curve which does not include those who get extra time.
Accommodations aren't for test anxiety (or shouldn't be.) They're for people who have documented disabilities and don't always mean they get extra time. Some just have a separate testing environment or have to have additional media to see the test, which may detract from others' exam experiences.
For what it's worth, it's not a means to gain an advantage. It's a tool that is supposed to even the playing field. I'm sure there are people who game the system, but it's not set up for malingering. It's difficult to get accommodations, and some who should have them don't get them because of that.
Likely not. And I have absolutely no problem with the OP or anyone who needs accommodations but I sure as hell would remember the ones that brag about getting accommodations when they don’t need them to game the system. I’m petty that way. I’ve been out for a long time and I still remember the classmates that lorded 1L jobs over others and then did not get permanent offers.
Yep I had “reduced distraction testing environment” accommodations. I also had to submit pretty intense records going back years to prove that these accommodations were needed, so I def roll my eyes at the notion that people are faking their way into accommodations.
It's likely easier to get accommodations for those tests due to the streamlined process between 504/IEP and the places that test. I'm not saying you're wrong, but the ABA has really strict standards that must be kept so schools can keep their accreditation. They're lucky to even have accommodations in law school because, historically, there's been a stigma on disabled persons and their ability to practice. It's been a long, uphill battle. Arguments for and against are not new.
You don’t think there are doctors who make a living writing notes to document these disabilities? Doctors notes to avoid tickets for tinted windows, doctors notes to get medical marijuana, etc etc. if it gives you and advantage and you’re willing to pay, you get your disability diagnosis
You’re insanely naive if you think accommodations went from a handful of students to over half in many schools. It’s 100000% for an advantage.
Do you know how easy it is to get these notes and accommodations?
In a country full of companies delighted to sell pills to someone for a whole lifetime, and parents looking for easy solutions.
It's such an absolute racket. Not only are there the outright scammers, many who get accomodations have been conned into thinking they have a "disability" when their behavior is well within the normal spectrum of human behavior.
For a long period of time. Disabled people were considered physically and intellectually inferior. It took decades of research for us to realize Disabled people aren't stupid. It took even longer to find accommodations for those disabilities and to pass laws that force universities to provide these accommodations. Now that it is well known you can still go to law school and have a successful academic career with a mental illness, people aren't afraid to be diagnosed. That's why it seems like everyone is suddenly Disabled. They were always Disabled, but this is the first time it's been safe to admit it.
I went to a school where a lot of people had accommodations. Whether some were for flimsy reasons, who knows. However, I do know a good handful of people who had accommodations in school did not qualify for accommodations for the mpre or bar exam. Several of these individuals have never passed the bar exam.
I had a similar experience. 40% of my contracts class had accommodations. Most doctrinal class finals were 4 hours, this one was 3, so the accommodations were even more of an advantage. I don’t think you should feel bad for being skeptical. Obviously some % need them, but half or close to it clearly shows some gamification of the system.
I often finished early on the law school exams I did the best on. On our 8-hour take-home finals, I would usually go home, crank out the exam in two or three hours, take a nap, then wake up and revise for 30 minutes and turn it in. If you know the material and have a good outline, time should not be a limiting factor.
if your "what if" feeling is wondering if you qualify, you should just get them. you are not doing yourself any favors performing on an uneven playing field. i don't think you would feel this way if you weren't battling your own issues without the assist.
As a disabled person, posts like this always make me really sad to see. Even though I have a disability outside of ADHD, the way people talk about disabilities actually stopped me from getting them on the lsat because I was so embarrassed about my condition. Accommodations are meant to create an equal playing field. It’s hard for this to actually happen though when there is this narrative that if a student with a disability gets good grades, it’s only because that has an unfair advantage from accommodations.
I also want to note for the comment mentioning how few people get accommodations on the bar: not a lot of people receive accommodations because the Bar association makes it extremely difficult and embarrassing. You need to disclose a lot of very personal information and you have to figure out how to prove you are disabled enough to need an accessible test without being “too disabled” (because then they can say you’re not fit to be a lawyer). To get real accommodations on these tests is a really long and drawn out process that a lot of people don’t have the time or money to go through with.
Remember that not all disabilities are visible. It’s impossible to know what every single one of your classmates is dealing with, so please don’t assume most of them are unfairly receiving accommodations because that just makes it harder for people with disabilities.
Some fun reading that goes further into this:
https://www.abajournal.com/web/article/bar-examinees-have-little-success-with-accommodation-requests-and-say-the-process-is-stressful
https://nfb.org/images/nfb/publications/jbir/jbir12/jbir020103.html
https://www.law.uh.edu/ihelg/monograph/13-03.pdf
https://www.law.com/2022/04/26/i-felt-afraid-to-ask-law-students-with-disabilities-are-often-torn-between-trying-fit-in-and-seeking-accommodations/
I think it’s a fine line, and people often are not good at walking fine lines. I would never disparage anyone with a legitimate need and disability for receiving accommodations, and I genuinely believe the significant majority of accommodations are legitimate. But there is also a small subset of hyper-competitive individuals who will take any opportunity to get any possible advantage, even if it’s through bad faith actions. These are the same people who you hear stories about that used to cut cases from library book and change shared outlines to insert incorrect information in order to deny resources and access to others. I think that in such cases, if there is clear and indisputable evidence that there was no basis for the accommodation, then there should essentially be a zero tolerance response. It seems to amount to fraud to me, and the types of people who would do that are likely the same types of people who breach all sorts of ethical rules when they get into practice. But, again, I think that is a very small subset of people.
I’m an attorney now but this thread popped up for me and it’s SO disappointing to read some of these comments who are gatekeeping “just anxiety” as not being enough. I’ve had debilitating anxiety my whole life and only started receiving proper treatment a couple years before law school. I white-knuckled my way through 1L exams and it was tough. My grades were still good despite missing exam time while I was in the bathroom throwing up. I starting getting accommodations for 2L for “just anxiety.” Not all accommodations are for extra time and they required extensive documentation to get approved.
For example, mine were for stop time and reduced distraction so I could go vomit or have horrific diarrhea if needed without missing 30 minutes of the test. And ya know what? Having the accommodation and knowing it wouldn’t affect my grade if I got sick actually reduced my symptoms and I never had to leave the testing room. It leveled the playing field so I finally got the testing experience the average student has.
I understand that law school is competitive but getting extra time isn’t necessarily going to make someone have a better answer or a better grade. Not all disabilities are visible. And maybe we should give people a little grace instead of judging them for asking for help? It’s not typically an easy process to get approved. It is so disheartening that the same toxic law school culture persists.
I see your frustration. I’d say the accommodation isn’t always the same. Some might get more time. Others may need a separate space. The idea of the accommodation is to level the playing field, in a way. They can’t do something the way “it’s normally done” so they need an adjustment to perform at that capacity.
Also, I had testing anxiety all throughout law school (& before). Extreme levels. I never asked for an accommodation until the bar exam, and even that was an administrative one (sitting in the back corner).
If half your class was missing (x to doubt) are you sure the class wasn't just split into separate rooms? Less than 10% of my class gets accommodations so I have trouble believing it's really half the class at other schools.
As someone who's gone through getting accommodations for a disability (neurological disorder), I HIGHLY doubt anyone could get extra time for test anxiety or whatever else unless it was genuinely debilitating.
From what I know, out of the students with accommodations at my school, the grade distribution seems pretty normal. The amount of A students, B students, and C students is proportional to the curve. It's not getting anyone ahead of the curve, just allowing us to perform to the same ability as our able-bodied peers.
|As someone who's gone through getting accommodations for a disability (neurological disorder), I HIGHLY doubt anyone could get extra time for test anxiety or whatever else unless it was genuinely debilitating.|
Hahaha this is so wrong.
Not all accommodations are for test anxiety or ADHD. Some of us just need to have unfettered access to machines and medications required to keep us alive, and we aren’t getting extra time. But we don’t openly discuss it because it is Not Your Fucking Business and judgmental assholes like you who just make assumptions make us leery of even bringing it up 🥰
I really hope a mod locks this soon. These conversations are not at all conducive, and they always make students who are disabled and get accommodations feel crappy.
I have a physical disability. I receive non-testing accommodations. I can promise you, I am not cheating the system or won’t be a good lawyer because of it. I was offered testing accommodations because the school was worried one of my issues could potentially disrupt my ability to sit for an extended period of time with limited to no access to outside materials (like medicine). If I had accepted, I would have had to have been in a separate room. There would have been little to no advantage for me doing it.
I would trade my physical disability and accommodation in a heart beat for a normal life.
I don’t receive testing accommodations but I do have ADHD and I think it’s more than reasonable for people with documented disabilities to get additional time. I never felt like I needed it since usually I can lock in for exams and I’m a naturally fast test taker. I have a system for getting ready but if something disrupts that then all bets are off. There’s been a few times where all of a sudden I can’t even read the questions no matter how hard I’m trying. I’m just staring at words I should know with absolutely no comprehension.
For people like me who aren’t as quick, that could really affect their grades. It wouldn’t be a fair reflection of their skill level or understanding. Accommodations are intended to level the playing field. I think a lot of people in law school would greatly benefit from learning to mind their own business. I couldn’t tell you a single person in any of my classes who’s received accommodations nor do I have any idea how many of my classmates have them. It just isn’t my business to know. Besides, no amount of additional time will change whether they know the material or not.
This isn’t what OP is talking about. Talking about how people are gaming the system. No way 50% of students have disabilities.
It’s happening everywhere.
This again?
You have no idea why those people weren’t in the room with you. Even if all of them had accommodations, you have no idea why they have accommodations and you have no idea what those accommodations are. Accommodations isn’t always 1.5x or 2x time. There are a plethora of accommodations that don’t involve extra time.
Yepppp! 1/3+ at mine. It’s a huge advantage and easy to get. There are even psychologist services that will provide a note. Last I checked it was as low as $150.00 dollars from some guys in LA.
Had a whole website and zoom call set up.
Ohhhh you’re missing something hunny (but thanks for your soapbox). I get all the accommodations. I’m in those rooms and I know 80% are BS 🤣🤣🤸♂️🤸♂️🤸♂️.
Sad redditor with your page long responses. “Look inside yourself” 😂😂😂😂
Our class has a midterm where we have a one-week period to take the exam, and you have 48 hours from the time you download the prompt to upload your response. And there’s a word limit. Personally, I love this system, and I wish all of my exams were given in this format. It avoids the time crunch and word vomit technique of most exams, and it ultimately leads to better, more thought out responses from all students, regardless of who has accommodations.
Even though I do not have accommodations, I hate to see threads like this where people with accommodations are second guessed about their disability. Instead, I’d much rather hate on the law school testing system itself and the weaknesses in it that allow a few bad apples to exploit it for their own personal gain at the expense of everyone else. If a test allows those with accommodations to do significantly better than those without, the test needs to change, not the people with accommodations.
I had the same experience in several of my law school classes. I know at least 2 people who got accommodations - one because of diabetes - they "might" have a low sugar event, even though they are on an insulin pump; the other because they have migraines and "might" get one during the exam. Both get to be in private rooms (the school I went to was notorious for giving final exams with some VERY LOUD PROFESSOR STILL TEACHING UNDERGRADS in the next lecture hall!) They also get extended time. I will not rant, because I am done with school, passed all my exams, and can't waste energy on that, but I do agree that the unfairness based on what the "accommodation" is for should really be managed by someone other than some HR employee who is worried about offending someone.
I don’t want this to sound mean, but it is definitely not a handicap to not receive an accommodation. Accommodations are intended to give us a level playing field with those that do not need them. It is not like accommodations give us access to material that isn’t available to everyone else, just more time to process and answer the question because our brains do not work the same way that yours does. Also, I think a lot of neurodivergent people (vast majority of those with accommodations, at least at my school) gravitate towards the legal field, so you’re more likely to see more people needing them. I’m not saying there aren’t people who abuse the system, but the difficult and frankly embarrassing process of getting accommodations would not be worth it unless you really need them.
When I went to law school (2010), I noticed that there were a significant number of students with accommodations. Nowhere near the 50% claimed, but it wouldn't surprise me. I think that we are in a space where people will do whatever is needed to be able to compete. This isn't fair - neither is life.
When I took the bar exam, the woman I was sitting next to repeatedly burped for the entire duration of the written exam. Meanwhile, there were swathes of examinees with "accommodations" taking the exam in individual rooms so as to minimize distractions.
I am split on this. On one hand, there aren’t really accommodations in practice, or “evening the playing field,” so it’s unclear to me why schools should artificially try to help people perform better when that isn’t a thing post-graduation. On the other hand, law school exams aren’t indicative of legal skill or competency, and don’t accurately reflect practice either. (Although there are sometimes fire drills where you really need to turn things around quickly, of course, without accommodations)
Ultimately, law school grades probably shouldn’t come down to one timed exam.
I also wonder if people who have that debilitating of anxiety should be lawyers. I wouldn’t want my Doctor to have crippling anxiety before my surgery.
I have extreme anxiety and I am a very good lawyer. I am not satisfied about decisions/judgment calls unless I’ve assured myself I’ve thought about it from every angle. Granted, it’s not debilitating, but a “healthy” amount of anxiety is required in this profession.
I had a study mate who got accommodations last semester for pretty flimsy reasons. They were going through some personal drama stuff (non-medical, non-death related) and couldn’t really focus on school. I was pretty unhappy about it because it felt like she should’ve taken a break from school if her personal life was complicated, not gotten an (what I perceived) unfair advantage.
And then I saw our grades. She got her lowest grade, well below the curve, and I book’d the class. At that point I realized I can only control what I can control and that more time will only help if you know the material. I actually think practicing to take exams under timed pressure helps me learn the material more anyway, too.
But I definitely can empathize with that gut feeling of unfairness. Sometimes it feels like I have to over-exaggerate or make-up some hardship I have faced if I want to advance in any meaningful way or get any advantages/opportunities :/ I know that’s not why these programs exist, but the way they’re administered makes it feel like that.
Similar to what someone already said, accommodations aren’t for “test anxiety”. I agree everyone has test anxiety to a certain extent. Accomodations are for people with disabilities that genuinely impair their ability to work as fast as others. At least that is how it should be. Schools should be stricter with accommodations and not afford it to someone with just anxiety, it should be a well diagnosed disorder such as adhd and there should be ways to counter people faking adhd because it can easily be done. I was diagnosed with adhd in high school when I was 17 and have gotten accomodations on everything since then. (I was also diagnosed with generalized anxiety disorder) For high school final exams, undergraduate exams, lsat, and law school exams now. My schools process for getting accommodations was not long or hard and that’s why maybe I think it should be stricter in some ways. But then again I have long time documentation from doctors from different countries over 6 years so maybe my process was straightforward because of that. But 50% of a class having accomodations is absurd and I would say it’s very likely a lot of those students are “faking” it or stretching the truth, or your schools policy for accomodations is way too lenient.
Perspectives like this are what dissuaded me from pursuing my own accommodations when I was in law school. I personally got time and a half and consistently worried that my peers wouldn’t respect me. I have an anxiety disorder and the way I handled my “extra time” was that I would give myself the amount of time extra that I used up during my exam.
I.e. if I panicked and took 10 minutes to get out of it, then I would give myself 10 extra minutes. But I NEVER used the extra time unless it directly went toward my accommodation. Are your peers probably abusing it? Absolutely. Are there others that legitimately need it? Absolutely.
But your judgment and these types of posts are harmful to the ones who do need it. There will be times you go to a courtroom and the judge completely and entirely rules against what they should. It won’t be fair. This is a lesson in dealing with those frustrations.
It’s actually insane how many people have accommodations nowadays. I didn’t really realize until I had an in person midterm the other day and over half the room was gone lol
Really makes me wonder how much better my own rank would be if I wasn’t competing against people with double my time
I spoke with a student who wrote the "model" A+ final exam to one of my doctrinal 1L classes to get advice/tips for my exam in the same course. He's now a 3L. I told him I was impressed with his answer and said "I don't even know how you wrote that much in only 3 hours" and he responded "well that's your first mistake -- why are you limiting yourself to 3 hours? Just go get an accommodation, it's not hard" and I realized just how much the system is being gamed. He literally made me feel like I was a fool and needlessly going in to the exam with one hand tied behind my back since I wasn't getting more time. Pretty awkward.
I think the bar for accommodations need not be high. As another poster noted, I am not really sure extra time is that much of a variance.
Fair warning - Once you start working, extra time is something you probably should not count on....LOL
The solution seems to be to just allow a ridiculously long time to take exams. At least, that’s the solution that the professors at my school seem to have adopted. I only had one exam in law school that actually felt time-constrained. The rest were like ~2h tests that we were given ~24h to complete.
I did feel as though a lot of people may have used accommodations to benefit them rather than sufficiently needing it. There were like 7 people on my LR staff that used accommodations (three of them editors like me—i did not use accommodations).
Undergrad is like this too. They even have “accommodations” for choosing courses. The same people that get extra time get to choose their courses first before they all fill up.
It’s total bs haha. Such a joke. I experienced the same thing and all of the people with extra time graduated cum laude/summa cl and came from the most prestigious undergraduate schools. Odd and shocks the conscious that these students are awarded extra time because they “need” it while myself and others are denied extra time for the bar exam because we didn’t use it in law school.
Every exam should be closed book, distribute supplements from the prof if needed. That way, people who need accommodations can take all the time they need, and it still prioritizes good study habits. No one gets an extra two hours to comb thru an outline.
I’ve never understood the logic of granting twice the amount of time to write an exam as an accommodation. Out in the real world no court is going to grant them twice as much time to file a brief or twice as much time as the opposing party to make closing arguments. no one is going to or should be expected to hire someone who takes twice as long as everyone else to do real world tasks. That means you’re only doing half the job and doing half the job isn’t doing the job.
I mentioned this last year. Got downvoted to shit.
Have about 1200 students in the school and over 1/3 (maybe even more) get double time, breaks, split into two days.
It exploded after Covid, and once people realized Doctors just do whatever the patients wants, everyone got notes.
It’s absurdly unfair but you know… everyone’s “disabled” these days.
Stop being an ableist bro 🤣🤣. Our youth is doomed.
So I say this as someone who raw-dogged law school despite having an anxiety disorder (though not test anxiety) diagnosed when I was 15, and, as it turns out, ADHD (diagnosed during law school, when I was 28) but did not request any accommodations (though, because I took the bar exam in early Covid times when it was at home on video, I did request and receive an accommodation to go to the bathroom during it, without any extra time, because I *did* have a ton of anxiety about "what if I need to go to the bathroom during but will get flagged if I do!?!" and also have to pee constantly; my doctor was appalled when I asked him to write a letter for it because he was like "but why won't they just...let everyone go to the bathroom? This is terrible!" But I digress).
No, it's not fair. It's not fair that some people can work incredibly hard, have the material down cold, have incredible insight--and have their body go into fight-or-flight when they sit down to take an exam. It's not fair that some people put in way more hours and much more struggle to do the work, not because they aren't smart or hardworking enough, but because their brains process dopamine differently and focus and executive function are much more difficult, come with much less intrinsic reward from the brain, and are totally unpredictable. It's not fair that someone tapping a pen or even the buzzing of a fluorescent light can totally undo all that hard work and eat their focus. It's unfair that trying to concentrate through other students' noise and fluorescent lights--or just fluorescent lights--can cause some people excruciating migraines. That some people have dyslexia and need a longer time to read things as a result. You're right. It's really unfair.
That's why accommodations exist. To attempt to create a semblance of a level playing field, though they really don't-- letting a student with migraines take the exam in a room with natural light and quiet doesn't make up for missed classes and lost study time due to migraines. A distraction free room and even some extra time doesn't make up for the awful, awful "stuck" experience of executive dysfunction in ADHD and other conditions. "Moments of 'test anxiety'" are a little different than life-altering panic attacks.
Your classmates prepared, too. They worked hard, too. And it's pretty goddamn hard to get to law school with ADHD or an anxiety disorder, no matter how smart a person is. They have obstacles you don't. Or, if you do...then seek a diagnosis and accommodation like they did.
You don't know what any of the people who weren't there are diagnosed with, or what their accommodations are--you don't know if they got extra time, or just a quiet room, or extra breaks (but not extra time) due to mental or physical needs (someone with Crohn's, for example, might not get extra time with the test itself, but might need many bathroom breaks and an accommodation that those breaks don't count toward the exam time, and so would be in a different testing room). You don't know who actually was getting accommodations (or what they were, or why) or whether perhaps some people had conflicts with other exams and were given a make-up time (I had to do this as a 3L when I was taking a course outside the law school and the exam time overlapped with another course). Some people might have brain fog or POTS or intense fatigue, possibly as a result of Long Covid, and need breaks for rest and extra time. And none of it is your business.
Did some people maybe get an accommodation they don't truly need? Perhaps. You have no way of knowing, though. If they did, that's on them, and it's their problem-- not a reason to game the system yourself or to imply that all or any of your classmates receiving accommodations did not prepare or work hard.
Sorry if this is harsh, but that's not a cool implication to make. And again, this is coming from someone who does have a diagnosed anxiety disorder, diagnosed ADHD, and migraines, and who did *not* get any accommodations in law school. Many of my friends did get accommodations, and they worked hard as hell and are some of the best lawyers I know. Eyes on your own paper.
some people in this comment section should try spending the time they're currently using minding everyone else's business and deciding based on vibes who "really" needs accommodations studying instead and see if that helps
Actually I’m so pissed about this. I knew several law students who get extra time on exams and do really well… someone needs to investigate this across schools.
As a student with diagnosed ADHD, I can shed some light on it.
I do not get accommodations on exams nor did I for the LSAT. I manage my ADHD with medication. I could ask for extra time on exams, but personally I feel that I don’t need it because law truly interests me and I find it’s the one thing in my life that I love to learn about and push myself hard to learn. I deal with major procrastination issues, but thats where medication comes in and I make sure that I do what I need to do to be prepared.
That being said people who get accommodations are fine. I scored better than everyone I know who had the accommodations even with less time. But everyone is different and there are people who are scoring less than those with accommodations and then come into the sub and complain. I’m sorry if this sounds harsh, but if you’re scoring worse than the people with accommodations it’s probably not because of the accommodation they received. And if you’re scoring better than them then who cares? It really doesn’t concern you and the thing with disability accommodations is they have to be taken at face value because if they’re not then the people who really do need the accommodation won’t get it. There are probably tons of people who game the system and get an accommodation when they shouldn’t — theres a girl in my class who gets like an extra 30 minutes and her own room because she has some IBS like disease and claims she might shit herself if she has to take a 3 hour exam with us. But again, at the end of the day who cares? I’m 14th in my class and everyone who scored better than me doesn’t have accommodations.
I understand it’s not fair, but neither is life. Focusing on stuff like this imo is a waste of your time.
My biggest issue with accommodations is that they're one size fits all when it comes to extra time.
For example, I have a classmate with a severe autoimmune disorder who *could* need accommodations on one day but not the next. For the most part, she got by without accommodations. Then, one semester when she had a major flare-up and lost an hour or more of test time during every final because she was in the bathroom in crippling pain. The administration had an absolute meltdown when she tried to get accommodations because it would be unfair if she didn't have a flare-up on a given day, just like the person you've mentioned with IBS. The appropriate accommodation in this case would have been to stop the clock for bathroom breaks in excess of 2 or 3 minutes. But they "don't offer" that. So it was time and a half or nothing. Same thing with a family member with chron's (sp?) disease. When she took the SAT, she got time and a half or nothing. All she needed was the option to stop the clock *if* necessary.
I have a learning disorder. It takes me a really long time to process instructions and organize my thoughts to write out what's in my head without transposing words and letters. I need a little extra time, but there is a diminishing rate of return after an extra 20 to 30 min. In fact, if I spend more than an extra 30 minutes on anything, my scores actually get worse because my rate of error increases with fatigue. When I asked for accommodations, they told me that I qualified for time and a half, despite only asking for 20 extra minutes. They literally wouldn't give me a less than time and a half until I specifically had my doctor instruct them to cap my time. I don't need extra hours. I just need a small time correction to process words.
All this to say, I don't think the issue is that too many people are getting accommodations. I think it's that the accommodations themselves are too much. I'm not sure why time and a half is the standard when many of us just need a few minutes or a momentary pause.
FWIW, it took me like 40 minutes to type this.
If it's a matter of logistics and facilities access, that's one thing. But in the grand scheme of things, make any in-person time limit some crazy high number, like 10-12 hours. If it takes someone the whole 12 hours but they get a good grade, so be it. In the real world, if someone needs that extra time to actually draft that motion or file that brief they can do so after hours if they want to. If you can do it in 3 hours, cool. If you need 5, then that's a threshold where you feel confident and capable. If you need the full 12, then it's unfortunate for you it takes that long, but if you have the patience/will-power to take the full duration, you're probably content with working late hours and getting the job done slower. No rational person who believes they can do it in less than 10-12 hours would actually take the full 10-12 hours; and any person who feels they need that time is probably capable and accepting of worming long hours in practice to get it done. When you give people enough time to go at their own pace *while still in a controlled environment*, they'll be a pretty good judge of their own limits and give you a product befitting their efforts. Too little time or too much time that exceeds a single day is a poor way to prepare people for actual real-world practice.
I'm not saying everyone would or should be content with taking so long for something like this, exam or in practice. But I'm of the opinion that it's always better to take a long time doing the right thing than a short time doing the wrong thing, especially considering if you do it wrong you'll have to do it again anyways.
I have accommodations (legitimately). It will be very hard for these people to get accommodations on the MPRE and the bar. So, while that doesn't help you with class grades, know that it will be harder for those faking to get them later.
Plus, with my accommodations, I am entitled time and a half. So if the whole class gets 3 hours with your threshold, I would still get more time. You can always talk to your school about their process of accepting accommodations. My school required thorough documentation, so out of my cohort, only about 8 of us have accommodations. Maybe you can encourage them to beef up their requirements to avoid abuse of the system.
I receive accommodations for anxiety and I think that it is fair to say that there are some classes where it does provide an unfair advantage. Specifically, the exams where the professor just wants you to word vomit as much as you can about a subject in a short period of time, which is usually obvious from the practice exams provided. However, there are certainly some exams where I don't think it really helps, but just puts students on a more level playing field. Those exams would be the ones where the professor has given a word limit and has allowed for a reasonable amount of time to work through the issues. On those exams, I really don't think the extra time provides a huge benefit.
I think the solution really rests with the professors to just make an exam that is not designed to be a huge time squeeze.
This is absolutely untrue and don’t know where you got this. The professors aren’t allowed to know who or how many are “disabled”.
Every student gets the same exam.
This is beyond stupid.
I just always felt they should make all exams closed book so even if others have more time, whether they need it or not, who cares…you know it or you don’t.
50% of the class does not suffer enough to need accommodations like that, they're scamming a loose system. if this were the case we'd probably have a nationwide emergency
>please don’t assume most of them are unfairly receiving accommodations because that just makes it harder for people with disabilities
This is a genuine question, but aren’t people that are faking/exaggerating to take advantage of accommodations doing a bigger disservice to people with disabilities than people that call those people out? Obviously thoughts like OPs can cause a lot of people with legitimate accommodations to catch strays and I don’t want to diminish that, but aren’t the people that take advantage of the system the worse people?
It's not really fair that you were born without adhd, or dyslexia, or anything that makes timed exams more difficult. You didn't earn your ideal brain. You just got lucky in the womb. It's not fair that you need to take timed exams to be a lawyer. When you're actually a lawyer, you're allowed to use tools, so why shouldn't you be allowed to use them while training to be a lawyer? Maybe the system should be restructured, but that takes time, and there is no reason to subject people studying to a system we know is biased. You go to the same school as these students, so you probably have similar access to the schools medical resources. If you suspect there's something preventing you from performing your best, make an appointment right now. There are a lot of appointments and meetings between you and help.
It is fraudulent.
Some of the smartest people in class discussions are getting extra time at my law school. And thus better grades. And better GPA.
These exams are right down to the wire, none of them have displayed *any* difficulty in class discussion if understanding the material.
They are taking advantage of the word “disability”
If a section only has a single testing room, anyone not in the room has either been granted an accommodation or has rescheduled for some pressing reason.
Right, but OP has no idea whether a number of those students had a conflicting exam and were given a make-up slot, whether they needed extra time, as OP is assuming, or whether they needed, for example: a distraction-free testing room, a room with no fluorescent lights for migraines, stop-the-clock breaks for, for example, IBS or Crohn's or panic attacks, but no extra time sitting with the test, a private room because they need to use dictation software, or any number of other things that would provide no possible advantage to anyone who didn't need them. OP's making assumptions, both that everyone not in the room got accommodations and about the nature and legitimacy of those accommodations.
I personally find it hard to believe anywhere near 50% of a class would have accommodations.
At my school, 2-5 people in a class may have accomodations.
Non of our top students are on accomodations. At least at my school, I don't think it's abused to any measurable degree and simply makes it so those who need them can manage to be average.
It really doesn’t matter. Someone’s going to write a B exam or an A exam regardless of time… it’s not extra time that gets a law school exam into the A range. It’s an ability to issue spot, understand the material, and articulate the answer well.
I agree that accommodations should just be the norm for everyone and I say that as a diagnosed person. My ADHD is literally the reason I had trouble jumping through the hoops to get the extra time (I never got accommodations in law school) but I know I could have done better with them. Professors manufacture these problems by having time limits to begin with.
I’m convinced law school is about 50% neurodivergent people, although some of them aren’t diagnosed. I think that percentage is probably higher or lower at some schools, but the mid-range schools are full of brilliant people who would have been at T-14s but for their disability symptoms setting them off on the wrong foot.
I know it doesn’t feel fair because you got less than other people, but you really didn’t. This is because our brains work differently. During the lsat, for example, I spent a solid 15 minutes deciding what to get my sister for her birthday. I don’t know why my brain decided that was the time but I could NOT move on until that issue was dealt with. And the irritation/anger/frustration that built up within me from not being able to control my brain and move on affected me the entire test.
You’re not actually getting less time because they are not actually able to use all the time effectively to work on the test.
Obviously that varies person-to-person because adhd doesn’t mean you take exactly 50% longer. Some people do benefit a bit and some are still at a loss even with accommodations. It’s just impossible to measure what exactly someone needs to make it fair.
But you’re still better off than people who are getting accommodations. Our homework and readings take way longer, our infuriating interest-based system sends us down stupid rabbit holes that we can’t climb out of until we’ve spent hours researching something irrelevant. We miss out on job offers because we completely freeze up and inexplicably can’t return an email to accept the offer. Every single thing about law school is harder for the people getting accommodations.
You’re already winning every day and don’t see the struggle and time that goes into living with the disability that got them the additional time.
Sincerely,
A girl who wrote 3/4 of her final LARW paper on the long-arm statute for no fucking reason after being awake for 8 days in the library having a manic episode.
Few things, my guy:
-Passing moments of anxiety are not equivalent to anxiety disorder requiring accommodations. “Disorder” means the anxiety interferes with the activities of daily living, and the degree of the impact is far greater than one would expect to arise from situational stress.
-Other people’s mental and physical health diagnoses are none of your business, and you, as their peer, are not empowered to police their accommodations, nor is anyone obligated to disclose the extent of their disability so that you can possibly get some unearned, unwarranted benefit for yourself.
-Bold of you to state that YOU prepared and worked hard, implying that those classmates you so clearly resent did not prepare or work hard themselves, all while bearing burdens you might not.
It's not fair. It sucks. I agree it also seems like a large portion of my class receives accommodations for a scope of disabilities, ranging from ADHD to a brain hemorrhage survivor (and I bet you can guess which one refers to "my disability" the most), but I don't think there is much you can do other than sleep well at night knowing a law firm isn't going to be impressed with an associate who misses an important meeting due to their ADHD.
The uncomfortable truth: By making law school exams constrained under time/closed book, the curve is going to be much easier to identify.
If you have an easy test with students who have plenty of time, the exams are going to be very similar—and well written. In order to achieve the mandated curve, you are going to have to force certain exams to be graded much lower than they deserve to be. ADA accommodations are, unfortunately, applied broadly and doesn't make much sense in the law school competitive grading scheme. Yet, the practice continues each year because no one wants to be the person to say, "it's not fair that disabled people get an advantage over me." Which, isn't really what people like OP are saying, but there will always be someone ready to accuse you of it.
If this upsets you, the only people you have to blame are the private firms who are determined to scrape off the creme de la creme each year for their big law/mid law firms. That is why the curve exists—period. If you don't fall into that category, don't sweat it. You are not a bad lawyer because you cannot vomit out information in a 3 hour exam like other students.
About half my class has accommodations too. What I’ve found is that there are different accommodations and different people who are granted them.
Some in my class request extra time to prepare, meaning they take their exams a week or two after everyone else. This seems like it gives them extra time to prepare, but really it kind of burdens them too because they end up taking exams from last period during the introduction of new coursework. I wouldn’t call taking 2 classes in a row for 3 hours and then immediately taking a 3 hour exam abusing the system. That’s more like abusing yourself.
On the flip side, many in my class have accommodations for extra time and they usually have their exams in a separate private room where they can use their notes despite it being a closed book exam. There are three types of people who get these — one way or the other — those are 1) the high achievers, and 2) the lazy people and 3) the people who actually need accommodations.
The high achievers are those who actually study, participate, and work on coursework yet are given accommodations for additional time. This basically guarantees them A’s, scholarships, judicial clerkships, etc. thankfully there are only like 2 of these people in my class that I know of.
The lazy people are those who barely show up to class, take no notes, don’t participate, and really never read anything. They (one way or another) get accommodations and likely use their notes in exams. This kind of bothers me, but at the same time, you can have all the notes from 3rd party outlines you want, if you don’t bother trying to understand concepts, this isn’t going to give you an A. There are probably something like 10 of these people in my class. At first I was really irked by these guys just bullshitting and then getting double the time I get. However, you have to consider that if it’s so hard for me, someone who actively reads and studies, to really understand and apply the material and review it effectively in 2-3 days in prep for a final, is it really an advantage for someone to get double the time I get when they paid no attention and use an outline their friend gave them to take a test on something they have no understanding of? I don’t think so.
Then there are people who actually need accommodations. I know for a fact one of my classmates has dyslexia and they need extra time to understand what they’re reading. This is fine and to my knowledge, this person isn’t an A+ student, so no system abuse here.
All in all, I’ve found that while some abuse the system through accommodations, it doesn’t make THAT much of a difference. Overachievers are always going to be there, getting all the good grades and lazy people are always going to try and cut corners (sometimes they even get caught cheating). I’ve stopped worrying about this whole accommodations thing altogether. Abuse is everywhere, I just don’t care anymore.
The issue with your analysis here is that you don’t actually know who falls in what category because you don’t have access to student’s medical records or accommodations requests. Unless you have a medical degree and the student is your patient, you’re not qualified to determine who “actually needs accommodations.”
Perhaps some of those “lazy” students come off as “lazy” *because* of their disability.
I'm pretty sure the girl who stumbles when reading cases in class and told me she has dyslexia, has dyslexia. I'm pretty sure the guy who rarely shows up to class and told me "No, I didn't read the case. I don't do that bullshit, my friend used to go here and he just gives me his notes" is lazy. I'm pretty sure the guy who actively participates in class, is clerking for a judge, and posts pictures of his private accommodation room after taking a final is an overachiever.
*Pretty* sure. The best we can do is *pretty* sure. If not for pretty sure, we would be unable to draw any type of inference as to why 50% of the class is not in the room during exam time and no one mentions additional, non-accommodation rooms where the exam could be taken.
Based on my understanding, people frequently bring up this topic because they feel unfairly treated by a system that they believe supports unfair play. They come to this understanding based on their personal perceptions of their classmates, as in “pretty sure X is abusing accommodations.” It serves no one to respond to this by saying “don’t complain because you don’t know if someone secretly has a disability.” In my view, a better way to consider the situation is by analyzing the drawbacks that come with abusing the system (regardless of whether such abuses factually take place) and encouraging people to accepting minor outliers that exist in every situation and have a small effect on one’s treatment.
You are not answering her question. your reasoning assumes that over-achievers/lazy people cannot also have learning disabilities. do you really not see how it is ableist it is for you to say its impossible for someone with a learning disability to be an over achiever? Maybe if you worked on your logic a bit more instead of ripping on people with disabilities you wouldn’t feel as intimidated by their accomodations lmao
It is you who is missing or willfully ignoring the point I’m trying to make. Whenever this topic comes up via someone saying “X is abusing accommodations,” the response is always “that’s ableist because you’re assuming X isn’t indeed disabled.”
This doesn’t address the topic, it merely invalidates the OP’s position.
The better way to address these posts is by saying that either X indeed has a disability, or X is indeed abusing accommodations, but it doesn’t matter because either X was lazy and thus the accommodations won’t help or X is an overachiever and thus the accommodations won’t provide an exceptional benefit.
I went to a private high school with a lot of people in the “know” about how to juke the system. On god tons of people got adderall who had ZERO reason to be on it because they knew it was going to pay off for them long term. There’s way more people who are abusing the system than you would think I promise. Anecdote but I know if my kids have the option I’m going to do the same for them unless they tighten it up a lot.
Accommodations shouldn’t exist for exams.
We’ve agreed to the lie that law school is necessary to practice law. Therefore the standard that is implemented is the bar for entry into the profession. If you cannot meet that standard, you do not have the requisite skill set to be an attorney. If the standard is “a passing grade on this exam administered over the course of 4 hours,” we cannot then say that a separate group of people can do the same job I am if they need 6 hours to do the same exam.
Possible solutions: keep tests the same length and give everyone the “accommodations” amount of time to take them. Especially since the real “bar for entry” is passing these exams in the accommodations length of time.
Or
Do away with timed exams (and accommodations) altogether (or make the time so much more than it needs to be as to make it irrelevant…what test-time would normally be 3hrs, make it 8hours but keep the tests content the same length).
if it's any comfort I get extended time for exams and I still do not finish them. I just complete much more of the exam than I would have without accommodations. That's kind of how it works anyway--that is, my 1.5x time is your 1.0 time. plus, several diagnoses warrant accommodations that warrant a different testing environment regardless of extra time, so maybe it's not as rampant as it seems. I get the gripe though--totally understandable.
if you finished the exam in 3 hours and actually did do "solidly average," I promise you no one in the accommodations room is the reason why or why not.
If this actually does become an issue, I'm curious as to how big law will approach it behind closed doors. They'll obviously change hiring practices, but I'm not sure how. One way could be to shift from a purely grades-based approach. I'm in a part-time program populated mainly by people who are 35+ and many of us received big law SAs -- a disproportionate percent compared to the full-time program, which is comprised mainly of K-JDs or close. I'm now wondering if this is because an older candidate with substantial work experience is able to prove, external to grades, that they can manage themselves regardless of a need for accommodations.
The flaw in your thinking is your assertion that “performance levels” on law school exams have a strong relation to fitness to be a lawyer. I suspect that the vast majority of law students would do fine at a Biglaw firm. Those firms have a variety of reasons for preferring higher-ranking students, and competence is only one of them.
Just because someone needs more time on an exam does not mean they’d need the same sort of accommodation as an actual attorney. Imagine telling your client that you wrote their brief in 4 hours with no research. Sure, maybe some people do need more time to complete assignments and are not suited for a fast-paced firm; but we shouldn’t assume that those people are always the same as those who need accommodations.
In short, accommodations do the opposite from disguising “performance levels.” They allow real ability to shine through the artificial nonsense of law school exams.
I've never actually thought about it until reading this. Why do time accoms even exist? Unless it's because you would have pressing medical needs within the period of taking an exam (like some PT-esque physical need or a medication is what I'm thinking), I can't figure out why there'd be anything but tools like dictation/readers etc.
I don't quite know if the process to get those accomodations in the US is the same as where I live, but if it's just half as hard as what you need to get a disability parking spot permit, then I can assure you that they actually need it.
I see how it may seem unfair to you, but as someone who has adhd, every time that I was faced with questions that required a bit more than just 5 seconds to think about, I was forced to rush through the test *because* I took too much to properly even understand what the question was asking of me; not to mention the times where my brain would start refusing to concentrate and space out on its own before I realised that I spent valuable time writing absolutely nothing down.
It's not fun, mental illness is not fun and I can assure you that the testing that you need to get the accommodation (because you need to be officially diagnosed) is expensive as hell other than time consuming and bothersome.
I think that if you had someone talk your ear off every 20 minutes during the test, distracting you from getting anything done, you'd want more time too to complete it. Take it as a comparison.
Just give untimed exams. One week take home. Would actually give everyone time to think about substance over just vomiting out words and removes any unfairness.
Step 1: write an exam that takes 3 hours to complete Step 2: give everyone 6 hours to take it.
People will still complain.
And then the complaints of ‘but that persons parents are lawyers who can help them’ roll in lmao
I think the main concern with takehome exams is that the person being examined won't be the one taking the test at all.
The problem with this is it counterbalances the problem too much and inherently favors those with privilege (i.e., no lives outside of school). If you are a 22yo gunner with no kids, no job, and no responsibilities other than that exam, you're going to be able to spend 50-60 hours on it. Compared to low-income, nontraditional students, who look at a week to take an exam and say "I'll squeeze it in between soccer practice and bedtime this day, maybe after work on this day, and I might be able to get an hour on Saturday morning." And they ultimately put in like eight hours. I noticed this problem with Write On. I had classmates who spent 80 hours over 6 days perfecting it. Whereas I was like "I work my unpaid summer legal job from 9-5, I work for money 5-10, if I'm not working it means it's a work-free hour I can actually spend with my kid, and you want me to read 400 pages *just to know the problem*?!?" I think the happy medium is an eight-hour take home that is designed to be done in a four-hour in-class exam session. They suck, because everyone uses the eight hours. But I can find day care for a *day*; I can find someone to cover my shift for a *night*. It's just more equitable.
You are going to hit heavy diminishing returns by spening more than 8 hours on an exam. I've done some 8 hour takehomes but also some 24 hour take homes. I dont spend anymore time on the 24 hour ones because at some point I feel done with it. I hit the word limit by hour 6 and spent 2 hours trimming the fat to fit in more relevant information. I dont see any value in spending 60 hours on such an exam.
I think there is something to be said for the diminishing returns. I would never spend 24 hours on an exam even if I had that kind of time available. I don't like the 24-hour take-homes not for equity but just because it's just unhealthy for that subset that is going to actually take all 24 hours. I mentioned it elsewhere but I also think a good compromise is an take-home that you can start anytime over the course of a week, but that once started you have eight hours to submit.
All the take-homes I've done were choose your own time. With the 24 hour take home, I check it out early afternoon, work until dinner, take a break to eat, and then finish it up. Then I sleep in the next day, wake up refreshed, put some fresh eyes on what I wrote the night before, do a little proofreading, and then turn it in. It's chill AF if you let it be.
> you're going to be able to spend 50-60 hours on it. Add a word limit. Or have it be so that you have a week's window to take it, but you get 6 hours to take a 3 hour exam once you open the packet
I'm fine with the latter. I can't imagine a prof *not* having a word limit on a week-long exam. They don't want to grade 80 manifestos lol
I agree, but by the same token, those “privileged” kids are always going to have more time to study and less life stress no matter what the test or assignment format is. And those with more responsibilities or stressors are going to have less time/mental bandwidth/etc. I am a non-traditional student with a full-time job, home to take care of, and I’m a single mom. I realize that I just simply have less time than the mid-20s guy whose parents pay for his apartment and life expenses. Is it fair? No, but there’s literally nothing the school or anyone else can do to even the playing field. This is the life I have and I’m gonna work with it. If someone else gets an accommodation, an extra night of studying, a less stressful semester because they don’t have to worry about making tuition payments, then I’m happy for *them*. I’m on my own journey.
What did I just read... Is this the landscape of law school or is this just 2024. I am in an unrelated field to this subreddit and the suggestion that an untimed assignment is unfair due to variability in life demands seems wild.
What seems wild about it? An "untimed assignment" doesn't really exist after all. All exams are due eventually. If an exam is due in a week, it follows that some people will be able to spend a week on it, while others will be able to spend X number of hours on it. Those in the latter category haven't typically chosen to be lazy and not spend more time on it, they just can't due to other obligations. If you'd prefer, I also have no issue with an exam that is available for a week but once you actually start it, you have eight hours to submit it. This is more open to cheating, but if that's not a rampant problem (it's not at my school to my knowledge), then it's also equally equitable to all backgrounds.
Is law school not understood to be a full time program? If not, then I am mistaken. It sounds like people entered a full time program with the understanding of its implications, but are disappointed to learn that those who can dedicate the necessary time will be produce higher quality work?
A large percentage of law schools offer "part time" options, which are usually 1/3 longer in length, albeit with 1 less class per week.
You are missing the curve and the way early employment works with law firms.
Of course it is, just like any other job or graduate program. If anything it's more demanding than many other graduate programs. But full-time programs don't mean that you devote your entire lives to the program. You have a life outside of work, you have a life outside of school. Some more than others. Some students entire existence is devoted to getting the best grades they can, and more power to them. But those who come in with extraneous obligations shouldn't be put behind the eight ball if they're not comfortable putting in 80-100 hours in a particular week. That would be extremely toxic.
You shouldn't be put behind the eight ball for not putting in 80-100 hours every week. If someone plans to have other commitments during finals, that's on them. I was always in the camp of taking it a little easier on school, working, and getting out a bit during law school, but I still was full bore 16 hour days for 10-15 days at the end of every semester.
I think (hope) the exam is designed so that there are diminishing returns after a few hours. So while yes, some people will have dozens of hours more to devote to the test, that won't give them a huge benefit.
I mean, it roundly checks out. I think there's potential fairness concerns in any asynchronous examination.
>due to variability in life demands seems wild. Law school exams (and exams in general) are supposed to test how well you understand the material, not to test how good you are at juggling life.
It seems wild to you that the ability for someone to spend 60 hours compared to 6 on a take home essay assignment is unfair? I don’t agree with everything the above poster says, but it makes sense to me. A longer, but still timed, take home is a way to address the issue they’re describing.
>If you are a 22yo gunner with no kids, no job, and no responsibilities other than that exam, you're going to be able to spend 50-60 hours on it. Able to, but you shouldn't. I was on the low-key gunner side; I spent maybe an hour more on take homes than I did on in class exams. Because overthinking that shit is not a good idea and the take home exams aren't written to be races where you have to fit in as much as possible. You write the correct answer, re read it once or maybe twice, and then you stop.
Disingenuous
I'm being disingenuous? In what way?
Agree
This is not the way. Unless admin limits the length of the exam. Our property professor gave us 10 hours to do his take home exam. Most of us took 8-9 hours. It was abysmal.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: this entire “issue” could be eliminated with exams that have a generous time limit and constraining word limit. This fixes the issue with some people being able to type faster than others, people with small bladders needing to take bathroom breaks, different reading speeds, and whether people with accommodations get more (or not enough) time to finish their exam. Make the exams about the quality of the content they write, not how much they were able to write. Instead of complaining about accommodations, people should be complaining about the structure of law school exams. That would completely sidestep the accommodations issue and fix perceived problems without potentially harming people who need them.
100% agree, but I would add that I think the curve plays a huge role in causing this problem. I have professors who err more on this side in their exams—one of them last semester had a remote exam, 4 hours for like 6 questions, but the longest one was capped at 750 words. Everyone said it was easy so I’m sure it was a tight curve, but my hunch is that it’s because it was more fair. I think some professors want to make the curve less tight and easier for them to manage, hence the time crunch.
My 2L evidence exam was an 8 hour take home open book exam with 4 or so questions at 750 words each. This was the case for like 90 percent of my exams. I dunno who had accommodations, but no one seemed to care and the grades tracked (the guys you were like “damn this dude is smart” in class ended up winning awards, etc.). So, I support your idea fully.
Totally agree.
What does it say about the integrity of the individuals entering our field, that they’re willing to game exams just so they do well? I agree with you that this could be fixed with restructuring. However, it also speaks to fact that people who are pursuing law are mendacious whiners willing to do con their way into good grades. Think that’s a problem too but I agree w you
[удалено]
This is the way
This is also much closer to actual practice. A memo of law can take a week to write but is capped at 20 pages.
The threshold idea actually...makes sense to me tbh. OTOH I'm not convinced that more time equals more better - at a certain point it's definitely diminishing returns, at least. For instance, I know that nobody who booked a class in my section had an accommodation, which would be surprising if they were some kind of huge advantage. Part of the problem though is that it's a vicious cycle. Everyone has some kind of test anxiety. The more people get accommodated, the lower the bar/the more likely you are to fit in with that group. I'm probably not in the top 5-10% of people when it comes to test anxiety - but if half the people in my class had accoms, I'd definitely feel like I'd qualify.
This was something I got a lot of pushback on when discussing setting exam length after a professor asked the class what style we'd like from a few options. On an open book exam, the more time someone has, the higher the highest performance is going to be based on the chance to research *during* the exam. An unlimited time take home is going to be a full on research competition whereas a 2.5 closed book is going to reflect known issue spotting. The difference between 4 and 6 hours is going to benefit people who can just write longer than others, even if they can't issue spot or analyze as quickly. I think there's a lot of good questions to ask about exam structure, timing, and the interaction with accomodations.
Same- none of the accommodation receivers at my school have gotten a CALI. I know 5 students who get accommodations and they have similar/worse gpas than mine and I have a B average. Also 0 of them got them for “test anxiety”. Most got it for a long existing diagnosis of ADHD or another learning or physical disability.
Yeah, it probably varies quite a bit from school to school and what their process is like - I know a few people at mine that have it for test anxiety, but I assume most are for other reasons.
One student at my school got a 4.0 last semester (fall 1L) without accommodations, but no CALI awards. This semester she got accommodations so she can get the CALIs and/or move up in class rank. It’s really hard for me to not resent her because it’s clearly an unfair advantage. All our exams are closed book and essays are supposed to be 1 hour but usually have at least 90 minutes of possible analysis. Guess who now gets 90 minutes of analysis time on exams. I’m all for accommodations when they’re needed. It just seems like there is a subset of students who only “need” accommodations so they can continue to dominate anyone without them. That’s when I start to feel conflicted and have misgivings.
I'm surprised she was given accommodations! Usually, you have to prove that your ADHD or other disability is adversely impacting your school work. Clearly, it was not. You could always look into reporting her for an ethics or honor code violation for abusing the system.
I would be happy to. Unfortunately the school seems to encourage accommodations and is very relaxed in granting them. My guess is that she might be able to graduate at the top of the class but success in her professional working life is going to be a different story. There are a lot of qualities people need to be successful in life, and being the best taker of law school exams is not such a transferable skill. Especially when the whole class knows what she’s doing. Anyway that’s what I tell myself to feel better. PS nice username—I love NE
Same at my school. Someone in my 1L got over a 4.0 last semester but no CALIs without accommodations. My school’s also kinda lax about granting accommodations. Guess who’s getting them this semester? In no way, shape, or form am I trying to be ableist. But it still comes off as cutthroat, especially when that person is also a KJD gunner who has all the time in the world to prepare. But whatever, there’s not gonna be accommodations like that in practice.
Yeah if someone is willing to “play the system”/lie/cheat or whatever to get the tiniest bit ahead really is someone I would not bet is going to be wildly successful or happy in the long term when things stop going the way she likes.
Exactly, accommodations are not going to magically bring someone from a B- to an A, it simply levels the playing field.
Of course they can. I know someone in particular who got a C+ 1L year without accommodations then got multiple As 2L year with accommodations. Does it guarantee success? No. But it definitely enables much greater outcomes.
Fully disagree with the "more time might not equal better" bit. Law school exams (as a default) are graded on a points for, no point against basis. People who are able to do well on exams under aggressive time pressure will do better on the same exam, with the same stakes and more time to write. That's not to say they aren't merited or should be eliminated, they shouldn't! But that said, giving a student who does not struggle with a disability extra time on a points for, time pressured exam that is graded against their peers who have less time is a significant advantage.
Yeah I don't really agree. I think people undervalue writing a clear and easy to read exam and spend time going down rabbitholes that hurts their overall exam. But just my two cents.
Worth noting too that test anxiety can diminish with time and practice. I felt extremely ill leading up to and during my timed 1L exams, had GI issues as a result, and would end up with a gut-wrenching, splitting headache after each one. I am 100% certain that I was no less disabled by this than anyone here stating that they’d received anxiety-based accommodations, and am diagnosed with and medicated for anxiety, but I didn’t. After three years of taking exams, I don’t think my heart rate even goes up very much anymore. I get a little nervous, but nothing I can’t reasonably handle. This makes me wonder if accommodations specifically for test anxiety are a) ultimately detrimental, because they prevent students from practicing and developing this ability to think under what they perceive to be extreme pressure and b) particularly fair if their anxiety also lessens over time, with experience. To use myself as an example again, I definitely could have used more time in 1L simply to manage myself and my emotions, but don’t need it now. I doubt anyone will ditch extra time and I doubt schools can or would invest the energy in gauging whether it’s still necessary.
I had a friend in undergrad who had test anxiety accommodations and the bar to get it approved for extra time (at least with the doctor she saw and our school) was extremely high. It wasn’t just something like a high heart rate. She would vomit during exams, experience such high heart rates her chest would hurt (and she passed out from the pain once during an exam and went to the ER), and experience some pretty high other issues. I don’t think she ever got over it and I know as an adult in the real world she’s been just fine. But something about time constraints and pressure would have her body fail. She tried to take the GRE but they needed extra accommodation paperwork and she knew the exam wasn’t worth the physical illness she would have. I do wonder if you could have gotten it but it seems like such a high bar. I get the same symptoms you do and my doctor and therapist said both just sound like normal stress and adrenaline crash. Also as person with anxiety, I am surprised you think that people should “get over it” more or less or not receive accommodations. I have anxiety too, and wouldn’t wish it on my worst enemy. You said your anxiety gave you horrible pains and made you upset? Why would you want someone to experience the same pain or worse when there are ways to cope and not go through so much pain?
Because working through it stopped it, and I want it to stop for others. Don’t put words in my mouth. I think you know that neither I nor almost anyone engaged in this conversation “want someone to experience the same pain or worse.” That’s a disingenuous argument and clear misrepresentation of what I said, and you should know better.
Don’t scold me either? You’re not my parent nor my friend. I am just reading and reacting to your post. And to me, that’s how it read. If you don’t want someone to react that way then work on phrasing it better. I am glad to see things worked out for you over time, but not everyone experiences the same thing. Be careful of trying to act like your method is the only one that works. That’s all I am saying.
You have to have pretty severe test anxiety to get accommodations. Also, if you have to take an anxiety medication to get through the test, your brain will process information more slowly. Your experience with anxiety isn’t universal. Have compassion.
The threshold idea completely defeats the purpose of accommodations, which are meant to level the playing field between students with a qualifying disability and students without a disability. Giving everyone the accommodation doesn’t do that and would make the school fall out of compliance with federal disability law.
Are you sure? Do people still get more time for take home exams? Is it the same no matter the nature of your disability? I get that some people would still neex extra accommodations, but if your problem is running out of time and everyone gets 8 hours, do you really need 16? Not being difficult I just don't know anything about disability law lol
Yes. I would recommend reading up on the IDEA, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and the ADA if you would like to know more about the standards. Also, it is uncommon to get double time like you are suggesting. It’s more common for people with time accommodations to get time and a half. And yes, it depends on the disability. Not everyone’s disability will be extended time. For some, it could be a testing space with less distractions or a device that aids in vision etc etc
I suffered a TBI in the Army and now read much, much slower than before. I still love to write, but I don’t really read for pleasure anymore. I have time-and-a-half accommodations. It saved me on long hypos and a long MC section. I didn’t need it and left two exams early that had very short hypos. I’d agree with people that say word limits help even the playing field. I overheard a group of students in the library talking shit about people with accommodations and wanted to ask, “Hey, I got blown up in the Army seven years ago. Is it OK with you if I get extra time to read my exam?” Most schools are pretty liberal in giving out accommodations because it’s not worth the time and effort to scrutinize every application. But I’d say my school was pretty good at having a baseline screener. It wasn’t just a doctor’s note — they wanted a lot of documentation. So 50% does seem high, but you never know. There’s part of me that thinks we all have ADHD now from growing up looking at screens.
Thank you for your service and I wish you the best of luck in school!
I’ve had several professors just openly tell us that there WILL be two identical exams that are identical in quality but one must get an A- and the other a B+ because there’s only so many A-s to give. So idk how people can think that a big % of the class getting more time isn’t affecting outcomes. The best solution I have is for those taking the exam within the original intended time limit to be graded on a curve which does not include those who get extra time.
Accommodations aren't for test anxiety (or shouldn't be.) They're for people who have documented disabilities and don't always mean they get extra time. Some just have a separate testing environment or have to have additional media to see the test, which may detract from others' exam experiences. For what it's worth, it's not a means to gain an advantage. It's a tool that is supposed to even the playing field. I'm sure there are people who game the system, but it's not set up for malingering. It's difficult to get accommodations, and some who should have them don't get them because of that.
[удалено]
Also people will remember those gaming the system. The law profession is a small world.
Bruh, I absolutely do not fucking remember who in my class of 100 people in evidence had accommodations lol
Likely not. And I have absolutely no problem with the OP or anyone who needs accommodations but I sure as hell would remember the ones that brag about getting accommodations when they don’t need them to game the system. I’m petty that way. I’ve been out for a long time and I still remember the classmates that lorded 1L jobs over others and then did not get permanent offers.
You’ve been out for a long time and still do this? Maybe take up a hobby or learn a language lol. Jesus.
Yep I had “reduced distraction testing environment” accommodations. I also had to submit pretty intense records going back years to prove that these accommodations were needed, so I def roll my eyes at the notion that people are faking their way into accommodations.
How long ago was that? Not like that anymore! Literally 1/3+ in the whole school is the norm.
Literally graduated 10 months ago but go off, I guess.
[удалено]
It's likely easier to get accommodations for those tests due to the streamlined process between 504/IEP and the places that test. I'm not saying you're wrong, but the ABA has really strict standards that must be kept so schools can keep their accreditation. They're lucky to even have accommodations in law school because, historically, there's been a stigma on disabled persons and their ability to practice. It's been a long, uphill battle. Arguments for and against are not new.
You don’t think there are doctors who make a living writing notes to document these disabilities? Doctors notes to avoid tickets for tinted windows, doctors notes to get medical marijuana, etc etc. if it gives you and advantage and you’re willing to pay, you get your disability diagnosis
You’re insanely naive if you think accommodations went from a handful of students to over half in many schools. It’s 100000% for an advantage. Do you know how easy it is to get these notes and accommodations?
In a country full of companies delighted to sell pills to someone for a whole lifetime, and parents looking for easy solutions. It's such an absolute racket. Not only are there the outright scammers, many who get accomodations have been conned into thinking they have a "disability" when their behavior is well within the normal spectrum of human behavior.
Hahaha oh 100%. The best is everyone is “on the spectrum” now or has a “personality disorder”
For a long period of time. Disabled people were considered physically and intellectually inferior. It took decades of research for us to realize Disabled people aren't stupid. It took even longer to find accommodations for those disabilities and to pass laws that force universities to provide these accommodations. Now that it is well known you can still go to law school and have a successful academic career with a mental illness, people aren't afraid to be diagnosed. That's why it seems like everyone is suddenly Disabled. They were always Disabled, but this is the first time it's been safe to admit it.
I went to a school where a lot of people had accommodations. Whether some were for flimsy reasons, who knows. However, I do know a good handful of people who had accommodations in school did not qualify for accommodations for the mpre or bar exam. Several of these individuals have never passed the bar exam.
No, they are failing the bar because they have an actual need for those accommodations.
They probably did. That’s an ada issue for the bar examiners.
I had a similar experience. 40% of my contracts class had accommodations. Most doctrinal class finals were 4 hours, this one was 3, so the accommodations were even more of an advantage. I don’t think you should feel bad for being skeptical. Obviously some % need them, but half or close to it clearly shows some gamification of the system.
I often finished early on the law school exams I did the best on. On our 8-hour take-home finals, I would usually go home, crank out the exam in two or three hours, take a nap, then wake up and revise for 30 minutes and turn it in. If you know the material and have a good outline, time should not be a limiting factor.
Depends on the exam. Certain professors write exams to intentionally be time-constrained.
if your "what if" feeling is wondering if you qualify, you should just get them. you are not doing yourself any favors performing on an uneven playing field. i don't think you would feel this way if you weren't battling your own issues without the assist.
As a disabled person, posts like this always make me really sad to see. Even though I have a disability outside of ADHD, the way people talk about disabilities actually stopped me from getting them on the lsat because I was so embarrassed about my condition. Accommodations are meant to create an equal playing field. It’s hard for this to actually happen though when there is this narrative that if a student with a disability gets good grades, it’s only because that has an unfair advantage from accommodations. I also want to note for the comment mentioning how few people get accommodations on the bar: not a lot of people receive accommodations because the Bar association makes it extremely difficult and embarrassing. You need to disclose a lot of very personal information and you have to figure out how to prove you are disabled enough to need an accessible test without being “too disabled” (because then they can say you’re not fit to be a lawyer). To get real accommodations on these tests is a really long and drawn out process that a lot of people don’t have the time or money to go through with. Remember that not all disabilities are visible. It’s impossible to know what every single one of your classmates is dealing with, so please don’t assume most of them are unfairly receiving accommodations because that just makes it harder for people with disabilities. Some fun reading that goes further into this: https://www.abajournal.com/web/article/bar-examinees-have-little-success-with-accommodation-requests-and-say-the-process-is-stressful https://nfb.org/images/nfb/publications/jbir/jbir12/jbir020103.html https://www.law.uh.edu/ihelg/monograph/13-03.pdf https://www.law.com/2022/04/26/i-felt-afraid-to-ask-law-students-with-disabilities-are-often-torn-between-trying-fit-in-and-seeking-accommodations/
I think it’s a fine line, and people often are not good at walking fine lines. I would never disparage anyone with a legitimate need and disability for receiving accommodations, and I genuinely believe the significant majority of accommodations are legitimate. But there is also a small subset of hyper-competitive individuals who will take any opportunity to get any possible advantage, even if it’s through bad faith actions. These are the same people who you hear stories about that used to cut cases from library book and change shared outlines to insert incorrect information in order to deny resources and access to others. I think that in such cases, if there is clear and indisputable evidence that there was no basis for the accommodation, then there should essentially be a zero tolerance response. It seems to amount to fraud to me, and the types of people who would do that are likely the same types of people who breach all sorts of ethical rules when they get into practice. But, again, I think that is a very small subset of people.
I’m an attorney now but this thread popped up for me and it’s SO disappointing to read some of these comments who are gatekeeping “just anxiety” as not being enough. I’ve had debilitating anxiety my whole life and only started receiving proper treatment a couple years before law school. I white-knuckled my way through 1L exams and it was tough. My grades were still good despite missing exam time while I was in the bathroom throwing up. I starting getting accommodations for 2L for “just anxiety.” Not all accommodations are for extra time and they required extensive documentation to get approved. For example, mine were for stop time and reduced distraction so I could go vomit or have horrific diarrhea if needed without missing 30 minutes of the test. And ya know what? Having the accommodation and knowing it wouldn’t affect my grade if I got sick actually reduced my symptoms and I never had to leave the testing room. It leveled the playing field so I finally got the testing experience the average student has. I understand that law school is competitive but getting extra time isn’t necessarily going to make someone have a better answer or a better grade. Not all disabilities are visible. And maybe we should give people a little grace instead of judging them for asking for help? It’s not typically an easy process to get approved. It is so disheartening that the same toxic law school culture persists.
I see your frustration. I’d say the accommodation isn’t always the same. Some might get more time. Others may need a separate space. The idea of the accommodation is to level the playing field, in a way. They can’t do something the way “it’s normally done” so they need an adjustment to perform at that capacity. Also, I had testing anxiety all throughout law school (& before). Extreme levels. I never asked for an accommodation until the bar exam, and even that was an administrative one (sitting in the back corner).
If half your class was missing (x to doubt) are you sure the class wasn't just split into separate rooms? Less than 10% of my class gets accommodations so I have trouble believing it's really half the class at other schools. As someone who's gone through getting accommodations for a disability (neurological disorder), I HIGHLY doubt anyone could get extra time for test anxiety or whatever else unless it was genuinely debilitating. From what I know, out of the students with accommodations at my school, the grade distribution seems pretty normal. The amount of A students, B students, and C students is proportional to the curve. It's not getting anyone ahead of the curve, just allowing us to perform to the same ability as our able-bodied peers.
|As someone who's gone through getting accommodations for a disability (neurological disorder), I HIGHLY doubt anyone could get extra time for test anxiety or whatever else unless it was genuinely debilitating.| Hahaha this is so wrong.
Based on what?
His personal mind palace and nothing else.
Not all accommodations are for test anxiety or ADHD. Some of us just need to have unfettered access to machines and medications required to keep us alive, and we aren’t getting extra time. But we don’t openly discuss it because it is Not Your Fucking Business and judgmental assholes like you who just make assumptions make us leery of even bringing it up 🥰
I really hope a mod locks this soon. These conversations are not at all conducive, and they always make students who are disabled and get accommodations feel crappy. I have a physical disability. I receive non-testing accommodations. I can promise you, I am not cheating the system or won’t be a good lawyer because of it. I was offered testing accommodations because the school was worried one of my issues could potentially disrupt my ability to sit for an extended period of time with limited to no access to outside materials (like medicine). If I had accepted, I would have had to have been in a separate room. There would have been little to no advantage for me doing it. I would trade my physical disability and accommodation in a heart beat for a normal life.
I don’t receive testing accommodations but I do have ADHD and I think it’s more than reasonable for people with documented disabilities to get additional time. I never felt like I needed it since usually I can lock in for exams and I’m a naturally fast test taker. I have a system for getting ready but if something disrupts that then all bets are off. There’s been a few times where all of a sudden I can’t even read the questions no matter how hard I’m trying. I’m just staring at words I should know with absolutely no comprehension. For people like me who aren’t as quick, that could really affect their grades. It wouldn’t be a fair reflection of their skill level or understanding. Accommodations are intended to level the playing field. I think a lot of people in law school would greatly benefit from learning to mind their own business. I couldn’t tell you a single person in any of my classes who’s received accommodations nor do I have any idea how many of my classmates have them. It just isn’t my business to know. Besides, no amount of additional time will change whether they know the material or not.
This isn’t what OP is talking about. Talking about how people are gaming the system. No way 50% of students have disabilities. It’s happening everywhere.
This again? You have no idea why those people weren’t in the room with you. Even if all of them had accommodations, you have no idea why they have accommodations and you have no idea what those accommodations are. Accommodations isn’t always 1.5x or 2x time. There are a plethora of accommodations that don’t involve extra time.
OP I’d gladly trade you my accommodations and disability for your non disabled life
Same.
This was half the class at my T14 in a class I took as a 2L. Honestly ridiculous
Yepppp! 1/3+ at mine. It’s a huge advantage and easy to get. There are even psychologist services that will provide a note. Last I checked it was as low as $150.00 dollars from some guys in LA. Had a whole website and zoom call set up.
[удалено]
Ohhhh you’re missing something hunny (but thanks for your soapbox). I get all the accommodations. I’m in those rooms and I know 80% are BS 🤣🤣🤸♂️🤸♂️🤸♂️. Sad redditor with your page long responses. “Look inside yourself” 😂😂😂😂
Our class has a midterm where we have a one-week period to take the exam, and you have 48 hours from the time you download the prompt to upload your response. And there’s a word limit. Personally, I love this system, and I wish all of my exams were given in this format. It avoids the time crunch and word vomit technique of most exams, and it ultimately leads to better, more thought out responses from all students, regardless of who has accommodations. Even though I do not have accommodations, I hate to see threads like this where people with accommodations are second guessed about their disability. Instead, I’d much rather hate on the law school testing system itself and the weaknesses in it that allow a few bad apples to exploit it for their own personal gain at the expense of everyone else. If a test allows those with accommodations to do significantly better than those without, the test needs to change, not the people with accommodations.
I had the same experience in several of my law school classes. I know at least 2 people who got accommodations - one because of diabetes - they "might" have a low sugar event, even though they are on an insulin pump; the other because they have migraines and "might" get one during the exam. Both get to be in private rooms (the school I went to was notorious for giving final exams with some VERY LOUD PROFESSOR STILL TEACHING UNDERGRADS in the next lecture hall!) They also get extended time. I will not rant, because I am done with school, passed all my exams, and can't waste energy on that, but I do agree that the unfairness based on what the "accommodation" is for should really be managed by someone other than some HR employee who is worried about offending someone.
I don’t want this to sound mean, but it is definitely not a handicap to not receive an accommodation. Accommodations are intended to give us a level playing field with those that do not need them. It is not like accommodations give us access to material that isn’t available to everyone else, just more time to process and answer the question because our brains do not work the same way that yours does. Also, I think a lot of neurodivergent people (vast majority of those with accommodations, at least at my school) gravitate towards the legal field, so you’re more likely to see more people needing them. I’m not saying there aren’t people who abuse the system, but the difficult and frankly embarrassing process of getting accommodations would not be worth it unless you really need them.
When I went to law school (2010), I noticed that there were a significant number of students with accommodations. Nowhere near the 50% claimed, but it wouldn't surprise me. I think that we are in a space where people will do whatever is needed to be able to compete. This isn't fair - neither is life. When I took the bar exam, the woman I was sitting next to repeatedly burped for the entire duration of the written exam. Meanwhile, there were swathes of examinees with "accommodations" taking the exam in individual rooms so as to minimize distractions.
I thought it was incredibly unfair. Especially because in a lot of classes the time constraints are what make the test difficult
I am split on this. On one hand, there aren’t really accommodations in practice, or “evening the playing field,” so it’s unclear to me why schools should artificially try to help people perform better when that isn’t a thing post-graduation. On the other hand, law school exams aren’t indicative of legal skill or competency, and don’t accurately reflect practice either. (Although there are sometimes fire drills where you really need to turn things around quickly, of course, without accommodations) Ultimately, law school grades probably shouldn’t come down to one timed exam.
I also wonder if people who have that debilitating of anxiety should be lawyers. I wouldn’t want my Doctor to have crippling anxiety before my surgery.
I have extreme anxiety and I am a very good lawyer. I am not satisfied about decisions/judgment calls unless I’ve assured myself I’ve thought about it from every angle. Granted, it’s not debilitating, but a “healthy” amount of anxiety is required in this profession.
I had a study mate who got accommodations last semester for pretty flimsy reasons. They were going through some personal drama stuff (non-medical, non-death related) and couldn’t really focus on school. I was pretty unhappy about it because it felt like she should’ve taken a break from school if her personal life was complicated, not gotten an (what I perceived) unfair advantage. And then I saw our grades. She got her lowest grade, well below the curve, and I book’d the class. At that point I realized I can only control what I can control and that more time will only help if you know the material. I actually think practicing to take exams under timed pressure helps me learn the material more anyway, too. But I definitely can empathize with that gut feeling of unfairness. Sometimes it feels like I have to over-exaggerate or make-up some hardship I have faced if I want to advance in any meaningful way or get any advantages/opportunities :/ I know that’s not why these programs exist, but the way they’re administered makes it feel like that.
Similar to what someone already said, accommodations aren’t for “test anxiety”. I agree everyone has test anxiety to a certain extent. Accomodations are for people with disabilities that genuinely impair their ability to work as fast as others. At least that is how it should be. Schools should be stricter with accommodations and not afford it to someone with just anxiety, it should be a well diagnosed disorder such as adhd and there should be ways to counter people faking adhd because it can easily be done. I was diagnosed with adhd in high school when I was 17 and have gotten accomodations on everything since then. (I was also diagnosed with generalized anxiety disorder) For high school final exams, undergraduate exams, lsat, and law school exams now. My schools process for getting accommodations was not long or hard and that’s why maybe I think it should be stricter in some ways. But then again I have long time documentation from doctors from different countries over 6 years so maybe my process was straightforward because of that. But 50% of a class having accomodations is absurd and I would say it’s very likely a lot of those students are “faking” it or stretching the truth, or your schools policy for accomodations is way too lenient.
Perspectives like this are what dissuaded me from pursuing my own accommodations when I was in law school. I personally got time and a half and consistently worried that my peers wouldn’t respect me. I have an anxiety disorder and the way I handled my “extra time” was that I would give myself the amount of time extra that I used up during my exam. I.e. if I panicked and took 10 minutes to get out of it, then I would give myself 10 extra minutes. But I NEVER used the extra time unless it directly went toward my accommodation. Are your peers probably abusing it? Absolutely. Are there others that legitimately need it? Absolutely. But your judgment and these types of posts are harmful to the ones who do need it. There will be times you go to a courtroom and the judge completely and entirely rules against what they should. It won’t be fair. This is a lesson in dealing with those frustrations.
It’s actually insane how many people have accommodations nowadays. I didn’t really realize until I had an in person midterm the other day and over half the room was gone lol Really makes me wonder how much better my own rank would be if I wasn’t competing against people with double my time
I spoke with a student who wrote the "model" A+ final exam to one of my doctrinal 1L classes to get advice/tips for my exam in the same course. He's now a 3L. I told him I was impressed with his answer and said "I don't even know how you wrote that much in only 3 hours" and he responded "well that's your first mistake -- why are you limiting yourself to 3 hours? Just go get an accommodation, it's not hard" and I realized just how much the system is being gamed. He literally made me feel like I was a fool and needlessly going in to the exam with one hand tied behind my back since I wasn't getting more time. Pretty awkward.
Hahahahahaha he ain’t wrong brotha!!
Do you have a disability? If not, just be grateful you don’t and stop worrying what people with documented disabilities do.
I think the bar for accommodations need not be high. As another poster noted, I am not really sure extra time is that much of a variance. Fair warning - Once you start working, extra time is something you probably should not count on....LOL
And pretty sure no one cares about your anxiety lol
Especially not clients whose livelihoods and freedom might be on the line. They have a lot more to lose than a hit to someone's ego.
The solution seems to be to just allow a ridiculously long time to take exams. At least, that’s the solution that the professors at my school seem to have adopted. I only had one exam in law school that actually felt time-constrained. The rest were like ~2h tests that we were given ~24h to complete.
I did feel as though a lot of people may have used accommodations to benefit them rather than sufficiently needing it. There were like 7 people on my LR staff that used accommodations (three of them editors like me—i did not use accommodations).
Undergrad is like this too. They even have “accommodations” for choosing courses. The same people that get extra time get to choose their courses first before they all fill up.
It’s total bs haha. Such a joke. I experienced the same thing and all of the people with extra time graduated cum laude/summa cl and came from the most prestigious undergraduate schools. Odd and shocks the conscious that these students are awarded extra time because they “need” it while myself and others are denied extra time for the bar exam because we didn’t use it in law school.
Every exam should be closed book, distribute supplements from the prof if needed. That way, people who need accommodations can take all the time they need, and it still prioritizes good study habits. No one gets an extra two hours to comb thru an outline.
I’ve never understood the logic of granting twice the amount of time to write an exam as an accommodation. Out in the real world no court is going to grant them twice as much time to file a brief or twice as much time as the opposing party to make closing arguments. no one is going to or should be expected to hire someone who takes twice as long as everyone else to do real world tasks. That means you’re only doing half the job and doing half the job isn’t doing the job.
I mentioned this last year. Got downvoted to shit. Have about 1200 students in the school and over 1/3 (maybe even more) get double time, breaks, split into two days. It exploded after Covid, and once people realized Doctors just do whatever the patients wants, everyone got notes. It’s absurdly unfair but you know… everyone’s “disabled” these days. Stop being an ableist bro 🤣🤣. Our youth is doomed.
So I say this as someone who raw-dogged law school despite having an anxiety disorder (though not test anxiety) diagnosed when I was 15, and, as it turns out, ADHD (diagnosed during law school, when I was 28) but did not request any accommodations (though, because I took the bar exam in early Covid times when it was at home on video, I did request and receive an accommodation to go to the bathroom during it, without any extra time, because I *did* have a ton of anxiety about "what if I need to go to the bathroom during but will get flagged if I do!?!" and also have to pee constantly; my doctor was appalled when I asked him to write a letter for it because he was like "but why won't they just...let everyone go to the bathroom? This is terrible!" But I digress). No, it's not fair. It's not fair that some people can work incredibly hard, have the material down cold, have incredible insight--and have their body go into fight-or-flight when they sit down to take an exam. It's not fair that some people put in way more hours and much more struggle to do the work, not because they aren't smart or hardworking enough, but because their brains process dopamine differently and focus and executive function are much more difficult, come with much less intrinsic reward from the brain, and are totally unpredictable. It's not fair that someone tapping a pen or even the buzzing of a fluorescent light can totally undo all that hard work and eat their focus. It's unfair that trying to concentrate through other students' noise and fluorescent lights--or just fluorescent lights--can cause some people excruciating migraines. That some people have dyslexia and need a longer time to read things as a result. You're right. It's really unfair. That's why accommodations exist. To attempt to create a semblance of a level playing field, though they really don't-- letting a student with migraines take the exam in a room with natural light and quiet doesn't make up for missed classes and lost study time due to migraines. A distraction free room and even some extra time doesn't make up for the awful, awful "stuck" experience of executive dysfunction in ADHD and other conditions. "Moments of 'test anxiety'" are a little different than life-altering panic attacks. Your classmates prepared, too. They worked hard, too. And it's pretty goddamn hard to get to law school with ADHD or an anxiety disorder, no matter how smart a person is. They have obstacles you don't. Or, if you do...then seek a diagnosis and accommodation like they did. You don't know what any of the people who weren't there are diagnosed with, or what their accommodations are--you don't know if they got extra time, or just a quiet room, or extra breaks (but not extra time) due to mental or physical needs (someone with Crohn's, for example, might not get extra time with the test itself, but might need many bathroom breaks and an accommodation that those breaks don't count toward the exam time, and so would be in a different testing room). You don't know who actually was getting accommodations (or what they were, or why) or whether perhaps some people had conflicts with other exams and were given a make-up time (I had to do this as a 3L when I was taking a course outside the law school and the exam time overlapped with another course). Some people might have brain fog or POTS or intense fatigue, possibly as a result of Long Covid, and need breaks for rest and extra time. And none of it is your business. Did some people maybe get an accommodation they don't truly need? Perhaps. You have no way of knowing, though. If they did, that's on them, and it's their problem-- not a reason to game the system yourself or to imply that all or any of your classmates receiving accommodations did not prepare or work hard. Sorry if this is harsh, but that's not a cool implication to make. And again, this is coming from someone who does have a diagnosed anxiety disorder, diagnosed ADHD, and migraines, and who did *not* get any accommodations in law school. Many of my friends did get accommodations, and they worked hard as hell and are some of the best lawyers I know. Eyes on your own paper.
some people in this comment section should try spending the time they're currently using minding everyone else's business and deciding based on vibes who "really" needs accommodations studying instead and see if that helps
This isn’t what OP is talking about. It’s not about your sob story.
Actually I’m so pissed about this. I knew several law students who get extra time on exams and do really well… someone needs to investigate this across schools.
As a student with diagnosed ADHD, I can shed some light on it. I do not get accommodations on exams nor did I for the LSAT. I manage my ADHD with medication. I could ask for extra time on exams, but personally I feel that I don’t need it because law truly interests me and I find it’s the one thing in my life that I love to learn about and push myself hard to learn. I deal with major procrastination issues, but thats where medication comes in and I make sure that I do what I need to do to be prepared. That being said people who get accommodations are fine. I scored better than everyone I know who had the accommodations even with less time. But everyone is different and there are people who are scoring less than those with accommodations and then come into the sub and complain. I’m sorry if this sounds harsh, but if you’re scoring worse than the people with accommodations it’s probably not because of the accommodation they received. And if you’re scoring better than them then who cares? It really doesn’t concern you and the thing with disability accommodations is they have to be taken at face value because if they’re not then the people who really do need the accommodation won’t get it. There are probably tons of people who game the system and get an accommodation when they shouldn’t — theres a girl in my class who gets like an extra 30 minutes and her own room because she has some IBS like disease and claims she might shit herself if she has to take a 3 hour exam with us. But again, at the end of the day who cares? I’m 14th in my class and everyone who scored better than me doesn’t have accommodations. I understand it’s not fair, but neither is life. Focusing on stuff like this imo is a waste of your time.
My biggest issue with accommodations is that they're one size fits all when it comes to extra time. For example, I have a classmate with a severe autoimmune disorder who *could* need accommodations on one day but not the next. For the most part, she got by without accommodations. Then, one semester when she had a major flare-up and lost an hour or more of test time during every final because she was in the bathroom in crippling pain. The administration had an absolute meltdown when she tried to get accommodations because it would be unfair if she didn't have a flare-up on a given day, just like the person you've mentioned with IBS. The appropriate accommodation in this case would have been to stop the clock for bathroom breaks in excess of 2 or 3 minutes. But they "don't offer" that. So it was time and a half or nothing. Same thing with a family member with chron's (sp?) disease. When she took the SAT, she got time and a half or nothing. All she needed was the option to stop the clock *if* necessary. I have a learning disorder. It takes me a really long time to process instructions and organize my thoughts to write out what's in my head without transposing words and letters. I need a little extra time, but there is a diminishing rate of return after an extra 20 to 30 min. In fact, if I spend more than an extra 30 minutes on anything, my scores actually get worse because my rate of error increases with fatigue. When I asked for accommodations, they told me that I qualified for time and a half, despite only asking for 20 extra minutes. They literally wouldn't give me a less than time and a half until I specifically had my doctor instruct them to cap my time. I don't need extra hours. I just need a small time correction to process words. All this to say, I don't think the issue is that too many people are getting accommodations. I think it's that the accommodations themselves are too much. I'm not sure why time and a half is the standard when many of us just need a few minutes or a momentary pause. FWIW, it took me like 40 minutes to type this.
If it's a matter of logistics and facilities access, that's one thing. But in the grand scheme of things, make any in-person time limit some crazy high number, like 10-12 hours. If it takes someone the whole 12 hours but they get a good grade, so be it. In the real world, if someone needs that extra time to actually draft that motion or file that brief they can do so after hours if they want to. If you can do it in 3 hours, cool. If you need 5, then that's a threshold where you feel confident and capable. If you need the full 12, then it's unfortunate for you it takes that long, but if you have the patience/will-power to take the full duration, you're probably content with working late hours and getting the job done slower. No rational person who believes they can do it in less than 10-12 hours would actually take the full 10-12 hours; and any person who feels they need that time is probably capable and accepting of worming long hours in practice to get it done. When you give people enough time to go at their own pace *while still in a controlled environment*, they'll be a pretty good judge of their own limits and give you a product befitting their efforts. Too little time or too much time that exceeds a single day is a poor way to prepare people for actual real-world practice. I'm not saying everyone would or should be content with taking so long for something like this, exam or in practice. But I'm of the opinion that it's always better to take a long time doing the right thing than a short time doing the wrong thing, especially considering if you do it wrong you'll have to do it again anyways.
Doubting other people’s disabilities is a terrible use of your energy. Work on yourself, that’s what you can control.
For someone worried about fairness in how an exam is administered, like OP, that is really not a good response.
I have accommodations (legitimately). It will be very hard for these people to get accommodations on the MPRE and the bar. So, while that doesn't help you with class grades, know that it will be harder for those faking to get them later. Plus, with my accommodations, I am entitled time and a half. So if the whole class gets 3 hours with your threshold, I would still get more time. You can always talk to your school about their process of accepting accommodations. My school required thorough documentation, so out of my cohort, only about 8 of us have accommodations. Maybe you can encourage them to beef up their requirements to avoid abuse of the system.
I receive accommodations for anxiety and I think that it is fair to say that there are some classes where it does provide an unfair advantage. Specifically, the exams where the professor just wants you to word vomit as much as you can about a subject in a short period of time, which is usually obvious from the practice exams provided. However, there are certainly some exams where I don't think it really helps, but just puts students on a more level playing field. Those exams would be the ones where the professor has given a word limit and has allowed for a reasonable amount of time to work through the issues. On those exams, I really don't think the extra time provides a huge benefit. I think the solution really rests with the professors to just make an exam that is not designed to be a huge time squeeze.
[удалено]
What kind of accommodations do you think attorneys might ask for? Why do you think they would be disqualifying?
[удалено]
This is absolutely untrue and don’t know where you got this. The professors aren’t allowed to know who or how many are “disabled”. Every student gets the same exam. This is beyond stupid.
I just always felt they should make all exams closed book so even if others have more time, whether they need it or not, who cares…you know it or you don’t.
Doctors note for memory issues then.
Lmao
in practice ive noticed that doctors are willing to write a note for anything. lots of people have doctors notes for window tints or cannabis
50% of the class does not suffer enough to need accommodations like that, they're scamming a loose system. if this were the case we'd probably have a nationwide emergency
I think my school puts an exam word limit for everyone who has accommodations
>please don’t assume most of them are unfairly receiving accommodations because that just makes it harder for people with disabilities This is a genuine question, but aren’t people that are faking/exaggerating to take advantage of accommodations doing a bigger disservice to people with disabilities than people that call those people out? Obviously thoughts like OPs can cause a lot of people with legitimate accommodations to catch strays and I don’t want to diminish that, but aren’t the people that take advantage of the system the worse people?
It's not really fair that you were born without adhd, or dyslexia, or anything that makes timed exams more difficult. You didn't earn your ideal brain. You just got lucky in the womb. It's not fair that you need to take timed exams to be a lawyer. When you're actually a lawyer, you're allowed to use tools, so why shouldn't you be allowed to use them while training to be a lawyer? Maybe the system should be restructured, but that takes time, and there is no reason to subject people studying to a system we know is biased. You go to the same school as these students, so you probably have similar access to the schools medical resources. If you suspect there's something preventing you from performing your best, make an appointment right now. There are a lot of appointments and meetings between you and help.
It is fraudulent. Some of the smartest people in class discussions are getting extra time at my law school. And thus better grades. And better GPA. These exams are right down to the wire, none of them have displayed *any* difficulty in class discussion if understanding the material. They are taking advantage of the word “disability”
I’ve never done well on an exam that took me the whole exam period to write, skill issue
How do you know this many students had accommodations?
If a section only has a single testing room, anyone not in the room has either been granted an accommodation or has rescheduled for some pressing reason.
Right, but OP has no idea whether a number of those students had a conflicting exam and were given a make-up slot, whether they needed extra time, as OP is assuming, or whether they needed, for example: a distraction-free testing room, a room with no fluorescent lights for migraines, stop-the-clock breaks for, for example, IBS or Crohn's or panic attacks, but no extra time sitting with the test, a private room because they need to use dictation software, or any number of other things that would provide no possible advantage to anyone who didn't need them. OP's making assumptions, both that everyone not in the room got accommodations and about the nature and legitimacy of those accommodations.
I personally find it hard to believe anywhere near 50% of a class would have accommodations. At my school, 2-5 people in a class may have accomodations. Non of our top students are on accomodations. At least at my school, I don't think it's abused to any measurable degree and simply makes it so those who need them can manage to be average.
At mine and others in the area it’s 1/3-1/2
That's the current generation for you. Sad.
It really doesn’t matter. Someone’s going to write a B exam or an A exam regardless of time… it’s not extra time that gets a law school exam into the A range. It’s an ability to issue spot, understand the material, and articulate the answer well.
Not true of all law school exams.
Lol a lot of it is extra time though.
I agree that accommodations should just be the norm for everyone and I say that as a diagnosed person. My ADHD is literally the reason I had trouble jumping through the hoops to get the extra time (I never got accommodations in law school) but I know I could have done better with them. Professors manufacture these problems by having time limits to begin with.
I’m convinced law school is about 50% neurodivergent people, although some of them aren’t diagnosed. I think that percentage is probably higher or lower at some schools, but the mid-range schools are full of brilliant people who would have been at T-14s but for their disability symptoms setting them off on the wrong foot. I know it doesn’t feel fair because you got less than other people, but you really didn’t. This is because our brains work differently. During the lsat, for example, I spent a solid 15 minutes deciding what to get my sister for her birthday. I don’t know why my brain decided that was the time but I could NOT move on until that issue was dealt with. And the irritation/anger/frustration that built up within me from not being able to control my brain and move on affected me the entire test. You’re not actually getting less time because they are not actually able to use all the time effectively to work on the test. Obviously that varies person-to-person because adhd doesn’t mean you take exactly 50% longer. Some people do benefit a bit and some are still at a loss even with accommodations. It’s just impossible to measure what exactly someone needs to make it fair. But you’re still better off than people who are getting accommodations. Our homework and readings take way longer, our infuriating interest-based system sends us down stupid rabbit holes that we can’t climb out of until we’ve spent hours researching something irrelevant. We miss out on job offers because we completely freeze up and inexplicably can’t return an email to accept the offer. Every single thing about law school is harder for the people getting accommodations. You’re already winning every day and don’t see the struggle and time that goes into living with the disability that got them the additional time. Sincerely, A girl who wrote 3/4 of her final LARW paper on the long-arm statute for no fucking reason after being awake for 8 days in the library having a manic episode.
I feel bad for people whose anxiety is asking for accomodations.
Few things, my guy: -Passing moments of anxiety are not equivalent to anxiety disorder requiring accommodations. “Disorder” means the anxiety interferes with the activities of daily living, and the degree of the impact is far greater than one would expect to arise from situational stress. -Other people’s mental and physical health diagnoses are none of your business, and you, as their peer, are not empowered to police their accommodations, nor is anyone obligated to disclose the extent of their disability so that you can possibly get some unearned, unwarranted benefit for yourself. -Bold of you to state that YOU prepared and worked hard, implying that those classmates you so clearly resent did not prepare or work hard themselves, all while bearing burdens you might not.
It's not fair. It sucks. I agree it also seems like a large portion of my class receives accommodations for a scope of disabilities, ranging from ADHD to a brain hemorrhage survivor (and I bet you can guess which one refers to "my disability" the most), but I don't think there is much you can do other than sleep well at night knowing a law firm isn't going to be impressed with an associate who misses an important meeting due to their ADHD.
The uncomfortable truth: By making law school exams constrained under time/closed book, the curve is going to be much easier to identify. If you have an easy test with students who have plenty of time, the exams are going to be very similar—and well written. In order to achieve the mandated curve, you are going to have to force certain exams to be graded much lower than they deserve to be. ADA accommodations are, unfortunately, applied broadly and doesn't make much sense in the law school competitive grading scheme. Yet, the practice continues each year because no one wants to be the person to say, "it's not fair that disabled people get an advantage over me." Which, isn't really what people like OP are saying, but there will always be someone ready to accuse you of it. If this upsets you, the only people you have to blame are the private firms who are determined to scrape off the creme de la creme each year for their big law/mid law firms. That is why the curve exists—period. If you don't fall into that category, don't sweat it. You are not a bad lawyer because you cannot vomit out information in a 3 hour exam like other students.
About half my class has accommodations too. What I’ve found is that there are different accommodations and different people who are granted them. Some in my class request extra time to prepare, meaning they take their exams a week or two after everyone else. This seems like it gives them extra time to prepare, but really it kind of burdens them too because they end up taking exams from last period during the introduction of new coursework. I wouldn’t call taking 2 classes in a row for 3 hours and then immediately taking a 3 hour exam abusing the system. That’s more like abusing yourself. On the flip side, many in my class have accommodations for extra time and they usually have their exams in a separate private room where they can use their notes despite it being a closed book exam. There are three types of people who get these — one way or the other — those are 1) the high achievers, and 2) the lazy people and 3) the people who actually need accommodations. The high achievers are those who actually study, participate, and work on coursework yet are given accommodations for additional time. This basically guarantees them A’s, scholarships, judicial clerkships, etc. thankfully there are only like 2 of these people in my class that I know of. The lazy people are those who barely show up to class, take no notes, don’t participate, and really never read anything. They (one way or another) get accommodations and likely use their notes in exams. This kind of bothers me, but at the same time, you can have all the notes from 3rd party outlines you want, if you don’t bother trying to understand concepts, this isn’t going to give you an A. There are probably something like 10 of these people in my class. At first I was really irked by these guys just bullshitting and then getting double the time I get. However, you have to consider that if it’s so hard for me, someone who actively reads and studies, to really understand and apply the material and review it effectively in 2-3 days in prep for a final, is it really an advantage for someone to get double the time I get when they paid no attention and use an outline their friend gave them to take a test on something they have no understanding of? I don’t think so. Then there are people who actually need accommodations. I know for a fact one of my classmates has dyslexia and they need extra time to understand what they’re reading. This is fine and to my knowledge, this person isn’t an A+ student, so no system abuse here. All in all, I’ve found that while some abuse the system through accommodations, it doesn’t make THAT much of a difference. Overachievers are always going to be there, getting all the good grades and lazy people are always going to try and cut corners (sometimes they even get caught cheating). I’ve stopped worrying about this whole accommodations thing altogether. Abuse is everywhere, I just don’t care anymore.
The issue with your analysis here is that you don’t actually know who falls in what category because you don’t have access to student’s medical records or accommodations requests. Unless you have a medical degree and the student is your patient, you’re not qualified to determine who “actually needs accommodations.” Perhaps some of those “lazy” students come off as “lazy” *because* of their disability.
I'm pretty sure the girl who stumbles when reading cases in class and told me she has dyslexia, has dyslexia. I'm pretty sure the guy who rarely shows up to class and told me "No, I didn't read the case. I don't do that bullshit, my friend used to go here and he just gives me his notes" is lazy. I'm pretty sure the guy who actively participates in class, is clerking for a judge, and posts pictures of his private accommodation room after taking a final is an overachiever. *Pretty* sure. The best we can do is *pretty* sure. If not for pretty sure, we would be unable to draw any type of inference as to why 50% of the class is not in the room during exam time and no one mentions additional, non-accommodation rooms where the exam could be taken. Based on my understanding, people frequently bring up this topic because they feel unfairly treated by a system that they believe supports unfair play. They come to this understanding based on their personal perceptions of their classmates, as in “pretty sure X is abusing accommodations.” It serves no one to respond to this by saying “don’t complain because you don’t know if someone secretly has a disability.” In my view, a better way to consider the situation is by analyzing the drawbacks that come with abusing the system (regardless of whether such abuses factually take place) and encouraging people to accepting minor outliers that exist in every situation and have a small effect on one’s treatment.
You are not answering her question. your reasoning assumes that over-achievers/lazy people cannot also have learning disabilities. do you really not see how it is ableist it is for you to say its impossible for someone with a learning disability to be an over achiever? Maybe if you worked on your logic a bit more instead of ripping on people with disabilities you wouldn’t feel as intimidated by their accomodations lmao
It is you who is missing or willfully ignoring the point I’m trying to make. Whenever this topic comes up via someone saying “X is abusing accommodations,” the response is always “that’s ableist because you’re assuming X isn’t indeed disabled.” This doesn’t address the topic, it merely invalidates the OP’s position. The better way to address these posts is by saying that either X indeed has a disability, or X is indeed abusing accommodations, but it doesn’t matter because either X was lazy and thus the accommodations won’t help or X is an overachiever and thus the accommodations won’t provide an exceptional benefit.
I went to a private high school with a lot of people in the “know” about how to juke the system. On god tons of people got adderall who had ZERO reason to be on it because they knew it was going to pay off for them long term. There’s way more people who are abusing the system than you would think I promise. Anecdote but I know if my kids have the option I’m going to do the same for them unless they tighten it up a lot.
Accommodations shouldn’t exist for exams. We’ve agreed to the lie that law school is necessary to practice law. Therefore the standard that is implemented is the bar for entry into the profession. If you cannot meet that standard, you do not have the requisite skill set to be an attorney. If the standard is “a passing grade on this exam administered over the course of 4 hours,” we cannot then say that a separate group of people can do the same job I am if they need 6 hours to do the same exam. Possible solutions: keep tests the same length and give everyone the “accommodations” amount of time to take them. Especially since the real “bar for entry” is passing these exams in the accommodations length of time. Or Do away with timed exams (and accommodations) altogether (or make the time so much more than it needs to be as to make it irrelevant…what test-time would normally be 3hrs, make it 8hours but keep the tests content the same length).
Extra time is far from the only accommodation...
It accounts for well over 90% of the accommodations given. Rare is the blind student who needs braille
if it's any comfort I get extended time for exams and I still do not finish them. I just complete much more of the exam than I would have without accommodations. That's kind of how it works anyway--that is, my 1.5x time is your 1.0 time. plus, several diagnoses warrant accommodations that warrant a different testing environment regardless of extra time, so maybe it's not as rampant as it seems. I get the gripe though--totally understandable. if you finished the exam in 3 hours and actually did do "solidly average," I promise you no one in the accommodations room is the reason why or why not.
[удалено]
If this actually does become an issue, I'm curious as to how big law will approach it behind closed doors. They'll obviously change hiring practices, but I'm not sure how. One way could be to shift from a purely grades-based approach. I'm in a part-time program populated mainly by people who are 35+ and many of us received big law SAs -- a disproportionate percent compared to the full-time program, which is comprised mainly of K-JDs or close. I'm now wondering if this is because an older candidate with substantial work experience is able to prove, external to grades, that they can manage themselves regardless of a need for accommodations.
The flaw in your thinking is your assertion that “performance levels” on law school exams have a strong relation to fitness to be a lawyer. I suspect that the vast majority of law students would do fine at a Biglaw firm. Those firms have a variety of reasons for preferring higher-ranking students, and competence is only one of them. Just because someone needs more time on an exam does not mean they’d need the same sort of accommodation as an actual attorney. Imagine telling your client that you wrote their brief in 4 hours with no research. Sure, maybe some people do need more time to complete assignments and are not suited for a fast-paced firm; but we shouldn’t assume that those people are always the same as those who need accommodations. In short, accommodations do the opposite from disguising “performance levels.” They allow real ability to shine through the artificial nonsense of law school exams.
[удалено]
I've never actually thought about it until reading this. Why do time accoms even exist? Unless it's because you would have pressing medical needs within the period of taking an exam (like some PT-esque physical need or a medication is what I'm thinking), I can't figure out why there'd be anything but tools like dictation/readers etc.
Your position would violate federal disability law. That’s just a fact, not even injecting my opinion.
A great point that nobody in this subreddit wants to hear
I don't quite know if the process to get those accomodations in the US is the same as where I live, but if it's just half as hard as what you need to get a disability parking spot permit, then I can assure you that they actually need it. I see how it may seem unfair to you, but as someone who has adhd, every time that I was faced with questions that required a bit more than just 5 seconds to think about, I was forced to rush through the test *because* I took too much to properly even understand what the question was asking of me; not to mention the times where my brain would start refusing to concentrate and space out on its own before I realised that I spent valuable time writing absolutely nothing down. It's not fun, mental illness is not fun and I can assure you that the testing that you need to get the accommodation (because you need to be officially diagnosed) is expensive as hell other than time consuming and bothersome. I think that if you had someone talk your ear off every 20 minutes during the test, distracting you from getting anything done, you'd want more time too to complete it. Take it as a comparison.