Last year, the University of Arizona James E. Rogers’s College of Law decided it would accept GRE scores in lieu of LSAT scores in its application. This choice was met with strong resistance, especially from the American Bar Association, which threatened to oust the university from its membership.
The Boston Globe explores the future of the LSAT, now that Harvard Law School is following in the footsteps of the University of Arizona, having recently announced that it will accept GRE scores in law school applications.
Law school deans are arguing that allowing students to take the GRE will encourage a more diverse collection of applicants to consider law school. ALI member and Boston University School of Law dean Maureen A. O’Rourke is among the deans championing the GRE in place of the LSAT. She explains, “If the test can be shown to be a reliable predictor of success in law school, most law schools across the country could begin to drop the LSAT.” Dean O’Rourke goes on to say, “It seems to make sense: If it’s valid for one, it ought to be valid for all.”
“I think the mad dash for the GRE is not being driven by declines in applications,” said ALI member and Suffolk Law School dean Andrew Perlman. “That said, if it allows for more people to apply to law school and gives us an equally valid measure of student success, that’s not a bad thing, either.”
Daniel M. Filler, ALI member and dean of Drexel University’s Thomas R. Kline School of Law, explains: “Ultimately, the fundamentals of what makes law school appealing are far more important than what the required test is.” He continues, “So if we see an uptick in jobs in the field, that’s going to have a much more dramatic effect than adding a new test at the entry point.”
Read the full article here.