Does Your LSAT Score Make You a Good Lawyer?

Many people dread the word LSAT when they hear it. Why is that? For some, it is a step they have been avoiding preparing for. For others, they fear that its outcome is an indicator of their future. The LSAT, or the Law School Admission Test, is required widely throughout Canada [and the United States]. It consists of logical reasoning, reading comprehension, and an argumentative essay. But is an exam enough to determine whether you are “worthy” of attending law school? Many believe it is not.

Schools have recently started questioning the LSAT requirement, as it does not take into consideration certain subjective or equity-based factors that may reflect what makes a “good lawyer.” It is about time that more schools start taking the initiative to understand how tests like the LSAT impact the admission of diverse or racialized students, and those from a lower socioeconomic status.

While studying for the LSAT can be free, it is also a barrier for those who cannot afford an additional $500 to $5,000 to guarantee a certain percentile grade via self-study or prep courses. On average, law schools require a score of around 160 to be competitive, along with at least a 3.7 GPA (or an equivalent combination if either your GPA or LSAT score is higher).

The LSAT is a useful tool for identifying who is serious about pursuing law, but it can deter those who can excel in the absence of pressure to outperform and be seen as “successful.” It is a time-intensive, stressful exam that perpetuates anxiety in an already overwhelming world.

Some individuals may prefer that the LSAT stay for reasons like: “you have to earn it,” “there needs to be a screening process,” “we did it, so you should too.”

With respect, those mindsets have already steered many capable future lawyers away from the profession. With greater understanding and perspective will come a grounded, well-rounded, and informed profession.

Refocusing the conversation from the LSAT to personal statements, volunteer efforts, community organization, resilience, and perseverance will help create a stronger foundation for the next generations of lawyers.

In a practical sense, the LSAT demands more time than necessary and negatively impacts mental health. Many students take on studying for the exam alongside a full course load and during their breaks, often feeling the need to rewrite it for a higher score to “prove themselves.” It adds more stress on the GPA, creates a hindrance for maintaining a positive mindset, and injects more competition into environments that need more collegiality.

While it is true that lawyers require an analytical mind, the LSAT fails to determine whether understanding nuances in fallacies, for example, is indicative of being a fierce litigator. Does the ability to rationalize in “logical reasoning” on an undergraduate admissions exam guarantee one’s chances of success in an actual graduate legal environment? Rarely.

For some, the law will be intuitive. For others, it will come with the intention to expand their knowledge or skillset. Just as people with a sciences background may choose law over medicine, acing the LSAT does not guarantee that someone will be a more conscientious or astute lawyer.

Allowing for equal opportunity, alongside eliminating barriers, will create a more approachable bar. At a time when students are facing roadblocks, eliminating the LSAT will provide hope for those who feel intimidated by an extra step that the system now recognizes is not an indicator of fit but more a matter of inherent luck.

We need more people who feel that they belong. To many, the LSAT will be ingrained as a basic principle or trophy ahead of achieving the success of completing the bar. It isn’t that we need to ignore it, but the focus should morph along with corporate values. Workplaces promote inclusion by giving headway to those who may be from less affluent backgrounds, those with more street smarts, and people who are tired of being met with “one more thing” when their main goal is to “do good work” and uplift the community at large.

Just as there were days when a first female partner was named, there will be a day when the first students who were not required to write an LSAT in Canada prove their grit in their articling office.

So rather than looking at this as a step back, let’s shift the focus to how many more people in the community we are inviting in, and how many more will achieve opportunity.