This past Christmas week, 80 something LSAT test takers got an email from LSAC notifying them that their answer sheets have been lost (see here) in the abyss of United Parcel Service (UPS). Talk about royal mess.
But this wasn't LSAC's fault. If there's anyone to blame, it's UPS - they're the ones that lost the answer sheets...or was it a test supervisor at the UC Santa Barbara campus who lacked common sense? Fingers are being pointed everywhere.
The main victims (the flustered and pissed students) are getting a refund ($175) and being permitted to retake the test in February free-of-charge. For obvious reasons this is little solace for the students because 1) they have to sit through a half-day long exam again; and 2) they will likely have to push off applying to law school for another year.
This begs the question - should the LSAT (like the GMAT and MCAT) be administered electronically? Personally, I think taking exams electronically sucks. I'm more of an analog guy. But in all fairness, had the exam been administered electronically, then this "mess" could possibly have been avoided. Granted that electronic testing isn't necessarily 100% bullet-proof protected from errors - for example, idiot testing supervisors.
Anyhow, I feel for those who are groaning and fuming because of this incident. I also feel bad for LSAC - it's getting the brunt of the blame for something that wasn't necessarily its fault.
good
ReplyDelete