Possibly. Of course, changes were already made to the LSAT a short time ago, but they were nothing to write home about. A new study out of Berkeley which suggests a more meaningful change is outlined in a recent WSJ Blog post. Here’s an excerpt:
Former Berkeley law prof Marjorie Shultz (pictured) thinks they can do better, reports the Recorder. Shultz and Berkeley psychology prof Sheldon Zedeck have been studying alternatives to the LSAT. They recently published their findings in a 100-page report. They say the LSAT, with its focus on cognitive skills, does not measure for skills such as creativity, negotiation, problem-solving or stress management, but that they have found promising new and existing tests from the employment context that do.
I will reserve judgment on the new test, but would welcome anything over the existing one. If anything, the LSAT measures speed reading and speed problem solving, to the exclusion of testing more relevant abilities. To be fair, the LSAT’s approach also mirrors most testing in law school and the bar exam. On the other hand, the LSAT, most law school testing, and the bar exam are all completely off on what it takes to be a good lawyer. Same goes for the GRE and being a professor. There, I’m done … carry on. 😉
Voir Dire 