In a recent announcement, the Law School Admission Council (LSAC) has stirred emotions among law students, aspiring attorneys, and legal experts. The decision to remove the “logic games” section from the Law School Admission Test (LSAT) has prompted spirited discussions across social media, blogs, and message boards. While some view this change as the end of a beloved test component, others celebrate eliminating what they consider perplexing scenarios unrelated to real legal work.

The LSAC’s Decision: The End of Logic Games

The LSAC, the organization responsible for developing and administering the LSAT, revealed its decision to phase out the logic games section starting in August 2024. Instead, this section will be replaced with additional logical reasoning questions, which are already a part of the test. This move has ignited a range of reactions.

Mixed Reactions from Legal Scholars

Notable legal scholars have expressed their views on this change. UC Berkeley law professor Orin Kerr welcomed the decision, labeling the analytical reasoning questions—the official name of the logic games—as “a silly barrier” to law school admission. He succinctly stated, “Good riddance.”

Want to know if you’re earning what you deserve? Find out with LawCrossing’s salary surveys.

Professor Kerr explained that logic games fail to assess the reasoning skills essential for a legal career, indicating that they often deviate from practical legal scenarios.

Divided Opinions Among Law Professors

In contrast, Yale Law School professor Taisu Zhang held a different perspective, emphasizing the value of logic games. Zhang felt that this section allowed students to have a bit of fun, relieving the intense pressure of the LSAT. He argued that logical categorization, a skill honed in this section, is highly relevant to various aspects of legal practice. For him, removing logic games is a “pretty bad move.”

Logic Games vs. Logical Reasoning

To understand the implications of this change, it’s essential to distinguish between logic games and logical reasoning. Logic games require test takers to solve complex puzzles, such as arranging dinner party guests based on specific rules. In contrast, logical reasoning questions involve reading a passage and answering questions based on its content.

Make informed decisions in real time. Subscribe to JDJournal and be in the know with the latest legal updates.

Legal Background: The ADA Settlement

This decision comes after a legal settlement in 2019 between the LSAC and two blind LSAT takers who argued that logic games violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). They claimed that the diagrams necessary for this section disadvantaged them. The settlement granted the LSAC four years to reevaluate and revise the logic games, but the lead plaintiff’s attorney did not comment on this development.

Historical Context: Analytical Reasoning Since 1982

Analytical reasoning, also known as logic games, has been a part of the LSAT since 1982. According to LSAC President Kellye Testy, it has consistently been the most polarizing aspect of the test, with passionate opinions on both sides. Some test takers loved the challenge, while others found it frustrating.

Expert Insights: Logic Games’ Teachability

Despite their challenging nature, several LSAT tutors have highlighted the educational value of logic games. They believe mastering these questions is a skill that can be taught through practice more effectively than other test sections. This perspective has been echoed by LSAT takers on platforms like Reddit, who see logic games as an opportunity to demonstrate their dedication and ability to overcome hurdles.

In conclusion, the LSAC’s decision to retire logic games from the LSAT has sparked many emotions within the legal community. While some celebrate the change, others lament the loss of a section they found both challenging and enjoyable. The implications of this shift on the future of law school admissions remain a topic of intense discussion among legal scholars and students alike.

Don’t be a silent ninja! Let us know your thoughts in the comment section below.