consideration the documentation requirements for candidates who have received some of their requested testing accommodations for a standardized examination related to applications for admission but who request additional testing accommodations, or in excess of double time, for the LSAT, consistent with the terms of Paragraph 5(b) [of the Consent Decree]. Current Practice LSAC has documentation guidelines for each major disability category on its website. These guidelines seek to establish that an individual has: (1) been diagnosed with a mental or physical impairment; (2) is substantially limited, compared to most people, in a major life activity relevant to taking the LSAT as a result of this physical or mental impairment; and (3) requires testing accommodations to address his or her specific functional limitations (with a rationale and objective basis for the testing accommodations requested). Panel’s Recommendation The Panel believes that LSAC’s documentation requirements are excessive for most candidates who seek testing accommodations on the LSAT and inconsistent with the documentation guidelines of other national testing entities. For example, LSAC has lengthy documentation requirements for candidates who have a learning disability and seek extra time as an accommodation.2 These documentation requirements specify certain diagnostic tests that a professional should administer to support a request for testing accommodations. By contrast, other testing entities, such as ACT, provide general guidelines, which are consistent with professionally recognized criteria, without specifying discrete test instruments.3 It is the expectation of the Panel that qualified professionals who provide documentation consistent with our Best Practices will use such criteria as a basis for their recommendation. There is no need for the Panel to be specific beyond that requirement because the qualified professional is typically the person in the best position to determine which diagnostic instruments are appropriate for a particular individual. By lessening the documentation requirements and implementing minimum standards for granting testing accommodation requests, as stated in response to Issue 5, LSAC staff can approve requests for testing accommodations on a more streamlined basis. As discussed below, the Panel recommends that close investigation of a testing accommodation request need only take place for those candidates who fall into what the Panel describes as “category 3” (i.e., candidate without a visual impairment who requests more than 50% extra time, or candidate with a visual impairment who requests more than 100% extra time). This streamlined process is consistent with the ADA’s requirement that “the question of whether an individual’s impairment is a disability under the ADA should See See 2 3
consideration the documentation requirements for candidates who have received some of their requested testing accommodations for a standardized examination related to applications for admission but who request additional testing accommodations, or in excess of double time, for the LSAT, consistent with the terms of Paragraph 5(b) [of the Consent Decree]. Current Practice LSAC has documentation guidelines for each major disability category on its website. These guidelines seek to establish that an individual has: (1) been diagnosed with a mental or physical impairment; (2) is substantially limited, compared to most people, in a major life activity relevant to taking the LSAT as a result of this physical or mental impairment; and (3) requires testing accommodations to address his or her specific functional limitations (with a rationale and objective basis for the testing accommodations requested). Panel’s Recommendation The Panel believes that LSAC’s documentation requirements are excessive for most candidates who seek testing accommodations on the LSAT and inconsistent with the documentation guidelines of other national testing entities. For example, LSAC has lengthy documentation requirements for candidates who have a learning disability and seek extra time as an accommodation.2 These documentation requirements specify certain diagnostic tests that a professional should administer to support a request for testing accommodations. By contrast, other testing entities, such as ACT, provide general guidelines, which are consistent with professionally recognized criteria, without specifying discrete test instruments.3 It is the expectation of the Panel that qualified professionals who provide documentation consistent with our Best Practices will use such criteria as a basis for their recommendation. There is no need for the Panel to be specific beyond that requirement because the qualified professional is typically the person in the best position to determine which diagnostic instruments are appropriate for a particular individual. By lessening the documentation requirements and implementing minimum standards for granting testing accommodation requests, as stated in response to Issue 5, LSAC staff can approve requests for testing accommodations on a more streamlined basis. As discussed below, the Panel recommends that close investigation of a testing accommodation request need only take place for those candidates who fall into what the Panel describes as “category 3” (i.e., candidate without a visual impairment who requests more than 50% extra time, or candidate with a visual impairment who requests more than 100% extra time). This streamlined process is consistent with the ADA’s requirement that “the question of whether an individual’s impairment is a disability under the ADA should 2 See 3 See