Goodbye Online LSAT: The Security Problem That Broke The System (Ep. 49)
Impossibile aggiungere al carrello
Rimozione dalla Lista desideri non riuscita.
Non è stato possibile aggiungere il titolo alla Libreria
Non è stato possibile seguire il Podcast
Esecuzione del comando Non seguire più non riuscita
Goodbye Online LSAT: The Security Problem That Broke The System (Ep. 49)
-
Letto da:
-
Di:
A proposito di questo titolo
Study LSAT with us
This episode of the Hey Future Lawyer Podcast kicks off with Ben Parker explaining a major LSAT shift: starting August 2026, the LSAT moves back to in-person testing. He gives quick context on how remote testing became normal during COVID, and why that convenience is now ending.
Ben digs into the real driver behind the change: test security. He breaks down how remote testing created new cheating avenues, including remote “ringer” test-takers and the recording of live test content, which becomes a huge problem when LSAC needs to reuse questions.
He also explains the behind-the-scenes logistics most students never think about. Online testing windows forced LSAC to create far more test forms per administration, and compromised forms made that workload even worse, which is part of why in-person testing relieves pressure.
From the student perspective, his takeaway is simple: the move is mostly an inconvenience, not a game-changer. You may have to travel to a Prometric center, and he points out that some states have very limited site availability, which could create scheduling bottlenecks.
Next, Ben switches to the NALP Class of 2024 National Summary Report, using it to cut through internet myths about lawyer pay. He emphasizes that medians matter more than averages, because Big Law salaries skew the “mean” upward and can mislead people about typical outcomes.
He walks through how salaries differ by job type, showing the big gap between private sector outcomes and public-interest, clerkship, and government roles. The theme is clarity: you cannot “choose” a high-paying track just by wanting it, and career plans should be based on real employment data, not TikTok and Reddit vibes.
He closes with a practical LSAT strategy Q and A: how to review questions you got wrong. His core message is that review quality beats volume, and that copying stems and making performative wrong-answer journals can distract from the only thing that matters: understanding exactly why the right answer is right and the wrong answers are wrong.