First, to be clear: I will not be arguing that test takers who are blind or visually impaired — like Angelo Binno, whose settlement with the Law School Admissions Council may eventually force LSAC to change or remove the Logic Games section altogether — should have to take the Logic Games section on the LSAT. I am neither a medical expert nor a psychometrician, but after working with an untold number of students I feel confident saying that visual aids like set-ups and scenarios make these games more manageable for basically everyone. It seems manifestly unfair that test takers who cannot use such visual aids should be forced to take the section, and I applaud Binno’s fight to level the LSAT’s playing field.
Since the 80s, LSAT test writers have forced test takers to battle some difficult Logic Games: circles, dinosaurs, buildings … the test writers have given us plenty to be shocked about. This week, some pretty startling news came out, giving test writers a constraint more difficult than anything seen on a test: within four years, the Logic Games section, as we know it, may be gone.