The
LSRP Battery measures cognitive skills in critical thinking and
the motivation to engage in learning relevant to success in legal
education and the successful practice of Law.
Inductive Reasoning in professional contexts
Deductive Reasoning in professional contexts
Legal Studies Confidence
Mental Focus
Intellectual Integrity
Scholarly Rigor
Communicative Confidence
Analyticity
Cognitive Maturity
Learning/Practice Style #1: "Self-Focused Competitor"
Learning/Practice Style #2: "Expressive Collaborator"
Social Desirability (A measure response-bias)
The
LSRP Battery supports essential educational and employment activities:
Applicant
admissions evaluation
Entering student individual and group diagnostics
Targeted student academic and career advisement
Pretest - posttest program evaluation
Student learning outcomes assessment
Exit measure learning benchmarking
Institutional accreditation
Research relating to reasoning skills and learning dispositions
Employment portfolio augmentation
Evaluation of candidates for internships and employment
Time:
75 minutes. Or the instrument an be given untimed.
Content
Knowledge:Attitudinal items are expressed in readily understandable
non-technical language. Reasoning skills questions are set in professional,
educational, or common legal workplace contexts. No specialized legal
knowledge is required. Items supply the necessary content for the
applications of reasoning skills. Those taking the LSRP Battery are
neither advantaged nor disadvantaged based on specific subject-matter
factual content knowledge or specialized experience.
Reliability
and Validity: The LSRP Battery was developed through extensive
research and field testing, the examination of contextual elements
in legal education and professional practice, and in consultation
with legal educators and practitioners. Consistent with Insight Assessments
reputation for excellence in the development of nationally and internationally
used reasoning and critical thinking assessment tools, the LSRP Battery
is a reliable measure of the attitudes and skills of the target population
practicing professionals and students in legal profession preparation
programs.
For
Use in: Legal education and professional practice at the post-baccaluareate
and advanced baccalaureate levels.
Law
Student Reasoning Profile - LSRP Battery
Twelve Scales Descriptions
The
first two scales measure core critical thinking and problem solving
skills in deductive and inductive reasoning contexts. Subjects who
score high demonstrate strong cognitive skills in analysis, inference,
evaluation, and reading comprehension.
1) INDUCTIVE REASONING
Relevance for legal education and professional practice: In addition
to being the fundamental basis upon which most good judgments are
made in a wide variety of human interactions, inductive reasoning
is used specifically in the discovery and application of precedents
as in "This situation is sufficiently similar to such-and-such
a prior case in which the final ruling was thus-and-so." The
skillful use of inductive reasoning is essential to forming strong
and persuasive arguments which convincingly link physical evidence,
theory, and testimony. Analogical inference, the comparison of the
fundamentals of one situation to another, is a paradigmatic form of
inductive reasoning.
Inductive
reasoning occurs when relying on the evidence at hand to infer with
reasonable certainty that a given conclusion is very probably true.
For example, if we know that the vast majority of people who smoke,
as compared to those who do not smoke, suffer serious health problems,
we might reasonably conclude by inductive reasoning that smoking is
very likely to be hazardous to one's health. Scientists use inductive
methods, such as experimentation; and they use inductive tools, such
as inferential statistics. Predictions based on generalizations from
past experience are made using inductive reasoning. Skill at developing
good inductive arguments dispels reasonable doubt by providing high
levels of confidence in one's inductively warranted conclusions.
2)
DEDUCTIVE REASONING
Relevance for legal education and professional practice: Deductive
reasoning is essential for determining whether conditions generally
stated - as in regulations, codes, legislation, or contracts - apply
or do not apply to specific situations. Deductive reasoning is critical
for correctly and convincingly inferring the implications of a given
set of hypothetical conditions, for example, as in "If, as you
say, you were not at the scene of the crime, how is it that your DNA
come to be found at that location?" Contracts prescribing responsibilities
and obligations in tightly worded language rely heavily on deductive
reasoning. Deductive reasoning permits the generation of knowledge
drawn inferentially from regulations and definitions rigorously presented.
Deductive
reasoning occurs when no matter what the circumstances, it is impossible
that one's conclusion can be false if each of one's premises are true.
For example, the income tax code determines the necessary and sufficient
conditions under which one person may be claimed by another as a dependent
for income tax purposes. Skill in deductive reasoning enables a person
to infer correctly whether or not those prescriptive conditions apply
or do not apply to a given case.
The
following nine scales evaluate dispositional attributes which include
a subjects values, opinions, inclinations, and attitudes.
3)
LEGAL STUDIES CONFIDENCE
This scale provides a global score in regard to students' confidence
in their own readiness to handle the stress, competitiveness, workload,
new vocabulary, instructional methods, and related academic complexities
of study in law school. High scores are expected of students who have
strong self efficacy about their ability to succeed in Law School.
Perceived efficacy does not indicate assurance of success, but does
position the student to approach Law School confidently. Low scores
on this scale should result in an advising session to assess confidence
about transition to Law School study.
4) MENTAL FOCUS
The Mental Focus scale measures the disposition toward being diligent,
systematic, task-oriented, organized, and clear-headed. High scorers
feel at ease when engaging a problem and feel systematic and confident
in their ability to complete tasks in a timely way. They feel focused
and clear-headed. Low scores on this measure can be used to identify
students who may benefit from advising that emphasizes time management
and study skills.
5)
INTELLECTUAL INTEGRITY
The Intellectual Integrity scale measures the disposition of striving
for honesty when evaluating differing viewpoints for the sake of learning
the truth or reaching the best decision. High scorers value the fair-minded
pursuit of best knowledge, and value the opportunity to hear people's
point of view. Low scores are indicative of a significant failure
to express ethical values and scholarly integrity typical of the ethical
professional or graduate student.
6)
SCHOLARLY RIGOR
The Scholarly Rigor scale measures the disposition to work hard to
interpret and achieve an in depth understanding of complex or abstract
material. High scorers are not put off by the need to read a difficult
text or to analyze complicated situations or problems. They express
strong intellectual curiosity. Low scores are indicative of a significant
failure to express the disposition to comprehensively seek new knowledge
and examine new content in depth.
7)
COMMUNICATIVE CONFIDENCE
The Communicative Confidence scale measures confidence in oral
and written communication and assesses the subject's attitudes about
technical writing. High scores exhibit confidence in their ability
to lead groups through the presentation of oral argument, to read
well, and to write effectively about their opinions. Low scores are
indicative of communication skills that will not likely support the
work of a law professional and should result in remedial programming
for students who are otherwise judged as able to continue in Law School
study.
8)
ANALYTICITY
This scale measures the disposition to approach problems analytically,
and one's valuation of clarity and accurate interpretation of complex
problem situations. High scores are associated with strong analytical
habits of mind. Low scores are of great concern in that they are the
self report of discomfort in the face of complicated problems that
require analytical thought.
9) COGNITIVE MATURITY
This scale assesses cognitive developmental level. High scores indicate
an appreciation of the existence of multiple potential perspectives
on best knowledge and wisdom when making judgments. Low scores are
of concern in that they are indicative of perspectives about knowledge
and truth that too often abdicate the power of judgment when uncertainty
is high and a nuanced perspective would be both more helpful for ascertaining
appropriate action and expected of professionals in responsible leadership
positions.
10)
LEARNING/PRACTICE STYLE #1: "SELF-FOCUSED COMPETITOR"
A person with a high score on Style Scale #1 might be characterized
as a highly competitive and aggressive loner. Which range of scores
better equips a person for success in a given aspect of the legal
profession depends on the character of the professional practice.
A high score on suggest a temperament better suited to highly competitive
practice settings such as working as a hard driving litigator rather
than perhaps as an amiable arbitrator. An individual entering Law
School with a midrange score on Style Scale #1 may be best positioned
for the greatest range of potential future areas of success in Law
School and in professional practice. A midrange score on Style Scale
#1 suggests certain advantages for law students enrolling in schools
and courses which require students to approach questions open-mindedly
and collaboratively and yet with a certain competitive determination.
11)
LEARNING/PRACTICE STYLE #2: "EXPRESSIVE COLLABORATOR"
An individual with a high score on Style Scale #2 might be characterized
as glib, social, high-verbal in class and with peer group. A person
with a high score on Style Scale #2 may be challenged in learning
situations and professional practice settings which demand a more
thoughtful, individualized approach to problem-solving, and the demonstration
of a more independent and focused effort from each individual. A person
with a high score on Style Scale #2 may find greater success in highly
social professional practice settings where building and maintaining
trusted collaborative relationships is the key to success. Note: high
scores on Style #2 are of particular concern in students who also
have midrange to low range scores on the LSRP REASONING SKILLS and
SCHOLARLY RIGOR scales.
Because some may attempt to respond to attitudinal
items by "telling them what they want to hear," the twelfth
LSRP Battery scale establishes a correction factor by measuring for
for what is psychometricians describe as Social Desirability Response
Bias
12)
SOCIAL DESIRABILITY RESPONSE BIAS
Embedded among the attitudinal items on the LSRP is a measure
of the tendency to present oneself to others as having a near perfect
nature, even when one must lie or exaggerate one's positive characteristics.
High scores on this measure indicate social desirability response
bias on attitudinal measures. If present, this, in turn, can be offset
by statistical adjustments to the other attitudinal scale scores.
