Top Law Schools

Easier? The same? Harder?

It looks like the number of people taking the LSAT is down from an all-time high of a year ago. Will schools recognize this before the cycle starts, or perhaps reject people they would have accepted later if this cycle turns out to be weaker?

Interested to hear other's thoughts.

It looks like the number of people taking the LSAT is down from an all-time high of a year ago.

The number of LSATs taken have become very hard to compare because more and more people are retaking. It'd be better to compare first-time test takers.

If you check Google Trends for terms associate with law school (like "law school," "lsat," "lsac," etc), you'll notice that these terms have tracked the number of applicants in the past fairly well. So far this year, much less people seem interested in law school-associated terms, suggesting that this upcoming cycle there will be much fewer applicants.

Harder. Economy hasn't improved

futurelawyer413 wrote:Harder. Economy hasn't improved

Recent evidence based on the total number of apps to most schools indicates the contrary

scammedhard wrote:

It looks like the number of people taking the LSAT is down from an all-time high of a year ago.

The number of LSATs taken have become very hard to compare because more and more people are retaking. It'd be better to compare first-time test takers.

If you check Google Trends for terms associate with law school (like "law school," "lsat," "lsac," etc), you'll notice that these terms have tracked the number of applicants in the past fairly well. So far this year, much less people seem interested in law school-associated terms, suggesting that this upcoming cycle there will be much fewer applicants.

If this were true then how much easier could it be to get into T14 schools? Would those schools not be affected as much as lower schools? Could a splitter with high LSAT have more of a shot at higher T14 because schools will want to keep their LSAT medians?

I'm not certain a correlation can be made between total number of apps (or even total number of people taking LSAT) and easier/harder admission cycle. Just because there is a lower number of total apps or LSAT takers does not mean/imply that the quality of applicants/competition will also decrease

splitster1221 wrote:If this were true then how much easier could it be to get into T14 schools? Would those schools not be affected as much as lower schools? Could a splitter with high LSAT have more of a shot at higher T14 because schools will want to keep their LSAT medians?

All things being equal, lower numbers of applicants should make the schools less selective... but all things are not equal from cycle to cycle. For instance, retakes are becoming more and more popular, scores keep improving, and thus pushing the median LSATs for the schools. Then, there is issue that law schools might reduce their class sizes, and there is some evidence out there that some have started t do just that.

The Fall 2010 cycle had 87500 applicants, and there have been rumors (from LSAC) that the Fall 2011 cycle is about 11% smaller (no official data yet). How did that affect LSATs and/or other selectivity criteria? Well, we'll just have to wait until schools release the 2011 cycle data in about 6 months.

futurelawyer413 wrote:I'm not certain a correlation can be made between total number of apps (or even total number of people taking LSAT) and easier/harder admission cycle. Just because there is a lower number of total apps or LSAT takers does not mean/imply that the quality of applicants/competition will also decrease

Fortunately there is data for that:

(see the Table in page 4)

http://lsac.org/LSACResources/Publicati ... EC2010.pdf

The answer is that LSAT distributions are the same regardless of the number of applicants (at least when comparing 2010 v 2011); therefore, the fewer the applicants, the fewer the number of "quality applicants," and schools need to be less picky to fill their seats (all other things being equal).

scammedhard wrote: http://lsac.org/LSACResources/Publicati ... EC2010.pdf

Fall 2010 for 165-169 scorers: 3513
Fall 2011 for 165-169 scorers: 3176*
337 fewer applicants with this score range.*

Fall 2010 for 170-174 scorers: 1912
Fall 2011 for 170-174 scorers: 1861*
51 fewer applicants with this score range.*

Fall 2010 for 175-180 scorers: 567
Fall 2011 for 175-180 scorers: 435*
132 fewer applicants with this score range.*

*As of 12/3/10

If the trend continues to be a falling number of test takers and that trend indicates a smaller number of applicants, this cycle might actually see some schools with lower medians and some applicants having an easier time being accepted. Of course schools could also reduce the number of seats instead. Or some combination thereof.

Still waiting until they release the number of June LSAT takers.
Last year they released it circa July 12-14th.
http://www.lsac.org/LSACResources/Data/ ... stered.asp

Edit: typo
Edit: disclaimer
Edit: grammar

scammedhard wrote:

futurelawyer413 wrote:I'm not certain a correlation can be made between total number of apps (or even total number of people taking LSAT) and easier/harder admission cycle. Just because there is a lower number of total apps or LSAT takers does not mean/imply that the quality of applicants/competition will also decrease

Fortunately there is data for that:

(see the Table in page 4)

http://lsac.org/LSACResources/Publicati ... EC2010.pdf

The answer is that LSAT distributions are the same regardless of the number of applicants (at least when comparing 2010 v 2011); therefore, the fewer the applicants, the fewer the number of "quality applicants," and schools need to be less picky to fill their seats (all other things being equal).

thx for the link! you make a good point at the end, "all other things being equal" lol

KevinP wrote:

scammedhard wrote: http://lsac.org/LSACResources/Publicati ... EC2010.pdf

Fall 2010 for 165-169 scorers: 3513
Fall 2011 for 165-169 scorers: 3176
337 less applicants with this score range.

Fall 2010 for 170-174 scorers: 1912
Fall 2011 for 170-174 scorers: 1861
51 less applicants with this score range.

Fall 2010 for 175-180 scorers: 567
Fall 2011 for 175-180 scorers: 435
132 less applicants with this score range.

Lets play spot the flaw(s)

Patriot1208 wrote: Lets play spot the flaw(s)

I added a disclaimer that the data might not take into account some applicants who took the Dec/Feb LSAT. Otherwise, enlighten me.

This cycle be hardest one ever.

Hey, if you have a crystal ball that tells you the future, don't leave TLS out of the loop, I'd rather win the Lottery than go biglaw...

From what I've heard though, admissions have been getting a little easier. My guess is more people are just jumping on the LS bandwagon to ride out the economy instead of having a definite passion for it. These ppl would tend to make up the mid-range LSAT scores. Anyone have any stats on scores in the 150's? Curious to see if those #'s have changed. To answer your real question though...don't count on others failing for you to do well. Just work your ass off and you'll be good to go.

This year cycle be hardest evar.

EDIT: GODDAMMIT BOO

paratactical wrote:This year cycle be hardest evar.

EDIT: GODDAMMIT BOO

KevinP wrote:

Patriot1208 wrote: Lets play spot the flaw(s)

I added a disclaimer that the data might not take into account some applicants who took the Dec/Feb LSAT. Otherwise, enlighten me.

Many people take the lsat who don't apply, retakes are more likely to happen from the lower scoring groups, quite a few take it over a year before applying, etc.

Patriot1208 wrote: Many people take the lsat who don't apply, retakes are more likely to happen from the lower scoring groups, quite a few take it over a year before applying, etc.

Well, that would be true if I was comparing the number of test takers. However, the LSAC data I'm referencing is about the number of Fall 2010/2011 applicants, not test takers.

--ImageRemoved--

Source: http://lsac.org/LSACResources/Publicati ... EC2010.pdf

Patriot1208 wrote:

KevinP wrote:

Patriot1208 wrote: Lets play spot the flaw(s)

I added a disclaimer that the data might not take into account some applicants who took the Dec/Feb LSAT. Otherwise, enlighten me.

Many people take the lsat who don't apply, retakes are more likely to happen from the lower scoring groups, quite a few take it over a year before applying, etc.

None of these affect the underlying argument though, unless you can show a change in these factors. (Edit, what KevinP said.)

To be entirely speculative though, I'm inclined to agree that the upcoming cycle will be generally easier. Will it be an even distribution though? I think the medians will drop less at T1 and T2 schools than at T14 and TTT. (Note the disproportionate drop in 175+ applicants.) The continuing struggle of the economy should make people more debt-averse, causing more people to attend lower-ranked schools in exchange for scholarship money or perhaps stronger regional job placement. At the other end, hopefully the debt aversion and increased awareness of the oversupply of lawyers will drive people from the TTTs, but that may just be wishful thinking.

KevinP wrote:

Patriot1208 wrote: Many people take the lsat who don't apply, retakes are more likely to happen from the lower scoring groups, quite a few take it over a year before applying, etc.

Well, that would be true if I was comparing the number of test takers. However, the LSAC data I'm referencing is about the number of Fall 2010/2011 applicants, not test takers.

--ImageRemoved--

Source: http://lsac.org/LSACResources/Publicati ... EC2010.pdf

Gotcha, misread what you were trying to say then

Samara wrote: To be entirely speculative though, I'm inclined to agree that the upcoming cycle will be generally easier. Will it be an even distribution though? I think the medians will drop less at T1 and T2 schools than at T14 and TTT. (Note the disproportionate drop in 175+ applicants.) The continuing struggle of the economy should make people more debt-averse, causing more people to attend lower-ranked schools in exchange for scholarship money or perhaps stronger regional job placement. At the other end, hopefully the debt aversion and increased awareness of the oversupply of lawyers will drive people from the TTTs, but that may just be wishful thinking.

Your speculation sounds pretty reasonable. Hopefully we'll get some data soon about GPA/LSAT medians for the 2011 cycle.

Patriot1208 wrote: Gotcha, misread what you were trying to say then

No worries bro. I've been doing LR question-types long enough that I'd get called out on TLS if I tried to extrapolate from data.

Patriot1208 wrote:

KevinP wrote:

scammedhard wrote: http://lsac.org/LSACResources/Publicati ... EC2010.pdf

Fall 2010 for 165-169 scorers: 3513
Fall 2011 for 165-169 scorers: 3176
337 less applicants with this score range.

Fall 2010 for 170-174 scorers: 1912
Fall 2011 for 170-174 scorers: 1861
51 less applicants with this score range.

Fall 2010 for 175-180 scorers: 567
Fall 2011 for 175-180 scorers: 435
132 less applicants with this score range.

Lets play spot the flaw(s)

The "flaw" that leapt out at me is less v. fewer.

rinkrat19 wrote: The "flaw" that leapt out at me is less v. fewer.

Fail on my part. Fixed via edit.