C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size Forum

[$alty]

June 2013 was down 5% from June 2012.

October 2013 was down 11% from October 2012.

The reduction of first-time test takers by 13% in Oct 2013 is an even better metric. Although at this point we're splitting hairs--the number of applicants is going to continue its precipitous decline.

Which begs the question: should those who are able to wait another cycle do so? Why would it be advisable to apply before this downturn bottoms if one isn't otherwise compelled to?

Schools will try to adjust to the new normal but cutting class size only goes so far. A bigger threat would be changes to the LSAT that remove the 99th percentile granularity. This would devastate splitters but won't happen overnight.

wrong use of "begs the question," but i don't think waiting to apply makes sense unless you have numbers that will suddenly open doors (168-170?) if certain medians drop a point or two. if you've maxed out your lsat potential and can put together a good app, i think it's not worth forfeiting a year of being a lawyer.

edit: my beg the question point was meant to be more informative than it sounds now looking at it again

[McAvoy]

June 2013 was down 5% from June 2012.

October 2013 was down 11% from October 2012.

The reduction of first-time test takers by 13% in Oct 2013 is an even better metric. Although at this point we're splitting hairs--the number of applicants is going to continue its precipitous decline.

Which begs the question: should those who are able to wait another cycle do so? Why would it be advisable to apply before this downturn bottoms if one isn't otherwise compelled to?

Schools will try to adjust to the new normal but cutting class size only goes so far. A bigger threat would be changes to the LSAT that remove the 99th percentile granularity. This would devastate splitters but won't happen overnight.

wrong use of "begs the question,"

Don't tell people this! It's great for profiling.

[pancho]

Also: http://begthequestion.info/

Thanks!

[pancho]

The reduction of first-time test takers by 13% in Oct 2013 is an even better metric. Although at this point we're splitting hairs--the number of applicants is going to continue its precipitous decline.

Which begs the question: should those who are able to wait another cycle do so? Why would it be advisable to apply before this downturn bottoms if one isn't otherwise compelled to?

Schools will try to adjust to the new normal but cutting class size only goes so far. A bigger threat would be changes to the LSAT that remove the 99th percentile granularity. This would devastate splitters but won't happen overnight.

wrong use of "begs the question,"

Don't tell people this! It's great for profiling.

Insecure much?

[pancho]

i don't think waiting to apply makes sense unless you have numbers that will suddenly open doors (168-170?) if certain medians drop a point or two. if you've maxed out your lsat potential and can put together a good app, i think it's not worth forfeiting a year of being a lawyer.

More along the lines of whether 177+ applicants will be treated differently in the c/o 2018 cycle than that of c/o 2017.

ETA: I shouldn't be so exclusive. Any 99th-percentile applicant will probably fare better in 2018 than 2017. Look at the numbers on Spivey's blog.

[McAvoy]

-

[pancho]

wrong use of "begs the question,"

Don't tell people this! It's great for profiling.

Insecure much?

It's kind of like "for all intensive purposes." You just let it go.[/quote]

No, I appreciated the original correction. If you "just let it go" you are making the conscious choice to be unhelpful. Granted, there are some situations in which it is best to refrain from giving such advice but this isn't one of them.

[McAvoy]

-

[pancho]

Well I apologize, then. It's so frequently used to mean "raise the question," even by authorities, that it's not really "wrong" to use it like that. It's more of a way for philosophy students to snicker to themselves.

Thanks for the apology.

[RetakeFrenzy]

Any chance of Cornell falling out of the T14? Median GPA and median LSAT is considerably lower than anyone else's.

No. It's an Ivy League school with solid prestige and good employment stats. Who would overtake them? UT? UCLA? Vandy?

lolno

They don't have to be replaced. They could tie for 15 with one of those schools.

I don't see any of the 14 falling anytime soon but wouldn't G be the most likely? Medians aren't everything.

Right. Cornell's medians are 1 LSAT point and .05 GPA lower than Michigan's. That's not really considerably lower.

Then that's only one component of USNWR. It's probably the easiest component for the schools to influence, but reputation scores are more important and aren't going to change from year to year.

Cornell was still ranked above GULC in the latest rankings. That was when GULC's medians were 169/3.73, Vandy's were 169/3.7, and Cornell's were 167/3.68. The fact that Cornell still ranked above GULC in that situation suggests its relatively higher scores in other areas such as reputation. Now GULC's and Vandy's LSAT medians went down and Cornell's remained stable. Cornell also introduced ED as a new tool for admissions this year, so I'm sure it will hold the 167 for another cycle.

So there's really no chance of Cornell falling out of T-14 anytime soon. And as has been pointed out, employers wouldn't notice if they did.

Well said, Lavitz

[DoveBodyWash]

Cornell's not going anywhere. I think G is still relatively safe too. Reputation scores are kind of set in stone barring some major change of faculty or something. The real question is, how much money is WUSTL gonna drop this year to maintain the 166?

[cannibal ox]

Everyone in that group right below the t14 until the mid 20s dropped (except WUSTL), so I wonder if any of those schools will take the same approach and throw money around to maintain their median.

[DoveBodyWash]

Everyone in that group right below the t14 until the mid 20s dropped (except WUSTL), so I wonder if any of those schools will take the same approach and throw money around to maintain their median.

i don't know if that's gonna be possible for them, even for WUSTL. Our soon-to-be-former Dean debriefed SBA about some stuff and hinted that WUSTL wouldn't be able to continue giving out the same kind of money as last cycle and that around 175 law schools are in serious deficit.

[t-14orbust]

So...has Penn decided to just not release its medians or what?

[bouleversement]

around 175 law schools are in serious deficit.

Interesting.

So...has Penn decided to just not release its medians or what?

and NYU. It's also curious that SLS is holding back the 25th/75ths.

[linkx13]

So...has Penn decided to just not release its medians or what?

They have to release it, but I don't think until March. Is that correct?

[McGruff]

So...has Penn decided to just not release its medians or what?

They have to release it, but I don't think until March. Is that correct?

As far as releasing them to the public, I'm not sure they ever have to, but we'll find out when the USNWR rankings come out next year(next fall? this year they came out in September iirc). The 2015 rankings, coming out in 2014, with data for the c/o 2016.

[Nova]

Usnwr publishes the medians in the spring

[McGruff]

Usnwr publishes the medians in the spring

I see. Have schools ever held out and not released them on their own before?

[linkx13]

Usnwr publishes the medians in the spring

I see. Have schools ever held out and not released them on their own before?

From what I understand, this is the first year they have done so. Last year they released them way earlier. I've even seen schools PRINT materials that have 2012 numbers instead of 2013 numbers.

Good sign for this cycle : )

[Happy Gilmore]

Usnwr publishes the medians in the spring

I see. Have schools ever held out and not released them on their own before?

From what I understand, this is the first year they have done so. Last year they released them way earlier. I've even seen schools PRINT materials that have 2012 numbers instead of 2013 numbers.

Good sign for this cycle : )

Does anyone think that it is good in theory for schools to avoid releasing medians? "Maybe if everyone applies thinking we have a 170 but then we tell them we only had a 169 once they are admitted?" Honestly I think it would have been better to release it when everyone else was taking heat for dropping too. Now if they release in Dec/Jan/Feb they will be the only ones that released that week so all the focus will be on their drop. Furthermore, dropping to a 169 is such an insignificant difference in intellectual ability that it really doesn't matter. You have what you have just own up to it and release it.

Of course I am just assuming they are not releasing it because they are ashamed of the drop.

[cannibal ox]

I imagine releasing a lower median would mean an increase in the number of applicants who have scores at, or just below, that median. I don't understand why they wouldn't want an increase in the number of applicants. It's got to be shame.

[linkx13]

I imagine releasing a lower median would mean an increase in the number of applicants who have scores at, or just below, that median. I don't understand why they wouldn't want an increase in the number of applicants. It's got to be shame.

Avoiding perceived loss in status?

[2014]

I imagine releasing a lower median would mean an increase in the number of applicants who have scores at, or just below, that median. I don't understand why they wouldn't want an increase in the number of applicants. It's got to be shame.

If Penn dropped to 169 and realistically is going to be stuck there after this year too, they might want 169 applicants to still think they are 170 so that when those people are accepted they are more inclined to accept (probably at sticker) thinking Penn was a reach instead of mentally thinking it's a target and holding out for scholarship money.

I think the above is plausible, but also it might just be that their admissions just doesn't care to release it because the information doesn't actually influence apps received or yield in a meaningful way.

[linkx13]

I imagine releasing a lower median would mean an increase in the number of applicants who have scores at, or just below, that median. I don't understand why they wouldn't want an increase in the number of applicants. It's got to be shame.

If Penn dropped to 169 and realistically is going to be stuck there after this year too, they might want 169 applicants to still think they are 170 so that when those people are accepted they are more inclined to accept (probably at sticker) thinking Penn was a reach instead of mentally thinking it's a target and holding out for scholarship money.

I think the above is plausible, but also it might just be that their admissions just doesn't care to release it because the information doesn't actually influence apps received or yield in a meaningful way.

Hear you, but if that were true it still wouldn't explain why they did it up till last year