C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

(Applications Advice, Letters of Recommendation . . . )
User avatar
Nova
Posts: 9116
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2012 8:55 pm

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby Nova » Fri Sep 20, 2013 2:44 pm

If I don't get a legal job, they should hire me to game the fuck out of their medians.

User avatar
danquayle
Posts: 1108
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 2:12 am

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby danquayle » Fri Sep 20, 2013 2:53 pm

Tiago Splitter wrote:
UVAIce wrote:Also, Minnesota was pretty open about the fact that the school could not sustain the school with small class sizes such as the class of 2015. They openly stated they were dropping the quality of the student body to fill up the class rooms. Well, they succeeded in significantly dropping the quality of the student body and enrolling one more student compared to last year. Not looking good for the future of the law school.

Haha wow. Minnesota went straight Illinois but without the cheating.


A little surprised by this. I always considered Minnesota's relative isolation from other markets and relatively strong economy to differentiate it from other law schools. I assumed most people who went to UM Law were from Minnesota and wanted to work in Minnesota, and thus they're not really competing as much with other similarly ranked law schools for the same candidate pool.

Guess I was wrong.

User avatar
UVAIce
Posts: 442
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 3:10 pm

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby UVAIce » Fri Sep 20, 2013 3:00 pm

danquayle wrote:
Tiago Splitter wrote:
UVAIce wrote:Also, Minnesota was pretty open about the fact that the school could not sustain the school with small class sizes such as the class of 2015. They openly stated they were dropping the quality of the student body to fill up the class rooms. Well, they succeeded in significantly dropping the quality of the student body and enrolling one more student compared to last year. Not looking good for the future of the law school.

Haha wow. Minnesota went straight Illinois but without the cheating.


A little surprised by this. I always considered Minnesota's relative isolation from other markets and relatively strong economy to differentiate it from other law schools. I assumed most people who went to UM Law were from Minnesota and wanted to work in Minnesota, and thus they're not really competing as much with other similarly ranked law schools for the same candidate pool.

Guess I was wrong.


Less than 40% of the class is composed of Minnesota residents. And our economy may be strong, but that doesn't mean that legal hiring is up in Minnesota.

zman
Posts: 500
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 9:31 am

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby zman » Fri Sep 20, 2013 3:03 pm

They still have high GPAs, how do you know for sure the quality is that much worse. It probably isn't. The gap is probably minimal.

User avatar
Nova
Posts: 9116
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2012 8:55 pm

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby Nova » Fri Sep 20, 2013 3:05 pm

25th dropped 2 points. Median dropped 3. That's significant

User avatar
jbagelboy
Posts: 9647
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 7:57 pm

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby jbagelboy » Fri Sep 20, 2013 3:08 pm

We knew they were hit bad when they started offering $$$ to 3.0/165

User avatar
UVAIce
Posts: 442
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 3:10 pm

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby UVAIce » Fri Sep 20, 2013 3:10 pm

I have some friends at William Mitchell who really wish they had taken a year or two off right now.

BigZuck
Posts: 10872
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2012 9:53 am

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby BigZuck » Fri Sep 20, 2013 3:17 pm

I wouldn't be shocked if UT had a Minnesota-esque median drop. Not as bad but a point or two I could definitely see.

User avatar
UVAIce
Posts: 442
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 3:10 pm

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby UVAIce » Fri Sep 20, 2013 3:18 pm

I was actually just thinking of something. These numbers are really unprecedented when you consider that schools need only report the highest LSAT score. Historically that was not the practice. So while schools like Minnesota used to have medians in the neighborhood of 165 back around 2000, they were reporting those numbers under a more rigorous accounting practice.

Tl;dr: Shit is bad.

User avatar
jingosaur
Posts: 2218
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2013 10:33 am

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby jingosaur » Fri Sep 20, 2013 3:36 pm

UVAIce wrote:I was actually just thinking of something. These numbers are really unprecedented when you consider that schools need only report the highest LSAT score. Historically that was not the practice. So while schools like Minnesota used to have medians in the neighborhood of 165 back around 2000, they were reporting those numbers under a more rigorous accounting practice.

Tl;dr: Shit is bad.


That's kind of true, but you also have to take into account that fewer people retook the LSAT back then. Retakes are now much more likely because of the importance of the highest LSAT score. For example, I'm retaking a 169->170. If I get a 180 on try 3, my average is only 173 which really wouldn't be worth a 3rd take for my goals. My target score, 174, gives me a 171 average. But with schools taking the highest score, it would be stupid for me to not retake.

Either way, things are bad for law schools right now. And in response to a previous post, I think that A LOT of UM students go to UM because it's top 20 and they really want to go to a top 20 law school hence the 60%+ out of state number.

User avatar
jbagelboy
Posts: 9647
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 7:57 pm

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby jbagelboy » Fri Sep 20, 2013 3:46 pm

jingosaur wrote:
UVAIce wrote:I was actually just thinking of something. These numbers are really unprecedented when you consider that schools need only report the highest LSAT score. Historically that was not the practice. So while schools like Minnesota used to have medians in the neighborhood of 165 back around 2000, they were reporting those numbers under a more rigorous accounting practice.

Tl;dr: Shit is bad.


That's kind of true, but you also have to take into account that fewer people retook the LSAT back then. Retakes are now much more likely because of the importance of the highest LSAT score. For example, I'm retaking a 169->170. If I get a 180 on try 3, my average is only 173 which really wouldn't be worth a 3rd take for my goals. My target score, 174, gives me a 171 average. But with schools taking the highest score, it would be stupid for me to not retake.

Either way, things are bad for law schools right now. And in response to a previous post, I think that A LOT of UM students go to UM because it's top 20 and they really want to go to a top 20 law school hence the 60%+ out of state number.


UMN can only hold the "top 20" thing with a 3-pt LSAT drop if UW, GWU, Emory, WashU, and Notre Dame all drop too.. Which they probably will except WUStl, lol

User avatar
Monochromatic Oeuvre
Posts: 1929
Joined: Fri May 10, 2013 9:40 pm

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby Monochromatic Oeuvre » Fri Sep 20, 2013 3:50 pm

UVAIce wrote:I was actually just thinking of something. These numbers are really unprecedented when you consider that schools need only report the highest LSAT score. Historically that was not the practice. So while schools like Minnesota used to have medians in the neighborhood of 165 back around 2000, they were reporting those numbers under a more rigorous accounting practice.

Tl;dr: Shit is bad.


LSAT medians are still way higher than they used to be a decade or more ago. In 1993, the first year of the 180 scale, Yale was the only school that had a 170 median. The difference between average and highest-reporting was only 0.43 points. The rise wasn't as high for T1 schools as for T14, but I very much doubt these numbers are unprecedented for UMN.

Even as standards have fallen from 2010, this past cycle was still probably one of the six or seven most difficult in T14 history. It was only fifteen years ago that 3.5/165 non-URMs were better than coin flips at UVA.

User avatar
altoid99
Posts: 249
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 12:04 am

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby altoid99 » Fri Sep 20, 2013 3:51 pm

jbagelboy wrote:
jingosaur wrote:
UVAIce wrote:I was actually just thinking of something. These numbers are really unprecedented when you consider that schools need only report the highest LSAT score. Historically that was not the practice. So while schools like Minnesota used to have medians in the neighborhood of 165 back around 2000, they were reporting those numbers under a more rigorous accounting practice.

Tl;dr: Shit is bad.


That's kind of true, but you also have to take into account that fewer people retook the LSAT back then. Retakes are now much more likely because of the importance of the highest LSAT score. For example, I'm retaking a 169->170. If I get a 180 on try 3, my average is only 173 which really wouldn't be worth a 3rd take for my goals. My target score, 174, gives me a 171 average. But with schools taking the highest score, it would be stupid for me to not retake.

Either way, things are bad for law schools right now. And in response to a previous post, I think that A LOT of UM students go to UM because it's top 20 and they really want to go to a top 20 law school hence the 60%+ out of state number.


UMN can only hold the "top 20" thing with a 3-pt LSAT drop if UW, GWU, Emory, WashU, and Notre Dame all drop too.. Which they probably will except WUStl, lol


I don't get how GW could possibly have only fallen to 166, especially with a significant increase in class size. Are we sure those numbers are accurate?!?

User avatar
Monochromatic Oeuvre
Posts: 1929
Joined: Fri May 10, 2013 9:40 pm

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby Monochromatic Oeuvre » Fri Sep 20, 2013 4:01 pm

altoid99 wrote:I don't get how GW could possibly have only fallen to 166, especially with a significant increase in class size. Are we sure those numbers are accurate?!?


Not listed anywhere, and it doesn't make any sense. Only falling one with an 80 person class size increase would be a staggering accomplishment.

User avatar
Tiago Splitter
Posts: 15508
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 1:20 am

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby Tiago Splitter » Fri Sep 20, 2013 4:14 pm

Monochromatic Oeuvre wrote:
altoid99 wrote:I don't get how GW could possibly have only fallen to 166, especially with a significant increase in class size. Are we sure those numbers are accurate?!?


Not listed anywhere, and it doesn't make any sense. Only falling one with an 80 person class size increase would be a staggering accomplishment.

Would be surprising but they abandoned even the pretext of a GPA floor last year, letting in as low as a 2.3 if it was paired with a 167 or better. They also went pretty deep with the 166's.

OTOH, Minnesota's LSN graph wouldn't make anyone think they'd come in at a 164, so who knows.

User avatar
cannibal ox
Posts: 2935
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2013 11:49 pm

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby cannibal ox » Fri Sep 20, 2013 4:17 pm

This is the GW page with incoming class stats from last year. I haven't found anything from this year. I also haven't looked back through this thread to see when GW's 166 was posted (if it was).

User avatar
jingosaur
Posts: 2218
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2013 10:33 am

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby jingosaur » Fri Sep 20, 2013 4:20 pm

Yeah, GW literally took ANYONE with a 166.

@Mono, not sure if you know this, but were the stats so much lower before because there were fewer candidates with good scores or because law schools just didn't care as much about the LSAT?

User avatar
Tiago Splitter
Posts: 15508
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 1:20 am

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby Tiago Splitter » Fri Sep 20, 2013 4:36 pm

jingosaur wrote:Yeah, GW literally took ANYONE with a 166.

@Mono, not sure if you know this, but were the stats so much lower before because there were fewer candidates with good scores or because law schools just didn't care as much about the LSAT?

Scores used to be much lower

Paul Campos
Posts: 644
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:44 am

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby Paul Campos » Fri Sep 20, 2013 5:21 pm

Couple of things:

(1) Good law schools used to be easier to get into, even though they were far cheaper than they are now, because the opportunity cost of going to law school used to be much higher. (This is econ talk for "generation Y is screwed no matter what it does.")

(2) A critical variable in all this class profile analysis that won't be available until the spring is, how much did schools pay to get their numbers? You can be pretty sure that schools that had "good" results (held or increased class size while not cutting admissions numbers, or not very much) paid for those results with unprecedented tuition discounts.

User avatar
crestor
Posts: 324
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2013 5:37 am

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby crestor » Fri Sep 20, 2013 5:24 pm

Paul Campos wrote:Couple of things:

(1) Good law schools used to be easier to get into, even though they were far cheaper than they are now, because the opportunity cost of going to law school used to be much higher. (This is econ talk for "generation Y is screwed no matter what it does.")

(2) A critical variable in all this class profile analysis that won't be available until the spring is, how much did schools pay to get their numbers? You can be pretty sure that schools that had "good" results (held or increased class size while not cutting admissions numbers, or not very much) paid for those results with unprecedented tuition discounts.


in after campos

User avatar
Clearly
Posts: 4166
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 4:09 pm

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby Clearly » Fri Sep 20, 2013 5:25 pm

This cycle was so messed up. It's like a Tarantino version of admissions. It's great to watch.

User avatar
altoid99
Posts: 249
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 12:04 am

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby altoid99 » Fri Sep 20, 2013 5:44 pm

Clearly wrote:This cycle was so messed up. It's like a Tarantino version of admissions. It's great to watch.


Here's hoping more of the same this cycle

User avatar
MoMettaMonk
Posts: 513
Joined: Thu Jul 04, 2013 3:29 pm

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby MoMettaMonk » Fri Sep 20, 2013 5:52 pm

Does anyone know where you can look up medians from past years?

User avatar
Crowing
Posts: 2636
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2012 4:20 pm

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby Crowing » Fri Sep 20, 2013 5:52 pm

Lol Reg. Word on the street is that 180 are expected at orientation anyway. That ridiculous M/F split may be pretty accurate though.

User avatar
Dr. Dre
Posts: 2347
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 7:10 pm

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby Dr. Dre » Fri Sep 20, 2013 6:07 pm

i predicate this cycle will be worse, especially for california lol skewls




Return to “Law School Admissions Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Socratease and 4 guests