CLASS OF 2018 MEDIANS! (LSAT/GPA/Class Size) Forum

gamerish · Post by **gamerish** » Tue Dec 08, 2015 11:41 am

Post removed...

TheBananaStand · Post by **TheBananaStand** » Tue Dec 08, 2015 12:26 pm

gamerish wrote:
nicknar wrote:
imperspective wrote:Stanford

173 (-1)
171 (-1)
169

3.97
3.89 (-.01)
3.78 (-.02)

https://law.stanford.edu/aba-required-disclosures/

Do you think they will still be tied with Harvard?
You have no idea how much false hope this is giving me.

Acceptance rate up 2% And Yield rate down about 2.5% as well. Still shocking to me that the SLS yield rate is in the 40s

haus · Post by **haus** » Tue Dec 08, 2015 10:45 pm

William Mitchell

156/152/148 (0/0/-1)
3.53/3.25/2.92 (-.06/0/-.06)
320 total 1L enrollment (+151)

The two hybrid online cohorts (Jan & Aug) make up over half of all this years incoming students.

P.S.
Tomorrow William Mitchell will announce that the merger with Hamline will be moving forward.

2015
http://web.wmitchell.edu/admissions/wp- ... t-2015.pdf

2014
http://web.wmitchell.edu/admissions/wp- ... mation.pdf

mintme · Post by **mintme** » Thu Dec 10, 2015 11:54 am

SMU

http://www.law.smu.edu/Media/Documents/ ... Report.pdf

3.27/3.63/3.75 (+.02/+.05/+.01)

156/161/163 (0/0/0)

212 (-14)

These numbers are for the full-time program and the part-time program combined

UCDAVISSTUDENT · Post by **UCDAVISSTUDENT** » Thu Dec 10, 2015 11:30 pm

Iowa

3.79(-.02)/3.61(-.03)/3.44(-.07)

162/161(+1)/156(-1)

http://law.uiowa.edu/files/law.uiowa.ed ... 009170.pdf

Huskies13! · Post by **Huskies13!** » Tue Dec 15, 2015 12:26 am

Tomorrow is 509 day i think...so any remaining mysteries should be solved`

LurkerShirker · Post by **LurkerShirker** » Tue Dec 15, 2015 10:21 am

509s are out

need to correct the UNC entry - their median LSAT is now 161 instead of 162

Rigo · Post by **Rigo** » Tue Dec 15, 2015 11:44 am

I'll go through today and verify all numbers entered and fill in all numbers missing.

pleadthafif · Post by **pleadthafif** » Tue Dec 15, 2015 11:48 am

Post removed...

SirArthurDayne · Post by **SirArthurDayne** » Tue Dec 15, 2015 12:09 pm

Post removed.

Rigo · Post by **Rigo** » Tue Dec 15, 2015 1:42 pm

Kind of confused on the William Mitchell and Hamline 509's. No Mitchell Hamline Law 509, but William Mitchell increased class size by about 90% so either the merger is already reflected on their 509 or it's egregiously shitty TTT behavior.
I guess I'll just keep them separate unless anyone can shine light on the situation. Only problem is double counting 1L's on the spreadsheet, but that's more of an OCD thing on my part.

Rigo · Post by **Rigo** » Tue Dec 15, 2015 2:20 pm

The long awaited...
~*~Cooley~*~
138(-3)-141(-4)-147(-2)
2.51(-.02)-2.85(-.05)-3.19(-.09)

Class size: 448 (+3)

cannibal ox · Post by **cannibal ox** » Tue Dec 15, 2015 2:27 pm

Rigo wrote:Kind of confused on the William Mitchell and Hamline 509's. No Mitchell Hamline Law 509, but William Mitchell increased class size by about 90% so either the merger is already reflected on their 509 or it's egregiously shitty TTT behavior.
I guess I'll just keep them separate unless anyone can shine light on the situation. Only problem is double counting 1L's on the spreadsheet, but that's more of an OCD thing on my part.

They haven't combined yet.

William Mitchell increased because this is the first 509 report with their new online program.

Rigo · Post by **Rigo** » Tue Dec 15, 2015 2:29 pm

cannibal ox wrote:
Rigo wrote:Kind of confused on the William Mitchell and Hamline 509's. No Mitchell Hamline Law 509, but William Mitchell increased class size by about 90% so either the merger is already reflected on their 509 or it's egregiously shitty TTT behavior.
I guess I'll just keep them separate unless anyone can shine light on the situation. Only problem is double counting 1L's on the spreadsheet, but that's more of an OCD thing on my part.
They haven't combined yet.
William Mitchell increased because this is the first 509 report with their new online program.

Ah okay ty

Rigo · Post by **Rigo** » Tue Dec 15, 2015 2:30 pm

Okay spreadsheet is complete. Thanks to everyone who helped out this year.

JCougar · Post by **JCougar** » Thu Dec 17, 2015 1:52 am

Rigo wrote:The long awaited...
~*~Cooley~*~
138(-3)-141(-4)-147(-2)
2.51(-.02)-2.85(-.05)-3.19(-.09)

Class size: 448 (+3)

Holy fuck.

There's no way that dumpster fire of a school survives this. A 141 median? That's like 17th percentile. And a good proportion of those that actually manage to get good grades there will transfer out after 1L.

It's hard to imagine how anyone from that school is going to pass the bar.

JCougar · Post by **JCougar** » Thu Dec 17, 2015 2:08 am

Also, an addendum to the Cooley numbers: Of those 448 students, only 41 are full time.

BasilHallward · Post by **BasilHallward** » Thu Dec 17, 2015 2:26 am

JCougar wrote:Also, an addendum to the Cooley numbers: Of those 448 students, only 41 are full time.

It's the other way around. 41 are part time. If you look at their 509, you'll see that they screwed up those columns.

http://www.cooley.edu/publicinformation ... mation.pdf

splitterfromhell · Post by **splitterfromhell** » Thu Dec 17, 2015 2:29 am

BasilHallward wrote:
JCougar wrote:Also, an addendum to the Cooley numbers: Of those 448 students, only 41 are full time.

It's the other way around. 41 are part time. If you look at their 509, you'll see that they screwed up those columns.

http://www.cooley.edu/publicinformation ... mation.pdf

In classic Cooley fashion.

JCougar · Post by **JCougar** » Thu Dec 17, 2015 2:30 am

LOL...they can't even fill out their forms right.

Please, God, just vaporize that school already (but do it on Christmas Eve, when nobody's there).

gamerish · Post by **gamerish** » Thu Dec 17, 2015 2:56 am

Post removed...

KMart · Post by **KMart** » Thu Dec 17, 2015 5:18 am

I can't believe they actually managed to increase their class size. That pisses me off.

JCougar · Post by **JCougar** » Thu Dec 17, 2015 1:39 pm

KMart wrote:I can't believe they actually managed to increase their class size. That pisses me off.

... at the cost of a significant number of LSAT points, especially considering where they were to begin with. There's no way more than say 30% of this incoming class passes the bar.

They're clearly trying to wring as much profit as possible out of that organization as possible before it's (now) inevitable collapse. The ABA's accreditation rules are so ineffective and clumsy that this school will still be able to kick around for a few more years--and in the interim, run a massive scam on students and US taxpayers--an open, public scam in the clear light of day that nobody will do anything about.

Paul Campos · Post by **Paul Campos** » Thu Dec 17, 2015 1:44 pm

To be fair to Cooley, they aren't misreporting their full-time v. part-time numbers. Almost all their "part-time" students go to school year-round and graduate in three years as a result, but they are technically part-time.

Also, the school's JD enrollment is 65% lower now than it was in 2010. They fired 60% of their full-time faculty last year.

JCougar · Post by **JCougar** » Thu Dec 17, 2015 1:49 pm

The ongoing joke that is Cooley gets even deeper/darker/more hilarious (depending on your perspective):

http://www.cooley.edu/prospective/bachelors.html

Most WMU-Cooley students have a bachelor's degree from an accredited college or university. Yet, under court rules adopted by the Michigan Supreme Court, an applicant may also attend if the student has completed at least 60 semester hours or 90 quarter hours either toward an undergraduate degree from an accredited school or from an accredited junior or community college.

WMU-Cooley Law School welcomes inquiries from individuals with associate's degrees or 60 to 90 credits at a four-year institution.