Evidence admission is more difficult this year? Forum

[lsatbdog]

Threads like this keep popping up week after week, and the answer remains the same: no one knows. It's still December and a lot of applications have yet to be submitted. You can talk about the increased number LSAT takers and about certain schools releasing preliminary stats (i.e. Iowa), but it's all speculation at this point. Anyone who is posting on here as if they somehow know what's going on is full of BS. Just calm down and wait a few more months.

Agreed.

However, I do think it can be said that by checking out the LSN for Iowa, it looks like it can fairly be concluded that however the cycle plays out, the sky isn't falling. That is to say, numbers that were competitive or auto-admits last year should still stand a solid chance this year. Plenty of people getting in to Iowa with mid 3 GPAs and 160 LSATS who don't look like they have special softs. Also, not everyone who takes the LSAT winds up even applying, including high scorers; I talked to a guy outside the test center who majored in electrical enginering and said he might consider going for patent law if he got a 167+ on the test (he studied for like 2 weeks and got 165s on most practice tests), otherwise he was just going to grad school. Sure these cases happen every cycle, but more test takers probably means more folks like this.

[09042014]

I will also say again, just because the number of applications is up, it doesn't mean the quality of applications is up.

They might get 1,000 more applicants, but how many of those will be competitive?

If the september exam is representative of this year's applicant pool, 20% will be more competitive.

September LSAT takers went from ~50k in 2008 to ~60k in 2009. This is a ~20% increase. Because LSAT scores are normalized, 20% more testtakers will receive any given score in that examination than did testtakers in 2008. For example, 20% more people scored a 170 in September 2009 than did in September 2008.

Therefore, competition should be expected to be tighter. The degree to how much tighter it will be is up in the air, but we're nearing a point where there will soon be more 170+s awarded to LSAT takers than there are seats in the T14.

That's not true. A 170 doesn't equal 97.5 percentile on every test. A 170 in Sept 08 is supposed to equal a 170 in Sept 09.

But its silly to assume almost all economy driven applicants are not going to be competitive. If the economy was good I'd probably wait several years to apply (or maybe never at all if I got management tracked in a good company) and I got a 176.

Aren't scores normalized over six administrations only though? So a profound increase in one of the six administration's test takers should be able to significantly skew the curve.

I believe you that I'm wrong about the 20% figure. I still think that there is a significant increase in 170+ scorers though... this requires more thinking.

No. They aren't normalized over anything. A 170 is supposed to equal a 170 for any two LSAT exams. Over three years they calculate the percentile. So over three years they find out how many people got a 170 then say its the 97.5th percentile. The real test will be to compare Junes LSAT percentiles to Sept to the upcoming Decembers. I'll bet you see the percentiles increasing.

This is why 170 used to be the 98th percentile but has fallen to the 97% after retaking without averaging was allowed.

I still think that there is a significant increase in 170+ scorers though... this requires more thinking.

If only half of the people applying because of the economy were as prepared as the average applicant last year, that means 10% more 170's.

I'm wondering if this will help or hurt splitters. Because some schools might try to make gains with the new applicants. Possibly bumping their 75% LSAT a point.

[eatmykant]

I am at or near metaphysical certitude that this admissions cycle will be more difficult. My reasoning is as follows:

P1. I am applying to law school.
P2. God hates me.
C: This will be a particularly difficult year.

QED.

p.s. Sorry to everyone else for getting a vengeful deity involved in this whole thing. It's totally my bad.

[traehekat]

haha think you are missing a few premises there, but i got the message loud and clear.

yes, i also think it will be more difficult/competitive.

[MC Southstar]

haha think you are missing a few premises there, but i got the message loud and clear.

yes, i also think it will be more difficult/competitive.

Your Colbert avatar makes me think you are very intelligent and always right.

[Vincent Vega]

I got dinged by Texas, and in the past five years, people with similar numbers to me got accepted 85% of the time and waitlisted the rest of the time.

[traehekat]

haha think you are missing a few premises there, but i got the message loud and clear.

yes, i also think it will be more difficult/competitive.

Your Colbert avatar makes me think you are very intelligent and always right.

I would have thought the fact that I am very intelligent and always right would have been sufficient to make you think that!

[celio]

I got dinged by Texas, and in the past five years, people with similar numbers to me got accepted 85% of the time and waitlisted the rest of the time.

In state or out of state applicant? I'd guess Texas' out of state applications will be particularly competitive this year.

[rondemarino]

I will also say again, just because the number of applications is up, it doesn't mean the quality of applications is up.

They might get 1,000 more applicants, but how many of those will be competitive?

If you check the Illinois 2010, you'll find that Dean Pless responded to my query about this.

Applications to UIUC - up 40%
Applications nationwide - up 8%
Applicants submitting - up 1%

So far, the pool of early applicants is simply sending out more applications.

However, LSAT administrations are up 15-20%.

[rondemarino]

I got dinged by Texas, and in the past five years, people with similar numbers to me got accepted 85% of the time and waitlisted the rest of the time.

I wouldn't read too much into it you're a high GPA splitter. Texas' GPA median jumped 0.10 points last year (to 3.71). They probably don't feel compelled to accept the 3.7s and 3.8s they used to in year's past.

However, if you're a high LSAT splitter, it might be time to buy canned goods.

[MF248]

I think it's a bit too early to tell. From various threads here on TLS and statements by law school admissions deans, it sounds like applications so far this cycle are up quite a bit from last year, but it's still not known whether this trend will continue through the end of the cycle. Going by that, I'm sure that schools are a bit more cautious at this point about accepting and rejecting applicants than before, because they don't know exactly what to expect.

In any case, it's difficult to judge this cycle at this point, in my opinion, for many schools haven't started sending out rejections yet.

I read somewhere (and maybe someone can help me with the source) that according to LSAC, there are way more applications this year, but the actual total number of applicants hasn't increased that dramatically- meaning applicants are applying to a lot more schools. If that's true, then adcomms will be faced with a lot more applications, but also (presumably) more withdrawals towards the end of the cycle, since more applications per individual will eventually lead to more withdrawals per individual. Anyway, I think the only way that adcomms will be able to deal with this situation rationally is to drastically increase the size of their waitlists, meaning it would be a more frustrating cycle for us, but not necessarily that much more difficult.

Maybe I'm being optimistic and naive though. Anyway, good luck everybody!

Hopefully this means the increase in apps at the top schools won't be as much. Ie. the increase this year is from people that would usually count on GULC or Cornell are expanding their range to include Vandy and Texas etc. but probably not the other way around.

[traehekat]

However, LSAT administrations are up 15-20%.

Taken from a November 17 post on ATL.

[februaryftw]

I'm baffled as to how an increase in the size of LSAT administrations is not leading to a greater number of applicants (if we assume the 1% increase in applicant claim). Any explanations?

[Unitas]

I'm baffled as to how an increase in the size of LSAT administrations is not leading to a greater number of applicants (if we assume the 1% increase in applicant claim). Any explanations?

There are also different rules about cancelling the LSAT. That adds numbers, plus people just go take the test seeing if they will do really well and get a free ride to LS instead of searching for non-existant jobs. After doing bad on the LSAT these people do not apply.

I said before I would think 5-10% increase, but I also am pretty sure more people are applying to more schools. I know I am applying to more this year, then I would have last year. Mainly because of TLS.

[Burger in a can]

http://www.lsac.org/LSAT/tests-administered.asp

We're still nowhere near the post-9/11 (2001-2002) LSAT boom though EDIT: (in terms of sudden increase in testers)

(AND June of last year had a greater net increase than June of this year)

[09042014]

I'm baffled as to how an increase in the size of LSAT administrations is not leading to a greater number of applicants (if we assume the 1% increase in applicant claim). Any explanations?

The most obvious is that 1% isn't accurate.

Other factors. You couldn't cancel Sept 09 before hand and not have it show up. I had a family emergency and called to cancel the tuesday before the test, and was told, I have to just not show up, and that's that. So I ended up going anyway (glad I did). Apparently that was a new policy this year, though I'm not sure in June had that policy.

This could account for several percent.

Maybe these economy driven applicants are applying later. It takes a while to get LOR and a PS ready. Its only the beginning of December. We might see a massive rush after new years.

I've heard of people taking it to "keep their options open", yet not planning to apply. I was a little confused because by the time they'd graduate and realize they didn't have a job, they'd have to wait a full year to go to law school, because they hadn't applied.

I'm guessing a mixture of many reasons.

[Burger in a can]

Ok, I think it's become sort of obvious that admission is more difficult, but it's obviously not THAT bad- there are plenty of candidates with LSATs below 168 and GPAs below 3.8 who have already been accepted+$$$ at some good schools!

[traehekat]

Ok, I think it's become sort of obvious that admission is more difficult, but it's obviously not THAT bad- there are plenty of candidates with LSATs below 168 and GPAs below 3.8 who have already been accepted+$$$ at some good schools!

IMPOSSIBLE! IT CAN'T BE! I... I JUST DON'T BELIEVE IT!

[Burger in a can]

Ok, I think it's become sort of obvious that admission is more difficult, but it's obviously not THAT bad- there are plenty of candidates with LSATs below 168 and GPAs below 3.8 who have already been accepted+$$$ at some good schools!

IMPOSSIBLE! IT CAN'T BE! I... I JUST DON'T BELIEVE IT!

nevermind. I guess I'll stop trying to cheer people up.

[ruleser]

All I know for sure is there are more people taking the LSAT, meaning there are more people with at least the INTENTION of applying this cycle. Whether or not this increase in LSAT takers has translated to an increase in competition for acceptances to the top law schools is still unknown, but it may be reasonable to assume it is at least a LITTLE more competitive. It can probably be even more reasonably assumed that it is a bit more competitive at your T2, T3/4 schools.

Interestingly, during a Q&A with Dean Pless at UIUC, I asked, "With the expected rise in applications, will you be looking at anything that may indicate an applicant has had the intention of applying to law school for some time, as opposed to someone who is doing it just to hide from the economy?" He answered that UIUC does look for such indications, like pre-law classes, involvement in pre-law clubs, etc. that may show an applicant isn't just applying out of the blue. Whether or not this is a significant factor in making a decision, he did not really say. I expect it plays a minor role.

During my interview with Vandy I was told the same thing - don't think I specifically asked about it - it came up at some point and the admis person said very clearly they are kind of on the lookout for those who look like they are just fleeing the econ - at first it's easy to think, yeah right, it's numbers, and maybe it is, but they want to watch out for poor performance or people who will withdraw after a year/are less likely to actually follow through and attend, etc., so I could see it hurting somewhat...

[Vincent Vega]

Maybe these economy driven applicants are applying later. It takes a while to get LOR and a PS ready. Its only the beginning of December. We might see a massive rush after new years.

I've heard of people taking it to "keep their options open", yet not planning to apply. I was a little confused because by the time they'd graduate and realize they didn't have a job, they'd have to wait a full year to go to law school, because they hadn't applied.

In my experience, most people (and even a lot of 0L's ) are pretty ignorant of the law school application process. My mom calls me pretty much every day and tells me about all of the third tiers that send me propaganda crap, thinking it's gold.

[Nom Sawyer]

Taken from a November 17 post on ATL.

--ImageRemoved--*


*Trademark: Puppins 2009

[the lantern]

I read somewhere that 20% more people have taken the LSAT but so far application volume is only up around 5%. Most of the schools I'm looking at do not look more difficult to get into than last year, but I haven't seen any decisions yet so who knows.

[Lyov Myshkin]

--ImageRemoved--*


*Trademark: Puppins 2009

aww... that's so cute.

[pearl_earrings]

Ok, I think it's become sort of obvious that admission is more difficult, but it's obviously not THAT bad- there are plenty of candidates with LSATs below 168 and GPAs below 3.8 who have already been accepted+$$$ at some good schools!

IMPOSSIBLE! IT CAN'T BE! I... I JUST DON'T BELIEVE IT!

nevermind. I guess I'll stop trying to cheer people up.

I'm all for good cheer! Why not spread a little optimism?