June 2011 LSAT Data: Biggest Drop in 20 years! Forum

[99.9luft]

http://www.lsac.org/LSACResources/Data/ ... stered.asp

So, 26,812 people took the test, which is a -18.7% drop, comparing to the 32,973 who took it in June 2010.

I bet this trend carries over to October, even if not in such record-breaking numbers.

[doukycats]

Great! Less competition, and hopefully fewer applicants will slow rising tuition costs (unlikely)

[incompetentia]

Dem medians gon drop

fewer applicants will slow rising tuition costs (unlikely)

uh

[am060459]

http://www.lsac.org/LSACResources/Data/ ... stered.asp

So, 26,812 people took the test, which is a -18.7% drop, comparing to the 32,973 who took it in June 2010.

I bet this trend carries over to October, even if not in such record-breaking numbers.

I guess some people are coming to their senses (not this guy!!!)

[iphone7]

That means it's good for reverse-splitters like me!

[Eichörnchen]

http://www.lsac.org/LSACResources/Data/ ... stered.asp

So, 26,812 people took the test, which is a -18.7% drop, comparing to the 32,973 who took it in June 2010.

I bet this trend carries over to October, even if not in such record-breaking numbers.

This pleases me. Oh medians .... please drop this cycle.

[KevinP]

To copy my statements from another thread.

I think this upcoming cycle should be an interesting one. The drop in the number of test takers last year also coincided with a drop in the number of applicants across all LSAT scores ranges, not just those at the lower end.

LSAC did publish information on the number of 2010 versus 2011 number of applicants by LSAT score and they matched up accordingly with the drop in LSATs administered for the 2010-2011 cycle (LSAC did add a caveat because of the date of the report). I'm just hoping the pattern is unchanged this cycle as well.

--ImageRemoved--

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

[phillipjg]

There are a similiar amount of applicatants with scores under 145 as applications with scores over 170.

I understand there have to be people taking the test who score under median, but they still apply with those scores?

edit: missing word

[doukycats]

It seems weird that 8% of test takers have a high score in the 98-99th percentile

[KevinP]

There are a similiar amount of applicatants with scores under 145 as applications with scores over 170.

I understand there have to be people taking the test who score under median, but they still apply with those scores?

edit: missing word

Yes. Even more worrisome is the fact that some schools actually accept them.
E.g. http://cooley.lawschoolnumbers.com/stats/1011/

It seems weird that 8% of test takers have a high score in the 98-99th percentile

This is applicants, not test takers. Not all test takers apply to law school.

[Asleep]

Its 8% of applicants, not 8% of test takers.

[Samara]

Not all test takers apply to law school.

Plus, a substantial portion of those are retakes.

[incompetentia]

Note that these are also year-to-date numbers as of December - I would imagine that the gunners who apply early are more likely to be high scorers (the lower scorers would also likely be waiting until Oct/Dec for a potential retake).

[JamMasterJ]

I would be sick if medians dropped.

[doukycats]

It seems weird that 8% of test takers have a high score in the 98-99th percentile

Hopefully errors like that don't keep me out of that 8%

[KevinP]

Do I sense a 167 for Cornell?

Here's to hoping that October shows a similar trend.

[incompetentia]

I doubt it's going to be 18%, as Oct is typically the most reliable testing bloc, but I know that NYU isn't keeping that 172 median for too long.

[JamMasterJ]

I doubt it's going to be 18%, as Oct is typically the most reliable testing bloc, but I know that NYU isn't keeping that 172 median for too long.

U of C and NU? PLEAAASE

[faithinlaw]

Why 101%?
4+6+11+16+19+19+15+9+2=101

[incompetentia]

Why 101%?
4+6+11+16+19+19+15+9+2=101

Rounding individual numbers causes this artifact, sometimes even with as few as 3 components.

[Samara]

Note that these are also year-to-date numbers as of December - I would imagine that the gunners who apply early are more likely to be high scorers (the lower scorers would also likely be waiting until Oct/Dec for a potential retake).

Yeah, according to LSAT Blog, June has the toughest curve. Partially, this is probably because it just has a lot more test takers, being in the summer and in the afternoon, but yeah, I agree on the effect of gunners.

[UnamSanctam]

Please let this be the difference between T14 and non-T14 acceptance.

[JamMasterJ]

Note that these are also year-to-date numbers as of December - I would imagine that the gunners who apply early are more likely to be high scorers (the lower scorers would also likely be waiting until Oct/Dec for a potential retake).

Yeah, according to LSAT Blog, June has the toughest curve. Partially, this is probably because it just has a lot more test takers, being in the summer and in the afternoon, but yeah, I agree on the effect of gunners.

No

[gavinstevens]

I'd be happy with a median freeze, but yeah, let's hope for some drops.

[suspicious android]

Did medians go up at many top schools this year? Or is that information even out yet?