16.9% Decrease In October Test Takers(Detailed Stats Inside) Forum

[vulpixie]

^ Is there any data available regarding what percentage of applicants apply before Thanksgiving?

[Robespierre]

As said above by Robespierre, I am thinking (and hoping) that maybe the medians won't necessarily decrease, but they will end up taking a regular 170 vs an amazing softs 170 to keep their medians.

Yeah, I definitely think softs and applying later won't matter as much, but IMO at least 3-4 of the T14 will have their medians drop, probably more like 7-8.

Yah, I'm not disagreeing with that. I mean, we are taking a very hardnosed approach in this thread; we're assuming T14 schools will anxiously scoop up enough 170s to guard their medians. But some won't do that; they'll try to put together the same diverse, interesting, balanced class they always do. And in an environment of declining application numbers, that'll cause the medians to drop; the laws of arithmetic require it. Unless they are willing to slash the size of the class ... but some won't want to do that, and some have already and won't want to again.

[crumpetsandtea]

But some won't do that; they'll try to put together the same diverse, interesting, balanced class they always do.

Where are these magical, awesome schools you refer to, and how can I apply to them?

[Errzii]

But some won't do that; they'll try to put together the same diverse, interesting, balanced class they always do.

Where are these magical, awesome schools you refer to, and how can I apply to them?

http://www.law.berkeley.edu

[crumpetsandtea]

But some won't do that; they'll try to put together the same diverse, interesting, balanced class they always do.

Where are these magical, awesome schools you refer to, and how can I apply to them?

http://www.law.berkeley.edu

lol, yeah they clearly don't focus on numbers at all... http://berkeley.lawschoolnumbers.com/st ... Cycle=1112

[thelawyler]

I spoke to the dean of a very reputable school this week that told me this cycle, thus far, is shaping up to be very similar to the last cycle. Both, in volume of applications and in the quality of the numbers contained within them.

What school?

Oh, and this is obviously just based on how the cycle is going so far. Volume they've received so far vs. last year at the same point, etc...

But it could just be that more people got off their butts and applied earlier and the cycle could very well change drastically by the time it's all said and done.

Well, I think from a top20 perspective, it could look very similar. However, it is the schools above them that will dictate how this cycle looks for top20 schools as if the better candidates get accepted into the schools higher up the chain, things will start to look very differently in 4 months.

[Errzii]

But some won't do that; they'll try to put together the same diverse, interesting, balanced class they always do.

Where are these magical, awesome schools you refer to, and how can I apply to them?

http://www.law.berkeley.edu

lol, yeah they clearly don't focus on numbers at all... http://berkeley.lawschoolnumbers.com/st ... Cycle=1112

Not sure if that's sarcasm but I was being serious. Out of T14 Berkeley consistently has had the lowest LSAT medians so a smaller applicant pool will not necessarily pressure them to hold onto medians as much as other top schools. Additionally, they are notorious for rejecting applicants even with high numbers while taking the occasional non-urm applicant with less than stellar stats based on softs or what not. I would definitely say they take the most "holistic" approach out of the T14 compared with their peer schools. My point is Berkeley can still afford to be selective with who they choose to admit because they simply don't emphasize LSAT as much as other schools do. It's the closest thing to what Robespierre was talking about imo.

[crumpetsandtea]

Not sure if that's sarcasm but I was being serious. Out of T14 Berkeley consistently has had the lowest LSAT medians so a smaller applicant pool will not necessarily pressure them to hold onto medians as much as other top schools. Additionally, they are notorious for rejecting applicants even with high numbers while taking the occasional non-urm applicant with less than stellar stats based on softs or what not. I would definitely say they take the most "holistic" approach out of the T14 compared with their peer schools. At least, it's the closest thing to what Robespierre was talking about imo.

It was partially joking, partially serious. Also, regarding the bolded, that doesn't necessarily mean that they prefer softs to maintaining medians. It just means they prioritize GPA medians instead of LSAT medians. Still though, their LSAT medians slipping even further could potentially hurt their rankings, which means they might indeed become pickier in the LSAT area, OR they will become EVEN pickier RE: GPAs.

Either way, I wasn't trying to ~dispute~ you, just saying that they seem to still have a hard GPA/LSAT floor, and they merely pick based on softs out of that index.

[AreJay711]

Fools, Occupy Wall Street is going to get our loans forgiven making law school the best investment everz!!!!!

[Robespierre]

I spoke to the dean of a very reputable school this week that told me this cycle, thus far, is shaping up to be very similar to the last cycle. Both, in volume of applications and in the quality of the numbers contained within them.

Wow, that is REALLY surprising. The number of LSAT takers is way down from last year. The number of LSN profiles is down from last year. The media is spewing out "Don't Apply to Law School" articles. How can the applicant pool possibly have the same quantity and quality this year as last???

Maybe this dean is just putting a good face on things. Or maybe he's at a "hot" school that is attracting lots of good applicants. Remember, last cycle, some schools maintained medians and class size even though applicants were down 10% nationwide. And they weren't just T6's or even T14's; other examples are Boston College and William & Mary.

[DonnaDraper]

I spoke to the dean of a very reputable school this week that told me this cycle, thus far, is shaping up to be very similar to the last cycle. Both, in volume of applications and in the quality of the numbers contained within them.

Wow, that is REALLY surprising. The number of LSAT takers is way down from last year. The number of LSN profiles is down from last year. The media is spewing out "Don't Apply to Law School" articles. How can the applicant pool possibly have the same quantity and quality this year as last???

Maybe this dean is just putting a good face on things. Or maybe he's at a "hot" school that is attracting lots of good applicants. Remember, last cycle, some schools maintained medians and class size even though applicants were down 10% nationwide. And they weren't just T6's or even T14's; other examples are Boston College and William & Mary.

OR it could be less people applying to more schools (with these people being the more qualified/early birds). Maybe this cycle people will be more likely to blanket, but at the end of the day they can only go to one school.

[Cornelius]

I spoke to the dean of a very reputable school this week that told me this cycle, thus far, is shaping up to be very similar to the last cycle. Both, in volume of applications and in the quality of the numbers contained within them.

Wow, that is REALLY surprising. The number of LSAT takers is way down from last year. The number of LSN profiles is down from last year. The media is spewing out "Don't Apply to Law School" articles. How can the applicant pool possibly have the same quantity and quality this year as last???

Maybe this dean is just putting a good face on things. Or maybe he's at a "hot" school that is attracting lots of good applicants. Remember, last cycle, some schools maintained medians and class size even though applicants were down 10% nationwide. And they weren't just T6's or even T14's; other examples are Boston College and William & Mary.

OR it could be less people applying to more schools (with these people being the more qualified/early birds). Maybe this cycle people will be more likely to blanket, but at the end of the day they can only go to one school.

In which case acceptance standards won't change much, but waitlists will see heavy activity as schools realize they planned for a yield higher than what will actually happen.

Still, as the other poster mentioned, even if applicants are blanketing more than usual, I find it very hard to believe the pool is very comparable to last year, unless the Dean happens to be at one of the schools where it didn't fluctuate much.

[mijenks]

In which case acceptance standards won't change much, but waitlists will see heavy activity as schools realize they planned for a yield higher than what will actually happen.

Still, as the other poster mentioned, even if applicants are blanketing more than usual, I find it very hard to believe the pool is very comparable to last year, unless the Dean happens to be at one of the schools where it didn't fluctuate much.

TITCR.

[Robespierre]

I spoke to the dean of a very reputable school this week that told me this cycle, thus far, is shaping up to be very similar to the last cycle. Both, in volume of applications and in the quality of the numbers contained within them.

Wow, that is REALLY surprising. The number of LSAT takers is way down from last year. The number of LSN profiles is down from last year. The media is spewing out "Don't Apply to Law School" articles. How can the applicant pool possibly have the same quantity and quality this year as last???

Maybe this dean is just putting a good face on things. Or maybe he's at a "hot" school that is attracting lots of good applicants. Remember, last cycle, some schools maintained medians and class size even though applicants were down 10% nationwide. And they weren't just T6's or even T14's; other examples are Boston College and William & Mary.

OR it could be less people applying to more schools (with these people being the more qualified/early birds). Maybe this cycle people will be more likely to blanket, but at the end of the day they can only go to one school.

Yes, that's part of it too. LSAC is making it easier and easier to apply to a ton of schools. I think you're onto something there.

[Tiago Splitter]

Still, as the other poster mentioned, even if applicants are blanketing more than usual, I find it very hard to believe the pool is very comparable to last year, unless the Dean happens to be at one of the schools where it didn't fluctuate much.

I agree with this. The Dean is probably blowing smoke. But in fairness to the Dean, a 5% reduction in quality would be hard to see without doing more detailed analysis, which won't happen until later in the cycle.

[Angrygeopolitically]

Fools, Occupy Wall Street is going to get our loans forgiven making law school the best investment everz!!!!!

Thank you for that! It made my evening.

[JoeMo]

I spoke to the dean of a very reputable school this week that told me this cycle, thus far, is shaping up to be very similar to the last cycle. Both, in volume of applications and in the quality of the numbers contained within them.

What school?

Oh, and this is obviously just based on how the cycle is going so far. Volume they've received so far vs. last year at the same point, etc...

But it could just be that more people got off their butts and applied earlier and the cycle could very well change drastically by the time it's all said and done.

Well, I think from a top20 perspective, it could look very similar. However, it is the schools above them that will dictate how this cycle looks for top20 schools as if the better candidates get accepted into the schools higher up the chain, things will start to look very differently in 4 months.

This makes sense.

[marcellus]

Its weird that we are talking about there still possibly being enough +170 applicants to keep T14 medians at 170 when we already see Cornell with a 168 median.

How can that be if there are 2-3000 estimated 170s out there (according to earlier posts) and that amount should allow enough 170s to go around to fill up the T14? (I think?)

We also see many schools with 75% range LSATs at way below 170: Stanford (167), NW (166), UVA (166), Penn (166), and Berkeley (162). This maybe indicates that those 170ish medians are hanging by a thread. Seems to be a lot of sub-170 people getting into great places and they can't all be URMs.

Before I commit further TLS heresy, I'll predict that not only will this cycle see laxer admissions standards at the T14 because of a reduced number of +170s, but also that last year's 10% fall in applicants & test takers failure to lower medians indicates that many people with +170s from previous years applied, reducing the shadow inventory of +170s from LSATs administered in previous cycles. The upshot: this cycle will see fewer fresh +170s and old +170s, meaning people should do marginally better than they expect in admissions.

[Rickjames11]

Wow interesting thread...

Hopefully it will be even easier to get in the t14 by next cycle when I apply lol.

Anyone want to go "all in" and bet that this trend continues at the same or even greater rate into next cycle? Are we witnessing the beginning of a trough in law school admissions standards (I hope so). Too early to tell ofcourse.

But lets face it, if you're reading this thread then you (like me), benefit from there being less people out there with JDs.

And a 165 and 3.5 MA URM with amazing softs just may get into a school that was a considered a reach last cycle and gets bumped to a weak consider by next (as opposed to the current).

I'd really like to know if there is a particular ethnic demographic that's witnessing a drop in applicants? I would think (conjecture), that it would be the URMs who would be the most volatile segment of applicants, and therefore if the number of applicants are going down, it would be them first.


Cool thread all around. Don't know if I should feel good about there being less people applying to law schools... Oh wait ofcourse I do lol!

[marcellus]

Rickjames11, I think you're right that URMs could be disproportionately represented among those not applying. I think theres 2 possible motivations for the fall in LSAT takers and applicants:

1) Negative reports about the value of a JD in the media (and from grads)
2) The bad economy making people cut back on everything, including LSAC and app fees

#2 would probably disproportionately affect URMs, and make folks like yourself scarcer in T14 admissions.

Also, I wonder, if things could get even better next cycle if theres a bigger drop in LSATs and applicants. May or may not happen. The applicants could return if law school's prestige rises if theres a letup in the bad reporting, or if word got out that admissions standards eased up in 2011-12.

[JoeMo]

Rickjames11, I think you're right that URMs could be disproportionately represented among those not applying. I think theres 2 possible motivations for the fall in LSAT takers and applicants:

1) Negative reports about the value of a JD in the media (and from grads)
2) The bad economy making people cut back on everything, including LSAC and app fees

#2 would probably disproportionately affect URMs, and make folks like yourself scarcer in T14 admissions.

Also, I wonder, if things could get even better next cycle if theres a bigger drop in LSATs and applicants. May or may not happen. The applicants could return if law school's prestige rises if theres a letup in the bad reporting, or if word got out that admissions standards eased up in 2011-12.

Yeah but the URM's are probably getting more waivers than ever too.

[hooma]

Does anyone think this could make a February LSAT score more influential in this cycle? I'm applying (next week hopefully) and also retaking in February - my original idea was to see where I can get in with my current score and then what I get in February would inform if I should take what I can get this cycle or wait and reapply next cycle. Now I'm thinking (at the risk of putting the cart before the horse) that a February score will be much more useful than usual in getting off of waitlists.

Thoughts?

[addy11]

Does anyone think this could make a February LSAT score more influential in this cycle? I'm applying (next week hopefully) and also retaking in February - my original idea was to see where I can get in with my current score and then what I get in February would inform if I should take what I can get this cycle or wait and reapply next cycle. Now I'm thinking (at the risk of putting the cart before the horse) that a February score will be much more useful than usual in getting off of waitlists.

Thoughts?

I could be wrong, but don't many of the t14 explicitly say that they do not consider Feb scores? Or do they just require you to take it for the first time before Feb and then Feb retakes can count?

[hooma]

I could be wrong, but don't many of the t14 explicitly say that they do not consider Feb scores? Or do they just require you to take it for the first time before Feb and then Feb retakes can count?

From the UVA app: Applicants should arrange to take the LSAT early, preferably by June or October of the year preceding the year for which admission to the School of Law is sought, although December and February scores will be accepted. However, applicants who submit February LSAT scores may be at a disadvantage, since many places in the class will have been filled by the time February scores are received.

It may be different elsewhere.

[addy11]

I could be wrong, but don't many of the t14 explicitly say that they do not consider Feb scores? Or do they just require you to take it for the first time before Feb and then Feb retakes can count?

From the UVA app: Applicants should arrange to take the LSAT early, preferably by June or October of the year preceding the year for which admission to the School of Law is sought, although December and February scores will be accepted. However, applicants who submit February LSAT scores may be at a disadvantage, since many places in the class will have been filled by the time February scores are received.

It may be different elsewhere.

Ah, OK. Yeah well if the idea that waitlisters will have much more luck this year is sound, then February LSAT scores will likely become more meaningful than in years past.

Still, these schools fill up their classes rapidly. I would explore each school's specific policies re: Feb, and operate under the assumption that an LSAT from years past/June/October > December >> Feb