ITT: New School Medians Revealed Forum

[Bobeo]

I think it is amazing that Chicago pulled the GPA number because they pull so many low-GPAers from their undergrad. If you inflated the 10-20 they take from UChicago to a normal level, the GPA would probably be up another .05.

Clearly Chicago is better than Harvard. Fucking retard.

...?

Does anyone know GW's numbers yet?

[bjsesq]

I think it is amazing that Chicago pulled the GPA number because they pull so many low-GPAers from their undergrad. If you inflated the 10-20 they take from UChicago to a normal level, the GPA would probably be up another .05.

Clearly Chicago is better than Harvard. Fucking retard.

...?

Does anyone know GW's numbers yet?

Check Corky Thatcher's post history for his fucking lunatic trolling for U of C.

[soj]

I think it is amazing that Chicago pulled the GPA number because they pull so many low-GPAers from their undergrad. If you inflated the 10-20 they take from UChicago to a normal level, the GPA would probably be up another .05.

If you took out those 10-20 students, Chicago's 171 LSAT median might be in jeopardy. Unless you're telling me Chicago accepts that many Chicago UG alumni below both medians each year. Only a TTT like Harvard would play favorites like that!

Chicago's median GPA is 3.87; 75th %ile, 3.94. Those 10-20 students constitute only 5-10% of the class. Suppose you replaced those 10-20 students with the same number of students with, for the sake of argument, 3.94s. Assuming the 10-20 replaced students all have GPAs below 3.87 (which I doubt), the new GPA median would be what the 55th/60th percentile was before replacement. Do you really believe Chicago's 55th/60th percentile GPA is 3.92? I would guess it's <3.90. So the median would only go up .00~.02. Not sure what would happen to the 25th and 75th percentiles, but I imagine something similar.

In other words, if you take splitters out of the equation, the GPA median might go up a little. Now that's a super cool story, bro.

[Robespierre]

George Mason: --LinkRemoved--

Medians were unchanged at 3.72/164. The incoming class shrunk from 303 to 186, an astounding 39% decrease.

[minnbills]

George Mason: --LinkRemoved--

Medians were unchanged at 3.72/164. The incoming class shrunk from 303 to 186, an astounding 39% decrease.

Wow that is crazy. Is that the biggest decrease yet?

[KevinP]

Here's the numbers for Villanova, assuming they're telling the truth.
Villanova: 160 (no change), 3.57 (+.24)

Class size shrunk from 251 to 218 (~13%).

The incoming class shrunk from 303 to 186, an astounding 39% decrease.

[Ford Prefect]

Mizzou posted earlier this week. Or last week. I don't remember

http://law.missouri.edu/admissions/classprofile.html

158/3.49

I think the LSAT is a point down. Don't know about the GPA. Our class size dropped from 149/150 last year to 133.

[Robespierre]

George Mason: --LinkRemoved--

Medians were unchanged at 3.72/164. The incoming class shrunk from 303 to 186, an astounding 39% decrease.

Wow that is crazy. Is that the biggest decrease yet?

Far as I know, yup.

Schools below the T25-ish generally got clobbered. The majority either had median drops or had to shrink the class. It's a big development, but TLSers don't generally care about those schools so it's not drawing much discussion.

[Mavraides87]

Do you all expect this trend to continue for this cycle (constant/falling medians or smaller class sizes)?

[KevinP]

Do you all expect this trend to continue for this cycle (constant/falling medians or smaller class sizes)?

Yes. June had an 18.7% decrease in the number of test takers from last year. Assuming the score distribution is similar to previous years*, this is significant because June has the second highest mean LSAT (151.68 for 2009-2010) and the highest percentage of top test takers (SD = 10.51 for 2009-2010).

*This is a dangerous assumption since the drop may have been from lower end of test takers. However, this assumption has worked with the recent drop in test takers.

[minnbills]

+1 I think we will see more drop offs at the lower end of schools. Though the developments in UIUC suggest it could be having a bigger effect than we realize at higher-ranked schools too.

[Robespierre]

Do you all expect this trend to continue for this cycle (constant/falling medians or smaller class sizes)?

By the laws of arithmetic, the trend has to continue if the number of applications continues to decrease. Will they decrease this year? Probably so, in light of the decrease in June LSAT takers and all the "Don't Go To Law School" articles in the media.

The only question is whether the decrease will be incremental or major. If incremental, I think we'll see another mixed bag of modest median drops, shrinking classes, and subtle maneuvering to maintain selectivity. If major, who knows? You could see significant median drops at the top and, at the bottom, a couple of TTTT schools closing their doors.

[minnbills]

I think the # of well-qualified applicants won't really change, and it will be business as usual for the T14.

On the other hand, Cornell dropped its GPA median to 3.66 which is a little sketchy, UIUC happened, and UMN dropped its 25th to 158, so the writing may be on the wall for some more drops for some of these T1s.

[Robespierre]

I think the # of well-qualified applicants won't really change, and it will be business as usual for the T14.

On the other hand, Cornell dropped its GPA median to 3.66 which is a little sketchy, UIUC happened, and UMN dropped its 25th to 158, so the writing may be on the wall for some more drops for some of these T1s.

Also Duke dropped its GPA median, and several shrunk their classes: Duke, Berkeley, Iowa, WUStL to name a few.

[minnbills]

I think the # of well-qualified applicants won't really change, and it will be business as usual for the T14.

On the other hand, Cornell dropped its GPA median to 3.66 which is a little sketchy, UIUC happened, and UMN dropped its 25th to 158, so the writing may be on the wall for some more drops for some of these T1s.

Also Duke dropped its GPA median, and several shrunk their classes: Duke, Berkeley, Iowa, WUStL to name a few.

Interesting, I didn't realize that.

[KevinP]

I think the # of well-qualified applicants won't really change, and it will be business as usual for the T14.

On the other hand, Cornell dropped its GPA median to 3.66 which is a little sketchy, UIUC happened, and UMN dropped its 25th to 158, so the writing may be on the wall for some more drops for some of these T1s.

I'm not so sure that is the case. Here's a couple reasons why:

~50% of the drop in test takers last year was from December which is both later in the cycle and historically has a significantly lower percentage of top test takers. (Mean = 150.11, SD = 9.92). Approximate result: A 170 is the 97.8th percentile, ~2.2% of December test takers score a 170+.

Now consider June (Mean = 151.68, 10.51). Approximate result: A 170 is the 95.9th percentile, ~4.1% of June test takers score a 170+. Last year there actually was an increase in the number of June test takers (1.2%) while this year there was a massive decrease (-18.7%).

Just based on the aforementioned results, I would expect a more significant drop in the number of high-end test takers especially because of the decrease in June. I realize this drop may not be as significant as the percentages indicate since December historically has a higher number of test takers. In other words, be aware of the shift from percentages to absolutes.

*I realize I'm extrapolating which in turn requires a lot of unwarranted assumptions (Distributions of scores will be similar, the number of test takers is proportional to the number of applicants, October will show a similar decrease, etc). As such, my analysis should be taken as purely speculative.
*I used data from 2009-2010 for calculations.

[Gizmo]

Just based on the aforementioned results, I would expect a more significant drop in the number of high-end test takers especially because of the decrease in June.

I hope so. Otherwise, how am I gonna get into Chicago now?

[jmoney]

I think the # of well-qualified applicants won't really change, and it will be business as usual for the T14.

On the other hand, Cornell dropped its GPA median to 3.66 which is a little sketchy, UIUC happened, and UMN dropped its 25th to 158, so the writing may be on the wall for some more drops for some of these T1s.

Also Duke dropped its GPA median, and several shrunk their classes: Duke, Berkeley, Iowa, WUStL to name a few.

Berkeley seemed to be compensating for an unusually large 2010 incoming class (292) with a smaller class this year (254). The target class size is 270, so it would make sense that the smaller class was driven by something other than a concern for "dropping medians." Really though, Berkeley isn't obsessed about numbers (or medians, for that matter).

[beachbum]

I think the # of well-qualified applicants won't really change, and it will be business as usual for the T14.

On the other hand, Cornell dropped its GPA median to 3.66 which is a little sketchy, UIUC happened, and UMN dropped its 25th to 158, so the writing may be on the wall for some more drops for some of these T1s.

Also Duke dropped its GPA median, and several shrunk their classes: Duke, Berkeley, Iowa, WUStL to name a few.

Berkeley seemed to be compensating for an unusually large 2010 incoming class (292) with a smaller class this year (254). The target class size is 270, so it would make sense that the smaller class was driven by something other than a concern for "dropping medians." Really though, Berkeley isn't obsessed about numbers (or medians, for that matter).

A similar statement can be made for Duke. Last year was over-enrolled; this year (212 students) is just a return to the norm.

[birdlaw117]

For the record, I think NYU is in the same boat. It just isn't as noticeable with a much larger class, but I think we're about 20 seats smaller (based 100% on memory, so I'm probably wrong). But this class is a normal size and last year was extra big.

[Robespierre]

If you have a big drop in applications, which Duke, Berkeley and NYU all did, it seems like a simple and logical way to preserve your selectivity, i.e. medians, would be to aim for a smaller class. But you guys are saying no, it didn't happen that way, all three schools were simply correcting for major oversubscriptions in '10? All three schools mismanaged their enrollment in the same year? And it all shook out in such a way that they ended up with virtually unchanged medians? And were the 20 or so other law schools that decreased class size in '11 correcting for oversubscriptions too?

Doesn't sound right to me, guys.

[birdlaw117]

If you have a big drop in applications, which Duke, Berkeley and NYU all did, it seems like a simple and logical way to preserve your selectivity, i.e. medians, would be to aim for a smaller class. But you guys are saying no, it didn't happen that way, all three schools were simply correcting for major oversubscriptions in '10? All three schools mismanaged their enrollment in the same year? And it all shook out in such a way that they ended up with virtually unchanged medians? And were the 20 or so other law schools that decreased class size in '11 correcting for oversubscriptions too?

Doesn't sound right to me, guys.

I can't speak for Duke or Boalt, but at least for NYU our class size this year is actually higher than the data on the NYU Profile page on this site. So this definitely was not decreasing the size in order to preserve medians. Even at last year's ASW they said the previous year they screwed up and had too many people matriculate, so they were going to be really sure about having the right size class this year.

Also, it would make sense that if applications were really high the previous year that schools could have all had the same issue with having an abnormally large class.

[edgarfigaro]

If you have a big drop in applications, which Duke, Berkeley and NYU all did, it seems like a simple and logical way to preserve your selectivity, i.e. medians, would be to aim for a smaller class. But you guys are saying no, it didn't happen that way, all three schools were simply correcting for major oversubscriptions in '10? All three schools mismanaged their enrollment in the same year? And it all shook out in such a way that they ended up with virtually unchanged medians? And were the 20 or so other law schools that decreased class size in '11 correcting for oversubscriptions too?

Doesn't sound right to me, guys.

Duke actually over enrolled 2 years in a row, not just last year. So there's that.

[beachbum]

If you have a big drop in applications, which Duke, Berkeley and NYU all did, it seems like a simple and logical way to preserve your selectivity, i.e. medians, would be to aim for a smaller class. But you guys are saying no, it didn't happen that way, all three schools were simply correcting for major oversubscriptions in '10? All three schools mismanaged their enrollment in the same year? And it all shook out in such a way that they ended up with virtually unchanged medians? And were the 20 or so other law schools that decreased class size in '11 correcting for oversubscriptions too?

Doesn't sound right to me, guys.

What? It doesn't sound right that, in the cycle that had an explosion of applicants, several top schools over-enrolled? And that, now with a much smaller applicant pool, they're returning to "normal" class sizes?

I can't speak for other schools, but Duke wasn't prepared last cycle for so many applicants to matriculate. But that was just the nature of the large and unpredictable (due to the economy?) applicant pool. So they handed out a lot of acceptances to very qualified applicants, expecting (as in a "normal" year) a sizable portion of those applicants to go somewhere else. But an unusually large number chose to attend Duke, causing both the medians and the class size to shoot up. Duke never even touched the waitlist.

And this cycle, with a much smaller and more manageable applicant pool, and with the experience of last cycle, Duke was more prepared in handing out acceptances. They also used the waitlist. The medians didn't change much because Duke, like Boalt and NYU, is a top school, and top schools get a lot of very qualified applicants. Maybe they weren't able to cherry-pick the "best" applicants (i.e. great numbers + great softs) like they were last year, but there are a lot of qualified applicants out there, even if this cycle didn't have as many of them as last cycle.

[tennisking88]

If you have a big drop in applications, which Duke, Berkeley and NYU all did, it seems like a simple and logical way to preserve your selectivity, i.e. medians, would be to aim for a smaller class. But you guys are saying no, it didn't happen that way, all three schools were simply correcting for major oversubscriptions in '10? All three schools mismanaged their enrollment in the same year? And it all shook out in such a way that they ended up with virtually unchanged medians? And were the 20 or so other law schools that decreased class size in '11 correcting for oversubscriptions too?

Doesn't sound right to me, guys.

I doubt Duke/NYU/Boalt and other T10s will drop out of the T10 just because the medians drop a few points. Most of US News weight is based on reputation and that's why the T10/14 has rarely changed and will prob stay as such.