ITT: New School Medians Revealed Forum

[HyeMart]

sound's like schools just trying to sell themselves, "yea we were big last year, but dont you worry, your class will be smaller." eventually perpetual 'over enrollment' becomes normal enrollment

[duckmoney]

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.

There are 3 UChicago UGs in the law school class this year...

[HyeMart]

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?

I forgot the GPA, but the lsat median for full and part time together was 167 again.

[birdlaw117]

sound's like schools just trying to sell themselves, "yea we were big last year, but dont you worry, your class will be smaller." eventually perpetual 'over enrollment' becomes normal enrollment

Which is why only one year would be abnormal, while every other year in the past decade would be normal...

[Blindmelon]

BU Law:
•Median LSAT: 167 (range 154–175)
•Median GPA: 3.72 (range 2.75–4.00)

They cut their class size by about 30 it seems too.

http://www.bu.edu/law/prospective/jd/class_profile/

[Tiago Splitter]

BU Law:
•Median LSAT: 167 (range 154–175)
•Median GPA: 3.72 (range 2.75–4.00)

They cut their class size by about 30 it seems too.

http://www.bu.edu/law/prospective/jd/class_profile/

That's a one point LSAT gain for BU.

[thelaststraw05]

Sorry I didn't see this thread earlier, but at Michigan we did get the information emailed to 1Ls about 3 weeks ago.

75th Percentile:
LSAT: 170 (-1)
GPA: 3.87 (+.02)

50th Percentile:
LSAT: 169 (n/c)
GPA: 3.76 (+.03)

25th Percentile:
LSAT: 167 (-1)
GPA: 3.59 (+.02)

70% of admitted students took at least one year off after undergrad.

Enrollment dropped 4.5%.

http://www.law.umich.edu/prospectivestu ... stics.aspx

[minnbills]

BU Law:
•Median LSAT: 167 (range 154–175)
•Median GPA: 3.72 (range 2.75–4.00)

They cut their class size by about 30 it seems too.

http://www.bu.edu/law/prospective/jd/class_profile/

That's a one point LSAT gain for BU.

That's impressive, interested to see how BC did.

[soj]

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.

There are 3 UChicago UGs in the law school class this year...

In which case you could replace them with 4.0s and the median GPA likely won't go up at all.

Just trying to point out TaipeiMort's ridiculous exaggerations, that's all.

[Hawkeye Pierce]

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.

There are 3 UChicago UGs in the law school class this year...

In which case you could replace them with 4.0s and the median GPA likely won't go up at all.

Just trying to point out TaipeiMort's ridiculous exaggerations, that's all.

But, Chicago is on par with and at times better than H and S.

[Robespierre]

Looks like we can add BU and Michigan to the list of schools that were overenrolled last year and corrected the problem this year. And WUStL, Iowa, George Mason and ten others, too. That was quite an epidemic of overenrollment in Fall '10. Amazing.

[minnbills]

Looks like we can add BU and Michigan to the list of schools that were overenrolled last year and corrected the problem this year. And WUStL, Iowa, George Mason and ten others, too. That was quite an epidemic of overenrollment in Fall '10. Amazing.

+1 even Pless was saying they had overenrolled...

I was just browsing the UMN website and they dropped their 25th to 157, not 158

[TheFutureLawyer]

Does anyone know GW's numbers yet?

[Kabuo]

Looks like we can add BU and Michigan to the list of schools that were overenrolled last year and corrected the problem this year. And WUStL, Iowa, George Mason and ten others, too. That was quite an epidemic of overenrollment in Fall '10. Amazing.

+1 even Pless was saying they had overenrolled...

I was just browsing the UMN website and they dropped their 25th to 157, not 158

The difference between the 25th% and the median is ~15 extra questions right . UMN seems like a great school for seeing how large LSAT gaps play out on a single curve.

[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.

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.

First bolded: There was no explosion of applicants in the Fall '10 cycle. The number of applicants rose only 1.5% over the previous year. http://www.lsac.org/LSACResources/Data/ ... ummary.asp

Second bolded: The economy is always unpredictable.

Third bolded: Duke's yield for Fall '10 was 22.8%. See the ABA data on the LSAC site. That's "unusually large"? Doesn't sound like it. Link us to something that indicates this please.

Fourth bolded: The class size was 238. Ibid. That's pretty small. Does that represent a "shoot up" from the previous few years? Link us to something that indicates this please.

In other words, your reasoning is sound but I would question some of your underlying facts. If you can back up those facts I'll gladly defer.

Congrats on getting into Duke, that is an awesome school.

[birdlaw117]

Looks like we can add BU and Michigan to the list of schools that were overenrolled last year and corrected the problem this year. And WUStL, Iowa, George Mason and ten others, too. That was quite an epidemic of overenrollment in Fall '10. Amazing.

Your sarcasm has been noted.

Just because top schools overenrolled last year (which would have probably hurt medians) doesn't mean there is some conspiracy out there. Fortunately, we have data. And, since I'm lazy, I can just look at LSN's class profile that is way outdated, and TLS's which is outdated. Both of those show a class size of 448. This year is 450. Now, I'm no mathematician, but I'm pretty sure 450 > 448, rather than way less. I'm not really sure why you have to be told multiple times in multiple ways.

[Robespierre]

Looks like we can add BU and Michigan to the list of schools that were overenrolled last year and corrected the problem this year. And WUStL, Iowa, George Mason and ten others, too. That was quite an epidemic of overenrollment in Fall '10. Amazing.

Your sarcasm has been noted.

Just because top schools overenrolled last year (which would have probably hurt medians) doesn't mean there is some conspiracy out there. Fortunately, we have data. And, since I'm lazy, I can just look at LSN's class profile that is way outdated, and TLS's which is outdated. Both of those show a class size of 448. This year is 450. Now, I'm no mathematician, but I'm pretty sure 450 > 448, rather than way less. I'm not really sure why you have to be told multiple times in multiple ways.

Wait a minute. Are you talking about NYU? Yesterday you said "I think we're about 20 seats smaller," and I took you at your word since it sounds like you go there. Now you're sarcastically lecturing me on how the class is actually bigger. Which is it? If the class this year was cut, we can discuss whether it was a correction to overenrollment in '10 or an attempt to maintain medians for '11. If the class has not been cut, there's nothing to discuss. But please, give us the facts and stick to them.

And no one's talking about any "conspiracy." I don't know where you're getting that.

[birdlaw117]

Looks like we can add BU and Michigan to the list of schools that were overenrolled last year and corrected the problem this year. And WUStL, Iowa, George Mason and ten others, too. That was quite an epidemic of overenrollment in Fall '10. Amazing.

Your sarcasm has been noted.

Just because top schools overenrolled last year (which would have probably hurt medians) doesn't mean there is some conspiracy out there. Fortunately, we have data. And, since I'm lazy, I can just look at LSN's class profile that is way outdated, and TLS's which is outdated. Both of those show a class size of 448. This year is 450. Now, I'm no mathematician, but I'm pretty sure 450 > 448, rather than way less. I'm not really sure why you have to be told multiple times in multiple ways.

Wait a minute. Are you talking about NYU? Yesterday you said "I think we're about 20 seats smaller," and I took you at your word since it sounds like you go there. Now you're sarcastically lecturing me on how the class is actually bigger. Which is it? If the class this year was cut, we can discuss whether it was a correction to overenrollment in '10 or an attempt to maintain medians for '11. If the class has not been cut, there's nothing to discuss. But please, give us the facts and stick to them.

And no one's talking about any "conspiracy." I don't know where you're getting that.

Those class profiles are like 4 years old. So I was comparing it with the normal class size. I feel like it's pretty obvious which schools are decreasing class sizes in an attempt to maintain medians and when they are returning to normal class sizes. Mostly I was using NYU as an example for you to stop asking silly questions about Duke and Boalt. And to not put them in the same category as Iowa, George Mason, etc.

[Robespierre]

Looks like we can add BU and Michigan to the list of schools that were overenrolled last year and corrected the problem this year. And WUStL, Iowa, George Mason and ten others, too. That was quite an epidemic of overenrollment in Fall '10. Amazing.

Your sarcasm has been noted.

Just because top schools overenrolled last year (which would have probably hurt medians) doesn't mean there is some conspiracy out there. Fortunately, we have data. And, since I'm lazy, I can just look at LSN's class profile that is way outdated, and TLS's which is outdated. Both of those show a class size of 448. This year is 450. Now, I'm no mathematician, but I'm pretty sure 450 > 448, rather than way less. I'm not really sure why you have to be told multiple times in multiple ways.

Wait a minute. Are you talking about NYU? Yesterday you said "I think we're about 20 seats smaller," and I took you at your word since it sounds like you go there. Now you're sarcastically lecturing me on how the class is actually bigger. Which is it? If the class this year was cut, we can discuss whether it was a correction to overenrollment in '10 or an attempt to maintain medians for '11. If the class has not been cut, there's nothing to discuss. But please, give us the facts and stick to them.

And no one's talking about any "conspiracy." I don't know where you're getting that.

Those class profiles are like 4 years old. So I was comparing it with the normal class size. I feel like it's pretty obvious which schools are decreasing class sizes in an attempt to maintain medians and when they are returning to normal class sizes. Mostly I was using NYU as an example for you to stop asking silly questions about Duke and Boalt. And to not put them in the same category as Iowa, George Mason, etc.

Please answer the question. Did NYU's class shrink this year, or not? If you don't know, just say so. It's not a problem. I didn't think the class shrunk, but you said "we're about 20 seats smaller."

With regard to the bolded, which ones are decreasing class sizes to maintain medians and which are returning to normal class sizes? I'd like to hear your views on that since you seem like a bright guy.

(Btw, I'll ask whatever questions I please and discuss whichever schools I want.)

[SG09]

...

[thelaststraw05]

Please answer the question. Did NYU's class shrink this year, or not? If you don't know, just say so. It's not a problem. I didn't think the class shrunk, but you said "we're about 20 seats smaller."

With regard to the bolded, which ones are decreasing class sizes to maintain medians and which are returning to normal class sizes? I'd like to hear your views on that since you seem like a bright guy.

(Btw, I'll ask whatever questions I please and discuss whichever schools I want.)

Michigan has been over-enrolled the last couple years and just returned to their typical enrollment this year. They have said each year for a few years that their target is 360. They want 4 sections of 90 each. This year they manage to get to almost exactly 360.

Dean Zearfoss tells a funny story about the class that started in 2003 that ended up over 400, but the goal has been about 360.

[rayiner]

Northwestern has posted new information: http://www.law.northwestern.edu/admissions/profile/

- Class shrunk by 3%, from 273 to 264 (including AJDs).
- Applicants stayed about the same.
- LSAT 25th down to 165.
- Average age is up from 25 to 26.
- W/E is way down, from 3/97/88% with 0/1/2+ years to 5/95/79%.

[TheFutureLawyer]

Does anyone know GW's numbers yet?

I forgot the GPA, but the lsat median for full and part time together was 167 again.

For this year? Where'd you hear 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.

First bolded: There was no explosion of applicants in the Fall '10 cycle. The number of applicants rose only 1.5% over the previous year. http://www.lsac.org/LSACResources/Data/ ... ummary.asp

Second bolded: The economy is always unpredictable.

Third bolded: Duke's yield for Fall '10 was 22.8%. See the ABA data on the LSAC site. That's "unusually large"? Doesn't sound like it. Link us to something that indicates this please.

Fourth bolded: The class size was 238. Ibid. That's pretty small. Does that represent a "shoot up" from the previous few years? Link us to something that indicates this please.

In other words, your reasoning is sound but I would question some of your underlying facts. If you can back up those facts I'll gladly defer.

Congrats on getting into Duke, that is an awesome school.

First: Ha, ok. Since we're discussing Duke specifically, I'll point to Duke-specific data. For the class of 2013, Duke received 7900 applications, compared to the 6300 applications it received the prior year (which, though I can't find the data on a quick google search, I'll assume was larger still than the year before given the increase in overall applications from the previous year). For a class of ~200, that's a pretty solid "explosion."

Second: I was referencing the unpredictability of the applicants, who might have been acting in response to a bleak economy. The greater number of applications paired with an applicant pool who seems to be taking cues from the economy (i.e. as in deciding whether/where to matriculate) makes for an unpredictable cycle.

Third: You got me here, chief.

Fourth: Duke was also over-enrolled for the class of 2012, with 228. We typically have much closer to 200 (see LSN, or Google, or whatever). FWIW, though, doesn't the two years of over-enrollment corresponding to the two years of increased applications prove my point that increased applications --> over-enrollment? With a more "normal" number of applications this year, we have a more "normal" class size (212).

[birdlaw117]

Please answer the question. Did NYU's class shrink this year, or not? If you don't know, just say so. It's not a problem. I didn't think the class shrunk, but you said "we're about 20 seats smaller."

With regard to the bolded, which ones are decreasing class sizes to maintain medians and which are returning to normal class sizes? I'd like to hear your views on that since you seem like a bright guy.

(Btw, I'll ask whatever questions I please and discuss whichever schools I want.)

wtf... Yes, I said NYU is 20 seats smaller than last year (roughly, I don't know last year's numbers and I'm not going to do all your research for you). Which, if my math is correct, means it shrunk.

It's pretty obvious that a school with an anomalously large class size last year (like Duke, Boalt, and NYU) is decreasing in an attempt to hit the class size they want. On the other hand, a school like George Mason who decreased by a large percentage from a typical class size to a smaller size, is probably doing it because of medians (or perhaps some other reason).

With respect to the bolded, get over yourself.