Top Law Schools

Any predictions? I've read conflicting reports on the 2009/2010 cycle..

This is a good question. I think the answer is no one can know for sure. I'm going to guess that it will be the hardest cycle ever, just because that is the cycle that I am applying in...and that's just how my luck goes

In any event, i'm preparing like this will be the most bloodthirsty and vicious cycle yet

There is no reason to assume so.

I'd be willing to bet that it's going to be easier than this cycle... IMO, it's pretty much guaranteed.

that being said, I have no idea how much easier it will be

capitalacq wrote:I'd be willing to bet that it's going to be easier than this cycle... IMO, it's pretty much guaranteed.

Why?

T14_Scholly wrote:

capitalacq wrote:I'd be willing to bet that it's going to be easier than this cycle... IMO, it's pretty much guaranteed.

Why?

no hard facts or anything..

but this last cycle was the freakout cycle. The timing of the economic crisis made it incredibly difficult for the class of 2009 to find jobs and the class of 2010 to find internships/jobs, causing many from both classes to take the LSAT and apply to LS. The job/internship situation for the class of 2011 is better so you shouldn't see so many ppl freakout and apply to LS, and while there will still be some class of 2010 applicants, they wont be as numerous as the class of 2009 applicants that applied last cycle.

^+1

After all of the headlines surrouding lay offs, deferrals and the shaky job siutation, a lot of kids in my class are deciding to wait a couple years instead of applying fresh out of UG - as originally planned.

I don't think there is conclusive evidence that it will be harder or easier.

I think it will be more competitive next year. I am realizing that since the ABA rules as to LSAT score reporting have changed from "report the average score" to "report the highest score," people are tending to retake the LSAT three or even four times to get the highest score possible and to get into the best school possible with the most amount of money -- I've read of instances of people with high scores (170+) retaking and aiming for even a couple points more. Granted, TLS is a very selective sample, but from postings on this site and interactions with others, it seems that people who got into pretty good schools are opting to put off admissions to retake the LSAT so as to get into the top schools with money. Because this cycle was so unpredictable, the next cycle will be more competitive as there will be more of a concentration of high LSAT scorers in the mix next year.

Bert wrote:I think it will be more competitive next year. I am realizing that since the ABA rules as to LSAT score reporting have changed from "report the average score" to "report the highest score," people are tending to retake the LSAT three or even four times to get the highest score possible and to get into the best school possible with the most amount of money -- I've read of instances of people with high scores (170+) retaking and aiming for even a couple points more. Granted, TLS is a very selective sample, but from postings on this site and interactions with others, it seems that people who got into pretty good schools are opting to put off admissions to retake the LSAT so as to get into the top schools with money. Because this cycle was so unpredictable, the next cycle will be more competitive as there will be more of a concentration of high LSAT scorers in the mix next year.

That policy changed years ago, and score inflation already happened, years ago.

Grad school admissions are heavily influenced by the economy. More importantly, grad school admissions are a lagging economic indicator--they spike after things go sour. 2009-2010 admissions cycle essentially corresponded to the economic crisis. But things are slowly starting to turn around, which should bring the application numbers back down. In the month of April, the US added 290000 jobs in the non-farm sector; these of the sorts of things that'll have an effect on how competitive 2010-2011 will be.

If you look at old admissions cycle charts, you usually see that huge spike post-crash, and then things start to even out again. We'll see, I guess, but I think things will start to normalize next cycle.

Desert Fox wrote:

Bert wrote:I think it will be more competitive next year. I am realizing that since the ABA rules as to LSAT score reporting have changed from "report the average score" to "report the highest score," people are tending to retake the LSAT three or even four times to get the highest score possible and to get into the best school possible with the most amount of money -- I've read of instances of people with high scores (170+) retaking and aiming for even a couple points more. Granted, TLS is a very selective sample, but from postings on this site and interactions with others, it seems that people who got into pretty good schools are opting to put off admissions to retake the LSAT so as to get into the top schools with money. Because this cycle was so unpredictable, the next cycle will be more competitive as there will be more of a concentration of high LSAT scorers in the mix next year.

That policy changed years ago, and score inflation already happened, years ago.

You are correct in the timing aspect, but I definitely see a trend in people retaking scores that used to be considered a lock for top schools for even a couple more points (admittedly, the data for that assertion comes from self-selecting sources). However, the fact still remains that more people are taking/retaking the LSAT which will make the LSAT pool more competitive.

Bert wrote:

Desert Fox wrote:

Bert wrote:I think it will be more competitive next year. I am realizing that since the ABA rules as to LSAT score reporting have changed from "report the average score" to "report the highest score," people are tending to retake the LSAT three or even four times to get the highest score possible and to get into the best school possible with the most amount of money -- I've read of instances of people with high scores (170+) retaking and aiming for even a couple points more. Granted, TLS is a very selective sample, but from postings on this site and interactions with others, it seems that people who got into pretty good schools are opting to put off admissions to retake the LSAT so as to get into the top schools with money. Because this cycle was so unpredictable, the next cycle will be more competitive as there will be more of a concentration of high LSAT scorers in the mix next year.

That policy changed years ago, and score inflation already happened, years ago.

You are correct in the timing aspect, but I definitely see a trend in people retaking scores that used to be considered a lock for top schools for even a couple more points (admittedly, the data for that assertion comes from self-selecting sources). However, the fact still remains that more people are taking/retaking the LSAT which will make the LSAT pool more competitive.

Unless you come up with LSAC data, I'm not going to believe this.

Bert wrote:

Desert Fox wrote:

Bert wrote:I think it will be more competitive next year. I am realizing that since the ABA rules as to LSAT score reporting have changed from "report the average score" to "report the highest score," people are tending to retake the LSAT three or even four times to get the highest score possible and to get into the best school possible with the most amount of money -- I've read of instances of people with high scores (170+) retaking and aiming for even a couple points more. Granted, TLS is a very selective sample, but from postings on this site and interactions with others, it seems that people who got into pretty good schools are opting to put off admissions to retake the LSAT so as to get into the top schools with money. Because this cycle was so unpredictable, the next cycle will be more competitive as there will be more of a concentration of high LSAT scorers in the mix next year.

That policy changed years ago, and score inflation already happened, years ago.

You are correct in the timing aspect, but I definitely see a trend in people retaking scores that used to be considered a lock for top schools for even a couple more points (admittedly, the data for that assertion comes from self-selecting sources). However, the fact still remains that more people are taking/retaking the LSAT which will make the LSAT pool more competitive.

Sure, that might make the pool of test takers increase but not necessarliy the number of applicants.

februaryftw wrote:Grad school admissions are heavily influenced by the economy. More importantly, grad school admissions are a lagging economic indicator--they spike after things go sour. 2009-2010 admissions cycle essentially corresponded to the economic crisis. But things are slowly starting to turn around, which should bring the application numbers back down. In the month of April, the US added 290000 jobs in the non-farm sector; these of the sorts of things that'll have an effect on how competitive 2010-2011 will be.

If you look at old admissions cycle charts, you usually see that huge spike post-crash, and then things start to even out again. We'll see, I guess, but I think things will start to normalize next cycle.

Agree with most of the above, but I really think that there is one more year in the spike before things return to normal. Also, and not intending to start any sort of debate on the validity of unemployment statistics because we all know it won't end well, isn't the 290K number you quoted the aggregate number of new jobs created (which number includes the 66K people hired in connection with the 2010 census who will, by virtue of the fact that their employment is only temporary, be unemployed soon enough)?

DavidYurman85 wrote:

Bert wrote:

Desert Fox wrote:

Bert wrote:I think it will be more competitive next year. I am realizing that since the ABA rules as to LSAT score reporting have changed from "report the average score" to "report the highest score," people are tending to retake the LSAT three or even four times to get the highest score possible and to get into the best school possible with the most amount of money -- I've read of instances of people with high scores (170+) retaking and aiming for even a couple points more. Granted, TLS is a very selective sample, but from postings on this site and interactions with others, it seems that people who got into pretty good schools are opting to put off admissions to retake the LSAT so as to get into the top schools with money. Because this cycle was so unpredictable, the next cycle will be more competitive as there will be more of a concentration of high LSAT scorers in the mix next year.

That policy changed years ago, and score inflation already happened, years ago.

You are correct in the timing aspect, but I definitely see a trend in people retaking scores that used to be considered a lock for top schools for even a couple more points (admittedly, the data for that assertion comes from self-selecting sources). However, the fact still remains that more people are taking/retaking the LSAT which will make the LSAT pool more competitive.

Sure, that might make the pool of test takers increase but not necessarliy the number of applicants.

Yeah, I could have phrased that a bit better, you are correct -- I meant that statement to tie into my previous statement that there will be an increased concentration of competitive scores than anything else. I was going with: more tests mean more scores which means more high scores (assuming that the "more scores" are not unevenly distributed).


I think see where the disconnect is. I am not saying that the application process will be more competitive because the number of people applying next year will be greater than the number of people applying this year. In fact, I don't believe that to be true -- I think that the trend towards more applicants than "normal" will continue, but I don't think that the number of applicants will exceed this years number of applicants. I think that the application process will be more competitive because the applicants will be more "qualified" (for lack of a better word), and not neccessarily because there are more applicants.

I predict that there will be a lot of "I got a gpa and lsat above median and got waitlisted/rejected so this must be the toughest/most unpredictable cycle ever because we know this has never happened in past years".... yeaaaaaa

Desert Fox wrote:

Bert wrote:

Desert Fox wrote:

Bert wrote:I think it will be more competitive next year. I am realizing that since the ABA rules as to LSAT score reporting have changed from "report the average score" to "report the highest score," people are tending to retake the LSAT three or even four times to get the highest score possible and to get into the best school possible with the most amount of money -- I've read of instances of people with high scores (170+) retaking and aiming for even a couple points more. Granted, TLS is a very selective sample, but from postings on this site and interactions with others, it seems that people who got into pretty good schools are opting to put off admissions to retake the LSAT so as to get into the top schools with money. Because this cycle was so unpredictable, the next cycle will be more competitive as there will be more of a concentration of high LSAT scorers in the mix next year.

That policy changed years ago, and score inflation already happened, years ago.

You are correct in the timing aspect, but I definitely see a trend in people retaking scores that used to be considered a lock for top schools for even a couple more points (admittedly, the data for that assertion comes from self-selecting sources). However, the fact still remains that more people are taking/retaking the LSAT which will make the LSAT pool more competitive.

Unless you come up with LSAC data, I'm not going to believe this.

+1

Bert wrote:I've read of instances of people with high scores (170+) retaking and aiming for even a couple points more.

Oh, hi.

I had a 169/3.4 when I applied to law school in 2007-08. I got into Cornell with a $75,000 scholarship.

My friend applied to Cornell a year later with a 169/3.6. Waitlisted.

According to Law School Numbers, there are students in the current admissions cycle with a 174/3.5 for whom Cornell was the best school they got into.

Economists have forecasted that the dow will dip to 5,000 sometime in 2011, causing even more baby boomers to hold on to their jobs. For students graduating with 200K in undergraduate debt, law school seems like a good alternative, especially considering the glamorization of lawyers in popular media.

So until the ABA requires more stringent "employed at graduation" numbers of law schools, I think this upward trend in competitiveness will continue.

.

mnewboldc wrote:I had a 169/3.4 when I applied to law school in 2007-08. I got into Cornell with a $75,000 scholarship.

My friend applied to Cornell a year later with a 169/3.6. Waitlisted.

According to Law School Numbers, there are students in the current admissions cycle with a 174/3.5 for whom Cornell was the best school they got into.

Economists have forecasted that the dow will dip to 5,000 sometime in 2011, causing even more baby boomers to hold on to their jobs. For students graduating with 200K in undergraduate debt, law school seems like a good alternative, especially considering the glamorization of lawyers in popular media.

So until the ABA requires more stringent "employed at graduation" numbers of law schools, I think this upward trend in competitiveness will continue.

Also, sources say that 15% of law schools will be shutting their doors or drastically reducing the number of students they take, and officials concur with this opinion. Experts agree.

Dentists recommend unwaxed floss.

eldizknee wrote:

mnewboldc wrote:Economists have forecasted that the dow will dip to 5,000 sometime in 2011

Cite your source?

If they're making that ridiculous claim, they're obviously nobody worth citing.

If the Dow drops below 5,000 in 2011, we're all going to have bigger problems. Like a depression. Where in the world did you hear that?

All I know is if Cornell receive another 50% increase in application (like they did this year), they might as well close down their admissions office or turn to robots.