Top Law Schools

Does any one know where to find the statistics of applicants, as opposed to admits, to the top 14 law schools?

(In other words something that resembles this from UCLA's undergrad: http://www.admissions.ucla.edu/prospect ... 09_mjr.htm which shows both applicant stats and admit stats)

I've been looking for it for the law schools but can't find it. All I find is the admitted student statistics that we all know about.

True, but I was hoping for something published by the law schools themselves. Because it would show the "average GPA/LSAT applied; and average GPA/LSAT admitted."

Such listings would be neatly organized, and moreover they'd be official, know what I mean?

ComatoseClown wrote:True, but I was hoping for something published by the law schools themselves. Because it would show the "average GPA/LSAT applied; and average GPA/LSAT admitted."

Such listings would be neatly organized, and moreover they'd be official, know what I mean?

Good one

Only a few schools post this. GWU is one of them, link is below.

http://www.law.gwu.edu/Admissions/JD/Pages/Profile.aspx

Why don't more schools post this? Do they want to convince us it's not all about the numbers?

whymeohgodno wrote:Why don't more schools post this? Do they want to convince us it's not all about the numbers?

I think that this shows that it isn't all about the numbers. Showing that not all applicants above threshold x/y were offered admission indicates they are considering other elements.

Maybe other schools have more disheartening grids.

Your UG prelaw advisor has those stats for applicants from your UG.

LSAC does have the applicant data for every school (at least for applicants who apply through LSAC, which is probably the vast majority of them), but they must choose not to release it.

I don't get it. What's the point of knowing this?

Yale: http://officialguide.lsac.org/Release/S ... AC3987.pdf

Duke: http://officialguide.lsac.org/Release/S ... AC5156.pdf

bdubs wrote:

whymeohgodno wrote:Why don't more schools post this? Do they want to convince us it's not all about the numbers?

I think that this shows that it isn't all about the numbers. Showing that not all applicants above threshold x/y were offered admission indicates they are considering other elements.

Maybe other schools have more disheartening grids.

Well you have to consider:

1. Multiple LSATs which grids don't count for

2. When the application came in. I would assume post Christmas applications could very well be a waitlist even though the applicant has strong numbers.

whymeohgodno wrote:

bdubs wrote:

whymeohgodno wrote:Why don't more schools post this? Do they want to convince us it's not all about the numbers?

I think that this shows that it isn't all about the numbers. Showing that not all applicants above threshold x/y were offered admission indicates they are considering other elements.

Maybe other schools have more disheartening grids.

Well you have to consider:

1. Multiple LSATs which grids don't count for

2. When the application came in. I would assume post Christmas applications could very well be a waitlist even though the applicant has strong numbers.

Prevailing thought seems to be that very few schools actually care about retakes anymore.

I fail to see how timing is really a huge issue here, it should be relatively uniform across all applicant categories (unless you think a 4.0 GPA indicates you are less likely to apply around the deadline)

bdubs wrote:

whymeohgodno wrote:

bdubs wrote:

whymeohgodno wrote:Why don't more schools post this? Do they want to convince us it's not all about the numbers?

I think that this shows that it isn't all about the numbers. Showing that not all applicants above threshold x/y were offered admission indicates they are considering other elements.

Maybe other schools have more disheartening grids.

Well you have to consider:

1. Multiple LSATs which grids don't count for

2. When the application came in. I would assume post Christmas applications could very well be a waitlist even though the applicant has strong numbers.

Prevailing thought seems to be that very few schools actually care about retakes anymore.

I fail to see how timing is really a huge issue here, it should be relatively uniform across all applicant categories (unless you think a 4.0 GPA indicates you are less likely to apply around the deadline)

Maybe yield protection then?

any other link to such schools as ucla, usc, uc davis/hastings/irvine, GU, cornell?

paulshortys10 wrote:any other link to such schools as ucla, usc, uc davis/hastings/irvine, GU, cornell?

A lot of these can probably be found on LSAC.org ... if you select a school, it should give you the option to select "ABA School Data" or something. Many of the pages have grids like those you see above.

The Duke stats really confound me.

whymeohgodno wrote:The Duke stats really confound me.

The bands for Duke are so wide that they are pretty much useless. 170-180 is a big big grouping which encompasses a large number of their admits.

bdubs wrote:

whymeohgodno wrote:The Duke stats really confound me.

The bands for Duke are so wide that they are pretty much useless. 170-180 is a big big grouping which encompasses a large number of their admits.

But I mean...3.75+/170+ that means they were above both medians (during that cycle).

So did Duke become really holistic or has TLS wisdom about numbers been wrong? I mean over half weren't admitted wth.

whymeohgodno wrote:

bdubs wrote:

whymeohgodno wrote:The Duke stats really confound me.

The bands for Duke are so wide that they are pretty much useless. 170-180 is a big big grouping which encompasses a large number of their admits.

But I mean...3.75+/170+ that means they were above both medians (during that cycle).

So did Duke become really holistic or has TLS wisdom about numbers been wrong? I mean over half weren't admitted wth.

Failure to write a "why duke"?? Seems like a YP issue to me, they do WL a number of people on PT (usually above at least LSAT median).

bdubs wrote:

whymeohgodno wrote:

bdubs wrote:

whymeohgodno wrote:The Duke stats really confound me.

The bands for Duke are so wide that they are pretty much useless. 170-180 is a big big grouping which encompasses a large number of their admits.

But I mean...3.75+/170+ that means they were above both medians (during that cycle).

So did Duke become really holistic or has TLS wisdom about numbers been wrong? I mean over half weren't admitted wth.

Failure to write a "why duke"?? Seems like a YP issue to me, they do WL a number of people on PT (usually above at least LSAT median).

I hope it's a YP issue. I seriously do.

where is duke's?

MissLucky wrote:where is duke's?

http://officialguide.lsac.org/Release/S ... AC5156.pdf

paulshortys10 wrote:any other link to such schools as ucla, usc, uc davis/hastings/irvine, GU, cornell?

Go on the LSAC site and look at the school profiles. UCLA and USC put them out, GULC and Cornell don't. I am not applying to davis/hastings/irvine so i didn't look.

Could this be explained by the fact that we're talking "admitted" rather than "offered admittance". I have no idea how big Duke's class is

edit: oops nm probly not that big

yep pretty much every single school has them up on LSAC....u have to download the school description PDF..