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

[ThomasMN]

I think a drop in class size would be a great thing as it is rather obvious that there is an oversupply of lawyers. Here's top hoping that the OCI in 2013 (edited: this is why I shouldn't post without sleep) is just a little bit better because of this.

[Cornelius]

I think a drop in class size would be a great thing as it is rather obvious that there is an oversupply of lawyers. Here's top hoping that the OCI in 2016 is just a little bit better because of this.

I'd rather see a slew of fourth tier closures and better regulation by the ABA concerning opening new law schools.

[062914123]

.

[ThomasMN]

I think a drop in class size would be a great thing as it is rather obvious that there is an oversupply of lawyers. Here's top hoping that the OCI in 2016 is just a little bit better because of this.

I'd rather see a slew of fourth tier closures and better regulation by the ABA concerning opening new law schools.

+1 Agreed

[CwallXC322]

Do you believe that the lower number of test takers correlates to quicker results for LSAT?

-Stressed LSAT Test Waiter

[suspicious android]

February results don't take significantly less time than October, so.. no. Sorry bro.

[ahnhub]

Here's top hoping that the OCI in 2016 is just a little bit better because of this

2016? Are you in high school?

[Easy-E]

Here's top hoping that the OCI in 2016 is just a little bit better because of this

2016? Are you in high school?

I'm sure you're just messing around, but I'm a college graduate, and 2016 is when I'd be involved with OCI. Work experience and applying as early to a cycle as possible are great for splitters (like me, and maybe him, I don't know)

[Tiago Splitter]

Here's top hoping that the OCI in 2016 is just a little bit better because of this

2016? Are you in high school?

I'm sure you're just messing around, but I'm a college graduate, and 2016 is when I'd be involved with OCI. Work experience and applying as early to a cycle as possible are great for splitters (like me, and maybe him, I don't know)

OCI happens just before the second year of law school dawg.

[Easy-E]

I think a drop in class size would be a great thing as it is rather obvious that there is an oversupply of lawyers. Here's top hoping that the OCI in 2016 is just a little bit better because of this.

I'd rather see a slew of fourth tier closures and better regulation by the ABA concerning opening new law schools.

This would be worth it solely to stop hearing this response to my re-taking the LSAT: "Oh just go wherever you can get in! You'll get a good job no matter what!".

And my internal response of..

[Easy-E]

Here's top hoping that the OCI in 2016 is just a little bit better because of this

2016? Are you in high school?

I'm sure you're just messing around, but I'm a college graduate, and 2016 is when I'd be involved with OCI. Work experience and applying as early to a cycle as possible are great for splitters (like me, and maybe him, I don't know)

OCI happens just before the second year of law school dawg.

My mistake. Uninformed 0L here, coming off 9-5 job and 5-10 studying.

[ahnhub]

My mistake. Uninformed 0L here, coming off 9-5 job and 5-10 studying.

It's a good sign for you, it means you haven't been wasting your life away on TLS . I wish OCI happened third year. I have a feeling the speed of the whole process is going to take all of us 0Ls by surprise--in 21 months all of us applicants eagerly waiting to see where we get in now will know whether we hit the OCI jackpot.

[Jeffort]

Furthermore, the number of applicants is noticeably down. As of December, compared to last year, the number of applicants is significantly down. The decease is far sharper than the decrease last year (YTD).

Indeed, it looks like 2 cycles ago had ~ 24,000 applicants, last cycle had 23,000 applicants, and this cycle has ~19,000 applicants (all as of year end).

I find the disparity between year-end applicants and by-August applicants of the last two cycles interesting:
2 cycles ago: year end: 24,000 -> 87,000 by August
last cycle: year end: 23,000 -> 79,000 by August.

I think you misinterpreted the charts and statistical data in the LSAC publication linked in the above post/didn't put the data into full context and are extrapolating beyond what can be predicted from it about this cycle.

The figures you cited are mainly snapshots of brief periods of time in a few application cycles. As the article described, the behaviors of law school hopefuls and applicants have been and are continuing to change.

The overall number of qualified applicants has not diminished severely in a way that is likely to require good law schools to lower admission standards out of desperation in order to fill classes. It's a different story for lower tier schools.
http://www.lsac.org/LSACResources/Data/ ... ummary.asp

.

[WhiteGuy5]

I think a drop in class size would be a great thing as it is rather obvious that there is an oversupply of lawyers. Here's top hoping that the OCI in 2016 is just a little bit better because of this.

Yeah but...it would make schools more competitive.

[hyakku]

Furthermore, the number of applicants is noticeably down. As of December, compared to last year, the number of applicants is significantly down. The decease is far sharper than the decrease last year (YTD).

Indeed, it looks like 2 cycles ago had ~ 24,000 applicants, last cycle had 23,000 applicants, and this cycle has ~19,000 applicants (all as of year end).

I find the disparity between year-end applicants and by-August applicants of the last two cycles interesting:
2 cycles ago: year end: 24,000 -> 87,000 by August
last cycle: year end: 23,000 -> 79,000 by August.

I think you misinterpreted the charts and statistical data in the LSAC publication linked in the above post/didn't put the data into full context and are extrapolating beyond what can be predicted from it about this cycle.

The figures you cited are mainly snapshots of brief periods of time in a few application cycles. As the article described, the behaviors of law school hopefuls and applicants have been and are continuing to change.

The overall number of qualified applicants has not diminished severely in a way that is likely to require good law schools to lower admission standards out of desperation in order to fill classes. It's a different story for lower tier schools.
http://www.lsac.org/LSACResources/Data/ ... ummary.asp

.

I don't see any data to back your claim up in that link. Not saying your definitely wrong, but I'm not sure if you linked the right page.

I would venture to say that the applicant fall is likely pretty evenly spread out. Trying to use internal logic to figure out the macroscopic underpinnings of this test's administration won't work. For I agree, for example, that perhaps logic dictates that those who would score poorly or take it randomly are less likely to do so ITE and with the costs of the tests itself and registration being $300+ OTOH, I could also reason that higher scoring applicants that may already have decent jobs or access to another field will be less likely to attend LS knowing the risks ITE. All that can be said is less people are applying, and assuming no one drastically cuts class sizes, there may be slightly less competition.

[Blessedassurance]

Here's top hoping that the OCI in 2016 is just a little bit better because of this.

???

[crumpetsandtea]

Here's top hoping that the OCI in 2016 is just a little bit better because of this.

???

Dude, it got explained like 5 posts above you

http://top-law-schools.com/forums/viewt ... 5#p5054559

[Blessedassurance]

Here's top hoping that the OCI in 2016 is just a little bit better because of this.

???

Dude, it got explained like 5 posts above you

http://top-law-schools.com/forums/viewt ... 5#p5054559

The OP hasn't explained it.

[Cornelius]

I think you misinterpreted the charts and statistical data in the LSAC publication linked in the above post/didn't put the data into full context and are extrapolating beyond what can be predicted from it about this cycle.

Considering all I did was post the numbers presented without offering any opinion or conclusions; no, I didn't.

Trying too hard to find a place to use the word extrapolating, I think.

[Easy-E]

I think you misinterpreted the charts and statistical data in the LSAC publication linked in the above post/didn't put the data into full context and are extrapolating beyond what can be predicted from it about this cycle.

Considering all I did was post the numbers presented without offering any opinion or conclusions; no, I didn't.

Trying too hard to find a place to use the word extrapolating, I think.

Triple word score?

[Cornelius]

I think you misinterpreted the charts and statistical data in the LSAC publication linked in the above post/didn't put the data into full context and are extrapolating beyond what can be predicted from it about this cycle.

Considering all I did was post the numbers presented without offering any opinion or conclusions; no, I didn't.

Trying too hard to find a place to use the word extrapolating, I think.

Triple word score?

Hopefully with a triple letter for the x as well.

[KevinP]

Another thing that really caught my eye is that the number of applications to the T14 schools last year decreased more than the 9.9% decrease in applicants last year.

Decrease in applications last year (for schools that I found data)
Yale: -16.53%
Harvard: -15.98%
Columbia: -17.23%
UVA: -13.43%
Berkeley: -12.58%
Duke: -22.85%
Cornell: -11.37%

I'm not making any conclusion(s) from these data; I just thought it was interesting.

[062914123]

.

[KevinP]

Duke: -22.85%

Whoa! The numbers actually shock me quite a bit. Thanks for the summary, very interesting...

Yeah, and Duke's entering class profile definitely reflects such a decrease.
Entering class size fell from 238 to 211.
Median GPA fell from 3.8 to 3.75. 25th percentile fell from 3.68 to 3.62. 75th percentile fell from 3.9 to 3.84.
Median LSAT/75th LSAT stayed the same. 25th LSAT fell from 168 to 167.

[addy11]

Another thing that really caught my eye is that the number of applications to the T14 schools last year decreased more than the 9.9% decrease in applicants last year.

Decrease in applications last year (for schools that I found data)
Yale: -16.53%
Harvard: -15.98%
Columbia: -17.23%
UVA: -13.43%
Berkeley: -12.58%
Duke: -22.85%
Cornell: -11.37%

I'm not making any conclusion(s) from these data; I just thought it was interesting.

Odd... didn't Harvard's numbers go up? Also, were these schools picked randomly or were they just a few of the most egregious drops in each of the "bands"?