How many people sat for the October 2013 LSAT? Forum

[linkx13]

do we have any data supporting a drop from the number of last year?

[ScottRiqui]

do we have any data supporting a drop from the number of last year?

I think this is just about the first place it shows up, although I don't remember how long it took to show June's numbers.

[nothingtosee]

Campos said down 13%

[linkx13]

from last year?!

[LSAT Blog]

Link?

Unless Campos has special access to LSAC data, that information hasn't been released yet. They usually don't release it until at least a few weeks after scores have been released.

[drawstring]

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 6#p7132006

This is Campos's post.

[justonemoregame]

Awesome if true

[iamgeorgebush]

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 6#p7132006

This is Campos's post.

Seems like the number of test takers for this cycle is poised to dip below 100,000, then. Goodie.

[linkx13]

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 6#p7132006

This is Campos's post.

Seems like the number of test takers for this cycle is poised to dip below 100,000, then. Goodie.

Wouldn´t that be the first time ever?

[bouleversement]

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 6#p7132006

This is Campos's post.

Seems like the number of test takers for this cycle is poised to dip below 100,000, then. Goodie.

Wouldn´t that be the first time ever?

For which we have numbers.

[iamgeorgebush]

Well, we certainly picked a good time to apply to law school...aside from the worrisome state of the profession, of course.

[PattyCake]

I may be begging for a snarky reply here, but can anyone please explain to me why a lower number of test takers would be a good thing? I mean, obviously fewer applicants means a better shot at admissions (I get why it would be better in that respect), but it doesn't have any effect on the scoring for a given exam, correct? I'm asking because I seriously considered canceling my score (extended moment of panic during my first LG section seriously messed up my timing), and I just barely decided not to do so. Is there any effect on scoring that I'm not thinking of? They equalize the test before it's given, so a low turnout for an exam shouldn't matter for our scores right?

[linkx13]

I may be begging for a snarky reply here, but can anyone please explain to me why a lower number of test takers would be a good thing? I mean, obviously fewer applicants means a better shot at admissions (I get why it would be better in that respect), but it doesn't have any effect on the scoring for a given exam, correct? I'm asking because I seriously considered canceling my score (extended moment of panic during my first LG section seriously messed up my timing), and I just barely decided not to do so. Is there any effect on scoring that I'm not thinking of? They equalize the test before it's given, so a low turnout for an exam shouldn't matter for our scores right?

Yeah, people are happy because of less competition. I don't think anyone would expect it to really affect the ability to get a higher score.

HOWEVER, there has also been a drop in the number of takers who DO receive a higher score, so even if you got a lower score than you wanted, you may still be competitive given the drop in median LSAT scores among universities. Alternatively, if you score big, you have a better chance of getting in since less people will likely have that score than in the past.

[charlesriver]

True only if the law school don't cut down the class size accordingly.