Should LSAC limit number of schools you can apply to? Forum

[Roseland]

In response to the question about requiring notification about application status to applicants, I think the discussion is more about reforming the process in general.
If applicants were not applying to 30+ schools, then maybe law schools would be "getting back to us" more promptly.
Perhaps there should be limits on the number of law schools you can apply to and a requirement that seat deposits are due the same day across the board.
I doubt law schools want to limit applications...even if they are buried. Afterall, it is revenue.
I applied early in October.
I still have not had a decision from 4 schools.
I am glad I have not been dinged from those schools, but seriously? October? and you still have me in your back pocket?

[erniesto]

Not if LSAC wants to remain relevant.

[adameus]

they make 12 bones off of every school you apply to. I don't think it's in their best interests.

[wizoz]

No. In fact, I encourage ppl to apply to more schools. Many schools use the application fees to fund scholarships. The more application fee paying applicants a school receives, the higher the scholarships those who actually choose to attend such a school may receive.

I know it takes forever to hear back and I agree that some reform could take place. I, unfortunately, do not know how that reform would look. Also, I don't think I'd ever be in the mood to have admissions officers deciding on my application without much contemplation just so I can have a faster turnaround.

[Integrity]

No, but I personally got out of hand with my applications due to the fee waiver. I applied to over 30 schools, and an honest assessment reveals I'd only attend 12 of them.