LSAC Data and Predicting Number of Applicants for Fall 2014, part 2

Following up on my recent post on LSAC data on LSAT administrations and applications for fall 2014, I wanted to call attention to these statements from the LSAC:  "As of 1/03/14, there are 131,097 Fall 2014 applications submitted by 19,529 applicants. Applicants are down 13.6% and applications are down 15.8% from 2013.  Last year at this time, we had 38% of the preliminary final applicant count. Last year at this time, we had 40% of the preliminary final application count."  If this year's applicants follow last year's pattern, we'll have approximately 51,392 total applicants for the class entering in fall 2014.  Dan has some historical data on the first year enrollment from 1964 to 2012 here.

Comments

[Wilbert]

I have some questions for the so-called law school scam bloggers. What should law school cost? $15,000 per year? $10,000? How do you plan on running a law school on that? Do you want to have a bunch of clinics? How are you going to pay for them?

Terry Malloy: "Why won't reality conform to my data!!" That's a critique of the so-called law school scam movement. People still want to go to law school. Tens of thousands of them.

[anon]

Steve: The subject of this blog was (and is) declining apps/enrollments in law school. YOu have changed teh subject to the "law scam" movement having been objectively unable to support your view that this decline is attributable to the many other opportunties available to BAs in a "booming" economy.
It is understandable that you now wish to change the subject and slander a group of critics by association with what you consider their worst elements - the "law scam" movement (your language being often political, over the top and immature, and thus, very entertaining!)
Perhaps you feel you will draw out this "crowd" and then feel a sense of satisfaction knowing that you have many profs on your side in that battle, and will be on stronger ground.
What is not clear is whether you believe the "law scam" movement to be relevant to declining apps/enrollments.
Presupposing valid motives on your part, is that your point?
Note, above you seemed to argue that judges were correct in concluding that the main premise of the "law scam" movement - misreps about employment outcomes leading to losses - was incorrect because the plaintiffs could not have reasonably relied on the falsehoods.
What has the "law scam" movement to do with declining apps/enrollments, then? Do you include the press in this "movement"? The revised standards for reporting?
Again, your reliance on the S&M study is just sort of bizarre. WHen challenged to support your view that the value of a BA is outweighing a JD in these booming times (accounting, in your view, for a decline in apps/enrollments until their are more new jobs than new lawyers), you are now citing a study that shows your theory to be wrong (or, at least those who believe your theory to be wrong).
What should be considered here is the reason the law academy has attracted so much ill will: in the press, in the public, among attorneys. Hint: it is not because of the "law scam" movement.