Search the Lounge


« Taboo Trades Reading Lists | Main | Pace Law School Hiring Announcement: VAP in Environmental Law »

April 23, 2014


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


No real trend either way the last few weeks. I see an 8% decline at a minimum. And the last 6,000 applicants to get there will be real tough!

I'd say we could end up anyway from 51,000 - 55,000.


Assume 52,500 applicants.

Assume 30% of the LSAT takers scored over 160.

52,500 * 30% = 15,750 applicants with LSATs over 160.

Assume 36,750 enroll (52,500 * 70%, a very conservative estimate).

Assume the T100 enroll 21,000 (according to second to the last thread, this number enrolled in the T100 last year).

If the T100 accepts and enrolls the entire population of students with LSAT scores over 160, there will be still about 5,250 seats to be filled in the T100 by students with LSAT scores below 160 (25% of the total number of seats in the T100).

And, that would leave about 15,750 enrollees to fill the entering classes in the next 100 law schools, all of whom with LSAT scores less than 160.

To put this in context and based on reported experience, last year about 16% of US law schools admitted students with a median LSAT of less than 150 and about 5% admitted students with a median LSAT of 145 or less.

At 150 on the LSAT, one is at about the 44th percentile.

At 140 on the LSAT, one is at about the 14th percentile.

Any corrections to these calculations, or identification of any inaccuracy in the reported facts, would be welcome!

How low will admissions criteria go? Will a student with a 2.0 UGPA from a lower ranked college, and a 140 on the LSAT, gain admission to an ABA accredited law school?

The answer undoubtedly YES, that this has already occurred and will increasingly occur this year unless some action is taken to prevent it.

And, to harken back to the thread about advising everyone who can read the advice to attend law school, think about that student just described graduating law school with 150K in debt that cannot be discharged, failing the bar examination and unable to find any employment - isn't "JD Advantaged" a cruel moniker here?

Gary Rosin

How low can numbers go? Ask Florida Coastal. Well, probably you should not:



Wow. Median LSAT of 141 at the 25th percentile? Forgive my lack of math skills: if this is so, what percentage of the incoming FC class scored worse than about 85% of LSAT takers (a 140, as I understand it, is the 14th percentile)?

The report states that a candidate who raised concerns about the school’s declining student credentials and bar pass rates was asked to leave in the middle of a lunch presentation.

Was a candidate actually forced to leave in the middle of a presentation based on having questioned the propriety of this admission policy? Can this be factual? Was there possibly some other reason the candidate was asked to leave?

Even having read the many comments here and elsewhere that suggest that many in legal academia somewhat religiously believe that any "enemy" of the status quo must be condemned in the harshest terms, and then banished and expelled, this report seems beyond the pale.


"Even having read the many comments here and elsewhere that suggest that many in legal academia somewhat religiously believe that any "enemy" of the status quo must be condemned in the harshest terms, and then banished and expelled, this report seems beyond the pale."

I'm not sure I understand what this means. It seems to imply that this action of expelling the dean candidate was somehow the work of "legal academia" or members of it. The few reports we have seem to indicate something else. It wasn't faculty that expelled or even objected. They, by what little information has come out to date, seem to have almost no real input in the process (in what appears to be a violation of the relevant ABA standard to me). The expelling of of the candidate appears to be the action of ownership or their representative.

Am I misunderstanding?



Fair question. The report indicates that "This all happened in the view of about 40 faculty and staff present at this presentation, which was being recorded so others who were teaching class could see it later."

One supposes the video, if it ever becomes available, and if this event is accurately described, will answer your questions. Indeed, if you reread my comment, you will see that I too wondered whether the expulsion was solely for the described reason ( Was there possibly some other reason the candidate was asked to leave?)

Surely, faculty would have defended, vocally and strenuously, the candidate's right to speak, if all that was said that caused the controversy concerned declining standards?

In fact, as I noted, even given the hostility and immature outbursts in which so many law faculty have engaged here and elsewhere, I would nevertheless find it hard to believe that this expulsion really happened as a result of a complacent, or worse, complicit faculty.

You are not doubt troubled, however, that my comment referred to many instances where members of the legal academy have attempted, sometimes quite vehemently and sometimes quite viciously, to enforce the status quo by brutal and sometimes especially vindictive measures. These persons have an ample supply of venom that is sometimes quickly injected into any attempts by members of the academy to discuss items that can be perceived as unfair criticisms - which, for some, means any criticism at all.

If you haven't seen this phenomenon, then I would urge you to reread some of the threads here and elsewhere. As I sense that you do read these threads, perhaps you have noticed the comments that have taken issue with some facets of legal academia more than others. For many other readers, I suspect, outbursts and intemperate attacks, here and elsewhere, upon critics of the law academy have likewise been noted.

Of course, a law professor can claim no defense for unprofessional and emotionally immature behavior by asserting that some blogger provoked it all by mere (sometimes, very tame) words. Every prof should model the temperament of a judicious, careful, ethical and mature professional and avoid sounding like a teenager!

Some here in the FL, like Al Brophy, and ultimately Ben Barros I would submit, have shown themselves to be capable of admirable conduct in this forum that commands respect.

Does the latter paragraph strike you as ridiculous, ATL? Hope not. If profs maintain a certain standard, it is very likely that reasoned argument may yet prevail, and progress and reform in the law academy yet might be possible. If you believe no such reform is necessary, then I would say, with respect, that you are misunderstanding the situation.

The comments to this entry are closed.


  • StatCounter
Blog powered by Typepad