Harvard is up 5-6% to date, Chicago is up ~5%:http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/admissions/2008/12/19/year-in-progress/http://uchicagolaw.typepad.com/adayinthelife/2009/01/what-is-up-in-the-admissions-office.htmlConsensus seems to be there's a lag that will hit next cycle.
I'd love to join this LGBT club. It's the Legos, Gobots, Barbies, and other Toys group, right? I'll show up with an armful of toys.
All I know is, recent college graduates, people whose career progression makes sense for law school and reapplicants from last year should get preference over any lamebag who has recently lost a high-paying Wall Street position and seems to just want to ride out the storm. I hope law schools are doing the responsible thing and really checking these applications for that, b/c it is going on. It's not fair to the applicants who are really into this and want to be attorneys. Personally, I would also love to see a cap on the number of law schools an applicant can apply to and the number of cycles an applicant can apply in. Maybe three years (max) in any five years, with a 12 school limit per year (that's fair, right?). Then we'll find out who really wants to be lawyers. And people would take more time, prep better for the LSAT (or whatever exam is instituted) and turn in higher quality applications. Most of all, maybe the weak links (people who shouldn't go to law school or people applying for the wrong reasons) would get weeded out. Plus, the admissions committees would not be as overworked and could scrutinize each applicant better. It might also allow schools to interview applicants, something they would all love to do.
My question still stands: are scholarships more tempting to elite applicants this cycle?
Blantant Obama Administration trolling. Regulate the free-market of law schools apps, its not fair because people who really want to be lawyers have a "right," screw bankers.... I didn't realize change was coming this quick. Jesus.Quote from: LawDog3 on February 11, 2009, 02:03:40 AMAll I know is, recent college graduates, people whose career progression makes sense for law school and reapplicants from last year should get preference over any lamebag who has recently lost a high-paying Wall Street position and seems to just want to ride out the storm. I hope law schools are doing the responsible thing and really checking these applications for that, b/c it is going on. It's not fair to the applicants who are really into this and want to be attorneys. Personally, I would also love to see a cap on the number of law schools an applicant can apply to and the number of cycles an applicant can apply in. Maybe three years (max) in any five years, with a 12 school limit per year (that's fair, right?). Then we'll find out who really wants to be lawyers. And people would take more time, prep better for the LSAT (or whatever exam is instituted) and turn in higher quality applications. Most of all, maybe the weak links (people who shouldn't go to law school or people applying for the wrong reasons) would get weeded out. Plus, the admissions committees would not be as overworked and could scrutinize each applicant better. It might also allow schools to interview applicants, something they would all love to do.