Analysis ofDifferential Declines in Law School Applicants Among Top-240 Feeder Schools
Some people recently have noted the decline in applications tolaw school from graduates of relatively elite colleges and universities - here and here. This suggests that differentpopulations of potential applicants to law school are responding differently tomarket signals about the cost of legal education and the diminished employmentprospects for law school graduates in recent years.
In this blog posting, I analyze the changes in applicationsamong the LSAC's Top 240 Feeder Schools between 2010 and 2012,documenting the extent to which the response to market signals about legaleducation has been different among graduates of elite colleges and universitieswhen compared with graduates of less elite colleges and universities. In Part Two, I will look at a different setof data regarding changes in LSAT profiles of applicants. In Part Three, I will offer some possibleexplanations for the different responses to market signals among differentgroups of applicants.
Overview
Between 2010 and 2012, the total number of applicants fromthe Top 240 Feeder Schools fell from 55,818 to 42,825. In both years, the Top 240 Feeder Schoolswere responsible for roughly 63% of the total pool of applicants (63.5% of87,900 in 2010 and 63.1% of 67,900 in 2012). But the decline in applications was not uniform across all of the Top240 Feeder Schools. There are a fewdifferent ways one can look at this information to get a sense of the differentresponses among different populations of potential applicants.
DifferentialDeclines Among Feeder Schools with Law Schools Ranked in Different Tiers
First, one can look at declines across the Top 240 Feeder Schoolsthat have law schools.
One might surmisethat potential applicants who are graduates of colleges and universities with alaw school might be particularly well aware of the increasing costs of legaleducation and the challenging employment environment for recent law schoolgraduates and assume that feeder schools with law schools would generally seesimilar declines in applications. Infact, however, the percentage decline in applications between 2010 and 2012varied significantly by the ranking of the law school at the feeder school.
Among feeder schools with law schools ranked between 1-50 inthe most recent USNews rankings, the average percentage decline in applicantsbetween Fall 2010 and Fall 2012 was 28.08%. Amongfeeder schools with law schools ranked between 51-100, the average percentage declinein applicants between Fall 2010 and Fall 2012 was 20.27%. Among feederschools with law schools ranked between 100-146, the average percentage declinein applicants was 18.14%. But amongfeeder schools with law schools that are ranked alphabetically, the averagepercentage decline in applicants was only 3.31%.
Given that most of the top ranked law schools are atcolleges and universities that also are considered elite colleges anduniversities, and most of the alphabetically ranked law schools are at collegesand universities that are not considered elite colleges and universities, thisanalysis suggests that graduates of elite colleges and universities areresponding to the market signals regarding legal education differently than graduatesof less elite college and universities. (Thismay seem particularly paradoxical, given that the percentage decline inapplicants generally is greater at colleges and universities with more highlyranked law schools (whose graduates generally experience more promisingemployment outcomes) while the percentage decline in applicants is lowest atcolleges and universities with less highly ranked law schools (whose graduatesgenerally experience less promising employment outcomes.))
Comparisons ofOutlier Schools – Those Schools More than One Standard Deviation from the Mean
Second, one can look at “outlier” schools and see hownegative outliers compare to positive outliers. The average percentage decline in applicants across the Top 240 Feeder Schools between 2010 and 2012 was 19.76%. The standard deviation was 18.67%. How do those schools more than one standard deviation from the meancompare with each other?
There are a total of 13 schools that saw a decline inapplicants between 2010 and 2012 putting them below the mean by more than onestandard deviation – schools with a decline in applications greater than 38.44%. There are a total of 26 schools that saw anincrease in applications or such a modest decline in applications that theirincrease/decline was more than one standard deviation above the mean – adecline of less than 1.09% or an increase. How do these schools compare?
Eight of the 13 feeder schools that saw the most significantdeclines in applications had a law school with an average rank of 69. (These schools include NYU (6), Virginia (7),Cornell (13), George Mason (41), Marquette (94), Akron (119), Loyola (NewOrleans) (126), and Univ. of San Fran. (144). Four of the eight were top-50 lawschools, while none were alphabetically ranked.)
Thirteen of the 26 feeder schools that saw the leastsignificant declines in applications (or saw increases in applications) had alaw school, including four that were ranked alphabetically. Among just the nine law schools in thiscategory that are ranked, the average rank is 104. (These schools include Denver (64), UNLV (68),Loyola (Chicago) (76), Rutgers (91), Florida International (105), Wyoming(113), CUNY (132), Southern Illinois (140), and Suffolk (144), along with Florida A & M,North Carolina Central, Nova Southeastern, and Southern (all alphabetical). Notably, only four of the thirteen wereranked in the top-100 law schools (none in the top-50).)
Again, in this analysis, with a few exceptions, those feeder schools that sawsignificant declines in applicants generally represent a more elite slice ofAmerican colleges and universities, while those with the most nominal declinesin applicants (or increases in applicants) generally represent a less elite sliceof American colleges and universities.
Outliers MoreBroadly – Comparing Schools with Declines Greater than 30% and Less than 10%
Third, if one wanted to look at a broader pool of feederschools at the bottom and the top, one could look at all schools down 30% ormore in applicants and all schools that were down 10% or less in applicantsbetween 2010 and 2012 (roughly 10% above and below the mean), two sets thataccount for nearly half of the Top 240 Feeder Schools.
There were 68 schools down 30% or more in applicants, 46 ofwhich had a law school, of which 29 were ranked in the top-50, with only oneschool ranked alphabetically. Theaverage rank of the 45 numerically ranked law schools was 48. The other 22 feeder schools in this category includeseveral highly regarded schools – including, for example, Rice, Vassar, MiamiUniversity, Brown, Amherst, Johns Hopkins and Princeton.
There were 51 schools with a decrease in applicants of 10%or less, 25 of which had law schools, only two of which were ranked in the top-50,with six schools ranked alphabetically. The average rank of the 19 numerically ranked law schools was 94. The other 26 feeder schools in this categoryinclude mostly less elite colleges and universities – including, for example, KenesawState University, University of Texas at San Antonio, and Florida Gulf CoastUniversity, along with University of Phoenix and Kaplan University.
Conclusion
All three approaches to analyzing the changes in applicantsamong the Top-240 Feeder Schools point in the same direction. Graduates of elite colleges and universities areopting not to apply to law school at a greater rate than graduates of lesselite colleges and universities. Onemight suppose that this translates to a greater decline in the number of applicants and matriculants with really high LSATs (165 or above) as compared to those with relatively low LSATs (149 and below). In Part 2, I explore whether this suppositionis accurate.
Posted by Jerry Organ