Law Schools Expect Enrollment to Remain Steady Amid COVID-19
Law school admission offices are also counseling admitted students not to defer for a year, saying that scholarships will likely be harder to come by in 2021.
July 28, 2020 at 02:54 PM
4 minute read
The COVID-19 pandemic brought an unprecedented disruption to the law school admissions cycle, but most law schools are expecting the same number of new students to start this fall, and some even anticipate an increase.
Among the 94 law school admissions offices recently surveyed by Kaplan Test Prep, 52% said they believe their entering class size will be on par with 2019. Another 26% said it will be larger, while 22% said they expect their class size to be down. Those predictions jibe with national applicant data from the Law School Admission Council, which show a 1% increase in applicants.
"While this has arguably been the most unusual law school admissions cycle in decades, the stability, in terms of just the numbers, is remarkable," said Jeff Thomas, executive director of legal programs at Kaplan Test Prep. "If you look at an application increase of just under 1%, the casual observer might think that things were business as usual, but behind the scenes there has been a lot going on to ensure a seamless process during unpredictable times, from the rollout of the first at-home version of the LSAT to extended application deadlines."
The cancellation of the LSAT in both March and April resulted in fewer people applying to law school by early summer. But the May introduction of a shorter, online version of the test dubbed LSAT-Flex helped usher in a late flux of applicants. Law school admissions offices also modified some policies to accommodate this year's latecomers, the Kaplan survey found.
Among the responding admissions offices, 67% said they made application policies more flexible this year to entice undecided applicants. Those measures include extending application deadlines and relaxing deposit requirements. Though some schools allowed people to apply with unofficial LSAT scores, all but one still required applicants to take the LSAT or the GRE, the survey found.
But it's still unclear whether more admitted students will make a last-minute decision to defer for a year given than many law schools will hold classes entirely or largely online during the coming semester. But many survey respondents said they are advising admitted students against deferring. For one thing, the employment market is not great right now.
"I would counsel prospective students to consider what they would be doing instead of enrolling in law school," wrote one survey respondent. "If they do not have alternative plans that would allow them to fill their time productively, they might want to proceed with their law school enrollment. I also believe competition will be stiffer next year and budgets will decrease, so applicants can expect admissions rates and scholarship offers to decrease."
Many admissions offices said that fewer scholarships are available for this fall's new students—a trend that is likely to ramp up next year as universities face budget shortfalls. And this year's deferrals mean that fewer seats will be available for next year's applicants, they noted, which may result in a more competitive admissions cycle for 2021.
"If you are an accepted applicant still deliberating about what to do, our advice is to consider the long term," Thomas said. "While the COVID-19 crisis is likely to continue for at least the rest of the year, your future legal career is something that will last for many decades. Also listen to what admissions officers are telling us. Next cycle might be more competitive and budget shortfalls may make financial aid less available. Overall, this may be a more advantageous year to enroll."
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'What Is Certain Is Uncertainty': Patchwork Title IX Rules Face Expected Changes in Second Trump Administration
5 minute read'No Evidence'?: Big Law Firms Defend Academic Publishers in EDNY Antitrust Case
3 minute readLaw Firms Are Turning to Online Training Platforms as Apprenticeship Model Falters
'Substantive Deficiencies': Judge Grants Big Law Motion Dismissing Ivy League Price-Fixing Claims
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1ICC Issues Arrest Warrants for Israel's Prime Minister Over Alleged War Crimes in Gaza
- 2Attorney Responds to Outten & Golden Managing Partner's Letter on Dropped Client
- 3Attracted to Thompson Hine's Fee Flexibility, Morgan Lewis Litigator Switches Firms in Chicago
- 4Phila. Attorney Hit With 5-Year Suspension for Mismanaging Firm and Mishandling Cases
- 5Simpson Thacher Replenishes London Ranks With Latest Linklaters Defection
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250