Yale Applications Down; William Mitchell Goes Transparent

As Above the Law reports today, Yale applications are down nearly 16.5% this year. Naturally, this doesn't quite make sense to Elie Mystal:

The NYT says “stay away from law school,” and applications to Yale drop. But if you read Above the Law, you pick up nuances like “stay away from crappy law schools.” See how much more subtle and informative that is? I know, I know, it bothers me too when the print media sensationalizes things.

No, Elie, you elitist T-14 marketing shill, the point is that it's so bad that even going to awesome schools may be a losing proposition. See, for example, you! People who went to T-14 schools, did well, scored at BigLaw, and were spit out 3-5 years later are a dime a dozen. In a world where even Georgetown has to fudge numbers, you know something's up with the game itself.

But Elie found a "more plausible" reason why there was a catacylsmic drop: Yale decided to start requiring a "dean's certificate" from one's former school:

Ah, now that’s an explanation that comports with what I’ve come to know about prospective law students. For many of them, it’s their first important professional decision; why would they put in the extra work required to apply to the very best law school? Paperwork? Bah. “I don’t want to do no paperwork, I want to be a lawyer.”

Look, I know it seems like I want there to be fewer law students by any means necessary. But really I just want people to be making intelligent decisions.

Not applying to Yale just because it requires more paperwork is not smart. But I suppose the kids not applying to Yale for that reason weren’t going to be Yale Law School material anyway.

Does this idiot honestly believe that otherwise-serious applicants strayed from a tip-top law school because they had to a dean's certificate, something that some other law schools already require, if I'm not mistaken? Seriously?

I know this might be a shock to people like Elie, but it wasn't just the 155 LSATs who are affected by the legal profession's down-turn. Those with 175 LSATs and shiny credentials are less likely to go as well if they understand it (properly) to be a giant crapshoot. If anything, the B.A. holder with the 170+ LSAT is more likely to be able to score a lucrative job absent law school than the 155 LSAT holder. Thus, Yale's prospective applicant pool might drop, as the 165 LSAT kids may not think themselves good enough to even bother.

It's all about alternatives. The kid who can get into Yale often has many of them, meaning there's no reason to take the (increasingly-higher) risk that law will not pan out. Kids lower on the academic totem pole may not have those alternatives and may keep applying to solid schools hoping they can secure a job down the line. Above all else, it's downright stupid to assume that high-achievers are not applying to a top law school because it involved an extra step when the LSAC process is already a bunch of hoop-jumping and the high achievers are more likely to jump through hoops, anyway. How condescending, yet entirely unsurprising.

Elie would, I suppose, rather propagate his elitist worldview that there's something magical about Yale ("Yale Law School material," blech) and the other top schools that somehow immunizes them from a lack of interest in law school unless students are being lazy and irrational.

___________________________________________

In happier news, William Mitchell has decided to be more transparent and has published a wide array of helpful information of its website to better diagnose the school and its propensity for producing quality graduates. Check this out:

• 67% of reporting employed 2009 graduates hold a position where bar admission is required.
• Overall average salaries range between $39,000 and $75,000, although there was a steep decline in the number of 2009 graduates reporting information.
• The 2009 overall average of $58,687 for 176 people includes at least 15 salaries of $100k or more.
• 11 graduates are working in publishing (Westlaw is in Minneapolis, if I'm not mistaken)
• 21 are in "solo practice," a dramatic rise from the '06-'07 numbers.

I still think there's some creative accounting going on here (they get 93% employed by discounting people who went back to school and are not seeking work, which to me presents a chicken-egg problem), but overall it's wonderful to have more informative numbers about what is going on.

Clearly, they're still oversaturating the area if only 2/3 of their employed graduates actually need a J.D. The salary information seems far more reasonable, even if it's still on the high side for 50-70% of graduates. I also find it curious that they used to focus on medians and now they're doing averages (I wonder which one is higher...).

The bottom line is that there's no way in heck I pay 50k a year plus interest to have a chance at a job averaging 58k with all sorts of strings attached.

Hopefully more schools will put out detailed information like this, even if it's buried deep on their side. I'll snoop around and see if I can find some others, and I encourage readers to email me if they spot any that I can dissect here.