Conventional wisdom says that taking a year off won't make any difference in your chance of admission, and that taking several years off will strengthen it. But I noticed that some data Law Services publishes shows that this isn't necessarily true.
For applicants starting law school in the fall of 2001, 77% of college seniors were accepted, while only 69% of those who took a year or two off were accepted, and folks who had several years off were accepted in even lower numbers. So, contrary to popular belief, a year or two of work experience doesn't seem to help.
2001 |
All |
Seniors |
1-3 yrs |
>3 yrs |
LSAT |
151.5 |
152.4 |
152 |
150.6 |
GPA |
3.16 |
3.28 |
3.17 |
2.99 |
# applied |
75128 |
25989 |
25739 |
18592 |
# accepted |
51758 |
20126 |
17822 |
11485 |
# enrolled |
42719 |
17329 |
14560 |
9017 |
% accepted |
69% |
77% |
69% |
62% |
Yield |
83% |
86% |
82% |
79% |
It occurred to me that this might be a fluke, so I checked against a previous year's data, and found the same results (although in lower percentages, since there were fewer applicants that year).
1999 |
All |
Seniors |
1-3 yrs |
>3 yrs |
LSAT |
151.4 |
152.4 |
151.7 |
150.8 |
GPA |
3.13 |
3.26 |
3.14 |
2.96 |
# applied |
72447 |
24714 |
24567 |
18527 |
# accepted |
51262 |
19664 |
17365 |
11951 |
# enrolled |
42163 |
16858 |
14263 |
9248 |
% accepted |
71% |
80% |
71% |
65% |
Yield |
82% |
86% |
82% |
77% |
Law Services also publishes the average number of apps and acceptances. A cross-reference shows that a lower percent of applicants who took time off were admitted than of seniors, although there was no real difference between the two different "older" groups:
2001 |
All |
Seniors |
1-3 yrs |
>3 yrs |
# apps |
4.64 |
5.71 |
4.70 |
3.46 |
# admits |
1.70 |
2.20 |
1.70 |
1.27 |
% admits |
37% |
39% |
36% |
37% |
This trend also held for the 1999 applicant pool:
1999 |
All |
Seniors |
1-3 yrs |
>3 yrs |
# apps |
4.37 |
5.45 |
4.33 |
3.34 |
# admits |
1.76 |
2.34 |
1.71 |
1.34 |
% admits |
40% |
43% |
39% |
40% |
There are several possible reasons for this:
The applicants who took time off had slightly lower median LSATs and GPAs; I doubt, however, that the difference was enough to trigger the result.
The applicants who took time off may have applied to a group of schools that are more difficult to get into, believing (incorrectly, it seems) that their experience would offset a weaker undergraduate record.
Applicants who are out of school, and thus lacking a prelaw advisor, may get poorer advice about where to apply.
Few applicants manage to do something interesting enough with the time off to increase their chances, as they had hoped.
Whatever the reason, the moral is clear:
Waiting a year to apply puts you at a slight, but definite, disadvantage.
Working a year or two (or getting a graduate degree) DOES NOT strengthen your chance of admission!