This might be interesting reading for you. It may have an impact on LLMs. It show the stats regarding people applying to the top schools and how that has impacted the size of the incoming classes over a 4 year period.

Stanford is one of the few schools seeing more people apply but they held their class sizes about the same.

OTOH Berkeley has seen less people applying yet they've increased their class sizes. So less demand usually means smaller class sizes to compensate. So the question I would like to know is did they lower their standards to increase the size of their classes?

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-01-26/the-best-law-schools-are-attracting-fewer-students

This might be interesting reading for you. It may have an impact on LLMs. It show the stats regarding people applying to the top schools and how that has impacted the size of the incoming classes over a 4 year period.

Stanford is one of the few schools seeing more people apply but they held their class sizes about the same.

OTOH Berkeley has seen less people applying yet they've increased their class sizes. So less demand usually means smaller class sizes to compensate. So the question I would like to know is did they lower their standards to increase the size of their classes?

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-01-26/the-best-law-schools-are-attracting-fewer-students

I realize the profiles of JDs and LLMs is different but quite often LLMs use the rankings based on the JD programs to guide them in their school search. I do plan to ask around at school but I don't have a lot of free time at the moment. I have too many papers to write. I took the max # of courses I could to get the most benefit of my time here.

A few years ago there was someone ranking the LLM programs but I haven't seen any current data. What I do like at SLS is that usually we are in the same classes as the JDs (not just the 1Ls) even if they don't seem to like it much.

What would have been an interesting addition was if there were any statistics regarding the average amount of student assistance offered. That is one way schools obviously use to attract new students.

Overall though the article does give an idea for how much demand for lawyers in the US has decreased. Most schools have significantly scaled back their enrollment yet it seems like it still might not have been enough yet for the US market.

This is indeed an interesting set of statistics though, IMO, a poor guide for LLMs for the following reasons

Interest in JD and thereby enrolment are determined by more variable factors than it is for LLM. JD students usually also look at med and business schools and due to the big difference and amount of funding (private and state) that is possible their decisions are influence-able more by these factors. LLM students typically are more decided, their financial situation is usually better and they are less likely to not go to a school of their choice purely due to the cost involved.

Decisions of schools to increase or decrease their class sizes usually match the demand for those programs. Harvard and Columbia, along with NYU have been marginally increasing their LLM batch size over the years due to increased number of applications - and the increased number of applicants means they can do so without 'diluting' the acceptance rate. My information is that stanford has a much smaller pool of applicants (various factors involved) and I suspect the increase there is not enough to justify an increase in seats without reducing the acceptance rate.

Unlike the bloomberg report though LLM applications are usually always increasing year-on-year so as a guide the report is of no help.

Lastly I would also like to dispel the myth about 'sharing classes with JDs' that some people feel so strongly about. Sharing classes with JDs has some curiosity value and yes, it allows for making some new friends and listening to american accents but on the whole its a lot of hype. The JDs are not in a hurry to bond with LLMs and have their own alumni networks which teach them the tricks to standard courses. Their language strength and usually greater familiarity with the american legal system means that on the whole they tend to do better and LLMs as a group suffer poorer grades. From the school's perspective they would love to capitalize on this 'joint class' branding but in reality its not as much of an advantage as it might seem. I personally enjoyed the LLM-only classes and felt it was a better reflection of my abilities as a graduate student.

I agree with a lot of what you said. The problem in general is nobody is directly assessing the quality of the LLM programs so about all you can rely upon is the general quality/rep of the school.

As for sharing classes with JDs, I find it quite useful personally. It gives me a good way of measuring myself against them as ultimately we may one day be in competition for some of the same jobs. It is very helpful to see how I stack up. Of course I am at a disadvantage because of language, but in other areas my experience has put me ahead of them. I didn't learn English as a young child. Regardless though the JDs have the "home field advantage" as the Americans like to say but I don't shy away from a challenge.

When I see the quality of work of many of them, I often expected more. Some of my worst classes are where I have to work on a team project with JDs. In general the LLMs seem more motivated and a lot of the JDs seem to coast on these projects. All too often there English is sloppy and it is a sad state of affairs, when I, a non-native English speaker, is left to correct their English areas so we won't get a bad result on our project. This isn't true of all, but a larger amount than I expected.

In general we (LLMs) are treated with disdain and looked down upon by the JDs. It no longer bothers me. I expected better but then again they are mostly young people with little life experience. So while they may think they are "tolerant and open minded" however in the practical sense they are anything but.

As for LLM class sizes, SLS has pretty much held constant from what I can tell over the years. I definitely think though if the schools can attract more LLMs to help keep the money coming in and to offset the reduced enrollment of JDs, then they are likely to do so. Letting in lower caliber LLMs doesn't really hurt their metrics in the law school rankings but can add a lot to their bottom line. Since Stanford doesn't give scholarships to foreign LLMs, every student they admit is about another $60,000 toward their budget. So about 120 LLMs and you have a nice $7 mil or so.

SLS is still very selective about admittance of the LLMs based on my discussions with people involved in the admissions process. They were surprisingly candid about it once I was on campus. I still think a lot of the schools are selling what the Americans call a "pipe dream" with their LLM programs. I would say very few are actually worth the investment.

I agree about the attitude of the JDs. Here in NY, the 3L JDs have absolutely no interest in academics having got offers from the top firms. Being paired with them for any group activity is a hazard. The 2Ls are not much better as most preparing for interviews and jobs. None of them have anything to contribute to LLMs and they regard LLMs with disdain at worst and curiosities and best. Another reason why I found the share-class-with-JD a big disappointment.