Top Law Schools

Blindmelon wrote:Wow, thats pretty insane Vanderbilt.

Edit: crap, after this, the BC trolls are going to go nuts. Damnit.

Don' be upset-- it's ok

I especially liked the partner's promotions.

kehdrms wrote:NW is #1, with 55.5% of its graduates hired at NLJ 250 firms
Last year, it was Columbia at 70.5%.. This year, the percentage for Columbia falls to 54.7%...
Something to help everyone choose schools this cycle

Here are some (personal) highlights
NW switches places with Columbia
Vandy at #11
USC > UCLA
BC > BU

http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNL ... OLS_REPORT

Wait, this one is almost the same as the Class 2005 Chart. so I guess It`s not that bad out there.

I love when useful information is posted. Thanks.

tram988 wrote:

Blindmelon wrote:Wow, thats pretty insane Vanderbilt.

Edit: crap, after this, the BC trolls are going to go nuts. Damnit.

Don' be upset-- it's ok

I especially liked the partner's promotions.

Yea, I concede thats pretty impressive. Stupid BU and relying on NYC too much.

Nightrunner wrote:Wisconsin > Emory and Minnesota?

They were close even back in class 2005.
If it`s within 3-5%, then it's probably the same

Wow, look at Vandy, holding its own and besting some of the T14 big dogs, and not even by just a couple percentage points either!

Hmm... now I'm really going to have a tough decision between Vandy and Michigan, depending on if and how much $$ I get from Vandy because both placed about 50%. So if I get $ from Vandy, seems like all that extra money for T10 might not result in greatly increased prospects. Of course, this is just one year, but Vandy seems to not only be holding up ITE, but improving.

Wow, Vandy is throwing up monster stats

GeorgeTTTown > Yale

.

How do clerkships factor into this? I am guessing that the affect is mute and may offset by timing differences. For example, NU's clerkship placement is abysmal compared to other T14's.

Blindmelon wrote:Wow, thats pretty insane Vanderbilt.

Edit: crap, after this, the BC trolls are going to go nuts. Damnit.

I don't find Vandy all that suprising given that their avg. class size is always a tad under 200.

Blindmelon wrote:Wow, thats pretty insane Vanderbilt.

Edit: crap, after this, the BC trolls are going to go nuts. Damnit.

Even though I'm no longer going to attend BC, I'm going to pass this along to Tram for distribution.

Edit: of course he already knows about this...

Very important data to add to the covnerstion, thanks for this

I'm even more determined to get off the Vandy WL now.

Also, it's VERY important that people realize what this chart represents.

It is NOT:
* The Class of 2012, who does OCI in August
* The Class of 2011, who did OCI a few months ago
* The Class of 2010, who did OCI over a year(!) ago

It IS the class of 2009, who:
* Graduated from law school in 2009
* Summered for their firm in 2008
* Did OCI / recruitment in 2007
* Started law school in 2006

The consensus seems to be that C/O 2011 had it worst, and C/O 2010 is all but certainly worse than C/O 2009.

These numbers take a long time to get, so while these look worse than the '07 and '08 grad data, expect the real carnage to come when we read the results for C/O 2010 and 2011, which are still one and two years out respectively.

.

can someone post a screenshot of the chart? i'm at work right now and for some reason, none of the charts are popping up.

gracias

Rand M. wrote: The Stanford thing is even more startling when you notice that the schools behind it 1. don't even come close and 2. are the mammoth schools that graduate 550 as opposed to Stanford's 175.

SLS for the win

Are the partner promotion numbers also only for the NLJ 250?

disco_barred wrote:Also, it's VERY important that people realize what this chart represents.

It is NOT:
* The Class of 2012, who does OCI in August
* The Class of 2011, who did OCI a few months ago
* The Class of 2010, who did OCI over a year(!) ago

It IS the class of 2009, who:
* Graduated from law school in 2009
* Summered for their firm in 2008
* Did OCI / recruitment in 2007
* Started law school in 2006

The consensus seems to be that C/O 2011 had it worst, and C/O 2010 is all but certainly worse than C/O 2009.

These numbers take a long time to get, so while these look worse than the '07 and '08 grad data, expect the real carnage to come when we read the results for C/O 2010 and 2011, which are still one and two years out respectively.

This is a very good point. I think that we will see some striking drop-offs in the data reported next year for those schools ranked below the T-14 + UT, UCLA, USC, and Vandy. I think so lilttle of WUSTL and Minnestota to include them in such a discussion.

chadwick218 wrote:

Blindmelon wrote:Wow, thats pretty insane Vanderbilt.

Edit: crap, after this, the BC trolls are going to go nuts. Damnit.

I don't find Vandy all that suprising given that their avg. class size is always a tad under 200.

Its surprising because they're actually improving (from 40% in '07 to about 45% in '08 to 47% in '09) while other schools are just happy to maintain/minimize losses.

Also, its surprsing (to me) because my perspective has been slightly warped by TLS, where hardliners talk about the T14 or T10 being in a class all on its own in terms of placement and well worth tens of thousands of dollars more in law school debt. The placement stats simply do not support those assertions.

But disco has a great point that c/o 2009 still had it good. We'll really see how schools held up this time next year... after we've enrolled at a school. Here's to making a big decision with seriously lagged employment data!

chadwick218 wrote:

disco_barred wrote:Also, it's VERY important that people realize what this chart represents.

It is NOT:
* The Class of 2012, who does OCI in August
* The Class of 2011, who did OCI a few months ago
* The Class of 2010, who did OCI over a year(!) ago

It IS the class of 2009, who:
* Graduated from law school in 2009
* Summered for their firm in 2008
* Did OCI / recruitment in 2007
* Started law school in 2006

The consensus seems to be that C/O 2011 had it worst, and C/O 2010 is all but certainly worse than C/O 2009.

These numbers take a long time to get, so while these look worse than the '07 and '08 grad data, expect the real carnage to come when we read the results for C/O 2010 and 2011, which are still one and two years out respectively.

This is a very good point. I think that we will see some striking drop-offs in the data reported next year for those schools ranked below the T-14 + UT, UCLA, USC, and Vandy. I think so lilttle of WUSTL and Minnestota to include them in such a discussion.

I'm pretty sure this data accounts for all of the offer revocations and indefinite deferrals (how else could schools like NYU and Penn fall so much?). I know the Class of 2010 got hit with a lot of no-offers, but I felt like the Class of 2009 was the primary target for decreasing the workforce as quickly as possible. I could be wrong, but can anyone point to data that says firms were looking to shed more people for 2010 than they were 2009?

For this chart to be even remotely meaningful you need the sum of clerkships + firm hiring.

The conclusion that Harvard and Yale got 'beat out' by Northwestern is ridiculous.

Same thing for beesknees, you need that clerkship info as well before you make that claim for Vandy. This data is also not 'ITE' data as disco pointed out.

.

chadwick218 wrote:

disco_barred wrote:Also, it's VERY important that people realize what this chart represents.

It is NOT:
* The Class of 2012, who does OCI in August
* The Class of 2011, who did OCI a few months ago
* The Class of 2010, who did OCI over a year(!) ago

It IS the class of 2009, who:
* Graduated from law school in 2009
* Summered for their firm in 2008
* Did OCI / recruitment in 2007
* Started law school in 2006

The consensus seems to be that C/O 2011 had it worst, and C/O 2010 is all but certainly worse than C/O 2009.

These numbers take a long time to get, so while these look worse than the '07 and '08 grad data, expect the real carnage to come when we read the results for C/O 2010 and 2011, which are still one and two years out respectively.

This is a very good point. I think that we will see some striking drop-offs in the data reported next year for those schools ranked below the T-14 + UT, UCLA, USC, and Vandy. I think so lilttle of WUSTL and Minnestota to include them in such a discussion.

If the hiring was as bad as it seemed, any school would be lucky to post 45% in big law for the class of 2010 - T14 or not.

Aberzombie1892 wrote:

chadwick218 wrote:

disco_barred wrote:Also, it's VERY important that people realize what this chart represents.

It is NOT:
* The Class of 2012, who does OCI in August
* The Class of 2011, who did OCI a few months ago
* The Class of 2010, who did OCI over a year(!) ago

It IS the class of 2009, who:
* Graduated from law school in 2009
* Summered for their firm in 2008
* Did OCI / recruitment in 2007
* Started law school in 2006

The consensus seems to be that C/O 2011 had it worst, and C/O 2010 is all but certainly worse than C/O 2009.

These numbers take a long time to get, so while these look worse than the '07 and '08 grad data, expect the real carnage to come when we read the results for C/O 2010 and 2011, which are still one and two years out respectively.

This is a very good point. I think that we will see some striking drop-offs in the data reported next year for those schools ranked below the T-14 + UT, UCLA, USC, and Vandy. I think so lilttle of WUSTL and Minnestota to include them in such a discussion.

If the hiring was as bad as it seemed, any school would be lucky to post 45% in big law for the class of 2010 - T14 or not.

My prediction (a year out, for what it's worth) is that we'll see ~40-50% hired in the ~T10 still. Firms still needed bodies, and the top 10 law schools in the country are where they went in lean times. I think the drop off will be severe after that - Georgetown likely to be one of the last schools in the 30%+ range.