Top Placing Classes (NLJ250 and Federal Clerkships)

(Rankings, Profiles, Tuition, Student Life, . . . )
User avatar
Stringer Bell
Posts: 1914
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 9:43 pm

Re: Top Placing Classes (NLJ250 and Federal Clerkships)

Postby Stringer Bell » Tue Feb 23, 2010 2:36 pm

Fancy Pants wrote:
Stringer Bell wrote:I agree with your assumptions, and this list obviously has a high probability of looking different with '09 clerkship data, but I think assuming static clerkship placement is more useful than just looking at '08. I work on an analytics desk and we make these kinds of assumptions internally in the absence of actual data when we have to. You just have to understand you are dealing with incomplete data.

The conclusion that you can draw from this is that the '09 placement breakout by school MIGHT look different than most of us thought it would.


So in your job they think it's a good idea to assume that data will remain consistent from one year to the next even when there are major reasons for believing things will be very different, and when the release of similar data has already confirmed that things will be very different?

I'm no analyst but that seems like a stupid idea.

Also, just FYI. Wrong data =/= "incomplete data".


In all honesty we would try to dig further and find out the answers to questions like what % of each school that tries for clerkships gets them and extrapolate that across the theoretical % of no offered students that will be looking for clerkships. For example, I might take a clerkship or two from each school and give it to Harvard. My point was that to predict what '09 looked like, I would rather have data for one variable and make a very crude assumption for another piece than just look at '08.

User avatar
Stringer Bell
Posts: 1914
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 9:43 pm

Re: Top Placing Classes (NLJ250 and Federal Clerkships)

Postby Stringer Bell » Tue Feb 23, 2010 2:38 pm

kittenmittons wrote:Except NLJ data on its own is more valuable than NLJ + misused clerkship data


They each have their own merits.

User avatar
kittenmittons
Posts: 1453
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 1:24 pm

Re: Top Placing Classes (NLJ250 and Federal Clerkships)

Postby kittenmittons » Tue Feb 23, 2010 2:39 pm

Stringer Bell wrote:
kittenmittons wrote:Except NLJ data on its own is more valuable than NLJ + misused clerkship data


They each have their own merits.


Incorrect. The second one has no merit.

hth

User avatar
RVP11
Posts: 2774
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:32 pm

Re: Top Placing Classes (NLJ250 and Federal Clerkships)

Postby RVP11 » Tue Feb 23, 2010 2:44 pm

As long as someone isn't hiding their methodology or outright fabricating, I don't get why anyone complains about the resulting ranks. The flaws of incomplete data are apparent; we're law students and future law students. But no one's stopping you from compiling your own statistics if you think those others present are inaccurate or misleading in any way.

User avatar
kittenmittons
Posts: 1453
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 1:24 pm

Re: Top Placing Classes (NLJ250 and Federal Clerkships)

Postby kittenmittons » Tue Feb 23, 2010 2:46 pm

JSUVA2012 wrote:As long as someone isn't hiding their methodology or outright fabricating, I don't get why anyone complains about the resulting ranks. The flaws of incomplete data are apparent; we're law students and future law students. But no one's stopping you from compiling your own statistics if you think those others present are inaccurate or misleading in any way.


I just don't see the benefit

User avatar
Kronk
Posts: 28046
Joined: Sat Dec 27, 2008 9:18 pm

Re: Top Placing Classes (NLJ250 and Federal Clerkships)

Postby Kronk » Tue Feb 23, 2010 2:47 pm

JSUVA2012 wrote:As long as someone isn't hiding their methodology or outright fabricating, I don't get why anyone complains about the resulting ranks. The flaws of incomplete data are apparent; we're law students and future law students. But no one's stopping you from compiling your own statistics if you think those others present are inaccurate or misleading in any way.


In a fluctuating economy it makes no sense to combined outdated data with actual data. hth

09042014
Posts: 18282
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:47 pm

Re: Top Placing Classes (NLJ250 and Federal Clerkships)

Postby 09042014 » Tue Feb 23, 2010 2:47 pm

kittenmittons wrote:
JSUVA2012 wrote:As long as someone isn't hiding their methodology or outright fabricating, I don't get why anyone complains about the resulting ranks. The flaws of incomplete data are apparent; we're law students and future law students. But no one's stopping you from compiling your own statistics if you think those others present are inaccurate or misleading in any way.


I just don't see the benefit


Pretend you are going to UVa and feel inferior about your school (for some unknown reason, wtf is it always UVa students?!?).

Now do you see it?

User avatar
Fancy Pants
Posts: 231
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2009 5:32 pm

Re: Top Placing Classes (NLJ250 and Federal Clerkships)

Postby Fancy Pants » Tue Feb 23, 2010 2:48 pm

kittenmittons wrote:
Stringer Bell wrote:
kittenmittons wrote:Except NLJ data on its own is more valuable than NLJ + misused clerkship data


They each have their own merits.


Incorrect. The second one has no merit.

hth


Credited.

JSUVA2012 wrote:As long as someone isn't hiding their methodology or outright fabricating, I don't get why anyone complains about the resulting ranks. The flaws of incomplete data are apparent; we're law students and future law students. But no one's stopping you from compiling your own statistics if you think those others present are inaccurate or misleading in any way.


Who is complaining about the "resulting ranks"? We're complaining about the uselessness of it all.

This is a neat graph:

Image

It's also useless. And if you posted a thread about it, I would post about how it's a useless graph that doesn't tell you anything worthwhile. And if you tried to say it was better than having no graph at all, I would say that's stupid.

User avatar
Stringer Bell
Posts: 1914
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 9:43 pm

Re: Top Placing Classes (NLJ250 and Federal Clerkships)

Postby Stringer Bell » Tue Feb 23, 2010 2:51 pm

kittenmittons wrote:
Stringer Bell wrote:
kittenmittons wrote:Except NLJ data on its own is more valuable than NLJ + misused clerkship data


They each have their own merits.


Incorrect. The second one has no merit.

hth


You are completely wrong. A more useful data set might be '09 NLJ plus a 3 year average of clerkship data. You could also throw in a 3 year average of academia and make assumptions on prestigous PI too.

The point is that in the real world people do analysis with incomplete numbers numbers and assumptions instead of saying "eff it, I'm not looking at this until I have actuals." hth

User avatar
kittenmittons
Posts: 1453
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 1:24 pm

Re: Top Placing Classes (NLJ250 and Federal Clerkships)

Postby kittenmittons » Tue Feb 23, 2010 2:53 pm

Stringer Bell wrote:
kittenmittons wrote:
Stringer Bell wrote:
kittenmittons wrote:Except NLJ data on its own is more valuable than NLJ + misused clerkship data


They each have their own merits.


Incorrect. The second one has no merit.

hth


You are completely wrong. A more useful data set might be '09 NLJ plus a 3 year average of clerkship data. You could also throw in a 3 year average of academia and make assumptions on prestigous PI too.

The point is that in the real world people do analysis with incomplete numbers numbers and assumptions instead of saying "eff it, I'm not looking at this until I have actuals." hth


We have actuals. Now we are just extrapolating with weak data for fun. How is this hard?
Last edited by kittenmittons on Tue Feb 23, 2010 2:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Stringer Bell
Posts: 1914
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 9:43 pm

Re: Top Placing Classes (NLJ250 and Federal Clerkships)

Postby Stringer Bell » Tue Feb 23, 2010 2:53 pm

Kronk wrote:
JSUVA2012 wrote:As long as someone isn't hiding their methodology or outright fabricating, I don't get why anyone complains about the resulting ranks. The flaws of incomplete data are apparent; we're law students and future law students. But no one's stopping you from compiling your own statistics if you think those others present are inaccurate or misleading in any way.


In a fluctuating economy it makes no sense to combined outdated data with actual data. hth


Yep. It's much better to just look at old data by itself and project from there.

User avatar
RVP11
Posts: 2774
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:32 pm

Re: Top Placing Classes (NLJ250 and Federal Clerkships)

Postby RVP11 » Tue Feb 23, 2010 2:54 pm

Kronk wrote:
JSUVA2012 wrote:As long as someone isn't hiding their methodology or outright fabricating, I don't get why anyone complains about the resulting ranks. The flaws of incomplete data are apparent; we're law students and future law students. But no one's stopping you from compiling your own statistics if you think those others present are inaccurate or misleading in any way.


In a fluctuating economy it makes no sense to combined outdated data with actual data. hth


Ending snarky comments with "hth" does not add any force to your points. 0L.

User avatar
kittenmittons
Posts: 1453
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 1:24 pm

Re: Top Placing Classes (NLJ250 and Federal Clerkships)

Postby kittenmittons » Tue Feb 23, 2010 2:55 pm

JSUVA2012 wrote:
Kronk wrote:
JSUVA2012 wrote:As long as someone isn't hiding their methodology or outright fabricating, I don't get why anyone complains about the resulting ranks. The flaws of incomplete data are apparent; we're law students and future law students. But no one's stopping you from compiling your own statistics if you think those others present are inaccurate or misleading in any way.


In a fluctuating economy it makes no sense to combined outdated data with actual data. hth


Ending snarky comments with "hth" does not add any force to your points. 0L.


To be fair, neither does ending it with 0L.

hth

09042014
Posts: 18282
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:47 pm

Re: Top Placing Classes (NLJ250 and Federal Clerkships)

Postby 09042014 » Tue Feb 23, 2010 2:56 pm

Here is 2008, Yale has an unknown NLJ 250 so it is omitted.

school nlj clerk Total

SLS 56.3 23 79.3
CLS 70.5 8.6 79.1
Penn 67.7 10.9 78.6
Chi 68.6 10 78.6
HLS 57.5 18.1 75.6
Cornell62 10.9 72.9
NYU 65.4 7.3 72.7
Duke 61.8 10.9 72.7
UCB 62.6 8.1 70.7
NU 62.9 6.8 69.7
UVA 57.2 12.4 69.6
Umich 55 13.9 68.9
GULC 49 5.6 54.6
Vandy44.6 7.9 52.5
Fordham43.75.9 49.6
BC 45.8 3.4 49.2
GW 43.5 4.9 48.4
UCLA 42.4 6 48.4
BU 41.2 1 42.2

Holy Shit UVA and Mich suck!>!!>!

awesomepossum
Posts: 928
Joined: Wed May 02, 2007 12:49 am

Re: Top Placing Classes (NLJ250 and Federal Clerkships)

Postby awesomepossum » Tue Feb 23, 2010 2:56 pm

It's nice to see that this thread is as unpleasant as before. It's like a tradition.


hth. 0L. wtf lol fwiw mrkb.

User avatar
RVP11
Posts: 2774
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:32 pm

Re: Top Placing Classes (NLJ250 and Federal Clerkships)

Postby RVP11 » Tue Feb 23, 2010 2:57 pm

kittenmittons wrote:
JSUVA2012 wrote:
Kronk wrote:
JSUVA2012 wrote:As long as someone isn't hiding their methodology or outright fabricating, I don't get why anyone complains about the resulting ranks. The flaws of incomplete data are apparent; we're law students and future law students. But no one's stopping you from compiling your own statistics if you think those others present are inaccurate or misleading in any way.


In a fluctuating economy it makes no sense to combined outdated data with actual data. hth


Ending snarky comments with "hth" does not add any force to your points. 0L.


To be fair, neither does ending it with 0L.

hth


Bad irony radar?

User avatar
Fancy Pants
Posts: 231
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2009 5:32 pm

Re: Top Placing Classes (NLJ250 and Federal Clerkships)

Postby Fancy Pants » Tue Feb 23, 2010 2:58 pm

Stringer Bell wrote:You are completely wrong. A more useful data set might be '09 NLJ plus a 3 year average of clerkship data. You could also throw in a 3 year average of academia and make assumptions on prestigous PI too.

The point is that in the real world people do analysis with incomplete numbers numbers and assumptions instead of saying "eff it, I'm not looking at this until I have actuals." hth


The fact that "the real world" (whatever that is) uses incomplete data to make predictions really doesn't change how you should feel about using wrong data to make predictions.

Also, you mention "assumptions" but fail to realize that the whole point of what we're saying is that the assumption is that the 2009 data is going to be very different from 2008.

User avatar
kittenmittons
Posts: 1453
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 1:24 pm

Re: Top Placing Classes (NLJ250 and Federal Clerkships)

Postby kittenmittons » Tue Feb 23, 2010 2:58 pm

JSUVA2012 wrote:
kittenmittons wrote:
JSUVA2012 wrote:Ending snarky comments with "hth" does not add any force to your points. 0L.


To be fair, neither does ending it with 0L.

hth


Bad irony radar?


Is that like in that Alanis song?

miamiman
Posts: 1486
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 8:55 pm

Re: Top Placing Classes (NLJ250 and Federal Clerkships)

Postby miamiman » Tue Feb 23, 2010 2:59 pm

Fancy Pants wrote:This is a neat graph:

Image

It's also useless. And if you posted a thread about it, I would post about how it's a useless graph that doesn't tell you anything worthwhile. And if you tried to say it was better than having no graph at all, I would say that's stupid.



i literally spat the coffee out of my mouth in laughter upon seeing this.

User avatar
RVP11
Posts: 2774
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:32 pm

Re: Top Placing Classes (NLJ250 and Federal Clerkships)

Postby RVP11 » Tue Feb 23, 2010 3:00 pm

I think we should return to TTT-LS's point.

What matters is how YOU do. No one who gets the job they want from a T4 should feel bad about their school. No one who pulls an utter fail at a T6 is going to be reassured by the fact that 60% or more of their classmates are able to pay off their loans.

09042014
Posts: 18282
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:47 pm

Re: Top Placing Classes (NLJ250 and Federal Clerkships)

Postby 09042014 » Tue Feb 23, 2010 3:01 pm

Fancy Pants wrote:
Stringer Bell wrote:You are completely wrong. A more useful data set might be '09 NLJ plus a 3 year average of clerkship data. You could also throw in a 3 year average of academia and make assumptions on prestigous PI too.

The point is that in the real world people do analysis with incomplete numbers numbers and assumptions instead of saying "eff it, I'm not looking at this until I have actuals." hth


The fact that "the real world" (whatever that is) uses incomplete data to make predictions really doesn't change how you should feel about using wrong data to make predictions.

Also, you mention "assumptions" but fail to realize that the whole point of what we're saying is that the assumption is that the 2009 data is going to be very different from 2008.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subprime_m ... it_ratings

User avatar
Stringer Bell
Posts: 1914
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 9:43 pm

Re: Top Placing Classes (NLJ250 and Federal Clerkships)

Postby Stringer Bell » Tue Feb 23, 2010 3:01 pm

Desert Fox wrote:
kittenmittons wrote:
JSUVA2012 wrote:As long as someone isn't hiding their methodology or outright fabricating, I don't get why anyone complains about the resulting ranks. The flaws of incomplete data are apparent; we're law students and future law students. But no one's stopping you from compiling your own statistics if you think those others present are inaccurate or misleading in any way.


I just don't see the benefit


Pretend you are going to UVa and feel inferior about your school (for some unknown reason, wtf is it always UVa students?!?).

Now do you see it?


If we look at NLJ 250 by itself for '09, UVA is 5th. My self esteem from looking at that list by itself instead isn't going to take a big hit. The reason this list still holds value is because it takes some account of clerkship data for Yale and Stanford.

If you want to look at the NLJ list by itself and claim NU is #1, knock yourself out.

User avatar
Kronk
Posts: 28046
Joined: Sat Dec 27, 2008 9:18 pm

Re: Top Placing Classes (NLJ250 and Federal Clerkships)

Postby Kronk » Tue Feb 23, 2010 3:03 pm

JSUVA2012 wrote:
Kronk wrote:
JSUVA2012 wrote:As long as someone isn't hiding their methodology or outright fabricating, I don't get why anyone complains about the resulting ranks. The flaws of incomplete data are apparent; we're law students and future law students. But no one's stopping you from compiling your own statistics if you think those others present are inaccurate or misleading in any way.


In a fluctuating economy it makes no sense to combined outdated data with actual data. hth


Ending snarky comments with "hth" does not add any force to your points. 0L.


I'm rejecting your school even with the 90k they gave me. hth

User avatar
kittenmittons
Posts: 1453
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 1:24 pm

Re: Top Placing Classes (NLJ250 and Federal Clerkships)

Postby kittenmittons » Tue Feb 23, 2010 3:05 pm

Stringer Bell wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:
kittenmittons wrote:
JSUVA2012 wrote:As long as someone isn't hiding their methodology or outright fabricating, I don't get why anyone complains about the resulting ranks. The flaws of incomplete data are apparent; we're law students and future law students. But no one's stopping you from compiling your own statistics if you think those others present are inaccurate or misleading in any way.


I just don't see the benefit


Pretend you are going to UVa and feel inferior about your school (for some unknown reason, wtf is it always UVa students?!?).

Now do you see it?


If we look at NLJ 250 by itself for '09, UVA is 5th. My self esteem from looking at that list by itself instead isn't going to take a big hit. The reason this list still holds value is because it takes some account of clerkship data for Yale and Stanford.

If you want to look at the NLJ list by itself and claim NU is #1, knock yourself out.


Using any of this data as a proxy for actual rankings is prolish.

User avatar
Stringer Bell
Posts: 1914
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 9:43 pm

Re: Top Placing Classes (NLJ250 and Federal Clerkships)

Postby Stringer Bell » Tue Feb 23, 2010 3:12 pm

kittenmittons wrote:Using any of this data as a proxy for actual rankings is prolish.


That is fair. I'm not at all saying we look at these lists and say VM pwned Chicago in '09, I'm merely saying we can look at these data sets and say we have SOME evidence that VM may have outplaced Chicago in these 2 categories in '09.




Return to “Choosing a Law School”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: drz and 2 guests