USNWR Rankings Released...Seriously Forum

[danquayle]

I apologize if this has already been discussed, but did anyone notice that Duke is the only school claiming 100% employment upon graduation? Can they be for real? My bullshit meter is screaming.

Yeah, any of those 100% is suspicious, regardless of metric. Only Wisconsin's 100% bar passage is believable.

[Rand M.]

I apologize if this has already been discussed, but did anyone notice that Duke is the only school claiming 100% employment upon graduation? Can they be for real? My bullshit meter is screaming.

I really think that if this is going to be allowed to continue then USNWR should just go ahead and scrap the metric all together. All it does is allow 'inferior' schools to close the gap by having a metric in which they can tie/come close to the better schools. It's kind of crazy to imagine the rankings with no employment component, so the real fix to this problem is to make it an actual measure.

[danquayle]

I apologize if this has already been discussed, but did anyone notice that Duke is the only school claiming 100% employment upon graduation? Can they be for real? My bullshit meter is screaming.

I really think that if this is going to be allowed to continue then USNWR should just go ahead and scrap the metric all together. All it does is allow 'inferior' schools to close the gap by having a metric in which they can tie/come close to the better schools. It's kind of crazy to imagine the rankings with no employment component, so the real fix to this problem is to make it an actual measure.

Yeah, its really the only thing that should matter to prospective students and yet its the easiest to manipulate.

[Unitas]

I apologize if this has already been discussed, but did anyone notice that Duke is the only school claiming 100% employment upon graduation? Can they be for real? My bullshit meter is screaming.

I really think that if this is going to be allowed to continue then USNWR should just go ahead and scrap the metric all together. All it does is allow 'inferior' schools to close the gap by having a metric in which they can tie/come close to the better schools. It's kind of crazy to imagine the rankings with no employment component, so the real fix to this problem is to make it an actual measure.

Yeah, its really the only thing that should matter to prospective students and yet its the easiest to manipulate.

Why doesn't the bar just track where each lawyer is employed?? They track which school you went too, why not just have to update them on job changes or lack of a job. Then they can report it to everyone.... Wouldn't be a really easy solution to this huge problem.

[Unitas]

I apologize if this has already been discussed, but did anyone notice that Duke is the only school claiming 100% employment upon graduation? Can they be for real? My bullshit meter is screaming.

I really think that if this is going to be allowed to continue then USNWR should just go ahead and scrap the metric all together. All it does is allow 'inferior' schools to close the gap by having a metric in which they can tie/come close to the better schools. It's kind of crazy to imagine the rankings with no employment component, so the real fix to this problem is to make it an actual measure.

Yeah, its really the only thing that should matter to prospective students and yet its the easiest to manipulate.

Why doesn't the bar just track where each lawyer is employed?? They track which school you went too, why not just make it mandatory to update them on any job changes or lack of a job. Then they can report it to everyone.... Wouldn't that be a really easy solution to this huge problem?

[Rand M.]

I apologize if this has already been discussed, but did anyone notice that Duke is the only school claiming 100% employment upon graduation? Can they be for real? My bullshit meter is screaming.

I really think that if this is going to be allowed to continue then USNWR should just go ahead and scrap the metric all together. All it does is allow 'inferior' schools to close the gap by having a metric in which they can tie/come close to the better schools. It's kind of crazy to imagine the rankings with no employment component, so the real fix to this problem is to make it an actual measure.

Yeah, its really the only thing that should matter to prospective students and yet its the easiest to manipulate.

Why doesn't the bar just track where each lawyer is employed?? They track which school you went too, why not just make it mandatory to update them on any job changes or lack of a job. Then they can report it to everyone.... Wouldn't that be a really easy solution to this huge problem?

I problem with that is that I think we are the only one's who care. For some reason the top schools don't seem all that interested in creating even more separation than there already is; if they did care they would fight it.

[mommamia]

100% employment. I am pretty sure that even working at McDonald's counts (and not in the legal department). The subject was brought up at a recent ASW I attended.

[Rand M.]

100% employment. I am pretty sure that even working at McDonald's counts (and not in the legal department). The subject was brought up at a recent ASW I attended.

Even if you were to count all sorts of jobs that still doesn't explain how absolutely no one in their class went on to get another degree; really? No one in the class is independently wealthy? There are just too many factors that can intervene for a school to EVER report out full employment. Not a single LLM in the bunch? No Phds?

[Unitas]

Why doesn't the bar just track where each lawyer is employed?? They track which school you went too, why not just make it mandatory to update them on any job changes or lack of a job. Then they can report it to everyone.... Wouldn't that be a really easy solution to this huge problem?

I problem with that is that I think we are the only one's who care. For some reason the top schools don't seem all that interested in creating even more separation than there already is; if they did care they would fight it.

I mean, I don't get why not. They would all be on equal ground if everyone had to be honest. ABA should track legal employment anyhow, there really is no reason against it.

I don't mean McDonald's burger flipping jobs either. They would have to be jobs that require or are made better by a JD. Maybe even should include salary and bonus. Haha, but then students would be encouraged to estimate high bonuses. Lovely.

[jl2032]

I'm sure any of us could find a way to get to 100%...

It means that those who want jobs have jobs.

If I find an alumna who doesn't have a job, I take it to mean that they aren't looking for a job, and so I wouldn't count them in the statistics. Some might be going on to pursue other interests, degrees, etc. The rest... well, if they wanted a job they'd find one flipping burgers. They must not want a job.

It's more like how the government defines unemployment - those who are actively seeking jobs and don't have one.

See, easy 100%

[aIvin adams]

100% employment. I am pretty sure that even working at McDonald's counts (and not in the legal department). The subject was brought up at a recent ASW I attended.

Even if you were to count all sorts of jobs that still doesn't explain how absolutely no one in their class went on to get another degree; really? No one in the class is independently wealthy? There are just too many factors that can intervene for a school to EVER report out full employment. Not a single LLM in the bunch? No Phds?

i think usnwr stopped counting unemployed who were not seeking employment or who are continuing formal education

[danquayle]

I'm sure any of us could find a way to get to 100%...

It means that those who want jobs have jobs.

If I find an alumna who doesn't have a job, I take it to mean that they aren't looking for a job, and so I wouldn't count them in the statistics. Some might be going on to pursue other interests, degrees, etc. The rest... well, if they wanted a job they'd find one flipping burgers. They must not want a job.

It's more like how the government defines unemployment - those who are actively seeking jobs and don't have one.

See, easy 100%

You don't think you should count someone actively seeking only a legal job? For any career really, but especially legal, taking a poor first job can slot you into a shaky career early on...

[jl2032]

I'm sure any of us could find a way to get to 100%...

It means that those who want jobs have jobs.

If I find an alumna who doesn't have a job, I take it to mean that they aren't looking for a job, and so I wouldn't count them in the statistics. Some might be going on to pursue other interests, degrees, etc. The rest... well, if they wanted a job they'd find one flipping burgers. They must not want a job.

It's more like how the government defines unemployment - those who are actively seeking jobs and don't have one.

See, easy 100%

You don't think you should count someone actively seeking only a legal job? For any career really, but especially legal, taking a poor first job can slot you into a shaky career early on...

my post wasn't meant to be taken seriously... i guess tone doesn't come across well online...

of course, i think we should count legal employment only... i'm just saying it's easy to play with numbers like this...

[danquayle]

You don't think you should count someone actively seeking only a legal job? For any career really, but especially legal, taking a poor first job can slot you into a shaky career early on...

my post wasn't meant to be taken seriously... i guess tone doesn't come across well online...

of course, i think we should count legal employment only... i'm just saying it's easy to play with numbers like this...

It was just this part:

If I find an alumna who doesn't have a job, I take it to mean that they aren't looking for a job

As if you met someone from (what is it, Columbia?) that didn't have a law job you'd think you just weren't trying... I don't see many Columbia grads taking up work as a cab driver if they don't have an offer coming out. Of course, that'd be a story to tell the customers. Prob get booku tips.

Edit: Then again, from Columbia... maybe it would be safe to say an unemployed alum isn't trying too hard

[jl2032]

You don't think you should count someone actively seeking only a legal job? For any career really, but especially legal, taking a poor first job can slot you into a shaky career early on...

my post wasn't meant to be taken seriously... i guess tone doesn't come across well online...

of course, i think we should count legal employment only... i'm just saying it's easy to play with numbers like this...

It was just this part:

If I find an alumna who doesn't have a job, I take it to mean that they aren't looking for a job

As if you met someone from (what is it, Columbia?) that didn't have a law job you'd think you just weren't trying... I don't see many Columbia grads taking up work as a cab driver if they don't have an offer coming out. Of course, that'd be a story to tell the customers. Prob get booku tips.

Edit: Then again, from Columbia... maybe it would be safe to say an unemployed alum isn't trying too hard

My entire post wasn't serious... I'm just saying that you could take a real extreme view and rationalize excluding everyone who isn't employed to get to 100%

"it depends on what your definition of 'is' is."

[danquayle]

You don't think you should count someone actively seeking only a legal job? For any career really, but especially legal, taking a poor first job can slot you into a shaky career early on...

my post wasn't meant to be taken seriously... i guess tone doesn't come across well online...

of course, i think we should count legal employment only... i'm just saying it's easy to play with numbers like this...

It was just this part:

If I find an alumna who doesn't have a job, I take it to mean that they aren't looking for a job

As if you met someone from (what is it, Columbia?) that didn't have a law job you'd think you just weren't trying... I don't see many Columbia grads taking up work as a cab driver if they don't have an offer coming out. Of course, that'd be a story to tell the customers. Prob get booku tips.

Edit: Then again, from Columbia... maybe it would be safe to say an unemployed alum isn't trying too hard

My entire post wasn't serious... I'm just saying that you could take a real extreme view and rationalize excluding everyone who isn't employed to get to 100%

"it depends on what your definition of 'is' is."

Uh, Res ipsa loquitur?

Just kidding. I don't even know what that means.

[CEO]

I understand there are are some criteria to these rankings like bar passage rate and the alumni's (un)employment level after graduation

Does anyone know how they weigh the factors to come up with the score and which factors are weighted more heavily?

Thanks!

[Rand M.]

I understand there are are some criteria to these rankings like bar passage rate and the alumni's (un)employment level after graduation

Does anyone know how they weigh the factors to come up with the score and which factors are weighted more heavily?

Thanks!

http://www.usnews.com/articles/educatio ... ology.html

[los blancos]

100% employment. I am pretty sure that even working at McDonald's counts (and not in the legal department). The subject was brought up at a recent ASW I attended.

Even if you were to count all sorts of jobs that still doesn't explain how absolutely no one in their class went on to get another degree; really? No one in the class is independently wealthy? There are just too many factors that can intervene for a school to EVER report out full employment. Not a single LLM in the bunch? No Phds?

FWIW the really small class size might help produce something seemingly improbable like this.

[General Tso]

I apologize if this has already been discussed, but did anyone notice that Duke is the only school claiming 100% employment upon graduation? Can they be for real? My bullshit meter is screaming.

Dude you better get some hard evidence that it's false. The TLS police (*ahem* SBL *ahem*) will not allow you make allegations you can't back up with facts.

[CEO]

I understand there are are some criteria to these rankings like bar passage rate and the alumni's (un)employment level after graduation

Does anyone know how they weigh the factors to come up with the score and which factors are weighted more heavily?

Thanks!

http://www.usnews.com/articles/educatio ... ology.html

Cool!

P.S.
Do you know where to get a break-down of where each law school lies on each component like quality, selectivity, etc?

[pelmen74]

100% employment. I am pretty sure that even working at McDonald's counts (and not in the legal department). The subject was brought up at a recent ASW I attended.

Even if you were to count all sorts of jobs that still doesn't explain how absolutely no one in their class went on to get another degree; really? No one in the class is independently wealthy? There are just too many factors that can intervene for a school to EVER report out full employment. Not a single LLM in the bunch? No Phds?

"The employment rates for 2008 graduating class determine success in this category. Graduates who are working or pursuing graduate degrees are considered employed." From the USNWR methodology page.... At least that much is not fudged.

[soullesswonder]

http://www.law.duke.edu/news/story?id=4826&u=11

Duke's not backing down, and FWIW, the process described in this article is almost exactly what I was told at ASW. Duke mobilized just about everyone to make sure their grads had jobs.

[Rand M.]

I understand there are are some criteria to these rankings like bar passage rate and the alumni's (un)employment level after graduation

Does anyone know how they weigh the factors to come up with the score and which factors are weighted more heavily?

Thanks!

http://www.usnews.com/articles/educatio ... ology.html

Cool!

P.S.
Do you know where to get a break-down of where each law school lies on each component like quality, selectivity, etc?

http://money-law.blogspot.com/2008/08/z ... n-law.html

I haven't seen one for this year, but this is a pretty good breakdown. Z-scores are pretty simple to understand; a bigger number is better. The chart is really small, but you can just save it and then open it and zoom in.

[Dick Whitman]

100% employment. I am pretty sure that even working at McDonald's counts (and not in the legal department). The subject was brought up at a recent ASW I attended.

Anyone who went to Duke Law is much more likely to be working at Goldman Sachs than McDonald's.