2013 Rankings Forum

[notstevedoocy]

Cooley's got to be up there. They've got a shitload of square footage.

Haha. This.

[notstevedoocy]

Isn't this the first year UC-Irvine will be ranked? I'm guessing they'll be ~30th.

I'm going to throw out a completely arbitrary and unfounded guess and say Irvine (if ranked this year, idk) will be ~73 and admission numbers will fall off a cliff.

Where on earth do you even get that guess from? Irvine's stats put it easily in the top 50. 73 is going to be closer to Drexel's entrance.

[The Brainalist]

I'm going to throw out a completely arbitrary and unfounded guess and say Irvine (if ranked this year, idk) will be ~73 and admission numbers will fall off a cliff.

Where on earth do you even get that guess from? Irvine's stats put it easily in the top 50. 73 is going to be closer to Drexel's entrance.

He was using a solid foundation of nonarbitrarily quantified factors.

I think an educated guess would actually put Irvine lower in ranking than its enrollment numbers support. Things like the two reputational factors and the secret factor of endowment would be lower than schools with similar numbers. Also, they wasted all their per student expenditures on scholarships early on and probably have a lot less due to the economy.

[apropos]

I'm going to throw out a completely arbitrary and unfounded guess and say Irvine (if ranked this year, idk) will be ~73 and admission numbers will fall off a cliff.

Where on earth do you even get that guess from? Irvine's stats put it easily in the top 50. 73 is going to be closer to Drexel's entrance.

He was using a solid foundation of nonarbitrarily quantified factors.

I think an educated guess would actually put Irvine lower in ranking than its enrollment numbers support. Things like the two reputational factors and the secret factor of endowment would be lower than schools with similar numbers. Also, they wasted all their per student expenditures on scholarships early on and probably have a lot less due to the economy.

Look at the numbers. The US News methodology for 2012 was as follows:

40% Quality Assessment (25% peer; 15% judges)
-- The only good gauge we have for judges is Judicial Clerkship hiring, which was famously third to Yale and Stanford by percentage of students. Sure, it was a small UCI class, but this is a very positive sign.
-- We don't really have a good gauge for peer ratings. The only hint we sort of have is the poll Leiter took in 2010 (http://leiterlawschool.typepad.com/leit ... r-all.html). This is not anywhere near conclusive, but there were also no factors biasing this in UCI's favor. Plus, this was in 2010. UCI's rep has only improved.

25% Selectivity
--Here we have good number to base this on, and UCI has the GPA/LSAT medians of schools in the high teens and low twenties. And UCI has a lower acceptance rate.

15% Resources (incl. Expenditures per student, faculty to student ratio, library resources.)
-- This is harder to determine. But, there have been a lot of donations from rich OC folk, the faculty to student ratio is among the best, the library, from what I've heard, is excellent. So there's not much here that spells trouble.

20% Employment
-- This is really the big unknown. There are too many factors determining employment for a given school, and while things obviously look positive at UCI right now, the class size is small enough that it might be under-supplying lawyers right now, making for positive numbers now until they start oversupplying when they hit a class of ~200. No one really knows, but for now employment looks good.

~73 is ridiculous, but that person admitted it was totally arbitrary. There is no reason to believe UCI won't be a top-tier school. Any debate from there should be on whether it will be top-20, top 30 or top-40 or whatever. There's not much to argue there, but I think that if things stay on trajectory at UCI, they will be somewhere between 16-35 the year they're ranked. I don't think it would be intellectually honest for any of us to make a claim to a narrower range. If they were ranked this year (they won't be), I'd throw in my guestimate at 18-22.

[splitbrain]

Look at the numbers. The US News methodology for 2012 was as follows:

40% Quality Assessment (25% peer; 15% judges)
-- The only good gauge we have for judges is Judicial Clerkship hiring, which was famously third to Yale and Stanford by percentage of students. Sure, it was a small UCI class, but this is a very positive sign.
-- We don't really have a good gauge for peer ratings. The only hint we sort of have is the poll Leiter took in 2010 (http://leiterlawschool.typepad.com/leit ... r-all.html). This is not anywhere near conclusive, but there were also no factors biasing this in UCI's favor. Plus, this was in 2010. UCI's rep has only improved.

This is a pretty tough thing to gauge - Leiter will probably positively affect the peer ratings (25%), but the remaining 15% of this score has a ~14% response rate, making this the biggest wildcard.

25% Selectivity
--Here we have good number to base this on, and UCI has the GPA/LSAT medians of schools in the high teens and low twenties. And UCI has a lower acceptance rate.

This ranking will be based off a future class, not that initial group. There is potential for them to drop the ball here, especially as guaranteed scholarships are no more, and they seem to be running pretty dry this cycle. That being said, if they can maintain their medians, then they're fine. I noticed their website does not show medians, though, only 25th and 75th percentiles.

15% Resources (incl. Expenditures per student, faculty to student ratio, library resources.)
-- This is harder to determine. But, there have been a lot of donations from rich OC folk, the faculty to student ratio is among the best, the library, from what I've heard, is excellent. So there's not much here that spells trouble.

10% is a pretty good portion of a ranking that we don't know about (regarding student expenditures). That being said, the student-faculty ratio will give them a boost, but it's only 3% of the total ranking.

20% Employment
-- This is really the big unknown. There are too many factors determining employment for a given school, and while things obviously look positive at UCI right now, the class size is small enough that it might be under-supplying lawyers right now, making for positive numbers now until they start oversupplying when they hit a class of ~200. No one really knows, but for now employment looks good.

I actually think this is the best thing going for them currently. That initial ranking will exclusively be based on that tiny first graduating class. They also made sure that group had 100% summer employment last summer. With ~59 students, this one's pretty easy. Same goes for bar passage (2% of ranking).

~73 is ridiculous, but that person admitted it was totally arbitrary. There is no reason to believe UCI won't be a top-tier school. Any debate from there should be on whether it will be top-20, top 30 or top-40 or whatever. There's not much to argue there, but I think that if things stay on trajectory at UCI, they will be somewhere between 16-35 the year they're ranked. I don't think it would be intellectually honest for any of us to make a claim to a narrower range. If they were ranked this year (they won't be), I'd throw in my guestimate at 18-22.

UCI seems to have a good grasp on gaming the USN rankings, but that 40% subjective portion is too huge a wildcard for there to be any narrow expectations at this time, high or low.

[apropos]

Look at the numbers. The US News methodology for 2012 was as follows:

40% Quality Assessment (25% peer; 15% judges)
-- The only good gauge we have for judges is Judicial Clerkship hiring, which was famously third to Yale and Stanford by percentage of students. Sure, it was a small UCI class, but this is a very positive sign.
-- We don't really have a good gauge for peer ratings. The only hint we sort of have is the poll Leiter took in 2010 (http://leiterlawschool.typepad.com/leit ... r-all.html). This is not anywhere near conclusive, but there were also no factors biasing this in UCI's favor. Plus, this was in 2010. UCI's rep has only improved.

This is a pretty tough thing to gauge - Leiter will probably positively affect the peer ratings (25%), but the remaining 15% of this score has a ~14% response rate, making this the biggest wildcard.

25% Selectivity
--Here we have good number to base this on, and UCI has the GPA/LSAT medians of schools in the high teens and low twenties. And UCI has a lower acceptance rate.

This ranking will be based off a future class, not that initial group. There is potential for them to drop the ball here, especially as guaranteed scholarships are no more, and they seem to be running pretty dry this cycle. That being said, if they can maintain their medians, then they're fine. I noticed their website does not show medians, though, only 25th and 75th percentiles. That's true. It is known now, though, that the LS dean has a mandate (or was given permission) to only increase class sizes while maintaining student numbers. This is what they've done so far (only minor variations), and I see no reason why they wouldn't continue. They seem to be in no rush to get to the projected 200.

15% Resources (incl. Expenditures per student, faculty to student ratio, library resources.)
-- This is harder to determine. But, there have been a lot of donations from rich OC folk, the faculty to student ratio is among the best, the library, from what I've heard, is excellent. So there's not much here that spells trouble.

10% is a pretty good portion of a ranking that we don't know about (regarding student expenditures). That being said, the student-faculty ratio will give them a boost, but it's only 3% of the total ranking.

20% Employment
-- This is really the big unknown. There are too many factors determining employment for a given school, and while things obviously look positive at UCI right now, the class size is small enough that it might be under-supplying lawyers right now, making for positive numbers now until they start oversupplying when they hit a class of ~200. No one really knows, but for now employment looks good.

I actually think this is the best thing going for them currently. That initial ranking will exclusively be based on that tiny first graduating class. They also made sure that group had 100% summer employment last summer. With ~59 students, this one's pretty easy. Same goes for bar passage (2% of ranking).

[thexfactor]

I think UCI is going to be top 40.
Is this the first year UCI will be ranked?

[Tiago Splitter]

We don't really have a good gauge for peer ratings. The only hint we sort of have is the poll Leiter took in 2010 (http://leiterlawschool.typepad.com/leit ... r-all.html).

11 people voted for Indiana over Yale?

[bk1]

We don't really have a good gauge for peer ratings. The only hint we sort of have is the poll Leiter took in 2010 (http://leiterlawschool.typepad.com/leit ... r-all.html).

11 people voted for Indiana over Yale?

welcometotheinternet.jpeg

[splitbrain]

I think UCI is going to be top 40.
Is this the first year UCI will be ranked?

Nah, one more year make that two more years - the newest rankings will be based off of the class of 2010's employment data. They'll need employment info for the class of 2012 9 months after graduation.

We don't really have a good gauge for peer ratings. The only hint we sort of have is the poll Leiter took in 2010 (http://leiterlawschool.typepad.com/leit ... r-all.html).

11 people voted for Indiana over Yale?

17 voted for Brooklyn over Yale, haha. 35 FSU, etc.

I think TLS refers to that as "blatant ______ trolling"

[Tiago Splitter]

We don't really have a good gauge for peer ratings. The only hint we sort of have is the poll Leiter took in 2010 (http://leiterlawschool.typepad.com/leit ... r-all.html).

11 people voted for Indiana over Yale?

welcometotheinternet.jpeg

Nevermind. I thought it was some kind of legit survey of people in the profession. Carry on.

[apropos]

Yeah, again: of course that poll is not a very good gauge. It's just the only non-anecdotal gauge available as far as I know. Enough people responded such that the relatively small number of people who were obviously trying to get a particular school up a few spots were not successful, or only minorly successful. That's the great thing about large sample sizes.

And there is no reason to believe UCI was inflated.
Today I think they would be rated higher. Only good evidence and optimistic signs have come out of that place.

I've been following them a bit, and I think they'll fall between UCLA/USC and UCD/UCH. There are a lot of reasons to believe that and very few, if any, to put them below UCD/UCH.

At any rate, it's an interesting place and I'll be eager to see what they make of it.

[jenkswarrior]

Why the predictions that berkeley will take such a big drop?

[lawyerwannabe]

Probably starts with their 167 LSAT median.

[Bronck]

Yeah, again: of course that poll is not a very good gauge. It's just the only non-anecdotal gauge available as far as I know. Enough people responded such that the relatively small number of people who were obviously trying to get a particular school up a few spots were not successful, or only minorly successful. That's the great thing about large sample sizes.

And there is no reason to believe UCI was inflated.
Today I think they would be rated higher. Only good evidence and optimistic signs have come out of that place.

I've been following them a bit, and I think they'll fall between UCLA/USC and UCD/UCH. There are a lot of reasons to believe that and very few, if any, to put them below UCD/UCH.

At any rate, it's an interesting place and I'll be eager to see what they make of it.

You haven't taken statistics have you? It doesn't mean shit if it's a nonrandom sample. And it certainly doesn't mean shit if it's by laypeople.

[Real Madrid]

Probably starts with their 167 LSAT median.

Uh, not really. Berkeley was tied with NYU a couple years ago despite having the lowest LSAT median of all T14s.

[lawyerwannabe]

Why the predictions that berkeley will take such a big drop?

Probably starts with their 167 LSAT median.

It directly answers why, every year, people predict a big drop in Berk's ranking. Nobody ever said that TLS predictions had any effect on reality.

Uh, not really. Berkeley was tied with NYU a couple years ago despite having the lowest LSAT median of all T14s.

[The Brainalist]

Not totally impossible for Berkeley to drop like that. It dropped to as low as 13 back in 2004.
http://www.prelawhandbook.com/law_schoo ... 00_present

[PDaddy]

The top-6 or so might remain largely the same, but after that...who knows? The middle of the T14 - MVPBND - is essentially musical chairs. I think the 2014 and 2015 rankings are going to be scary.

UCI will probably be top-30. I say somewhere between 25 and 30. Their prestigious faculty will inflate their "reputation" rankings (Chemerinsky alone will make UCI look like Duke to the voters), and we know the LSAT/GPA will help them. They will obviously have great faculty-student ratio and per student expenditures because the classes have been so small. UCI has a very low acceptance rate...lower than Yale's, right?

I would not be surprised if UCI supplanted U-Minn-GWU-WUSTL in the top-20 or made the top-25, but I think they will fall between 25 and 30.

[PDaddy]

Chicago finally overtakes CLS

What has inspired this wave of chicago over cls predictions?

I have visited both Harvard and U-Chicago, and I understand why some scholars think it's the best law school in the country. According to USC's Susan Estrich, there are so-called "experts" - professors and legal scholars, who would rank Chicago over HYS CN.

[Bronck]

Chicago finally overtakes CLS

What has inspired this wave of chicago over cls predictions?

I have visited both Harvard and U-Chicago, and I understand why some scholars think it's the best law school in the country. According to USC's Susan Estrich, there are so-called "experts" - professors and legal scholars, who would rank Chicago over HYS CN.

She's probably referring to Leiter

[lawyerwannabe]

Chicago finally overtakes CLS

What has inspired this wave of chicago over cls predictions?

I have visited both Harvard and U-Chicago, and I understand why some scholars think it's the best law school in the country. According to USC's Susan Estrich, there are so-called "experts" - professors and legal scholars, who would rank Chicago over HYS CN.

She's probably referring to Leiter

[PDaddy]

She's probably referring to Leiter

Obviously Leiter, but I have spoken to a few judges who think the USNWR rankings are absolute garbage. Most say Harvard is the best, but some think Columbia is the best, while others say Stanford or Chicago. Yale and NYU are almost never mentioned. I have met about 50 of them over the years (a few of them federal), and not one has ever received one of the USNWR surveys. That's a bit odd.

Here's a ranking (and no...not a Chicago or anti-Yale troll):

1. Harvard
2. Chicago
2. Stanford
4. Columbia
5. Northwestern
5. NYU
5. Penn
5. Virginia
8. Yale
9. Michigan
10. Berkeley
12. Duke
13. Cornell
14. Texas
14. Vanderbilt
16. GULC
16. UCLA
18. USC
19. GWU
20. BU
21. WUSTL
22. N.D.
23. BC
24. Minnesota
25. UC-Davis
26. Emory
26. Fordham
26. UC-Irvine
29. Illinois
30. UC-Hastings
30. Iowa
30. Indiana
30. North Carolina
30. Ohio State
30. Tulane
30. Washington
30. Washington & Lee
30. William & Mary
30. Wisconsin
40. Wake Forest
41. Georgia
41. George Mason
43. Alabama
43. Arizona
43. BYU
43. Maryland
47. SMU
48. Utah
49. UConn
50. Baylor
50. Case Western
50. Cardozo
50. Florida
50. Houston
50. Miami
50. San Diego
57. Brooklyn
58. Seton Hall
59. Pittsburgh
60. Oregon

I just want to see a shakeup, and I like the way that looks. Yale shouldn't be #1 just because it can recruit the highest LSAT's and grades - and turn out clerks, politicians and law profs. The best law schools produce practicing lawyers.

Penn and Northwestern seem like grossly underrated law schools to me, because their graduates continue to get jobs! And yes, like many other TLSers, I believe GULC will be the first T14 school to drop out.

[Bronck]

Eh the Yale name gives students the greatest opportunity to acquire the most difficult positions. They could easily dump a bunch of their class into NLJ firms if their class had such a bias.

[sach1282]

A lot of the rankings is essentially based on cumulative advantage. A school gets a name for being a "top" school, that school then attracts the best and brightest students, those students go out into the workforce and do incredible things, reinforcing the school's position on top. In my opinion, almost all of the variation between school outcomes can probably be explained by variations in the students rather than the school.

How a school got to be a "top" school in the first place varies from place to place, but once it's there, it's like fighting against an incumbent in Congress. Name recognition is just such a powerful for attracting students (or almost anything else).