Texas tech vs. south Texas college of law Forum

[Mce252]

What are you even looking at? For 2010, 92.65 % of graduating students responded to whether they were working, and 91.78 % of reporting students were employed. 83.64 % of those jobs required bar admission. Another 11 % of the jobs were JD "preferred." The statistic that has the low response rate is for salary, which only 26.23 % of the respondents answered.


So, like I said, I don't see how it's founded that South Texas students don't become attorneys. And, again, like I said, the data on salary is bad because so many students were unwilling to submit that data.


http://www.stcl.edu/admissions/stcl-job-placement.html

And for Tech (it's not as detailed as STCL's numbers):

http://www.law.ttu.edu/prospective/admi ... tSheet.pdf

I didn't see anything on salary in my quick search. But the numbers posted on that Fact Sheet are not all that different from those at STCL.


And even though Tech has an 8 % better reporting rate (so this isn't a conclusion but it certainly hurts your argument), I still think it's worth noting that the existing numbers show that STCL grads take a higher percentage of bar admission required jobs than Tech graduates.

[Lord Randolph McDuff]

What are you even looking at? For 2010, 92.65 % of graduating students responded to whether they were working, and 91.78 % of reporting students were employed. 83.64 % of those jobs required bar admission. Another 11 % of the jobs were JD "preferred." The statistic that has the low response rate is for salary, which only 26.23 % of the respondents answered.


So, like I said, I don't see how it's founded that South Texas students don't become attorneys. And, again, like I said, the data on salary is bad because so many students were unwilling to submit that data.


http://www.stcl.edu/admissions/stcl-job-placement.html

And for Tech (it's not as detailed as STCL's numbers):

http://www.law.ttu.edu/prospective/admi ... tSheet.pdf


I didn't see anything on salary in my quick search. But the numbers posted on that Fact Sheet are not all that different from those at STCL.


And even though Tech has an 8 % better reporting rate (so this isn't a conclusion but it certainly hurts your argument), I still think it's worth noting that the existing numbers show that STCL grads take a higher percentage of bar admission required jobs than Tech graduates.

Uhhh you will stop at nothing to maintain this idea..

STCL's website is TTTT. It doesn't tell you the number of full-time JD required jobs nine months out. Like many TTTT employment sites, you have to try to extrapolate the data from a bunch of seemingly incompatible categories. (also, your school is one of the very few schools that do not disclose info at graduation, even to NALP. When many T1 schools are reporting 50% employed at graduation, what do you think STCL would have reported had they not deliberately hid the information?) Other laws schools don't seem to appreciate STCL's shady business practice: the school gets a 1.7 in the all important peer review score.
Here are a few things to consider:

1. TTT/TTTT and some TT/T1 school webistes often don't like to tell you the real employment rate. Your school, STCL, reported 85% employment to NALP. That is because NALP has standards and asks real questions, and the schools have a hard time lying. I'm not sure why STCL reported 91% employment on its propaganda site, but only sent in a number of 85% for NALP and thus the rankings. There are lots of reasons and suffice to say that you should except your school to cook the books. See latest court development: NYLS lawsuit dismissed because the judge believed that a reasonable person would know or should have known that the employment data from TTT/TTTT schools was bullshit.

2. You have to take the employment rate to get the employed grads, then take that number and multiply it by .836 (JD required). Then you have one more step. If some guy/gal was only working 10 hours a week at a small firm for an hourly wage (this is common EVEN FROM T1 schools- I go to a T1 and I do this; I know others who have graduated and are working temp jobs at law firms) their law school would count this person as employed at a JD required job. However, could they count this person as employed full-time? Some schools like Nova and Illinois were recently busted for flat out lying, but surely most schools would not do that. Therefor your last step is multiplying that by .827 (Those employed in JD required who are working full-time). Get a number and plug it into your 381 (graduates); you get 57%. I think you have to agree that if you aren't working in a steady, full-time position as an attorney, you did not have the employment outcome that you wanted. In fact... you are probably swimming in debt (your school reports average indebtedness at 114k with 86% borrowing.......) and only earning a few hundred bucks a week. You may literally starve. Note: I used the numbers sent in by your school to NALP, not your schools employment site. I would never use a schools employment cite for obvious reasons. However, I did look at your schools info because you posted the link, and while it was super TTTT and shady, it did disclose that it only got 85 salaries reported from its 381 graduates. I promise you that those 85 individuals had the best jobs of all the graduates nine months out, and even 1/4 of them made 55k or less.... Assuming the rest aren't independently wealthy, which, they aren't, 86% borrowed, imagine the destruction of those other 300 people.

3. I do think Tech is a better school, but I never said that going there was a good idea. I haven't studied their employment, but I did see that 71% were full time attorneys. This is a respectable number ITE, even if their salaries are very low. I was just responding to the STCL rocks vibe that I rightly or wrongly interpreted from you. You seem like a really smart guy/girl and I bet you are a leader at your school. I hope you can inform yourself because the more smart people who know about this problem the better.

[Mce252]

What are you even looking at? For 2010, 92.65 % of graduating students responded to whether they were working, and 91.78 % of reporting students were employed. 83.64 % of those jobs required bar admission. Another 11 % of the jobs were JD "preferred." The statistic that has the low response rate is for salary, which only 26.23 % of the respondents answered.


So, like I said, I don't see how it's founded that South Texas students don't become attorneys. And, again, like I said, the data on salary is bad because so many students were unwilling to submit that data.


http://www.stcl.edu/admissions/stcl-job-placement.html

And for Tech (it's not as detailed as STCL's numbers):

http://www.law.ttu.edu/prospective/admi ... tSheet.pdf


I didn't see anything on salary in my quick search. But the numbers posted on that Fact Sheet are not all that different from those at STCL.


And even though Tech has an 8 % better reporting rate (so this isn't a conclusion but it certainly hurts your argument), I still think it's worth noting that the existing numbers show that STCL grads take a higher percentage of bar admission required jobs than Tech graduates.

Uhhh you will stop at nothing to maintain this idea..

STCL's website is TTTT. It doesn't tell you the number of full-time JD required jobs nine months out. Like many TTTT employment sites, you have to try to extrapolate the data from a bunch of seemingly incompatible categories. (also, your school is one of the very few schools that do not disclose info at graduation, even to NALP. When many T1 schools are reporting 50% employed at graduation, what do you think STCL would have reported had they not deliberately hid the information?)
Here are a few things to consider:

1. TTT/TTTT and some TT/T1 school webistes often don't like to tell you the real employment rate. Your school, STCL, reported 85% employment to NALP. That is because NALP has standards and asks real questions, and the schools have a hard time lying. I'm not sure why STCL reported 91% employment on its propaganda site, but only sent in a number of 85% for NALP and thus the rankings. There are lots of reasons and suffice to say that you should except your school to cook the books. See latest court development: NYLS lawsuit dismissed because the judge believed that a reasonable person would know or should have known that the employment data from TTT/TTTT schools is bullshit.

2. You have to take the employment rate to get the employed grads, then take that number and multiply it by .836 (JD required). Then you have one more step. If some guy/gal was only working 10 hours a week for an hourly wage (this is common EVEN FROM T1 schools) their law school would count this person as employed at a JD required job. However, could they count this person as employed full-time? Some schools like Nova and Illinois were recently busted for flat out lying, but surely most schools would not do that. Therefor your last step is multiplying that by .827 (Those employed in JD required who are working full-time). Get a number and plug it into your 381 (graduates); you get 57%. I think you have to agree that if you aren't working in a steady, full-time position as an attorney, you did not have the employment outcome that you wanted. In fact... you are probably swimming in debt (your school reports average indebtedness at 114k with 86% borrowing.......) and only earning a few hundred bucks a week. You may literally starve. Note: I used the numbers sent in by your school to NALP, not your schools employment site. I would never use a schools employment cite for obvious reasons. However, I did look at your schools info because you posted the link, and while it was super TTTT and shady, it did disclose that it only got 85 salaries reported from its 381 graduates. I promise you that those 85 individuals had the best jobs of all the graduates nine months out, and even 1/4 of them made 55k or less.... Assuming the rest aren't independently wealthy, which, they aren't, 86% borrowed, imagine the destruction of those other 300 people.

3. I do think Tech is a better school, but I never said that going there was a good idea. I haven't studied their employment, but I did see that 71% were full time attorneys. This is a respectable number ITE, even if their salaries are very low. I was just responding to the STCL rocks vibe that I rightly or wrongly interpreted from you. You seem like a really smart guy/girl and I bet you are a leader at your school. I hope you can inform yourself because the more smart people who know about this problem the better.

I don't see how these propositions apply only to STCL. Is this just a general complaint about employment reporting, or the way STCL does it? I know the reporting rate for STCL salary numbers is really sketchy but I don't see how every school couldn't do the things you just described.

[Lord Randolph McDuff]

I just showed you that barely half of the graduates from your school in 2010 found real work as an attorney nine months out, and even then the vast majority of those earning far less than it would take to pay back the average loan debt. I have noticed this was a big improvement from the 2009 numbers...

This was your response.

I don't see how these propositions apply only to STCL. Is this just a general complaint about employment reporting, or the way STCL does it? I know the reporting rate for STCL salary numbers is really sketchy but I don't see how every school couldn't do the things you just described.

If you are saying other TTT/TTTT schools suck, why are we having this discussion? Everyone knows this. The point is that you need to stop advertising your shit tier four school on this website. That is the point. Don't try to change the point of the debate because this argument hasn't progressed in your favor, respond to the crux of the issue with facts or stop posting about STCL.

[Mce252]

I just showed you that barely half of the graduates from your school in 2010 found real work as an attorney nine months out, and even then the vast majority of those earning far less than it would take to pay back the average loan debt. I have noticed this was a big improvement from the 2009 numbers...

This was your response.

I don't see how these propositions apply only to STCL. Is this just a general complaint about employment reporting, or the way STCL does it? I know the reporting rate for STCL salary numbers is really sketchy but I don't see how every school couldn't do the things you just described.

If you are saying other TTT/TTTT schools suck, why are we having this discussion? Everyone knows this. The point is that you need to stop advertising your shit tier four school on this website. That is the point. Don't try to change the point of the debate because this argument hasn't progressed in your favor, respond to the crux of the issue with facts or stop posting about STCL.

Haha and yet I'm the only one who has posted a link to anything. You expect your illegible explanation of some calculation you did to convince me. I'm not advertising South Texas. My advice is to go to neither. My point is that Tech is not an increase in quality that would justify moving to Lubbock. You love to parse (if we can call it that), my part of the argument without even taking a look at my entire point. Where is your breakdown of Tech's stats, which is what all this is about?

[Mce252]

By the way, my whole point in this is to say that South Texas grads aren't graduating and deciding they aren't going to be attorneys. You act like I'm trying to convince everyone that South Texas has great employment stats. My point is that they do become attorneys, but many of the jobs aren't pretty and don't pay well.

But this still doesn't mean that Tech is having completely different results.

[Lord Randolph McDuff]

I just showed you that barely half of the graduates from your school in 2010 found real work as an attorney nine months out, and even then the vast majority of those earning far less than it would take to pay back the average loan debt. I have noticed this was a big improvement from the 2009 numbers...

This was your response.

I don't see how these propositions apply only to STCL. Is this just a general complaint about employment reporting, or the way STCL does it? I know the reporting rate for STCL salary numbers is really sketchy but I don't see how every school couldn't do the things you just described.

If you are saying other TTT/TTTT schools suck, why are we having this discussion? Everyone knows this. The point is that you need to stop advertising your shit tier four school on this website. That is the point. Don't try to change the point of the debate because this argument hasn't progressed in your favor, respond to the crux of the issue with facts or stop posting about STCL.

Haha and yet I'm the only one who has posted a link to anything.

You posted a link to your TTTT schools propaganda numbers. Not impressive. Here is a link to the data they reported to NALP. http://premium.usnews.com/best-graduate ... -law-03149
You will have to pay for access, but I'll PM you the numbers so you can see the results for STCL.

You expect your illegible explanation of some calculation you did to convince me.

I'm sure you don't really mean illegible. It is an online forum and I apologize if I am not writing as well as you would prefer. I do think my message is both obvious and discernible.

I'm not advertising South Texas. My advice is to go to neither. My point is that Tech is not an increase in quality that would justify moving to Lubbock. You love to parse (if we can call it that), my part of the argument without even taking a look at my entire point. Where is your breakdown of Tech's stats, which is what all this is about

You are now trying to make it about Tech stats because you are losing the argument. This is a common tactic that human beings, including myself, use and it is related to what this conversation is really about. You don't want to change your mind. People are stubborn, and they protect their ideas with desperation if need be. Their ideas are connected to their self-esteem in an inseparable way. Read a book about it.

Interestingly enough, I've already run the same numbers for Tech as I did for STCL. That is my "breakdown of Tech's stats." 71% full time employed in a JD required job, and I provided medians. I guess I didn't dissect their propaganda site like I did STCL's, but I assure you, had some irrational jerk wad (not at all like you, of course) started a TECHS THE BEST thread I would have. That is my promise to you.

[b.gump81]

Holy moly, he actually looked up the data.

I don't have a subscription to NALP (lord Randolph, would you mind pming me the tech stats)

But here is Tech's employment data from its website: http://www.law.ttu.edu/prospective/admissions/faq/

Is this completely accurate? I have no idea, but they claimed 100% reported, and with all the recent lawsuits and aba rule changes, I'd wager they were more aware of being misleading, and they are therefore a decent source (probably not as good as nalp, I'm sure)

[Mce252]

For South Texas from the numbers that you sent to me:

Graduates known to be employed nine months after graduation 85.0%
Bar admission required/anticipated - percent employed in full-time positions 82.7%


.85 x .827 = .70295 (so a little over 70 % full time employmed in a bar admission required job which I'm assuming doesn't include JD preferred)


You said:

my "breakdown of Tech's stats." 71% full time employed in a JD required job

So we're talking about 1% here?

[Lord Randolph McDuff]

For South Texas from the numbers that you sent to me:

Graduates known to be employed nine months after graduation 85.0%
Bar admission required/anticipated - percent employed in full-time positions 82.7%


.85 x .827 = .70295 (so a little over 70 % full time employmed in a bar admission required job which I'm assuming doesn't include JD preferred)


You said:

my "breakdown of Tech's stats." 71% full time employed in a JD required job

So we're talking about 1% here?

No. I have now stated three times that you must take one more step. You must take the graduates that are left after subtracting for unemployed and non-JD required, and multiply that by your percentage for "full time employment in a JD required field."

Now you are just making me repeat myself.

[Mce252]

I'm sorry, I don't understand this additional step. It seems as though the 82.7 percentile has already weeded out unemployed and non-JD jobs from the overall pool of 85 % employed from the responses. Why else would that percentage be called "Bar admission required/anticipated - percent employed in full-time positions?"

I really believe that South Texas students accept a lot of part time jobs 9 months out, I just don't see how the numbers show it.

[Mce252]

Nevermind. I guess it's a subsector of another stat:

Bar admission required/anticipated (e.g., attorney and corporate counsel positions, law clerks, judicial clerks) 83.6%
Bar admission required/anticipated - percent employed in full-time positions 82.7%


So your calculation is:

.85 x .836 x .827 = 58.76 percent?

If so, could you send Tech's employment stats?

[Lord Randolph McDuff]

I'll walk you through it like an infant.

Total grads x employment rate:
381 x .85 = 323.85

Then take that number and multiply by bar admission required rate, which is 83.6%:

323.85 x .836 = 270.7386

THEN, THERE IS ONE MORE STEP.

TAKE YOUR NEW NUMBER, 270.7386, AND MULTIPLY BY THE NEXT LITTLE LINE IN YOUR LITTLE SHEET. PERCENT EMPLOYED IN FULL TIME FOR BAR ADMISSION REQUIRED, OR 82.7%:

270.7386 x .827 = 223.900822

This is your magic number, the number you couldn't arrive at because you skipped a step. Next, take the magic number and divide it into the total grads, or 381.

223.900822 divided by 381 = .5876662

58% of STCL graduates were full time attorneys nine months out. This is an improvement from the 2009 numbers I see, where less than half accomplished this feat.

Look man, your school sucks like a bunch of other schools suck. I'm not trying to personally attack you, at all, I'm just showing you the numbers because I think they are massively important to people who attend law school. Someone who is at the top of the class at STCL should know these numbers so they can give an even stronger warning that you are giving to prospective applicants. I don't want us to not be friends anymore, really. Can we let this go please? If you'd like to insist that Tech sucks more or equal to the sucking exhibited by STCL I'm willing to look the other on that one in order to bury this hatchet.

[ze2151]

this thread is tl;dr. but op, don't go to either one of these schools!

[Mce252]

I'll walk you through it like an infant.

Total grads x employment rate:
381 x .85 = 323.85

Then take that number and multiply by bar admission required rate, which is 83.6%:

323.85 x .836 = 270.7386

THEN, THERE IS ONE MORE STEP.

TAKE YOUR NEW NUMBER, 270.7386, AND MULTIPLY BY THE NEXT LITTLE LINE IN YOUR LITTLE SHEET. PERCENT EMPLOYED IN FULL TIME FOR BAR ADMISSION REQUIRED, OR 82.7%:

270.7386 x .827 = 223.900822

This is your magic number, the number you couldn't arrive at because you skipped a step. Next, take the magic number and divide it into the total grads, or 381.

223.900822 divided by 381 = .5876662

58% of STCL graduates were full time attorneys nine months out. This is an improvement from the 2009 numbers I see, where less than half accomplished this feat.

Look man, your school sucks like a bunch of other schools suck. I'm not trying to personally attack you, at all, I'm just showing you the numbers because I think they are massively important to people who attend law school. Someone who is at the top of the class at STCL should know these numbers so they can give an even stronger warning that you are giving to prospective applicants. I don't want us to not be friends anymore, really. Can we let this go please? If you'd like to insist that Tech sucks more or equal to the sucking exhibited by STCL I'm willing to look the other on that one in order to bury this hatchet.

See above. You sent me these numbers like thirty minutes ago. Chill dude.

[Lord Randolph McDuff]

Glanced over them just now. From what I can tell these numbers definitely point to better outcomes for median students. hard to tell at the top because Tech reports more salaries which will always water down the big law numbers. Ok now I really, really have to go. Congrats on to TTTT man for the super grades and to TTT dooder for going to a school that will most likely make you a full-time attorney. (71% had to be a full time attorney, but there is always some self selection out of that group so I bet you have a slightly better chance and altogether a pretty good chance of becoming a "real" attorney).


Law School Careers

Bar Statistics (Winter and Summer 2010 administrations)

State where the greatest number of first-time test takers took the bar TX
Bar passage rate (first-time test takers) 87.2% - Medium
Statewide bar passage rate (first-time test takers) 82.5%
Class of 2010 Graduates

Total graduates 210
Graduates known to be employed at graduation N/A
Graduates known to be employed nine months after graduation 93.3%
Class of 2010 Graduates-Class Breakdown at Graduation

Graduates whose employment status is unknown N/A
Graduates whose employment status is known N/A
Graduates known to be employed at graduation N/A
Graduates known to be enrolled in a full-time degree program N/A
Graduates known to be unemployed and seeking work N/A
Graduates known to be unemployed and not seeking work N/A
Class of 2010 Graduates-Class Breakdown at Nine Months

Graduates whose employment status is unknown 0.5%
Graduates whose employment status is known 99.5%
Graduates known to be employed nine months after graduation 93.3%
Graduates known to be enrolled in a full-time degree program 3.8%
Graduates known to be unemployed and seeking work 0.5%
Graduates known to be unemployed and not seeking work 1.9%
Starting Salaries of Graduates Employed Full-time (Class of 2010)

25th percentile private sector starting salary $52,000
Median private sector starting salary $60,000
75th percentile private sector starting salary $83,500
Percent in the private sector who reported salary information 44%
Median public service starting salary $49,750
Areas of Legal Practice (Class of 2010)

Percent employed in academia 1.5%
Percent employed in business and industry 17.9%
Percent employed in government 19.4%
Percent employed in all judicial clerkships 5.1%
Percent employed in law firms 53.6%
Percent employed in public interest 2.6%
Percent employed in an unknown field 0.0%
Employment Location (Class of 2010)

Graduates employed in-state 84%
Graduates employed out-of-state 15.6%
Graduates employed in foreign countries 0%
Number of states where graduates are employed 15
New England (CT, ME, MA, NH, RI, VT) 0.5%
Middle Atlantic (NY, NJ, PA) N/A
East North Central (IL, IN, MI, OH, WI) 0.5%
West North Central (IA, KS, MN, MO, NE, ND, SD) N/A
South Atlantic (DE, DC, FL, GA, MD, NC, SC, VA, WV) 5.2%
East South Central (AL, KY, MS, TN) 0.5%
West South Central (AR, LA, OK, TX) 84.4%
Pacific (AK, CA, HI, OR, WA) 2.1%
Mountain (AZ, CO, ID, MT, NV, NM, UT, WY) 6.8%
Employment location unknown 0.0%
Career Services

(Data appear as originally submitted by this school)
Career services operations Career Services Center provides a forum for interviewing with prospective Texas employers. Law firms seek second year students for summer clerkships that can lead to offers for associate positions. Besides On-Campus Interviewing, other programs include Texas-In-Washington, Sunbelt Minority, Public Interest and Texas Young Lawyers Association. Please see: http://www.law.ttu.edu
Job Type

Bar admission required/anticipated (e.g., attorney and corporate counsel positions, law clerks, judicial clerks) 76.1%
Bar admission required/anticipated - percent employed in full-time positions 100.0%
J.D. preferred, law degree enhances position (e.g., corporate contracts administrator, alternative dispute resolution specialist, government regulatory analyst, FBI special agent) 10.5%
J.D. preferred - percent employed in full-time positions 100.0%
Professional other (jobs that require professional skills or training but for which a J.D. is neither preferred nor particularly applicable; e.g., accountant, teacher, business manager, nurse) 5.3%
Professional other - percent employed in full-time positions 100.0%
Non-professional other (job that does not require any professional skills or training or is taken on a temporary basis and not viewed as part of a career path) 1.9%
Non-professional other - percent employed in full-time positions 100.0%

[Mce252]

Graduates known to be employed nine months after graduation 93.3%
Bar admission required/anticipated (e.g., attorney and corporate counsel positions, law clerks, judicial clerks) 76.1%
Bar admission required/anticipated - percent employed in full-time positions 100.0%


Percent in the private sector who reported salary information 44% (Although better than STCL, still a bad sample size)


So we're talking about a 12% increase in the number of attorneys working part time from South Texas as compared to Tech after 9 months into their careers. What was the whole issue that started all this? Whether STCL grads actually become attorneys? If so, then this difference points out that there may be a few more STCL working part time at 9 months, but the rate of STCL actually working in bar admission required jobs (part-time or not) is 82.7 and Tech's is 76.1.

I still don't see anything earth shattering.

[b.gump81]

Whoa there math wizard. How are you number 1 in your class? Lord Randolph, very well I might add, explained the math to you 3+ times, yet you still are getting it confused. The 76% for tech is only full-time, bar required/anticipated. This doesnt include part-time. Stcl's correlating number is in the 50s. This is even considering "the great location" in a major legal market you so highly regarded earlier. Pretty earth shattering to me. This repeated denial and feigned ignorance is really starting to make your sanity suspect. If you represent the best stcl has to offer, the school just lost that much more respect in my eyes

[Lord Randolph McDuff]

Other than the 6.7% who were unemployed or uninterested in working (aka baby on the way or LLM types), everyone who graduated from Tech had a real job. 100% full-time employment for JD required, JD preferred, professional other, nonprofessional other.

93.3% of Tech grads were for rlz employed, even if their job sucked.

Look at your school. The JD preferred AND professional other don't even break 80% for full-time employment.

A part-time job is never a career, it a glorified internship that probably pays 12 an hour. Mathematically, no more than 6.7% of Tech's class could have even had this type of employment, and common sense dictates that number would have to be significantly smaller than the maximum possible. I don't want to do the math right now because I know it won't persuade you, but what percentage of people at STCL had that type of employment? Keep in mind the cost of attendance differences too because these diferences are at least as important if not more important than starting salary statistics. Only 3/4 people borrowed at Tech, and the average debt was 62k. Compare that to 86% of people borrowing at your toilet school at the clip of 114k of debt. The more you dig into the numbers, the more it becomes obvious that these schools are not in fact peer schools. Tech >>>>>>> STCL

There is a noticeable difference between these schools, the kind of difference you would expect from a "3" to a "2" lawyers judges difference and a 101 rank vs. not ranked. You don't see it because you are biased. Sorry about that.

[Mce252]

Whoa there math wizard. How are you number 1 in your class? Lord Randolph, very well I might add, explained the math to you 3+ times, yet you still are getting it confused. The 76% for tech is only full-time, bar required/anticipated. This doesnt include part-time. Stcl's correlating number is in the 50s. This is even considering "the great location" in a major legal market you so highly regarded earlier. Pretty earth shattering to me. This repeated denial and feigned ignorance is really starting to make your sanity suspect. If you represent the best stcl has to offer, the school just lost that much more respect in my eyes

The only major difference he's pointing out is that there are more STCL willing to take part-time employment as attorneys. But there is still a higher percentage of STCL students working as lawyers when you consider both part-time and full-time jobs. Yes, all Tech grads working as attorneys are working full-time, but the percentage of overall bar-required jobs is lower.


These differences are minor. Your bias is as heavy as mine and your unwillingness just as great. Tech still isn't worth the trip to Lubbock...


And to Lord whatever:

93 v. 85 is not that big of deal when we're talking about student-reported numbers which arent' complete. And now you're bringing finances into the picture. I've already conceded that issue.

[Mce252]

And the whole ranking issue is affected by the fact that Tech has an entire university tied to its law school which has an affect on its image to those who calculate "academic" rankings. South Texas isn't part of a university so it's naturally not going to be as appealing to people who put together rankings in U.S. News.

[Mce252]

I'm done so I promise I won't come back to this thread. I'm still sticking to my original proposition:

Tech may have advantages over South Texas but not ones great enough to justify going to Lubbock, except for significant financial reasons.

[Lord Randolph McDuff]

Way to interpret all the evidence correctly. Really super.

I fixed your post for you.

The only major difference he's pointing out is that there are more STCL willing forced to take part-time employment as attorneys, or baristas, secretaries, etc. But there is still a higher percentage of STCL students working as lawyers a difference between these two schools when you consider both part-time and full-time jobs. Yes, all Tech grads working as attorneys are working full-time, but the percentage of overall bar-required jobs is lower. However, this is largely offset in real terms by the fact that Tech has a greater employment rate overall.


These differences are minor there. You're un biased because you go to school in Colorado, and I just admitted that I'm biased. is as heavy as mine and your unwillingness just as great. Tech still isn't worth the trip to Lubbock... (While it's better than wasting three years in Houston, I have to agree on that last one)

You're welcome.

And the whole ranking issue is affected by the fact that Tech has an entire university tied to its law school which has an affect on its image to those who calculate "academic" rankings. South Texas isn't part of a university so it's naturally not going to be as appealing to people who put together rankings in U.S. News.

Lawyers and Judges account for one category, law schools administrators the other. There are five scores, and an option for "I don't know." Wrong again.

[b.gump81]

These differences are minor. Your bias is as heavy as mine and your unwillingness just as great. Tech still isn't worth the trip to Lubbock...

I'm not irrationally biased like you. I'm looking at objective data and saying your school barely has half of its graduates in full-time legal jobs, while mine has more than 75%

Tech may have advantages over South Texas but not ones great enough to justify going to Lubbock, except for significant financial reasons.

If you don't think having a lot better shot at a full-time legal job after graduation is not a "great enough" advantage, then no one can help you. But I guarantee 99% of law school applicants disagree with you

[Mce252]