The continued importance of school rank

(Rankings, Profiles, Tuition, Student Life, . . . )
User avatar
rayiner
Posts: 6184
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 11:43 am

Re: The continued importance of school rank

Postby rayiner » Tue Jul 17, 2012 3:49 pm

moonman157 wrote:
fatduck wrote:

what a terrible metric. the average loyola student getting biglaw is probably in the top 5-10% of his class. could easily be below median at chicago.


I don't dispute this at all. If you want to make partner at a big law firm, go to U of C. My point is that the practice of favoring t14 students for employment seems to lessen as people get older/get into their careers.


I don't think that the data suggests this at all. What it suggests is that hiring top 1% from Loyola and top 25% from U Chicago probably overstates the difference in student quality on the fronted, not that whatever difference there is gets less significant further down the road.

User avatar
moonman157
Posts: 1039
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2011 10:26 pm

Re: The continued importance of school rank

Postby moonman157 » Tue Jul 17, 2012 4:03 pm

rayiner wrote:
moonman157 wrote:
fatduck wrote:

what a terrible metric. the average loyola student getting biglaw is probably in the top 5-10% of his class. could easily be below median at chicago.


I don't dispute this at all. If you want to make partner at a big law firm, go to U of C. My point is that the practice of favoring t14 students for employment seems to lessen as people get older/get into their careers.


I don't think that the data suggests this at all. What it suggests is that hiring top 1% from Loyola and top 25% from U Chicago probably overstates the difference in student quality on the fronted, not that whatever difference there is gets less significant further down the road.


But that's exactly my point. When there's nothing else to go off of other than school prestige, employers tend to overstate the difference between UCHi grads and the top 1% of Loyola grads. However, once you have work experience in a law firm, and they have more to go off of than grades or school rank, then school name becomes less important.

User avatar
rayiner
Posts: 6184
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 11:43 am

Re: The continued importance of school rank

Postby rayiner » Tue Jul 17, 2012 4:23 pm

moonman157 wrote:But that's exactly my point. When there's nothing else to go off of other than school prestige, employers tend to overstate the difference between UCHi grads and the top 1% of Loyola grads. However, once you have work experience in a law firm, and they have more to go off of than grades or school rank, then school name becomes less important.


I think if the Loyola grad and the U Chicago grad both end up at Kirkland & Ellis, there isn't nearly as much emphasis on pedigree. If one ends up at K&E and another at a small firm, then there isn't as much ability for employers to make an apples to apples comparison of the experience.

nouseforaname123
Posts: 336
Joined: Sun Feb 07, 2010 12:32 pm

Re: The continued importance of school rank

Postby nouseforaname123 » Tue Jul 17, 2012 8:49 pm

jarofsoup wrote:A lot has to do with who the firm can sell to their clients. Clients like to see that the person that they are paying 1k+ an hour is from an elite school.


Tanicius wrote:I think it's market pressure. I don't know what kind of work Barlit Beck does, but if it's corporate, that means they have to appeal to the tastes of corporate clients, and corporate clients often want pedigree.


I'm not sure that clients care about legal pedigree. They certainly don't obsess about it like lawyers do.

As an anecdote, my best friend is a relatively knowledgeable person. His employer is a universally known F25; on a yearly basis, he assigns well over seven figures worth of legal work to various firms. We had the following text conversation last Friday night:

Him: you ever heard of [insert super-prestigious V10 firm], nyc office?

Me: yeah, why?

Him: they are representing our borrower. some of their proposed changes are legit, others are way out there. who are these idiots? do they want us to walk away from this deal?

I know it's one guy, but I suspect that, especially outside of NYC, he's probably more of the norm. My guess is that the average employee pushing work to outside counsel couldn't tell you the difference between Cravath, Swaine and Crate & Barrel.

I know his legal department gives him a list of approved law firms for any particular market. In his home market (major secondary market), where he does most of his business, he chooses to use the local, very low V100 even though a V20 known for its obsession with pedigree and grades is one of his approved firms. Says he prefers the V100 people.

As an additional observation about the relevance of pedigree to clients, there are plenty of partners from TTT's with big books of business.

User avatar
TheThriller
Posts: 2285
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2012 10:12 pm

Re: The continued importance of school rank

Postby TheThriller » Wed Jul 18, 2012 2:04 pm

timbs4339 wrote:The whole class argument really bothers me.

As a solidly middle-class bro (Chili's was the shit growing up), I've noticed a few trappings of elitism in my 3 years. But I think those are far outweighed by the harm done when lower-ranked law schools that charge 40K per year try to play themselves off as being schools for blue-collar kids or for real people. It's a pretty worn out tactic by now.

There is still some hope- schools with good local reps that charge around 10-15K. But these are vastly outnumbered by the schools with poor job prospects charge 40K all in the name of access and opportunity.


Chili's is still the shit (the statement "still gives me" also works here).

This aside, I think social class and T-14 schools go hand in hand when it comes to employment prospects. It is, in a few ways, a self-selecting group.




Return to “Choosing a Law School”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], Bing [Bot] and 4 guests