2014 USNWR Rankings: Winners and Losers

(Rankings, Profiles, Tuition, Student Life, . . . )
User avatar
cahwc12
Posts: 941
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2012 4:49 pm

2014 USNWR Rankings: Winners and Losers

Postby cahwc12 » Tue Mar 12, 2013 4:42 pm

Link to google spreadsheet

So I took the 2014 rankings and input them into a spreadsheet I made comparing the c/o 2011 employment data with the 2013 rankings. It doesn't seem like the 2014 Rankings methodology is much different, but thanks largely to people like those at LST, the leaps in employment data transparency made the data simply better. Even though employment only encompasses 18% of the ranking, you'll see that the schools most whitewashing were the generally the biggest losers, while schools that gained from having more accurate data saw the biggest jumps.

%JDReq is a ranking based exclusively on the school's percentage of graduates employed in full-time, long-term jobs requiring bar passage.
2013 and 2014 are the school's respective USNWR rankings.
Change is the movement from 2013 to 2013 USNWR rankings.
JD FTLT is the number of graduates employed in full-time, long-term jobs requiring bar passage.
Total Graduates is the number of graduates from the school in the c/o 2011 ABA data.
% JD FTLT is the percentage of graduates employed in full-time, long-term jobs requiring bar passage.

Color Key: A while ago I created a spreadsheet to see what schools would rank if the ranking was based exclusively on JDFTLT jobs held at 9 months. That percentage is listed in the far right column, and that "JD ranking" is listed on the far left. Then I colored the schools shades of green and red based on their actual 2013 ranking relative to the c/o 2011 employment data. It was pretty scattered, but when you insert the 2014 rankings, many of those seemingly anomalous (or not-so-anomalous) rises and falls in the rankings can be explained simply by the new, more transparent employment data.

For example, American, which is widely considered a poorly disguised for-profit JD mill, ranks 180th out of 201 ABA-accredited law schools in percentage of graduates in full-time, long-term jobs requiring bar passage. It's actual ranking in 2013, 49, doesn't really bear any relation to the available employment data. (Hence the very dark red highlighting, and I marked this as "two tiers" worse. If schools were ranked according to employment outcomes alone, American would be behind 90% of accredited law schools, and possibly some unaccredited ones.)

(In case you didn't know or realize, the c/o 2010 data was very generalized and not too useful, and last year's employment data was the first that was genuinely insightful. The 2013 rankings are based off the c/o 2010 rankings, while the ones released yesterday are based off last year's more transparent c/o 2011 rankings.)


Without further introduction, here is a list of the biggest winners and losers in the new ranking system, as compared to their 2011 employment data.

Image
Last edited by cahwc12 on Tue Mar 12, 2013 8:19 pm, edited 5 times in total.

User avatar
Ruxin1
Posts: 1284
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2010 3:12 pm

Re: 2014 USNWR Rankings: Winners and Losers

Postby Ruxin1 » Tue Mar 12, 2013 4:44 pm

Winners - schools deans that move up in these pointless rankings that will now get ignorant 0L's to pay sticker price at a school because OMG THEY WENT UP 8 SPOTS!!!

User avatar
guano
Posts: 2268
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 9:49 am

Re: 2014 USNWR Rankings: Winners and Losers

Postby guano » Tue Mar 12, 2013 4:46 pm

I don't have the slightest clue what you're doing here

User avatar
cahwc12
Posts: 941
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2012 4:49 pm

Re: 2014 USNWR Rankings: Winners and Losers

Postby cahwc12 » Tue Mar 12, 2013 4:47 pm

guano wrote:I don't have the slightest clue what you're doing here


Just showing that the large gains and drops by schools are primarily due to the improvements in employment transparency and little else.

And also because I know others are interested to see who moved the most, independent of whether or not they/we/you/I hold much stock in the rankings.

As someone mentioned in the other thread, it's kind of like rooting for your favorite sports teams.

User avatar
guano
Posts: 2268
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 9:49 am

Re: 2014 USNWR Rankings: Winners and Losers

Postby guano » Tue Mar 12, 2013 4:49 pm

cahwc12 wrote:
guano wrote:I don't have the slightest clue what you're doing here


Just showing that the large gains and drops by schools are primarily due to the improvements in employment transparency and little else.

what do the columns mean? How have you ordered it?

I mean, seriously, I can't make heads or tails of what you're saying.

User avatar
cahwc12
Posts: 941
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2012 4:49 pm

Re: 2014 USNWR Rankings: Winners and Losers

Postby cahwc12 » Tue Mar 12, 2013 4:49 pm

guano wrote:
cahwc12 wrote:
guano wrote:I don't have the slightest clue what you're doing here


Just showing that the large gains and drops by schools are primarily due to the improvements in employment transparency and little else.

what do the columns mean? How have you ordered it?

I mean, seriously, I can't make heads or tails of what you're saying.


Sure, I'll edit the OP

User avatar
Lovely Ludwig Van
Posts: 370
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 1:43 pm

Re: 2014 USNWR Rankings: Winners and Losers

Postby Lovely Ludwig Van » Tue Mar 12, 2013 4:58 pm

"Winners" and "losers." This sounds like ESPN's analysis of the NFL draft.

Lord Randolph McDuff
Posts: 1587
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 4:37 pm

Re: 2014 USNWR Rankings: Winners and Losers

Postby Lord Randolph McDuff » Tue Mar 12, 2013 5:04 pm

So wait, why do you have a column for full-time JD req? The new method is full-time, long term, JD req or JD adv.. right?

jack5on
Posts: 61
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2013 2:10 pm

Re: 2014 USNWR Rankings: Winners and Losers

Postby jack5on » Tue Mar 12, 2013 5:06 pm

This isn't as helpful as you think for those of us who are color blind

User avatar
guano
Posts: 2268
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 9:49 am

Re: 2014 USNWR Rankings: Winners and Losers

Postby guano » Tue Mar 12, 2013 5:11 pm

jack5on wrote:This isn't as helpful as you think for those of us who are color blind look at it

Aroldis105
Posts: 210
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2013 11:38 am

Re: 2014 USNWR Rankings: Winners and Losers

Postby Aroldis105 » Tue Mar 12, 2013 5:14 pm

Also very confused.
How can some of the first column percentages be over 100%?
Why is a school that jumped in the rankings and is T1 highlighted in red? (OSU/Wake/Etc)
Why won't Natalie Portman respond to my tweets?

User avatar
A. Nony Mouse
Posts: 22892
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:51 am

Re: 2014 USNWR Rankings: Winners and Losers

Postby A. Nony Mouse » Tue Mar 12, 2013 5:24 pm

Why do you have Utah ranked at 100 in last year's USNWR? I'm pretty sure it was ranked around 45.

I also have no idea what the colors are supposed to mean - what is >1 Tier better etc? (This may just be me, but would love an explanation.)

User avatar
guano
Posts: 2268
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 9:49 am

Re: 2014 USNWR Rankings: Winners and Losers

Postby guano » Tue Mar 12, 2013 5:42 pm

Aroldis105 wrote:Also very confused.
How can some of the first column percentages be over 100%?
Why is a school that jumped in the rankings and is T1 highlighted in red? (OSU/Wake/Etc)
Why won't Natalie Portman respond to my tweets?

For the last question, take the answer to the first two, and substitute your name for OP's

mb9113
Posts: 27
Joined: Sat Mar 09, 2013 1:13 am

Re: 2014 USNWR Rankings: Winners and Losers

Postby mb9113 » Tue Mar 12, 2013 6:39 pm

Utah did not jump 59 spots.

It was mid to high 40's before.

User avatar
cahwc12
Posts: 941
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2012 4:49 pm

Re: 2014 USNWR Rankings: Winners and Losers

Postby cahwc12 » Tue Mar 12, 2013 8:03 pm

mb9113 wrote:Utah did not jump 59 spots.

It was mid to high 40's before.


You're right, thanks. I thought that was highly odd.

A. Nony Mouse wrote:Why do you have Utah ranked at 100 in last year's USNWR? I'm pretty sure it was ranked around 45.

I also have no idea what the colors are supposed to mean - what is >1 Tier better etc? (This may just be me, but would love an explanation.)


So a while ago I created a spreadsheet to see what schools would rank if the ranking was based exclusively on JDFTLT jobs held at 9 months. That percentage is listed in the far right column, and that "JD ranking" is listed on the far left. Then I colored the schools shades of green and red based on their actual 2013 ranking relative to the c/o 2011 employment data.

It was pretty scattered, but when you insert the 2014 rankings, many of those seemingly anomalous (or not-so-anomalous) rises and falls in the rankings can be explained simply by the new, more transparent employment data.

(In case you didn't know or realize, the c/o 2010 data was very generalized and not too useful, and last year's employment data was the first that was genuinely insightful. The 2013 rankings are based off the c/o 2010 rankings, while the ones released yesterday are based off last year's more transparent c/o 2011 rankings.

This single metric seems to pretty accurately explain almost every mover on the list (while some of the lower ranked schools moved up or down a few spots simply due to four- and five-way ties).
Last edited by cahwc12 on Tue Mar 12, 2013 8:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
MikeSpivey
Posts: 2618
Joined: Sun May 03, 2009 4:28 pm

Re: 2014 USNWR Rankings: Winners and Losers

Postby MikeSpivey » Tue Mar 12, 2013 8:10 pm

Can you define your color code a bit more, if possible? Many thanks!

User avatar
guano
Posts: 2268
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 9:49 am

Re: 2014 USNWR Rankings: Winners and Losers

Postby guano » Tue Mar 12, 2013 8:12 pm

MikeSpivey wrote:Can you define your color code a bit more, if possible? Many thanks!

don't waste your time. the information as presented is of no use to man or beast

User avatar
Dr. Dre
Posts: 2347
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 7:10 pm

Re: 2014 USNWR Rankings: Winners and Losers

Postby Dr. Dre » Tue Mar 12, 2013 8:24 pm

guano wrote:I don't have the slightest clue what you're doing here

User avatar
MikeSpivey
Posts: 2618
Joined: Sun May 03, 2009 4:28 pm

Re: 2014 USNWR Rankings: Winners and Losers

Postby MikeSpivey » Tue Mar 12, 2013 8:28 pm

guano wrote:
MikeSpivey wrote:Can you define your color code a bit more, if possible? Many thanks!

don't waste your time. the information as presented is of no use to man or beast


Actually I just read the section called "color code" and now that makes sense. That is interesting [if true].

071816
Posts: 5511
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2011 8:06 pm

Re: 2014 USNWR Rankings: Winners and Losers

Postby 071816 » Tue Mar 12, 2013 8:32 pm

That chart looks pretty fucked.

User avatar
banjo
Posts: 1345
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2011 8:00 pm

Re: 2014 USNWR Rankings: Winners and Losers

Postby banjo » Tue Mar 12, 2013 8:33 pm

Looks like USNWR does an okay job ranking the top schools

PRgradBYU
Posts: 1419
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2013 8:04 pm

Re: 2014 USNWR Rankings: Winners and Losers

Postby PRgradBYU » Tue Mar 12, 2013 9:14 pm

Aroldis105 wrote:Why won't Natalie Portman respond to my tweets?


This.

But c'mon guys, the chart isn't that bad... just unnecessary.

Aroldis105
Posts: 210
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2013 11:38 am

Re: 2014 USNWR Rankings: Winners and Losers

Postby Aroldis105 » Tue Mar 12, 2013 9:56 pm

Now that you've made the changes I actually think this chart is pretty, pretty, pretty okay.
Not to be greedy, but it'd be great if it was then ordered from highest to lowest employment numbers.
UPDATE: Natalie Portman has blocked me on Twitter.

User avatar
Dr. Dre
Posts: 2347
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 7:10 pm

Re: 2014 USNWR Rankings: Winners and Losers

Postby Dr. Dre » Tue Mar 12, 2013 10:03 pm

OP forgot to include the prestigious

--ImageRemoved--




Return to “Choosing a Law School”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 1 guest