hashashin wrote: cotiger wrote:
The problem with this assertion is that even if you consider all of GULC's Gov/PI stuff as super awesome, they still come in behind the lowest performing other schools of the T14.
Here is a thread about that: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=219104#p7216961
This is not to say that GULC is a bad school, or that it wouldn't work for OP (especially considering the patent-eligible URM thing), but GULC absolutely does have worse overall placement than the rest of the T14.
Yeah? For the c/o 2012 you actually have Cornell and NU and GULC showing up as 85 % EACH (Your AVERAGE has GULC about TWO PERCENT behind Cornell); why is this a significant difference?
Northwestern: 85, 85 -> avg: 85
Cornell: 76, 85 -> avg: 81
Georgetown: 72, 85 -> avg: 79
GULC's enormous class size hurt it significantly more than other schools during the class of 2011. So yeah, no shit 2011 #s were somewhat lower (again, by 4% in comparison with Cornell).
First, you picked the stat that was being the most generous to GULC. This assumed that every single Gov, PI, school-funded, and JD advantage job was as desirable as a biglaw or clerkship gig. This is a heroic assumption.
Second, despite this generosity, GULC still came in last. They got hammered due to the biglaw crash of 2011? Great, Cornell's biglaw percentage (ie their specialty) went from 74% to 39%. And they STILL beat GULC. GULC's lack of reliance on biglaw for their outcomes more than makes up for any size-based excuses you want to make. And regardless, it's still a relevant data point. Who's to say that C/O 2017 won't face a similar situation?
Finally, even ignoring all of the above, and assuming that GULC's positive outcomes place equally strongly with the lowest performing T14s, GULC still gives you a hugely larger chance of a disastrously negative outcome. To quote what I've already written:
cotiger wrote:Lastly, looking at unambiguously negative outcomes (ST, PT, non-professional, or unemployed) shows major problems at GULC.
Northwestern: 11, 13, 12 -> 3 yr avg: 12
Cornell: 6, 20, 13 -> 3 yr avg: 13
Georgetown: 16, 23, 13 -> 3 yr avg: 17
17% is not just some "kids near the bottom of the class who are struggling." That's inching towards 1/5 of the class with disastrous (not just undesirable) outcomes. If above-median grades avoid that fate, that would mean that fully 1/3 of the below-median students at GULC have terrible outcomes. That's not as bad as many schools, sure. But there is a reason why TLS tends to hold Georgetown in lower standing than the other members of the T14.
cotiger wrote:As it is, I think the difference between 12/13 and 17 underemployment is pretty big (50% more at GULC). But if you add school-funded jobs, the gap changes to 22 for GULC vs 12/13 for NU/Cornell. That's again approaching twice the likelihood of a negative outcome.