Study Analysis

(Rankings, Profiles, Tuition, Student Life, . . . )
sdgdg35
Posts: 4
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2014 10:48 pm

Study Analysis

Postby sdgdg35 » Sat Feb 07, 2015 2:11 am

What do you all think of this article and its attached study?: http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2010/07/30/new ... raight-as/

My friends are citing this study and telling me that I am stupid to go to a T14 school and should reject it in favor of a state school because I'll likely have a higher GPA.

Kimikho
Posts: 3971
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 7:01 pm

Re: Study Analysis

Postby Kimikho » Sat Feb 07, 2015 3:09 am

You can't guarantee top grades. 100% want them and 90% fail.

User avatar
Mack.Hambleton
Posts: 5417
Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2014 2:09 am

Re: Study Analysis

Postby Mack.Hambleton » Sat Feb 07, 2015 4:35 am

Is this what law professors spend their time doing lmao

User avatar
A. Nony Mouse
Posts: 22779
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:51 am

Re: Study Analysis

Postby A. Nony Mouse » Sat Feb 07, 2015 10:14 am

I mean, I can see the point about grades making a difference. But the authors' assumptions about how much someone's grades would drop moving up the food chain (from whatever - Iowa? - to GW) appears to be pure speculation. To guarantee better grades at the lower ranked school, there would have to be a really BIG gulf between them, big enough that you're probably giving up significant job placement (and even then it's not guaranteed, although perhaps more likely).

jarofsoup
Posts: 1951
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 2:41 am

Re: Study Analysis

Postby jarofsoup » Sat Feb 07, 2015 10:25 am

You know that some elite firms do not even recruit lower than the T30, so this article is a bit stupid.

User avatar
pancakes3
Posts: 3891
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2014 2:49 pm

Re: Study Analysis

Postby pancakes3 » Sat Feb 07, 2015 10:51 am

A. Nony Mouse wrote:I mean, I can see the point about grades making a difference. But the authors' assumptions about how much someone's grades would drop moving up the food chain (from whatever - Iowa? - to GW) appears to be pure speculation. To guarantee better grades at the lower ranked school, there would have to be a really BIG gulf between them, big enough that you're probably giving up significant job placement (and even then it's not guaranteed, although perhaps more likely).


For those who TLDR, from what I gathered in skimming the report it seems that:

1) The tiers are 1-10, 11-20, rest of the top 100, and 101+, which... is a bad idea.
2) They predict the grade bump/drop by an LSAC questionnaire asking people if they went to their first choice or not, and then "obtained estimates" from that - presumably looking at the specific GPA of those who reported attending the 2nd choice measured against SOMETHING, presumably the median of the foregone 1st choice.

But what it's basically saying is there's a stronger correlation for GPA's 3.75+ with biglaw than what ranked school you attend.

User avatar
TheodoreKGB
Posts: 497
Joined: Sat Jul 13, 2013 3:46 pm

Re: Study Analysis

Postby TheodoreKGB » Sat Feb 07, 2015 11:09 am

.
Last edited by TheodoreKGB on Mon Mar 16, 2015 12:15 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
romothesavior
Posts: 14772
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:29 pm

Re: Study Analysis

Postby romothesavior » Sat Feb 07, 2015 1:51 pm

Paging DF.

I've seen him (and maybe Rayiner?) provide some actual data on why this argument is stupid. The "grades bump" you get from going to a lower ranked school doesn't come anywhere close to making up for the sacrifice in placement power. The correlation in LSAT score also isn't all that strong. Going to a lower ranked, but still decent school drastically cuts down on your placement power, but only marginally diminishes the strength of your competition.

This scholarship and the inferences drawn therefrom is borderline reckless.

User avatar
romothesavior
Posts: 14772
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:29 pm

Re: Study Analysis

Postby romothesavior » Sat Feb 07, 2015 1:53 pm

Also, the example used is fucking ridiculously stupid. GWU and UF are a hell of a lot closer in placement power than GW and say UVA.

CanadianWolf
Posts: 10439
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 4:54 pm

Re: Study Analysis

Postby CanadianWolf » Sat Feb 07, 2015 2:16 pm

After a quick read of the article, my main concern is that the article focuses on grades rather than class rank. Attending a T-14 law school typically results in more & better career options. In my opinion, the more interesting study would examine whether it is better for one to do very well at an in-state law school versus median at a T-14 law school when desiring to remain in that state; for example, is it better for one to place in the top 10% (& law review ? ) at the University of Florida if seeking permanent employment in Florida or to finish at median at the various T-14 law schools. (Would be particularly interesting for states like Texas, Arizona & Georgia which offer great in-state options.)

User avatar
pancakes3
Posts: 3891
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2014 2:49 pm

Re: Study Analysis

Postby pancakes3 » Sat Feb 07, 2015 3:21 pm

which is essentially LST.

jarofsoup
Posts: 1951
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 2:41 am

Re: Study Analysis

Postby jarofsoup » Sat Feb 07, 2015 5:03 pm

romothesavior wrote:Also, the example used is fucking ridiculously stupid. GWU and UF are a hell of a lot closer in placement power than GW and say UVA.


I think the only reason why GW and UVAs placement data could have similarities is because of regions, i.e., UVA grads are in NY and DC, and so are GWs.

User avatar
romothesavior
Posts: 14772
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:29 pm

Re: Study Analysis

Postby romothesavior » Sun Feb 08, 2015 10:34 am

jarofsoup wrote:
romothesavior wrote:Also, the example used is fucking ridiculously stupid. GWU and UF are a hell of a lot closer in placement power than GW and say UVA.


I think the only reason why GW and UVAs placement data could have similarities is because of regions, i.e., UVA grads are in NY and DC, and so are GWs.

They didn't use GW and UVA, they compared Florida and GW. Their theory crumbles as soon as they start comparing T14s with even T20s.

User avatar
rondemarino
Posts: 529
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 12:29 am

Re: Study Analysis

Postby rondemarino » Sun Feb 08, 2015 10:43 am

LOL @ empirical studies from law professors, whose research is rarely, if ever, subjected to peer review.

timbs4339
Posts: 2733
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2011 12:19 pm

Re: Study Analysis

Postby timbs4339 » Mon Feb 09, 2015 1:29 am

Two people who went to T13 schools and work in the most prestige-whorish of legal jobs wrote:As an illustrative hypothetical, imagine an average student (GPA 3.25‐3.5) at 47th ranked University of Florida. Using the fifth column from Table 11 (AJD regressions on salary), we can predict how her earnings would be affected under various counterfactuals. If she had attended 20th ranked George Washington University, her grades likely would have slipped to the 2.75‐3.0 range, and her salary would drop considerably (by 22%, all other factors held constant.) Even if she had managed to get a spot at 7th ranked UC Berkeley, where the tier premiums are highest, her grades likely would have fallen into the 2.5‐2.75 range, and her salary would be 7% lower. On the other hand, if she had attended 80th ranked Rutgers, she probably could have improved her grades to land in the 3.5‐3.75 range, and earned a 13% higher salary.


What fucking T14 school gives people 2.5-2.75's? The difference between UCB and UF is 5 points on the LSAT and .1 GPA. No way that busts someone down from median to bottom 5%.




Return to “Choosing a Law School”

Who is online

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