what's up with Michigan

(Rankings, Profiles, Tuition, Student Life, . . . )
User avatar
DELG
Posts: 2936
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 7:15 pm

Re: what's up with Michigan

Postby DELG » Sat Mar 14, 2015 11:43 am

jrthor10 wrote:A lot of guessing and misinformation in this thread, so I'll try to clear up a few things:

1. Michigan Drop: Yes Michigan dropped, but it was really only a spot from last year as Duke just moved up and we didn't follow suit. This isn't meant to imply the drop didn't happen, it did, but it's not as serious as some people have let on. Michigan has been towards the bottom of the top 10 for the last few years now, so a 1 spot drop is/should not be alarming.

2. Explanations For Drop: Lots of factors here, most of which have already been mentioned. We don't have a home market, so when the market contracted, we got screwed. That's true. I also think for a few years Michigan continued to admit an incoming class that did not have as much work experience, on the whole, as classes at peer schools. This hurt us as well at OCI. Finally, and this is certainly the hardest to explain, I think demographic and changes in living preferences has also played a huge role. Young people today want to be in cities, even much more so than 10-15 years ago. To many students from the coasts, Michigan seems like a foreign land (trust me, this continues even amongst such students from the coasts now attending). I think it is harder today to get good students to come to the middle of Michigan than it was 15 years ago. Hopefully some people will want to come see Harbaugh.

3. Adjustments Already Made: Our 2L class is smaller by about 50 people than previous classes. I think this will make a huge difference when OCI #s come out. All anecdotal information from students and OCP indicates that OCI went very well for our class this past fall. OCP also moved up OCI to the first week of August, I think this will also benefit students. Additionally, Michigan adjusted its grade curve last year, so we are now in line with our peer schools, whereas before we were unnecessarily below. Finally, Michigan decided to play along with the rankings game started by other schools; we have started "employing" graduates without jobs post-graduation. These numbers, though, won't show up in our employment data used by U.S. News for at least 1-2 more years, according to the Dean. Oh, we also hired a new football coach, so I am confident that will do wonders for us as well.

Michigan leadership is pretty honest that we are never going to get back to our place in the T-6, i.e. when the rankings first came out. Two of the biggest metrics now used are spending per student and endowment. Michigan, as a public school, is never going to catch HSY, Columbia, NYU, Chicago, or even Penn. That we know. But I wouldn't be surprised if we are are back in the lower part of the T-14 in the next few years.

Your explanation for the Michigan USNWR drop discussing OCI is nonsensical given their ranking criteria.

User avatar
rickgrimes69
Posts: 1107
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2012 8:56 am

Re: what's up with Michigan

Postby rickgrimes69 » Sat Mar 14, 2015 11:52 am

BZ is pretty much on point ITT. Another factor is likely Michigan's stinginess with scholarships and infamous refusal to negotiate, when schools like Duke are throwing around scholly money like candy.

User avatar
BiglawAssociate
Posts: 355
Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2015 12:05 am

Re: what's up with Michigan

Postby BiglawAssociate » Sat Mar 14, 2015 12:05 pm

jbagelboy wrote:
dabigchina wrote:
BiglawAssociate wrote:
BigZuck wrote:Duke doesn't have a major market to feed into either

Michigan is closer to Chicago than Duke is to DC


Duke is half the size of Michigan.

Michigan should just cut its class size to 600, and it will shoot up in the rankings. Same with UVA. I bet Michigan/UVA would rank higher than Penn/Berkeley/Duke if it just cut class sizes by a few hundred. If Georgetown cuts its class size to half, it would probably be ranked higher than NU/Cornell.


HavIng a huge class isn't bad in and of itself. Harvard Columbia and nyu have huge classes. It does tend to exacerbate other underlying problems when the legal profession is over saturated.


Columbia and UVA have the same class size, several hundred less than NYU or Harvard. I wouldn't call it "huge."

Moreover I don't think the "if X underperforming school cut class sizes, it would be jump in rankings" argument does much work. It doesn't align with how legal hiring works: law firms still recruit heavily based on grades and placement in the class. If you bring down Michigan's class size to 200, a firm pulling median and above students with its current class won't suddenly dip lower in the new smaller one. From a percentage perspective, this doesn't substantially change outcomes, even if it leaves less students jobless in absolute terms.

Moreover, cutting students means cutting faculty, resources, and other parts of the USNWR ranking structure. I suppose a school could reduce class size in a gaming effort and become more selective, but I don't know if Michigan could suddenly hold a 3.8/171 median if it just decided to only accept those type of students - they just wouldnt have a class, and thats a huge risk for an admissions team.

If someone can support a reasonable counterargument I'm open to hearing it.


How do you know what legal hiring is at firms? Aren't you in law school? The amount of crap being spewed by law students and 0Ls is like a circle jerk of repeating the same information some other clueless poor repeated.

Firms, or at least the people doing hiring at OCI, don't really know placement/average 1L GPAs as well as you think. Do you think partners bother looking up average GPAs before interviewing? No. They have better things to do - like making money and their work. A lot of the hiring is done by not that well informed partners (and associates, but partners' opinions are really what matters) who either think oh the GPA generally looks good and/or, if they like you. I've done callbacks where all I had was that person's resume... If a partner wants to call you back and/or give you an offer, you have an offer. So Michigan bumping up their average GPA is good for the school because then the GPAs look good compared to schools that have already been inflating their GPAs for years.

Michigan is still one of the richest T-14 law schools endowment wise, so I think it could afford to cut at least a few hundred students. Schools like Berkeley, which is smaller, are still operating despite being, in comparison, less wealthy.

Plus, Michigan could just operate using the UVA admissions model - accept only splitters ED and reject everyone else, although recently people may be less likely to want to apply ED anywhere...I think UVA lowered its acceptance rate from like 25% to much less in a couple of years because of this gaming method.

So yes, cutting class sizes, gaming methods (employing their own students), maybe changing their admissions models to accepting splitter dumbs would probably all help. I think the point differential between the schools ranked 8 and 11 were 1 point this year, so using the aforementioned methods would help game the system. It's kind of pathetic though - USNews forcing schools to game the system for rankings purposes...so shady.
Last edited by BiglawAssociate on Sat Mar 14, 2015 12:13 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
jrthor10
Posts: 364
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2011 10:33 am

Re: what's up with Michigan

Postby jrthor10 » Sat Mar 14, 2015 12:12 pm

DELG wrote:
jrthor10 wrote:A lot of guessing and misinformation in this thread, so I'll try to clear up a few things:

1. Michigan Drop: Yes Michigan dropped, but it was really only a spot from last year as Duke just moved up and we didn't follow suit. This isn't meant to imply the drop didn't happen, it did, but it's not as serious as some people have let on. Michigan has been towards the bottom of the top 10 for the last few years now, so a 1 spot drop is/should not be alarming.

2. Explanations For Drop: Lots of factors here, most of which have already been mentioned. We don't have a home market, so when the market contracted, we got screwed. That's true. I also think for a few years Michigan continued to admit an incoming class that did not have as much work experience, on the whole, as classes at peer schools. This hurt us as well at OCI. Finally, and this is certainly the hardest to explain, I think demographic and changes in living preferences has also played a huge role. Young people today want to be in cities, even much more so than 10-15 years ago. To many students from the coasts, Michigan seems like a foreign land (trust me, this continues even amongst such students from the coasts now attending). I think it is harder today to get good students to come to the middle of Michigan than it was 15 years ago. Hopefully some people will want to come see Harbaugh.

3. Adjustments Already Made: Our 2L class is smaller by about 50 people than previous classes. I think this will make a huge difference when OCI #s come out. All anecdotal information from students and OCP indicates that OCI went very well for our class this past fall. OCP also moved up OCI to the first week of August, I think this will also benefit students. Additionally, Michigan adjusted its grade curve last year, so we are now in line with our peer schools, whereas before we were unnecessarily below. Finally, Michigan decided to play along with the rankings game started by other schools; we have started "employing" graduates without jobs post-graduation. These numbers, though, won't show up in our employment data used by U.S. News for at least 1-2 more years, according to the Dean. Oh, we also hired a new football coach, so I am confident that will do wonders for us as well.

Michigan leadership is pretty honest that we are never going to get back to our place in the T-6, i.e. when the rankings first came out. Two of the biggest metrics now used are spending per student and endowment. Michigan, as a public school, is never going to catch HSY, Columbia, NYU, Chicago, or even Penn. That we know. But I wouldn't be surprised if we are are back in the lower part of the T-14 in the next few years.

Your explanation for the Michigan USNWR drop discussing OCI is nonsensical given their ranking criteria.


Please explain how it is nonsensical...

User avatar
DELG
Posts: 2936
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 7:15 pm

Re: what's up with Michigan

Postby DELG » Sat Mar 14, 2015 12:22 pm

Given how USNWR ranks. Those factors only speak to LST type numbers.

User avatar
BiglawAssociate
Posts: 355
Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2015 12:05 am

Re: what's up with Michigan

Postby BiglawAssociate » Sat Mar 14, 2015 12:25 pm

DELG wrote:Given how USNWR ranks. Those factors only speak to LST type numbers.


I'm going to agree with jrthor10, I don't understand your point. USNews uses full time employment numbers, school's self-employment numbers, etc. Bringing up your school's average GPA, moving OCI up earlier (before law firms fill their classes), etc. are all ways to improve employment percentages. USNews also counts employing your own grads, so doing that helps as well.

Why don't you clarify, instead of rambling ambiguously so we can better understand your argument?

03152016
Posts: 9189
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 3:14 am

Re: what's up with Michigan

Postby 03152016 » Sat Mar 14, 2015 12:27 pm

jbagelboy wrote:Columbia and UVA have the same class size, several hundred less than NYU or Harvard. I wouldn't call it "huge."

bagel your unwavering cls homerism is a sight to behold
cls 2014 class size 381
nyu 2014 class size 452
452-381 = 71

BigZuck
Posts: 10854
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2012 9:53 am

Re: what's up with Michigan

Postby BigZuck » Sat Mar 14, 2015 12:29 pm

Bit of a slow start but this thread is shaping up quite nicely. Looking forward to seeing where it goes over the next 3-4 pages.

User avatar
BiglawAssociate
Posts: 355
Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2015 12:05 am

Re: what's up with Michigan

Postby BiglawAssociate » Sat Mar 14, 2015 12:32 pm

BigZuck wrote:Bit of a slow start but this thread is shaping up quite nicely. Looking forward to seeing where it goes over the next 3-4 pages.


All I call tell from this thread, and the stuff being spewed, is that the quality of T-14 students has really done down the drain since I've been in school.....is law school turning into the "public health" or "public policy" master's degree?

BigZuck
Posts: 10854
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2012 9:53 am

Re: what's up with Michigan

Postby BigZuck » Sat Mar 14, 2015 12:35 pm

BiglawAssociate wrote:
BigZuck wrote:Bit of a slow start but this thread is shaping up quite nicely. Looking forward to seeing where it goes over the next 3-4 pages.


All I call tell from this thread, and the stuff being spewed, is that the quality of T-14 students has really done down the drain since I've been in school.....is law school turning into the "public health" or "public policy" master's degree?

I don't know who or what spawned you brother but let me be the first to say "Welcome" and "I like the cut of your jib."

BigZuck
Posts: 10854
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2012 9:53 am

Re: what's up with Michigan

Postby BigZuck » Sat Mar 14, 2015 12:38 pm

Before we go any further I think it might be helpful for people to declare whether or not they are Michigan Men. Perhaps the OP can be updated to reflect that?

So we have BigZuck, IAFG, Bags, Ricky G, Brut as not Michigan Men.

Jthor and Aeon look to be Michigan Men.

How about you BiglawAssociate?

Eta: I know I missed quite a few but people can just declare their Michigan Manliness ITT and we can get that updated

Eta2: Also this thread might be relevant to our discussion. Not sure whose alt it is but its p good:
viewtopic.php?f=18&t=245004

truthat
Posts: 9
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 10:15 am

Re: what's up with Michigan

Postby truthat » Sat Mar 14, 2015 12:48 pm

.
Last edited by truthat on Sun Mar 15, 2015 4:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.

BigZuck
Posts: 10854
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2012 9:53 am

Re: what's up with Michigan

Postby BigZuck » Sat Mar 14, 2015 12:50 pm

truthat wrote:disclaimer: i'm 0L. however, i did extensive research into Michigan, UVA, NW, etc. (lower-14s) as i'm looking to apply next cycle.

i think the 'fall of michigan' has been wayyyy-overblown/exaggerated on this forum. yes, i understand the whole not having a home market deal, but wasn't that always the case? detroit's never been a legal powerhouse, and if i remember correctly, michigan law never relied too heavily on state-support (not sure about undergrad & other grad programs).

either way, i think it's just USNWR coming up with ideas to sell prints by tweaking here and there, and god knows what their exact employment metrics are. remember, berkeley was sitting outside the t-10 not too long ago before magically jumping back in.

i think it's a cyclical thing, not a permanent downfall or anything of that sort for michigan. they're a solid t-10 school.

k we'll put you down as a Michigan Man then

User avatar
rickgrimes69
Posts: 1107
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2012 8:56 am

Re: what's up with Michigan

Postby rickgrimes69 » Sat Mar 14, 2015 12:59 pm

truthat wrote:i think it's a cyclical thing, not a permanent downfall or anything of that sort for michigan. they're a solid t-10 school.


NOT ANYMORE LOLOLOL

User avatar
jbagelboy
Posts: 9635
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 7:57 pm

Re: what's up with Michigan

Postby jbagelboy » Sat Mar 14, 2015 1:01 pm

BiglawAssociate wrote:
jbagelboy wrote:
dabigchina wrote:
BiglawAssociate wrote:
Duke is half the size of Michigan.

Michigan should just cut its class size to 600, and it will shoot up in the rankings. Same with UVA. I bet Michigan/UVA would rank higher than Penn/Berkeley/Duke if it just cut class sizes by a few hundred. If Georgetown cuts its class size to half, it would probably be ranked higher than NU/Cornell.


HavIng a huge class isn't bad in and of itself. Harvard Columbia and nyu have huge classes. It does tend to exacerbate other underlying problems when the legal profession is over saturated.


Columbia and UVA have the same class size, several hundred less than NYU or Harvard. I wouldn't call it "huge."

Moreover I don't think the "if X underperforming school cut class sizes, it would be jump in rankings" argument does much work. It doesn't align with how legal hiring works: law firms still recruit heavily based on grades and placement in the class. If you bring down Michigan's class size to 200, a firm pulling median and above students with its current class won't suddenly dip lower in the new smaller one. From a percentage perspective, this doesn't substantially change outcomes, even if it leaves less students jobless in absolute terms.

Moreover, cutting students means cutting faculty, resources, and other parts of the USNWR ranking structure. I suppose a school could reduce class size in a gaming effort and become more selective, but I don't know if Michigan could suddenly hold a 3.8/171 median if it just decided to only accept those type of students - they just wouldnt have a class, and thats a huge risk for an admissions team.

If someone can support a reasonable counterargument I'm open to hearing it.


How do you know what legal hiring is at firms? Aren't you in law school? The amount of crap being spewed by law students and 0Ls is like a circle jerk of repeating the same information some other clueless poor repeated.

Firms, or at least the people doing hiring at OCI, don't really know placement/average 1L GPAs as well as you think. Do you think partners bother looking up average GPAs before interviewing? No. They have better things to do - like making money and their work. A lot of the hiring is done by not that well informed partners (and associates, but partners' opinions are really what matters) who either think oh the GPA generally looks good and/or, if they like you. I've done callbacks where all I had was that person's resume... If a partner wants to call you back and/or give you an offer, you have an offer. So Michigan bumping up their average GPA is good for the school because then the GPAs look good compared to schools that have already been inflating their GPAs for years.

Michigan is still one of the richest T-14 law schools endowment wise, so I think it could afford to cut at least a few hundred students. Schools like Berkeley, which is smaller, are still operating despite being, in comparison, less wealthy.

Plus, Michigan could just operate using the UVA admissions model - accept only splitters ED and reject everyone else, although recently people may be less likely to want to apply ED anywhere...I think UVA lowered its acceptance rate from like 25% to much less in a couple of years because of this gaming method.

So yes, cutting class sizes, gaming methods (employing their own students), maybe changing their admissions models to accepting splitter dumbs would probably all help. I think the point differential between the schools ranked 8 and 11 were 1 point this year, so using the aforementioned methods would help game the system. It's kind of pathetic though - USNews forcing schools to game the system for rankings purposes...so shady.


Wondering where you work now. This hiring method sounds surprisingly unsophisticated. I'm not saying hiring is perfectly scientific, but most firms definitely know the difference between below median and above median grades. Sure you can fudge it a bit but the percentage point still stands.

And I'm not sure why you think upper year law students have zero insight into legal hiring.

User avatar
dabigchina
Posts: 693
Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2014 2:22 am

Re: what's up with Michigan

Postby dabigchina » Sat Mar 14, 2015 1:06 pm

BiglawAssociate wrote:

accepting splitter dumbs would probably all help.


Yeah bro calling splitters dumb is going to win you a whole lot of fans around here.

But yeah you are overthinking it. If they

1. Emphasized work experience in admissions like NU
2. Threw around money like NU/duke

Their problems would go away tomorrow.

User avatar
cron1834
Posts: 1920
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2014 1:36 am

Re: what's up with Michigan

Postby cron1834 » Sat Mar 14, 2015 2:19 pm

dabigchina wrote:
BiglawAssociate wrote:

accepting splitter dumbs would probably all help.


Yeah bro calling splitters dumb is going to win you a whole lot of fans around here.

But yeah you are overthinking it. If they

1. Emphasized work experience in admissions like NU
2. Threw around money like NU/duke

Their problems would go away tomorrow.

This is wrong.

Anyway, it's obvious that Michigan benefited for years from their former status as a top-3 (or whatever) school, and that this is finally being corrected, at least in USNWR T10 terms.

However, it's ALSO true that Michigan's biglaw numbers understate their placement power. Not by a ton, but it's a thing. LOTS of ppl at Michigan are uninterested in NYC, certainly a much higher percentage than at east coast schools like Cornell. Now, if every single student did OCI and bid NYC, it's not like the BL/FC numbers would make them CCN, but they'd go up some, and wouldn't look so discordant. The same is true for Berkeley - more PI and less NYC interest than Duke, Cornell, and the like.

Of course, anti-Mich trolls like Zuck will harrumph and claim that this is equivalent to saying, "the students are stupid and failing the school!!!1" We should expect this sort of straw manning from non-peer students. It has nothing to do with students being smart or dumb, but rather what their goals are. Michigan attracts fewer NYC biglaw-targeting folks. It's a thing.

Michigan's placement power is NOT as good as its historical reputation, and simply getting more NYC-targeting folks wouldn't put them back in your T6. But I think it is fair to say that BL numbers understate the placement power some, as with Berkeley.

User avatar
Clemenceau
Posts: 856
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2014 11:33 am

Re: what's up with Michigan

Postby Clemenceau » Sat Mar 14, 2015 2:30 pm

Michigan gives grants to over 70% of students. Thats #2 in t14

I suppose a median grant amount of 15k isn't huge, but I still wouldn't consider them stingy. Splitters are getting an easy 75-90k this cycle

Also, the university of michigan itself was ranked top 10 among all universities in the 80s. This is certainly not the case anymore. I realize that LS rankings do not follow uni rankings, but it isn't crazy to imagine that uni rankings play a part in lay prestige, attracting top law students, etc.

User avatar
skers
Posts: 4950
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:33 am

Re: what's up with Michigan

Postby skers » Sat Mar 14, 2015 2:31 pm

lol. we don't care about the drop in the usnews rankings. We're talking about longterm placement differences.

User avatar
Clemenceau
Posts: 856
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2014 11:33 am

Re: what's up with Michigan

Postby Clemenceau » Sat Mar 14, 2015 2:44 pm

skers wrote:lol. we don't care about the drop in the usnews rankings. We're talking about longterm placement differences.


My point was that the clout of um as a whole has been on the decline, this is true regardless of rankings

BigZuck
Posts: 10854
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2012 9:53 am

Re: what's up with Michigan

Postby BigZuck » Sat Mar 14, 2015 2:58 pm

cron1834 wrote:
dabigchina wrote:
BiglawAssociate wrote:

accepting splitter dumbs would probably all help.


Yeah bro calling splitters dumb is going to win you a whole lot of fans around here.

But yeah you are overthinking it. If they

1. Emphasized work experience in admissions like NU
2. Threw around money like NU/duke

Their problems would go away tomorrow.

This is wrong.

Anyway, it's obvious that Michigan benefited for years from their former status as a top-3 (or whatever) school, and that this is finally being corrected, at least in USNWR T10 terms.

However, it's ALSO true that Michigan's biglaw numbers understate their placement power. Not by a ton, but it's a thing. LOTS of ppl at Michigan are uninterested in NYC, certainly a much higher percentage than at east coast schools like Cornell. Now, if every single student did OCI and bid NYC, it's not like the BL/FC numbers would make them CCN, but they'd go up some, and wouldn't look so discordant. The same is true for Berkeley - more PI and less NYC interest than Duke, Cornell, and the like.

Of course, anti-Mich trolls like Zuck will harrumph and claim that this is equivalent to saying, "the students are stupid and failing the school!!!1" We should expect this sort of straw manning from non-peer students. It has nothing to do with students being smart or dumb, but rather what their goals are. Michigan attracts fewer NYC biglaw-targeting folks. It's a thing.

Michigan's placement power is NOT as good as its historical reputation, and simply getting more NYC-targeting folks wouldn't put them back in your T6. But I think it is fair to say that BL numbers understate the placement power some, as with Berkeley.

Cron, stop trolling, we all know it's just cuz city folk don't like Ann Arbor

Just to be clear though, Michigan is the place where PI gunners who don't go to HYS, NYU, Berkeley, or GULC flock to to ruin the school's placement?

Can I officially mark you down as a SELF-SELECTIONer?

User avatar
BiglawAssociate
Posts: 355
Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2015 12:05 am

Re: what's up with Michigan

Postby BiglawAssociate » Sat Mar 14, 2015 3:38 pm

dabigchina wrote:
BiglawAssociate wrote:

accepting splitter dumbs would probably all help.


Yeah bro calling splitters dumb is going to win you a whole lot of fans around here.

But yeah you are overthinking it. If they

1. Emphasized work experience in admissions like NU
2. Threw around money like NU/duke

Their problems would go away tomorrow.


High GPA/low LSATs are likely dumb. Plus, the law student GPA/LSAT medians have gone way down since I was in law school, so current law students are dumber than when I was in school. The smartest people are choosing not to go to law school.

But yeah, probably throwing money around, emphasizing work experience, cutting class sizes (this is a big one I think), etc. would make Michigan jump up above Berkeley/Duke. Also, employing their own grads (like UVA does - doesn't UVA employ 20% of its own grads if not more?) would help too.

User avatar
BiglawAssociate
Posts: 355
Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2015 12:05 am

Re: what's up with Michigan

Postby BiglawAssociate » Sat Mar 14, 2015 3:41 pm

Clemenceau wrote: Also, the university of michigan itself was ranked top 10 among all universities in the 80s. This is certainly not the case anymore. I realize that LS rankings do not follow uni rankings, but it isn't crazy to imagine that uni rankings play a part in lay prestige, attracting top law students, etc.


I think the rankings methodology changed a lot in the early 90s to screw over public schools. Berkeley was ranked like top 5 in the 80s, but is now 20 or so. A lot of it was endowment/spending per student/class size faculty ratio. Public schools just don't have as much money as the top private schools and are a lot bigger. I think undergrad rankings for the most part are stupid though (I mean Caltech tied with Duke/Penn?) and has very little to do with anything (including selectivity - I mean seriously Caltech tied with Penn/Duke when it's the hardest school to get into?) or employment prospects. Undergrad rankings for the most part are complete bullshit IMO (and I went to a top undergrad).

Plus NYU has very little lay prestige outside of NYC (I had never heard of it really until I was applying to law school), relatively little prestige in academia, and its undergrad is worse than all of the other T-14s, but because it's in NYC the law school has gotten better.

Wondering where you work now. This hiring method sounds surprisingly unsophisticated. I'm not saying hiring is perfectly scientific, but most firms definitely know the difference between below median and above median grades. Sure you can fudge it a bit but the percentage point still stands.

And I'm not sure why you think upper year law students have zero insight into legal hiring.


I am at a v50 in a big city. It's not scientific and kind of dumb, to be honest. I don't know what recruiting sees, but I know that when I did callbacks I had no idea what the person's GPA was. And I know that partners pretty much do whatever they want. Plus a lot of offers depends on when you have your callback. Once we have a set number of open offers on the table, the firm stops offering them. So moving your OCI process earlier helps for hiring.

HP5450
Posts: 49
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2014 5:37 pm

Re: what's up with Michigan

Postby HP5450 » Sat Mar 14, 2015 3:52 pm

Michigan had a bunch of issues including the grade curve, the way OCI was working, and class sizes being too large--these issue put a drag on employment numbers. Those issues have been fixed for the class of 2016. However, the data and rankings will not reflect the improvement until March of 2017. Class size went from 400 to 315. Grade curve was improved to more closely match similar schools. Crazy construction projects were completed (no this doesn't matter a ton). And the school has devoted a lot more resources to career services. The administration was a couple years slow in addressing some key issues, but they've been fixed now.

User avatar
jbagelboy
Posts: 9635
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 7:57 pm

Re: what's up with Michigan

Postby jbagelboy » Sat Mar 14, 2015 4:04 pm

BiglawAssociate wrote:
dabigchina wrote:
BiglawAssociate wrote:

accepting splitter dumbs would probably all help.


Yeah bro calling splitters dumb is going to win you a whole lot of fans around here.

But yeah you are overthinking it. If they

1. Emphasized work experience in admissions like NU
2. Threw around money like NU/duke

Their problems would go away tomorrow.


High GPA/low LSATs are likely dumb. Plus, the law student GPA/LSAT medians have gone way down since I was in law school, so current law students are dumber than when I was in school. The smartest people are choosing not to go to law school.

But yeah, probably throwing money around, emphasizing work experience, cutting class sizes (this is a big one I think), etc. would make Michigan jump up above Berkeley/Duke. Also, employing their own grads (like UVA does - doesn't UVA employ 20% of its own grads if not more?) would help too.


Splitter means the opposite: high lsat/low gpa. And I hardly think gpa/lsat is a fair proxy for intelligence.




Return to “Choosing a Law School”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 01panm, brendo17, Socratease, Wipfelder and 7 guests