Class of 2016 Employment Statistics by School Forum

[registering]

USC up. 40%

76 BL + 4 FC out of 200 graduates = 40%

4 federal clerkships lol.

USC: 40% [38%] (+2%)

[rpupkin]

USC up. 40%

76 BL + 4 FC out of 200 graduates = 40%

4 federal clerkships lol.

LOL indeed. That's, like, Columbia-level bad.

[Thomas Hagan, ESQ.]

What are the odds that Duke (77.7%) and UVA (76.9%) pass NYU (74.5%) in the rankings in the next few years?

The explicit goal of the Duke law dean has been to knock off NYU at #5. Whether it happens or not because of the ranking metrics, who knows. But the law school believes it can.

This is a game changer. I have long said that if Duke would just believe in itself, it could skyrocket up the rankings. After years of being satisfied with lingering on the fringes of the V10, the university has finally hired a law school dean with just the right combination of ambition and moxie. Penn, NYU, and CLS aren't going to know what hit them.

Exactly the same reason why going to a TTTT isn't really a gamble. Sure, only 34% of Ave Maria grads become lawyers...but if I work hard, I'm comfident that I'll graduate top 5% and be included in that 34%!

[Gitaroo_Dude]

What are the odds that Duke (77.7%) and UVA (76.9%) pass NYU (74.5%) in the rankings in the next few years?

The explicit goal of the Duke law dean has been to knock off NYU at #5. Whether it happens or not because of the ranking metrics, who knows. But the law school believes it can.

This is a game changer. I have long said that if Duke would just believe in itself, it could skyrocket up the rankings. After years of being satisfied with lingering on the fringes of the V10, the university has finally hired a law school dean with just the right combination of ambition and moxie. Penn, NYU, and CLS aren't going to know what hit them.

[vcap180]

What are the odds that Duke (77.7%) and UVA (76.9%) pass NYU (74.5%) in the rankings in the next few years?

The explicit goal of the Duke law dean has been to knock off NYU at #5. Whether it happens or not because of the ranking metrics, who knows. But the law school believes it can.

This is a game changer. I have long said that if Duke would just believe in itself, it could skyrocket up the rankings. After years of being satisfied with lingering on the fringes of the V10, the university has finally hired a law school dean with just the right combination of ambition and moxie. Penn, NYU, and CLS aren't going to know what hit them.

The only thing that matters in life is lay prestige, and Duke already has much more of that than NYU.

[TLS_Dreamer]

What are the odds that Duke (77.7%) and UVA (76.9%) pass NYU (74.5%) in the rankings in the next few years?

Assuming you're serious, no chance at all.

Why though? Their BL+Clerk is a good bit higher. Even ud you include PI and Gov they're just like equal. Why is NYU even regarded more highly?

[TLS_Dreamer]

A friend of mine who went to Duke told me when she was interviewing for a competitive post grad job in NY the lawyer said: "Duke has a law school?"

That's why it won't knock off NYU.

Was this in PI? based on your word choice I'm assuming so. I'm not really sure one person in PI (sounds like not a firm) forgetting about them is why they can never jump NYU

Would be cool if we could see an empirical study of how the degrees are viewed by employers. Maybe some percentage indicating how well all students did when trying to get competitive post grad positions or something like that....

I don't think you understood the point of my post. My point was that Duke has less name recognition in the legal community at large, and name recognition is one of the primary factors in the USNWR.

I understood what you were trying to imply with your post, I just don't think one person proves it. I also think that BL+FC numbers go a long way in proxying name recognition in the legal community (as the most "preftegious" outcomes, they require a degree viewed positively by the hiring body).

I mean, the percentages we're talking about are pretty trivial. It's not like the difference between Berkeley and Penn or something where 15% separates them - a 5% difference isn't going to make people see Duke as that much more prestigious. That's on top of the fact that BL+FC is just a TLS thing and not an actual industry metric, and on top of the fact that NYU has over twice as many students in each class compared to Duke.

The argument is that NYU is more prestigious, not almost as prestigious. No one said BL + FC was an industry metric, but those prospects are the two most sought after positions and do drive USNW ranking.

Finally how do so many people have problems with percentages? Class size is unimportant when we discuss these things.

The impact on the rankings isn't going to be large as to a 3% difference like that. The larger NYU classes also help pay for preftigious faculty, which seems to be how the school is maintaining its ranking since it offers penthouse suites in a desirable part of Manhattan (hell, it even poaches CLS professors that way). Unless Duke's main school is losing money on the law school (which I doubt), it's going to have a harder time on that front. For students, location also matters and, if they're going to have a biglaw job either way, things that don't matter as much start becoming more important. As between a college town feel from Durham and living in the big city, I think millenials are attracted to the latter.

Percentages at this level of granularity don't really tell you much. Duke and UVA beat out HLS and SLS too - no one would use that as an example of why UVA is more or as prestigious than HLS. Duke having a higher % than NYU is literally the function of 10 more people at Duke landing biglaw or federal clerkships. That's MoE float for most schools, especially smaller ones.

But why aren't UVA and Duke more prestigious than Harvard? If the former schools give you better employment options, aren't people who say Harvard is better just objectively wrong? Why do people give Harvard higher standing? It just makes no sense to me.

[buckiguy_sucks]

How many presidents has Columbia law graduated?

University of Cincinnati College of Law and Albany Law School finally getting the respect they deserve on these fora

[grades??]

How many presidents has Columbia law graduated?

University of Cincinnati College of Law and Albany Law School finally getting the respect they deserve on these fora

At least Duke's graduated president isn't objectively the worst president anymore. Thats a big relief (the Nixon portrait is still kinda creepy though)

[xn3345]

But why aren't UVA and Duke more prestigious than Harvard? If the former schools give you better employment options, aren't people who say Harvard is better just objectively wrong? Why do people give Harvard higher standing? It just makes no sense to me.

It's almost like prestige is a subjective quality useful only for impressing relatives and members of the opposite sex

[PeanutsNJam]

But UVA and Duke don't give better employment prospects. BL+FC # is not dispositive.

[RedPurpleBlue]

But why aren't UVA and Duke more prestigious than Harvard? If the former schools give you better employment options, aren't people who say Harvard is better just objectively wrong? Why do people give Harvard higher standing? It just makes no sense to me.

I'm not sure if you're serious, but I'll bite. Prestige is marginally based on employment statistics. Harvard Law produces presidents, Attorney Generals, Supreme Court Justices, U.S. Representatives, and Senators. UVA and Duke can't even compete in those regards. Combined they have 2 SCOTUS justices (one of whom didn't even graduate UVA and the other served on the court over 70 years ago), two presidents (Wilson didn't even graduate from UVA Law, and Nixon resigned as to not get impeached), and a few Reps./Senators I imagine, but those are few in number compared to Harvard. Plus, Harvard Law gets the added bonus of the prestige produced by the Harvard UG (where some of the smartest/wealthiest students have gone for 100s of years), and Harvard Grad (where some of the most preeminent scholars, doctors, and business people have gone). UVA and Duke have what? Strong graduate history programs, okay business schools, and the latter has a good medical school. That's about it. Harvard Law also gets a ton of great PI/Gov't jobs that are prestigious that don't fit inside the really limited (and thus dumb) BL + FC box that TLS salivates over.

I think it's pretty clear why everyone views Harvard as objectively better, regardless of what a couple points on BL + FC employment percentages say.

[proteinshake]

UVA and Duke have what? Strong graduate history programs, okay business schools, and the latter has a good medical school. That's about it.

yup that's all nothing else worth noting really

[vcap180]

But why aren't UVA and Duke more prestigious than Harvard? If the former schools give you better employment options, aren't people who say Harvard is better just objectively wrong? Why do people give Harvard higher standing? It just makes no sense to me.

I'm not sure if you're serious, but I'll bite. Prestige is marginally based on employment statistics. Harvard Law produces presidents, Attorney Generals, Supreme Court Justices, U.S. Representatives, and Senators. UVA and Duke can't even compete in those regards. Combined they have 2 SCOTUS justices (one of whom didn't even graduate UVA and the other served on the court over 70 years ago), two presidents (Wilson didn't even graduate from UVA Law, and Nixon resigned as to not get impeached), and a few Reps./Senators I imagine, but those are few in number compared to Harvard. Plus, Harvard Law gets the added bonus of the prestige produced by the Harvard UG (where some of the smartest/wealthiest students have gone for 100s of years), and Harvard Grad (where some of the most preeminent scholars, doctors, and business people have gone). UVA and Duke have what? Strong graduate history programs, okay business schools, and the latter has a good medical school. That's about it. Harvard Law also gets a ton of great PI/Gov't jobs that are prestigious that don't fit inside the really limited (and thus dumb) BL + FC box that TLS salivates over.

I think it's pretty clear why everyone views Harvard as objectively better, regardless of what a couple points on BL + FC employment percentages say.

the lay prestige meter, which is the only thing that matters, reads as follows:

Harvard >>> Duke > NYU > UVA

[proleteriate]

UVA and Duke have what? Strong graduate history programs, okay business schools, and the latter has a good medical school. That's about it.

yup that's all nothing else worth noting really

I've heard that the Duke Lacrosse program is quite well known.

[proteinshake]

UVA and Duke have what? Strong graduate history programs, okay business schools, and the latter has a good medical school. That's about it.

yup that's all nothing else worth noting really

I've heard that the Duke Lacrosse program is quite well known.

the garden is quite nice as well

[existentialcrisis]

But UVA and Duke don't give better employment prospects. BL+FC # is not dispositive.

This. Because they quite obviously do not give you Bette employment prospects.

Straight Ps at HLS Is still almost a lock for NYC big law.

Straight B- at UVA or Duke is probably striking out.

The only thing that matters is a school's placement power and bl+fc is only relevant insofar as it's an indicator of that.

There is no school in the country where it's easier to get a biglaw job or a federal clerkship, and yet YLS usually has relatively low bl+fc.

[cannibal ox]

USC total employment is 69.5% (down from 72.7%)
UCLA total employment 75.6%

[BasilHallward]

Mildly disappointed in UT's results; but, 362 graduates is quite high. The 2018 class should see better results. Only 265 came in and 25 transfers came in after first year. So, 290 is the expected number for the 2018 graduating class. If BigLaw hiring stays consistent (130 every year out of UT) and we get 30 clerks, we're at 160/295, which tracks nicely with Vandy. Vandy made a great move by drastically trimming its class. UT will hopefully reap the same results in 2 years.

[RParadela]

But why aren't UVA and Duke more prestigious than Harvard? If the former schools give you better employment options, aren't people who say Harvard is better just objectively wrong? Why do people give Harvard higher standing? It just makes no sense to me.

I'm not sure if you're serious, but I'll bite. Prestige is marginally based on employment statistics. Harvard Law produces presidents, Attorney Generals, Supreme Court Justices, U.S. Representatives, and Senators. UVA and Duke can't even compete in those regards. Combined they have 2 SCOTUS justices (one of whom didn't even graduate UVA and the other served on the court over 70 years ago), two presidents (Wilson didn't even graduate from UVA Law, and Nixon resigned as to not get impeached), and a few Reps./Senators I imagine, but those are few in number compared to Harvard. Plus, Harvard Law gets the added bonus of the prestige produced by the Harvard UG (where some of the smartest/wealthiest students have gone for 100s of years), and Harvard Grad (where some of the most preeminent scholars, doctors, and business people have gone). UVA and Duke have what? Strong graduate history programs, okay business schools, and the latter has a good medical school. That's about it. Harvard Law also gets a ton of great PI/Gov't jobs that are prestigious that don't fit inside the really limited (and thus dumb) BL + FC box that TLS salivates over.

I think it's pretty clear why everyone views Harvard as objectively better, regardless of what a couple points on BL + FC employment percentages say.

the lay prestige meter, which is the only thing that matters, reads as follows:

Harvard >>> Duke > NYU > UVA

Lol NYU has 0 lay prestige. NYU has the least lay prestige out of the T13 IMO

[Nebby]

What a dumb discussion

[Gitaroo_Dude]

USC total employment is 69.5% (down from 72.7%)
UCLA total employment 75.6%

That's a relief on the UCLA front after seeing FC drag down their other score.

[Gitaroo_Dude]

But why aren't UVA and Duke more prestigious than Harvard? If the former schools give you better employment options, aren't people who say Harvard is better just objectively wrong? Why do people give Harvard higher standing? It just makes no sense to me.

I'm not sure if you're serious, but I'll bite. Prestige is marginally based on employment statistics. Harvard Law produces presidents, Attorney Generals, Supreme Court Justices, U.S. Representatives, and Senators. UVA and Duke can't even compete in those regards. Combined they have 2 SCOTUS justices (one of whom didn't even graduate UVA and the other served on the court over 70 years ago), two presidents (Wilson didn't even graduate from UVA Law, and Nixon resigned as to not get impeached), and a few Reps./Senators I imagine, but those are few in number compared to Harvard. Plus, Harvard Law gets the added bonus of the prestige produced by the Harvard UG (where some of the smartest/wealthiest students have gone for 100s of years), and Harvard Grad (where some of the most preeminent scholars, doctors, and business people have gone). UVA and Duke have what? Strong graduate history programs, okay business schools, and the latter has a good medical school. That's about it. Harvard Law also gets a ton of great PI/Gov't jobs that are prestigious that don't fit inside the really limited (and thus dumb) BL + FC box that TLS salivates over.

I think it's pretty clear why everyone views Harvard as objectively better, regardless of what a couple points on BL + FC employment percentages say.

the lay prestige meter, which is the only thing that matters, reads as follows:

Harvard >>> Duke > NYU > UVA

Lol NYU has 0 lay prestige. NYU has the least lay prestige out of the T13 IMO

Speaking as a Californian, I'd put Penn below them. You might find the occasional person here who's aware of NYU for its arts programs. Almost everyone will confuse Penn with Penn State.

[RedPurpleBlue]

What a dumb discussion

Agreed. Don't even know why I took a bite.

[Hikikomorist]

Lay prestige generally is a good topic, but I'm especially interested in the intersection between lay prestige and social class.