So what makes Alabama a T30 law school? Forum

[danquayle]

The same thing that separates HYS from t-14 and t-14 from the rest --> a strong student body, for which median LSAT and GPA serve as a proxy.

Say what you will about gaming and say what you will about Alabama being overrated (which I agree with, by the way), but how does one truly determine the value of a law school except by the talent of its student body? Alabama has made tremendous strides in attracting a stronger student body in the last 3 years. Hey, good for them.

If the US News is meant to be useful in tracking trends but not necessarily in providing a true ranking, then having Bama at 30 is pretty accurate. They're definitely one of the law schools thats developed some momentum for itself.

The bottom line is --> a strong student body comes first. All else will [eventually] follow from that. You could argue that this is the very thing that made Iowa a fluke for all those years: The student body just never matched the rank.

[ScaredWorkedBored]

The same thing that separates HYS from t-14 and t-14 from the rest --> a strong student body, for which median LSAT and GPA serve as a proxy.

Say what you will about gaming and say what you will about Alabama being overrated (which I agree with, by the way), but how does one truly determine the value of a law school except by the talent of its student body?

You determine it by return on investment. Who the hell goes to law school for a "strong student body?" The entire point of that is that it is used as a proxy for marketability of graduates.

Does anyone in BigLaw take Alabama seriously? Based on LSN - 49 firms at their OCI in 2007 (which was an excellent OCI year), no NY/DC/LA at all - the answer there is no.

This is true to a lesser extent at Illinois. Sure, they place pretty well, but they've tried to jack their stats to reflect a T14 and absolutely no one belives that BS either.

[GodFatherPENNington]

interesting subject

[ruleser]

My whole point is straight line uses of the US News rankings is stupid beyond the Top14. It can be used to compare schools in the same state and possibly a similar region; however, people will obsess over it and make terrible decisions based on uneducated guesses.

Yea.. but you're oversimplifying things. Should one choose Brooklyn over GW for NYC biglaw? Nope. Should one choose Brooklyn over BU/BC for NYC biglaw? Nope. Should one choose American over Emory for DC biglaw? Nope. These are all regional schools, yet rankings will make some trump others even in non-primary markets. This is why the T30 or whatever distinction is actually useful. I would take ND over 'Dozo any day of the week for NYC biglaw. Would I take it over Fordham? Hell no, but the T30ish schools are regional yet still beat out other schools in their home turf.
They're more clumped together than the rankings would imply I agree. I don't think BU is any better than Fordham, or ND any better than BC, etc.

Damn you, it was so simplified.

There just need to be two levels of rankings, 1) schools that are national, 2) rankings by region/market, and of course, 3) t3/t4

That would actually be very helpful - in a place like NY you could determine where the regional/beter out of region is, such as BU vs Brooklyn, etc.

[General Tso]

The same thing that separates HYS from t-14 and t-14 from the rest --> a strong student body, for which median LSAT and GPA serve as a proxy.

Say what you will about gaming and say what you will about Alabama being overrated (which I agree with, by the way), but how does one truly determine the value of a law school except by the talent of its student body?

You determine it by return on investment. Who the hell goes to law school for a "strong student body?" The entire point of that is that it is used as a proxy for marketability of graduates.

Does anyone in BigLaw take Alabama seriously? Based on LSN - 49 firms at their OCI in 2007 (which was an excellent OCI year), no NY/DC/LA at all - the answer there is no.

This is true to a lesser extent at Illinois. Sure, they place pretty well, but they've tried to jack their stats to reflect a T14 and absolutely no one belives that BS either.

TITCR + 1,000,000

How Bama suckers in 160+ LSATs with mediocre career prospects is a great mystery to me. Usually the schools that are successful at that are at least in desirable regions.

[rondemarino]

TITCR + 1,000,000

How Bama suckers in 160+ LSATs with mediocre career prospects is a great mystery to me. Usually the schools that are successful at that are at least in desirable regions.

People wanting to work in the region sounds like a pretty good reason. Realistically, where are these people going to go (160-165)? A regional school in an area where they have no desire to practice?

[General Tso]

TITCR + 1,000,000

How Bama suckers in 160+ LSATs with mediocre career prospects is a great mystery to me. Usually the schools that are successful at that are at least in desirable regions.

People wanting to work in the region sounds like a pretty good reason. Realistically, where are these people going to go (160-165)? A regional school in an area where they have no desire to practice?

Well, yeah. But what's so much better about Bama than other regional schools like Ole Miss, LSU, UT Knox, etc.? Career-wise there's little difference and at least at these lower ranked schools you could expect scholarships. Are there that many 160+ people living in Alabama and/or are desperate to work in Alabama? Or are they getting a lot of out of state applicants who are applying just because of USNWR

[sbalive]

TITCR + 1,000,000

How Bama suckers in 160+ LSATs with mediocre career prospects is a great mystery to me. Usually the schools that are successful at that are at least in desirable regions.

People wanting to work in the region sounds like a pretty good reason. Realistically, where are these people going to go (160-165)? A regional school in an area where they have no desire to practice?

Well, yeah. But what's so much better about Bama than other regional schools like Ole Miss, LSU, UT Knox, etc.? Career-wise there's little difference and at least at these lower ranked schools you could expect scholarships. Are there that many 160+ people living in Alabama and/or are desperate to work in Alabama? Or are they getting a lot of out of state applicants who are applying just because of USNWR

20 free iTunes downloads, FTW, apparently.

[rondemarino]

TITCR + 1,000,000

How Bama suckers in 160+ LSATs with mediocre career prospects is a great mystery to me. Usually the schools that are successful at that are at least in desirable regions.

People wanting to work in the region sounds like a pretty good reason. Realistically, where are these people going to go (160-165)? A regional school in an area where they have no desire to practice?

Well, yeah. But what's so much better about Bama than other regional schools like Ole Miss, LSU, UT Knox, etc.? Career-wise there's little difference and at least at these lower ranked schools you could expect scholarships. Are there that many 160+ people living in Alabama and/or are desperate to work in Alabama? Or are they getting a lot of out of state applicants who are applying just because of USNWR

Its cheap ($14k in-state, $26k out of state). That one could use Stafford Loans to cover all of tuition makes it a very attractive option for the region.

[General Tso]

Its cheap ($14k in-state, $26k out of state). That one could use Stafford Loans to cover all of tuition makes it a very attractive option for the region.

Yeah but the ones I listed would still be cheaper, and would still give comparable career prospects.

[rondemarino]

Its cheap ($14k in-state, $26k out of state). That one could use Stafford Loans to cover all of tuition makes it a very attractive option for the region.

Yeah but the ones I listed would still be cheaper, and would still give comparable career prospects.

Based on? I don't know jack about the area, and never will. If you can demonstrate that, I'll concede the point.

[OperaSoprano]

TITCR + 1,000,000

How Bama suckers in 160+ LSATs with mediocre career prospects is a great mystery to me. Usually the schools that are successful at that are at least in desirable regions.

People wanting to work in the region sounds like a pretty good reason. Realistically, where are these people going to go (160-165)? A regional school in an area where they have no desire to practice?

Well, yeah. But what's so much better about Bama than other regional schools like Ole Miss, LSU, UT Knox, etc.? Career-wise there's little difference and at least at these lower ranked schools you could expect scholarships. Are there that many 160+ people living in Alabama and/or are desperate to work in Alabama? Or are they getting a lot of out of state applicants who are applying just because of USNWR

People are rankings whores. Didn't I tell you how I almost threw the damned magazine in a dumpster without informing TLS of the rankings therein? The PT methodology change was bad enough...

I don't think Alabama's a bad school, and it's certainly way the hell cheaper than where I'm going, but if I was a Southerner who couldn't get into Vandy, I'd probably be gunning for UGA.

[rondemarino]

People are rankings whores. Didn't I tell you how I almost threw the damned magazine in a dumpster without informing TLS of the rankings therein? The PT methodology change was bad enough...

I don't think Alabama's a bad school, and it's certainly way the hell cheaper than where I'm going, but if I was a Southerner who couldn't get into Vandy, I'd probably be gunning for UGA.

Why is the PT change bad?

p.s: Are you in PT or FT at Fordham?

[jcl2]

TITCR + 1,000,000

How Bama suckers in 160+ LSATs with mediocre career prospects is a great mystery to me. Usually the schools that are successful at that are at least in desirable regions.

People wanting to work in the region sounds like a pretty good reason. Realistically, where are these people going to go (160-165)? A regional school in an area where they have no desire to practice?

Well, yeah. But what's so much better about Bama than other regional schools like Ole Miss, LSU, UT Knox, etc.? Career-wise there's little difference and at least at these lower ranked schools you could expect scholarships. Are there that many 160+ people living in Alabama and/or are desperate to work in Alabama? Or are they getting a lot of out of state applicants who are applying just because of USNWR

20 free iTunes downloads, FTW, apparently.

See, I mentioned this on the first page of this thread and didn't get any response. Obviously this accounts for their high ranking. Problem solved.

[NewtonCampusKid]

I can't believe I now have another source of information, other than Big Love, regarding the Mormon faith.

(though I did live in MA under Romney for a bit...)

[OperaSoprano]

People are rankings whores. Didn't I tell you how I almost threw the damned magazine in a dumpster without informing TLS of the rankings therein? The PT methodology change was bad enough...

I don't think Alabama's a bad school, and it's certainly way the hell cheaper than where I'm going, but if I was a Southerner who couldn't get into Vandy, I'd probably be gunning for UGA.

Why is the PT change bad?

p.s: Are you in PT or FT at Fordham?

Oooh, don't get me started, lol. I have to run down to campus in a minute. I had a few things to say in this thread: http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... =2&t=69342

I am a PT student, but really, I just wanted to go to Fordham. I was studying for a retake, and had already climbed from 164 to 169 when I was admitted, and called it off. I took a lot of grief for that decision.

I was pretty steamed about the whole thing, but I was also embarrassed that I didn't have a better score to bring to my school. 164 was a pretty sizable fail on my part, but it was my own fault. My numbers would have been 43rd percentile for FT, but 59th percentile for PT, according to our resident genius and statistics god YCRevolution.

[rondemarino]

People are rankings whores. Didn't I tell you how I almost threw the damned magazine in a dumpster without informing TLS of the rankings therein? The PT methodology change was bad enough...

I don't think Alabama's a bad school, and it's certainly way the hell cheaper than where I'm going, but if I was a Southerner who couldn't get into Vandy, I'd probably be gunning for UGA.

Why is the PT change bad?

p.s: Are you in PT or FT at Fordham?

Oooh, don't get me started, lol. I have to run down to campus in a minute. I had a few things to say in this thread: http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... =2&t=69342

I am a PT student, but really, I just wanted to go to Fordham. I was studying for a retake, and had already climbed from 164 to 169 when I was admitted, and called it off. I took a lot of grief for that decision.

I was pretty steamed about the whole thing, but I was also embarrassed that I didn't have a better score to bring to my school. 164 was a pretty sizable fail on my part, but it was my own fault. My numbers would have been 43rd percentile for FT, but 59th percentile for PT, according to our resident genius and statistics god YCRevolution.

Interesting.

[OperaSoprano]

Interesting.

Here's what actually happened: Fordham did cut the PT program from 160 to 120, but there was a lot of demand, so many more waitlistees than usual were admitted this summer. The class size is now back up to 160. I'm glad my school had enough integrity not to game the rankings and make students suffer. I look at our #30 differently now, because I know it means Fordham refused to screw people over just to get to #25. I think people know we're a better school than the ranking would indicate.

[rondemarino]

Interesting.

Here's what actually happened: Fordham did cut the PT program from 160 to 120, but there was a lot of demand, so many more waitlistees than usual were admitted this summer. The class size is now back up to 160. I'm glad my school had enough integrity not to game the rankings and make students suffer. I look at our #30 differently now, because I know it means Fordham refused to screw people over just to get to #25. I think people know we're a better school than the ranking would indicate.

I agree that Fordham probably lost some ground because of the PT stats, its not clear to me that they didn't pay more attention to LSAT scores in admitting PT students this year, as someone in the previous thread you linked to suggested.

p.s: The difference between #30 and #26 isn't large enough get worked up about in my opinion, but maybe I'm in the minority.

[Blindmelon]

Interesting.

Here's what actually happened: Fordham did cut the PT program from 160 to 120, but there was a lot of demand, so many more waitlistees than usual were admitted this summer. The class size is now back up to 160. I'm glad my school had enough integrity not to game the rankings and make students suffer. I look at our #30 differently now, because I know it means Fordham refused to screw people over just to get to #25. I think people know we're a better school than the ranking would indicate.

I agree that Fordham probably lost some ground because of the PT stats, its not clear to me that they didn't pay more attention to LSAT scores in admitting PT students this year, as someone in the previous thread you linked to suggested.

p.s: The difference between #30 and #26 isn't large enough get worked up about in my opinion, but maybe I'm in the minority.

Agreed.... Theres hardly a difference between BU/BC (BC has a 3% higher biglaw placement, but a considerably smaller placement into more "elite firms", yet also places slightly more into clerkships) and they're 6 spots apart. 20-30 is a pretty big mish-mosh of schools.

[danquayle]

The same thing that separates HYS from t-14 and t-14 from the rest --> a strong student body, for which median LSAT and GPA serve as a proxy.

Say what you will about gaming and say what you will about Alabama being overrated (which I agree with, by the way), but how does one truly determine the value of a law school except by the talent of its student body?

You determine it by return on investment. Who the hell goes to law school for a "strong student body?" The entire point of that is that it is used as a proxy for marketability of graduates.

Does anyone in BigLaw take Alabama seriously? Based on LSN - 49 firms at their OCI in 2007 (which was an excellent OCI year), no NY/DC/LA at all - the answer there is no.

This is true to a lesser extent at Illinois. Sure, they place pretty well, but they've tried to jack their stats to reflect a T14 and absolutely no one belives that BS either.

TITCR + 1,000,000

How Bama suckers in 160+ LSATs with mediocre career prospects is a great mystery to me. Usually the schools that are successful at that are at least in desirable regions.

You miss understand my point. Completely. I'm not saying you're be smarter to go to Alabama or that Bama is a better choice than, say, Northeastern. Alabama won't give you better prospects than most Tier 2 schools, and I'm not pretending they are. But please, try to think a little deeper.

Us News is a not a proxy for the marketability of your degree. Its states nothing more than 'the best law schools.' Just because you or other potential law students use them as a proxy for marketability doesn't make it so. '

The best law schools are the best law schools only because they have consistently received the best law students over a long period of time. That's it. Employers go there because they essentially shift the 'selecting' cost off to these institutions. They push the cost of failure off to a third party. They go to Harvard because they know Harvard is particularly adept at picking solid law students, so their risk in hiring a Harvard selected law student is subtantially lower than their risk in choosing a Suffolk trained law student. I actually think that's terribly inefficient for the system, but its efficient for the individual firm.

There's nothing particularly special about Michigan, for example. It probably only became so reputable because it was a public school that served one of the 5 largest population centers in the country. It just had more people to choose from, so invariably had a stronger student body. Likewise, they're nothing special about Harvard, other than it was in the first major university in the first Colonial population center. They developed their reputations somewhat early on, and everything after that has simply been an continuous positive feedback loop.

This ties very well into the 'nothing beyond the T-14 matters' train of thought. While I agree, to a certain point, I do think Us News is great for shedding light on trends. If Alabama is able to sustain its ability to recruit highly credentialed student bodies, eventually employers will catch wind of this and Alabama's marketability will grow exponentially. So while at the moment Alabama's marketability isn't even close to those of other T-30 schools, it may be after 10 decades of producing a student bodies with strong incoming credentials.

If you know how to look at US News and don't make the mistake of thinking its intended to convey marketability, as you have, its actually remarkably accurate. Its just another tool. A student wouldn't be crazy to look at the trends and bet on Alabama over Tennessee, for example, on the theory that they'll be receiving a diploma with increasing value.




Edit: Again, this is a very narrow point. I'm not attempting to pretend Alabama is better than Georgia or Tennessee. I'd choose either of the latter, personally, over Bama. I'd likewise choose Tulane, UNC, SMU, Florida, Florida State, Kentucky, etc., over Bama. I'm merely stating that for the most recent recruiting class, Alabama had a superior student body. If that is a trend that holds for 10-20 years, then Alabama would probably be as good or a better choice than any of those schools.

That's why I say outside of the t-14, maybe t-30, the US News should only be used for trends. The point differentials between all the schools outside of the t-18 are so narrow, that its expected the rankings would be somewhat volatile. Maybe that's why the US News includes the raw scores in addition to the rankings.

The problem is that marketability is almost entirely based upon reputation, particularly in the legal field. And that's such an ephemeral concept, that all of these rankings systems are going to be imperfect. So, when real empirical data is available, like LSAT medians, I'd rather err in their favor than against them. Otherwise, I'm merely letting my personal biases guide me.

[ruleser]

The same thing that separates HYS from t-14 and t-14 from the rest --> a strong student body, for which median LSAT and GPA serve as a proxy.

Say what you will about gaming and say what you will about Alabama being overrated (which I agree with, by the way), but how does one truly determine the value of a law school except by the talent of its student body?

You determine it by return on investment. Who the hell goes to law school for a "strong student body?" The entire point of that is that it is used as a proxy for marketability of graduates.

Does anyone in BigLaw take Alabama seriously? Based on LSN - 49 firms at their OCI in 2007 (which was an excellent OCI year), no NY/DC/LA at all - the answer there is no.

This is true to a lesser extent at Illinois. Sure, they place pretty well, but they've tried to jack their stats to reflect a T14 and absolutely no one belives that BS either.

TITCR + 1,000,000

How Bama suckers in 160+ LSATs with mediocre career prospects is a great mystery to me. Usually the schools that are successful at that are at least in desirable regions.

You miss understand my point. Completely. I'm not saying you're be smarter to go to Alabama or that Bama is a better choice than, say, Northeastern. Alabama won't give you better prospects than most Tier 2 schools, and I'm not pretending they are. But please, try to think a little deeper.

Us News is a not a proxy for the marketability of your degree. Its states nothing more than 'the best law schools.' Just because you or other potential law students use them as a proxy for marketability doesn't make it so. '

The best law schools are the best law schools only because they have consistently received the best law students over a long period of time. That's it. Employers go there because they essentially shift the 'selecting' cost off to these institutions. They push the cost of failure off to a third party. They go to Harvard because they know Harvard is particularly adept at picking solid law students, so their risk in hiring a Harvard selected law student is subtantially lower than their risk in choosing a Suffolk trained law student. I actually think that's terribly inefficient for the system, but its efficient for the individual firm.

There's nothing particularly special about Michigan, for example. It probably only became so reputable because it was a public school that served one of the 5 largest population centers in the country. It just had more people to choose from, so invariably had a stronger student body. Likewise, they're nothing special about Harvard, other than it was in the first major university in the first Colonial population center. They developed their reputations somewhat early on, and everything after that has simply been an continuous positive feedback loop.

This ties very well into the 'nothing beyond the T-14 matters' train of thought. While I agree, to a certain point, I do think Us News is great for shedding light on trends. If Alabama is able to sustain its ability to recruit highly credentialed student bodies, eventually employers will catch wind of this and Alabama's marketability will grow exponentially. So while at the moment Alabama's marketability isn't even close to those of other T-30 schools, it may be after 10 decades of producing a student bodies with strong incoming credentials.

If you know how to look at US News and don't make the mistake of thinking its intended to convey marketability, as you have, its actually remarkably accurate. Its just another tool. A student wouldn't be crazy to look at the trends and bet on Alabama over Tennessee, for example, on the theory that they'll be receiving a diploma with increasing value.




Edit: Again, this is a very narrow point. I'm not attempting to pretend Alabama is better than Georgia or Tennessee. I'd choose either of the latter, personally, over Bama. I'd likewise choose Tulane, UNC, SMU, Florida, Florida State, Kentucky, etc., over Bama. I'm merely stating that for the most recent recruiting class, Alabama had a superior student body. If that is a trend that holds for 10-20 years, then Alabama would probably be as good or a better choice than any of those schools.

That's why I say outside of the t-14, maybe t-30, the US News should only be used for trends. The point differentials between all the schools outside of the t-18 are so narrow, that its expected the rankings would be somewhat volatile. Maybe that's why the US News includes the raw scores in addition to the rankings.

The problem is that marketability is almost entirely based upon reputation, particularly in the legal field. And that's such an ephemeral concept, that all of these rankings systems are going to be imperfect. So, when real empirical data is available, like LSAT medians, I'd rather err in their favor than against them. Otherwise, I'm merely letting my personal biases guide me.

Longest post ever?

With even an addit. "EDIT" tacked on FTW

[LSATfromNC]

Longest post ever?

With even an addit. "EDIT" tacked on FTW

Not quite FOB.

[danquayle]

For a wannabe law student, you seem awfully averse to reading.

[tha trev]

I'd choose Florida State, Kentucky, etc., over Bama.

this is ridiculous.