U. of Illinois Law suspends Dean of Admissions Forum

[romothesavior]

People speaking in defense of UIUC Law reeks of desperation and wishful thinking. I think this turn of events is going to be catastrophic for UIUC. The effects might not be observable for several years, but I think long-term hiring at UIUC is going to be hit, and hit hard.

Yes, the top students from UIUC will still get the great Chicago jobs they've always gotten. You can name all the biglaw firms you want to. That doesn't prove your point.

Well, like I said. My undergrad had MULTIPLE riots and you know what? It's still standing. Just as it has for the last 150 years. And the same companies came to recruit the student body that was featured on the news tipping over cars, burning couches, and the like. Did McKinsey ask about the riots when they saw my resume? No, sure didn't.

Your position is not stupid, although I disagree with it. It is a reasonable position to take, and we'll have to just see what happens.

On the other hand, your logic is absolutely batshit retarded.

[bjsesq]

People speaking in defense of UIUC Law reeks of desperation and wishful thinking. I think this turn of events is going to be catastrophic for UIUC. The effects might not be observable for several years, but I think long-term hiring at UIUC is going to be hit, and hit hard.

Yes, the top students from UIUC will still get the great Chicago jobs they've always gotten. You can name all the biglaw firms you want to. That doesn't prove your point.

Well, like I said. My undergrad had MULTIPLE riots and you know what? It's still standing. Just as it has for the last 150 years. And the same companies came to recruit the student body that was featured on the news tipping over cars, burning couches, and the like. Did McKinsey ask about the riots when they saw my resume? No, sure didn't.

Your position is not stupid, although I disagree with it. It is a reasonable position to take, and we'll have to just see what happens.

On the other hand, your logic is absolutely batshit retarded.

THANK YOU

[tttlllsss]

Your position is not stupid, although I disagree with it. It is a reasonable position to take, and we'll have to just see what happens.

On the other hand, your logic is absolutely batshit retarded.

Has anything like this ever happened to a school before, aside from Villanova?

I would think that this would have a drastically negative impact on UIUC, especially considering its precarious position in the Chicago pecking order.

[sparty99]

People speaking in defense of UIUC Law reeks of desperation and wishful thinking. I think this turn of events is going to be catastrophic for UIUC. The effects might not be observable for several years, but I think long-term hiring at UIUC is going to be hit, and hit hard.

Yes, the top students from UIUC will still get the great Chicago jobs they've always gotten. You can name all the biglaw firms you want to. That doesn't prove your point.

Well, like I said. My undergrad had MULTIPLE riots and you know what? It's still standing. Just as it has for the last 150 years. And the same companies came to recruit the student body that was featured on the news tipping over cars, burning couches, and the like. Did McKinsey ask about the riots when they saw my resume? No, sure didn't.

And how does this irrelevant anecdote prove your original point that overall hiring at UIUC will not be affected in the long-term?

It means that you are blowing this scandal out of proportion. People don't really care about US News Rankings, except dumb people applying to law school. AND while the scandal is interesting and a shocker (168 vs. 163), it will have little effect on the job prospects for students. Illinois Law isn't going anywhere and I'd go there in a heart beat if I was given a full-tuition scholarship.

[Bildungsroman]

Did McKinsey ask about the riots when they saw my resume? No, sure didn't.

Extremely subtle brag, but what have been more effective had you mentioned a job offer from them.

Confused by your concept of subtle.

Sarcasm, bro.

Or is it? LAYERS UPON LAYERS.

[bjsesq]

It means that you are blowing this scandal out of proportion. People don't really care about US News Rankings, except dumb people applying to law school. AND while the scandal is interesting and a shocker (168 vs. 163), it will have little effect on the job prospects for students. Illinois Law isn't going anywhere and I'd go there in a heart beat if I was given a full-tuition scholarship.

You aren't the demographic they are concerned about losing.

[Indifferent]

People speaking in defense of UIUC Law reeks of desperation and wishful thinking. I think this turn of events is going to be catastrophic for UIUC. The effects might not be observable for several years, but I think long-term hiring at UIUC is going to be hit, and hit hard.

Yes, the top students from UIUC will still get the great Chicago jobs they've always gotten. You can name all the biglaw firms you want to. That doesn't prove your point.

Well, like I said. My undergrad had MULTIPLE riots and you know what? It's still standing. Just as it has for the last 150 years. And the same companies came to recruit the student body that was featured on the news tipping over cars, burning couches, and the like. Did McKinsey ask about the riots when they saw my resume? No, sure didn't.

I think I am missing connection between evaluating a school based on sporadic riots (likely caused by a small, irrelevant contingent of students) and fraudulent misrepresentation of the academic qualifications of the school's entire student body...

[Helmholtz]

People speaking in defense of UIUC Law reeks of desperation and wishful thinking. I think this turn of events is going to be catastrophic for UIUC. The effects might not be observable for several years, but I think long-term hiring at UIUC is going to be hit, and hit hard.

Yes, the top students from UIUC will still get the great Chicago jobs they've always gotten. You can name all the biglaw firms you want to. That doesn't prove your point.

Well, like I said. My undergrad had MULTIPLE riots and you know what? It's still standing. Just as it has for the last 150 years. And the same companies came to recruit the student body that was featured on the news tipping over cars, burning couches, and the like. Did McKinsey ask about the riots when they saw my resume? No, sure didn't.

I think I am missing connection between evaluating a school based on sporadic riots (likely caused by a small, irrelevant contingent of students) and fraudulent misrepresentation of the academic qualifications of the school's entire student body...

You see, dawg, McKinsey didn't ask him about the riots, ergo Kirkland & Ellis will never care at any point in the future about UIUC's scandal or its consequences.

[tttlllsss]

I would like to say something about the USNWR rankings.

A keep hearing from a lot of you people that the rankings don't matter because recruiters don't read the rankings. Well, I'll agree that recruiters don't read the rankings. You aren't exactly unveiling a ground-breaking trade secret when you say this, you know, so you can stop pretending like it's the final blow in a bulletproof argument.

The rankings DO matter. They matter because many students depend on the rankings. Whether you like it or not, for most prospective students, the USNWR is one of the main factors in picking a school to attend. For that reason alone, the ranking of a school affects the quality of its student body. And this, in turn, affects hiring in the long-term.

[birdlaw117]

The rankings DO matter. They matter because many students depend on the rankings. Whether you like it or not, for most prospective students, the USNWR is one of the main factors in picking a school to attend. For that reason alone, the ranking of a school affects the quality of its student body. And this, in turn, affects hiring in the long-term.

That's what everyone but sparty has been saying.

[Mickey Quicknumbers]

This looks like a case of Sparty99 claiming she knows about "hiring" and conflating that with knowing about "legal hiring."

[tttlllsss]

The rankings DO matter. They matter because many students depend on the rankings. Whether you like it or not, for most prospective students, the USNWR is one of the main factors in picking a school to attend. For that reason alone, the ranking of a school affects the quality of its student body. And this, in turn, affects hiring in the long-term.

That's what everyone but sparty has been saying.

Well, I've seen that argument brought up in other places as well, and it irritates me, especially since it's usually stated in a condescending "real-world-employer vs. silly student" tone.

[sparty99]

The rankings DO matter. They matter because many students depend on the rankings. Whether you like it or not, for most prospective students, the USNWR is one of the main factors in picking a school to attend. For that reason alone, the ranking of a school affects the quality of its student body. And this, in turn, affects hiring in the long-term.

That's what everyone but sparty has been saying.

No, dawg, I said dumb students are the only ones who care about rankings because their prestige whores. Do you think this is the only scandal that has happened in the last 10 years? No. And it certainly isn't the first admissions scandal at Illinois.

There are empirical studies that show the rankings of law schools are relatively fixed, there is little movement. If you compare the rankings from today to 10 years ago, you will see this. The pecking order for Illinois graduates getting jobs won't change. The school isn't going anywhere. "It is what it is." If you liked Illinois graduates last year, you aren't going to change your mind b/c of this scandal. A school that has been around since 1897 isn't going to lose it's reputation from a mere admissions scandal. This is America. People forget. Seriously.

[bjsesq]

The rankings DO matter. They matter because many students depend on the rankings. Whether you like it or not, for most prospective students, the USNWR is one of the main factors in picking a school to attend. For that reason alone, the ranking of a school affects the quality of its student body. And this, in turn, affects hiring in the long-term.

That's what everyone but sparty has been saying.

1. No, dawg, I said dumb students are the only ones who care about rankings because their prestige whores. 2. Do you think this is the only scandal that has happened in the last 10 years? No. And it certainly isn't the first admissions scandal at Illinois.

3. There are empirical studies that show the rankings of law schools are relatively fixed, there is little movement. If you compare the rankings from today to 10 years ago, you will see this. 4. The pecking order for Illinois graduates getting jobs won't change. The school isn't going anywhere. "It is what it is." If you liked Illinois graduates last year, you aren't going to change your mind b/c of this scandal. 5. A school that has been around since 1897 isn't going to lose it's reputation from a mere admissions scandal. 6. This is America. People forget. Seriously.

1. The legal profession is prestige driven, retard.
2. Think this might lead to more bad sauce, retard?
3. Empirical studies? You mean, "Hey, I looked at the past data," retard?
4. Illinois is one of many schools that mostly feeds into Chicago. Think this might hurt them somehow, retard?
5. Yeah, and it surely won't even take one scintilla of a hit either, retard.
6. Yes. Society at large and the legal employment market are synonymous, retard.


































































Retard.

[romothesavior]

There are empirical studies that show the rankings of law schools are relatively fixed, there is little movement. If you compare the rankings from today to 10 years ago, you will see this.

Okay... how does this support what you are saying again? Even if the rankings of law schools are "relatively fixed" (which is true at the top, not so true as you move down the list), we're talking about a school dropping ~20 spots in one year, and likely staying there for the foreseeable future (and maybe even dropping a few more spots if helmholz's predictions about the long term effects of this are correct).

Also, I have been a huge critic of the USNWR rankings, and I've argued many times that employers don't care much at all about fluctuations in the rankings. But you are a fucking stooge if you think that USNWR serves as a guidepost for prospective students, and they aren't only used by "prestige whores." The first thing most students do when they're looking to pick a law school is look at the rankings, look at the medians, and start to build a list of places they think they can get into and where they might reasonably want to go. USNWR is the best source of this information. Using it sure as hell isn't prestige whoring.

[birdlaw117]

The rankings DO matter. They matter because many students depend on the rankings. Whether you like it or not, for most prospective students, the USNWR is one of the main factors in picking a school to attend. For that reason alone, the ranking of a school affects the quality of its student body. And this, in turn, affects hiring in the long-term.

That's what everyone but sparty has been saying.

No, dawg, I said dumb students are the only ones who care about rankings because their prestige whores. Do you think this is the only scandal that has happened in the last 10 years? No. And it certainly isn't the first admissions scandal at Illinois.

There are empirical studies that show the rankings of law schools are relatively fixed, there is little movement. If you compare the rankings from today to 10 years ago, you will see this. The pecking order for Illinois graduates getting jobs won't change. The school isn't going anywhere. "It is what it is." If you liked Illinois graduates last year, you aren't going to change your mind b/c of this scandal. A school that has been around since 1897 isn't going to lose it's reputation from a mere admissions scandal. This is America. People forget. Seriously.

I'm not sure how much Villanova's scandal impacted the most recent rankings, but they did drop 17 spots...

[tttlllsss]

The rankings DO matter. They matter because many students depend on the rankings. Whether you like it or not, for most prospective students, the USNWR is one of the main factors in picking a school to attend. For that reason alone, the ranking of a school affects the quality of its student body. And this, in turn, affects hiring in the long-term.

That's what everyone but sparty has been saying.

No, dawg, I said dumb students are the only ones who care about rankings because their prestige whores. Do you think this is the only scandal that has happened in the last 10 years? No. And it certainly isn't the first admissions scandal at Illinois.

There are empirical studies that show the rankings of law schools are relatively fixed, there is little movement. If you compare the rankings from today to 10 years ago, you will see this. The pecking order for Illinois graduates getting jobs won't change. The school isn't going anywhere. "It is what it is." If you liked Illinois graduates last year, you aren't going to change your mind b/c of this scandal. A school that has been around since 1897 isn't going to lose it's reputation from a mere admissions scandal. This is America. People forget. Seriously.

Again, this is wishful thinking. Rankings aren't fixed, even in the T30. Look at Emory last cycle. They changed the way they reported employment #s to USNWR, and dropped 8 spots in one year. Now, 8 spots is huge for a T30 school, especially one that usually sits comfy around the 20-25 zone.

Like I said, yes, recruiters will still look upon UIUC the same way, for the time being. Two things to keep in mind, however; first, this scandal, as opposed to the prior UIUC scandal, reflects upon the overall C/O '14 as a whole. C/O '13 was at 167 and C/O was at 163. This means the quality of C/O is drastically lower than preceding classes, and this might draw the attention of some recruiters.

Second, this scandal greatly diminishes UIUC's attractiveness to prospective students. Believe it or not, many students chose UIUC b/c it's a T30 near Chicago. Many of these students could have attended WUSTL, ND, etc, but were allured by UIUC for some reason. I would think, in future cycles, that particular student would NOT choose UIUC. That's why I expect the student quality to decrease for the foreseeable future.

Now, if the student quality stays low for several years, recruiters WILL notice that. They WILL notice that UIUC just doesn't stand up to its former peers, ND, WUSTL, etc. Relative to UIUC, ND, WUSTL, etc, grads will start to look more attractive. If the competition weren't so fierce for Chicago, sure, this wouldn't have a big effect. But that's not the case.

[Mickey Quicknumbers]

There are empirical studies that show the rankings of law schools are relatively fixed, there is little movement. If you compare the rankings from today to 10 years ago, you will see this.

Okay... how does this support what you are saying again? Even if the rankings of law schools are "relatively fixed" (which is true at the top, not so true as you move down the list), we're talking about a school dropping ~20 spots in one year, and likely staying there for the foreseeable future (and maybe even dropping a few more spots if helmholz's predictions about the long term effects of this are correct).

Also, I have been a huge critic of the USNWR rankings, and I've argued many times that employers don't care much at all about fluctuations in the rankings. But you are a fucking stooge if you think that USNWR serves as a guidepost for prospective students, and they aren't only used by "prestige whores." The first thing most students do when they're looking to pick a law school is look at the rankings, look at the medians, and start to build a list of places they think they can get into and where they might reasonably want to go. USNWR is the best source of this information. Using it sure as hell isn't prestige whoring.

Also, see Washington & Lee; a school's perception changing permanently, for a specific counterexample to this "general rule."

[adammac17]

The rankings DO matter. They matter because many students depend on the rankings. Whether you like it or not, for most prospective students, the USNWR is one of the main factors in picking a school to attend. For that reason alone, the ranking of a school affects the quality of its student body. And this, in turn, affects hiring in the long-term.

That's what everyone but sparty has been saying.

No, dawg, I said dumb students are the only ones who care about rankings because their prestige whores. Do you think this is the only scandal that has happened in the last 10 years? No. And it certainly isn't the first admissions scandal at Illinois.

There are empirical studies that show the rankings of law schools are relatively fixed, there is little movement. If you compare the rankings from today to 10 years ago, you will see this. The pecking order for Illinois graduates getting jobs won't change. The school isn't going anywhere. "It is what it is." If you liked Illinois graduates last year, you aren't going to change your mind b/c of this scandal. A school that has been around since 1897 isn't going to lose it's reputation from a mere admissions scandal. This is America. People forget. Seriously.

Again, this is wishful thinking. Rankings aren't fixed, even in the T30. Look at Emory last cycle. They changed the way they reported employment #s to USNWR, and dropped 8 spots in one year. Now, 8 spots is huge for a T30 school, especially one that usually sits comfy around the 20-25 zone.

Like I said, yes, recruiters will still look upon UIUC the same way, for the time being. Two things to keep in mind, however; first, this scandal, as opposed to the prior UIUC scandal, reflects upon the overall C/O '14 as a whole. C/O '13 was at 167 and C/O was at 163. This means the quality of C/O is drastically lower than preceding classes, and this might draw the attention of some recruiters.

Second, this scandal greatly diminishes UIUC's attractiveness to prospective students. Believe it or not, many students chose UIUC b/c it's a T30 near Chicago. Many of these students could have attended WUSTL, ND, etc, but were allured by UIUC for some reason. I would think, in future cycles, that particular student would NOT choose UIUC. That's why I expect the student quality to decrease for the foreseeable future.

Now, if the student quality stays low for several years, recruiters WILL notice that. They WILL notice that UIUC just doesn't stand up to its former peers, ND, WUSTL, etc. Relative to UIUC, ND, WUSTL, etc, grads will start to look more attractive. If the competition weren't so fierce for Chicago, sure, this wouldn't have a big effect. But that's not the case.

I think this post has done the best job of explaining what is likely to happen to UIUC. I think that in the short term (employer-wise) there is going to be a little negative response from employers - those who regularly recruit from here will still be here next year, but if we f up when/if we get offer it will negatively impact future UIUC students.

In terms of applicants - those applying with no connection or desire to work in chicago will be shied away - there is not denying that. However, i think those who want to work in Chicago will still choose uiuc *FOR 1 maybe 2 more years* because of the track record it has in the city. Overall, firms want wants best for their bottom line, i agree, but in the short run the Illinois name brand will still last in chicago until those grads prove overwise.

[Hannibal]

Well, shit.

[sparty99]

The rankings DO matter. They matter because many students depend on the rankings. Whether you like it or not, for most prospective students, the USNWR is one of the main factors in picking a school to attend. For that reason alone, the ranking of a school affects the quality of its student body. And this, in turn, affects hiring in the long-term.

That's what everyone but sparty has been saying.

No, dawg, I said dumb students are the only ones who care about rankings because their prestige whores. Do you think this is the only scandal that has happened in the last 10 years? No. And it certainly isn't the first admissions scandal at Illinois.

There are empirical studies that show the rankings of law schools are relatively fixed, there is little movement. If you compare the rankings from today to 10 years ago, you will see this. The pecking order for Illinois graduates getting jobs won't change. The school isn't going anywhere. "It is what it is." If you liked Illinois graduates last year, you aren't going to change your mind b/c of this scandal. A school that has been around since 1897 isn't going to lose it's reputation from a mere admissions scandal. This is America. People forget. Seriously.

Again, this is wishful thinking. Rankings aren't fixed, even in the T30. Look at Emory last cycle. They changed the way they reported employment #s to USNWR, and dropped 8 spots in one year. Now, 8 spots is huge for a T30 school, especially one that usually sits comfy around the 20-25 zone.

Like I said, yes, recruiters will still look upon UIUC the same way, for the time being. Two things to keep in mind, however; first, this scandal, as opposed to the prior UIUC scandal, reflects upon the overall C/O '14 as a whole. C/O '13 was at 167 and C/O was at 163. This means the quality of C/O is drastically lower than preceding classes, and this might draw the attention of some recruiters.

Second, this scandal greatly diminishes UIUC's attractiveness to prospective students. Believe it or not, many students chose UIUC b/c it's a T30 near Chicago. Many of these students could have attended WUSTL, ND, etc, but were allured by UIUC for some reason. I would think, in future cycles, that particular student would NOT choose UIUC. That's why I expect the student quality to decrease for the foreseeable future.

Now, if the student quality stays low for several years, recruiters WILL notice that. They WILL notice that UIUC just doesn't stand up to its former peers, ND, WUSTL, etc. Relative to UIUC, ND, WUSTL, etc, grads will start to look more attractive. If the competition weren't so fierce for Chicago, sure, this wouldn't have a big effect. But that's not the case.

The Illinois name is already ingrained in Chicago. If you have lived in Chicago, you would know this. The schools reputation goes beyond it's law school. Alums are plastered throughout the city and are decision makers in business, law firms, and city government. Their still going to poach Illionois students. Also, give me a break. Look at the rankings the past 10 years. The schools in the top 30 are roughly the same.....Will students not apply to U of I this year? I could see that. Will applicants care about this scandal three years from now? MMMM. HIGHLY DOUBT IT.

[Chupavida]

.

[adammac17]

Well, shit.

thank you. im going to assume my argument won you over and caulk this up for +1 uiuc studens co 2014 being capable.....please dont disprove me

[birdlaw117]

The Illinois name is already ingrained in Chicago. If you have lived in Chicago, you would know this. The schools reputation goes beyond it's law school. Alums are plastered throughout the city and are decision makers in business, law firms, and city government. Their still going to poach Illionois students. Also, give me a break. Look at the rankings the past 10 years. The schools in the top 30 are roughly the same.....Will students not apply to U of I this year? I could see that. Will applicants care about this scandal three years from now? MMMM. HIGHLY DOUBT IT.

Wait a second... you're telling me people in Chicago know where Illinois is and shit? You gotta be fucking kidding me, that's unbelievable name recognition!

Also, you're just plain ridiculous.

[romothesavior]

Will applicants care about this scandal three years from now? MMMM. HIGHLY DOUBT IT.

Will as many applicants with 165-168 LSAT scores apply/matriculate at a school with a 163 median that is ranked in the 40s three years from now?

I doubt it.