ATL's Law School Rankings Forum

[DorianGray89]

I don't go to CLS. I'm just saying putting CLS behind Duke is hilarious when the main aspect of the methodology is supposedly employment stats, biglawl placement, and clerkships.

So I guess you're basing your conclusion on reputation, and not actual facts like ATL did... hmm...

[Clearly]

I don't go to CLS. I'm just saying putting CLS behind Duke is hilarious when the main aspect of the methodology is supposedly employment stats, biglawl placement, and clerkships.

It depends on the data source. I know CLS will place better, but duke managed to report really impressive placement last year.

[Kronk]

I don't go to CLS. I'm just saying putting CLS behind Duke is hilarious when the main aspect of the methodology is supposedly employment stats, biglawl placement, and clerkships.

So I guess you're basing your conclusion on reputation, and not actual facts like ATL did... hmm...

(goes to Duke)

[DorianGray89]

I don't go to CLS. I'm just saying putting CLS behind Duke is hilarious when the main aspect of the methodology is supposedly employment stats, biglawl placement, and clerkships.

So I guess you're basing your conclusion on reputation, and not actual facts like ATL did... hmm...

(goes to Duke)

Yes, I do...so what? ATL doesnt and they still found Duke above CLS....

[Kronk]

Yes, I do...so what? ATL doesnt and they still found Duke above CLS....

There's a difference in quality of employment, is my point.

Employment Data for BigLawl (100+ firms) in 2012:

Duke - 52% of all graduates
CLS - 64.6% of all graduates


I guess that is my point.

[MyNameIsFlynn!]

I don't go to CLS. I'm just saying putting CLS behind Duke is hilarious when the main aspect of the methodology is supposedly employment stats, biglawl placement, and clerkships.

Meh. Could be justifiable depending on how they broke shit down within the employment category. Not laughably absurd imo

Federal clerkship rate
Duke - 13%
Columbia - 8%

School funded jerbs
Duke - 5%
Columbia - 8%

BigLaw(l)
Columbia - 64%
Duke - 51%

[DorianGray89]

Yes, I do...so what? ATL doesnt and they still found Duke above CLS....

There's a difference in quality of employment, is my point.

Employment Data for BigLawl (100+ firms) in 2012:

Duke - 52% of all graduates
CLS - 64.6% of all graduates


I guess that is my point.

Thats only one aspect of the rankings though...

[Bildungsroman]

Are SCOTUS clerkships in the calculation supposed to be a prestige proxy or is it really just because David Lat has a SCOTUS clerk boner?

[sublime]

..

[timbs4339]

Are SCOTUS clerkships in the calculation supposed to be a prestige proxy or is it really just because David Lat has a SCOTUS clerk boner?

Likely a bit of both. You can't have a legitimate ranking without HYS first, there's no easy way to count Fed COA clerks, and Lat is the biggest prestige whore on the planet.

[Kronk]

Thats only one aspect of the rankings though...

I'd say "which school gets you a market-paying job?" should be a bigger aspect of the rankings, then. I don't care if both schools put 90% of their graduates into jobs if one school has 75% in 160K jobs and federal clerkships and the other has 60% 160K jobs and federal clerkships with another 15% in midlaw or other private work that they took because they couldn't get one of the other two.

[SportsFan]

Thats only one aspect of the rankings though...

I'd say "which school gets you a market-paying job?" should be a bigger aspect of the rankings, then. I don't care if both schools put 90% of their graduates into jobs if one school has 75% in 160K jobs and federal clerkships and the other has 60% 160K jobs and federal clerkships with another 15% in midlaw or other private work that they took because they couldn't get one of the other two.

So what you're saying is Penn is better than Yale.

[Kronk]

Thats only one aspect of the rankings though...

I'd say "which school gets you a market-paying job?" should be a bigger aspect of the rankings, then. I don't care if both schools put 90% of their graduates into jobs if one school has 75% in 160K jobs and federal clerkships and the other has 60% 160K jobs and federal clerkships with another 15% in midlaw or other private work that they took because they couldn't get one of the other two.

So what you're saying is Penn is better than Yale.

Not at all. Academia and prestigious clerkships are better than 160K jobs. I'm just saying if school X and school Y employ 90% of people, but the average prestige of the jobs school X places people into is a 9/10 and the prestige that school Y puts people into is a 7/10 there is a difference.

People considering whether to go to Duke or CLS are (usually) smart enough to be able to make a personal decision on whether to attend the school with the higher COA. It's weird to put it into the rankings and it just leads to misleading results, IMO.

[lawschoolwoohoo]

After seeing this I'm kind of crying that I chose Emory over UGA...with more $ at UGA (not much, but still). Boo.

[TheThriller]

After seeing this I'm kind of crying that I chose Emory over UGA...with more $ at UGA (not much, but still). Boo.

Why? employment stats alone suggest Emory over UGA (although the numbers are marginal). The reason UGA is so high in the rankings is that the tuition is cheaper than the schools around it.

Shoulda gone to New Mexico

[quiver]

Thats only one aspect of the rankings though...

I'd say "which school gets you a market-paying job?" should be a bigger aspect of the rankings, then. I don't care if both schools put 90% of their graduates into jobs if one school has 75% in 160K jobs and federal clerkships and the other has 60% 160K jobs and federal clerkships with another 15% in midlaw or other private work that they took because they couldn't get one of the other two.

So what you're saying is Penn is better than Yale.

Not at all. Academia and prestigious clerkships are better than 160K jobs. I'm just saying if school X and school Y employ 90% of people, but the average prestige of the jobs school X places people into is a 9/10 and the prestige that school Y puts people into is a 7/10 there is a difference.

People considering whether to go to Duke or CLS are (usually) smart enough to be able to make a personal decision on whether to attend the school with the higher COA. It's weird to put it into the rankings and it just leads to misleading results, IMO.

(quiver, J. concurring)

[billiris321]

After seeing this I'm kind of crying that I chose Emory over UGA...with more $ at UGA (not much, but still). Boo.

Why? employment stats alone suggest Emory over UGA (although the numbers are marginal). The reason UGA is so high in the rankings is that the tuition is cheaper than the schools around it.

Shoulda gone to New Mexico

NEW MEXICO!!!

Isn't that place a desert wasteland?

[los blancos]

Thats only one aspect of the rankings though...

I'd say "which school gets you a market-paying job?" should be a bigger aspect of the rankings, then. I don't care if both schools put 90% of their graduates into jobs if one school has 75% in 160K jobs and federal clerkships and the other has 60% 160K jobs and federal clerkships with another 15% in midlaw or other private work that they took because they couldn't get one of the other two.

I agree with you on this, but aren't federal clerkships > biglawl on the hierarchy? I mean at a school like Duke is there anyone that gets a federal or high-level state clerkship that either doesn't have biglaw, couldn't have gotten it, or won't be getting it post-clerkship? Basically any federal clerkship is tougher to get than a market paying job.


Related question: when a school like Duke has 10% fed clerks + 50% big firm placement, do the two overlap, or are people who are going clerkship -> firm excluded from that 50% number?

[los blancos]

I don't go to CLS. I'm just saying putting CLS behind Duke is hilarious when the main aspect of the methodology is supposedly employment stats, biglawl placement, and clerkships.

Meh. Could be justifiable depending on how they broke shit down within the employment category. Not laughably absurd imo

Federal clerkship rate
Duke - 13%
Columbia - 8%

School funded jerbs
Duke - 5%
Columbia - 8%

BigLaw(l)
Columbia - 64%
Duke - 51%

Is it typically like this year after year or was last year just an abnormally good year for Duke/abnormally bad year for CLS? To me, the most important stat is Biglawl + Clerkships

Duke 64%
CLS 72%

And that difference is mitigated by the fact that CLS has more folks that take school-funded jobs. Duke probably also places more students into regional firms that aren't caught by that biglaw metric but are of similar 'quality'

[Kronk]

Duke 64%
CLS 72%

And that difference is mitigated by the fact that CLS has more folks that take school-funded jobs. Duke probably also places more students into regional firms that aren't caught by that biglaw metric but are of similar 'quality'

I agree with this number, but it makes no sense that the difference would be mitigated by school-funded jobs. School-funded jobs would have no bearing on that number at all, obviously. CLS also has a much larger class size.

[los blancos]

Duke 64%
CLS 72%

And that difference is mitigated by the fact that CLS has more folks that take school-funded jobs. Duke probably also places more students into regional firms that aren't caught by that biglaw metric but are of similar 'quality'

I agree with this number, but it makes no sense that the difference would be mitigated by school-funded jobs. School-funded jobs would have no bearing on that number at all, obviously. CLS also has a much larger class size.

Yeah, probably not between 8% and 5% - but like you said earlier ITT it's relevant to placement on the whole if a school has a ridiculous number of students taking school-funded jobs.

[Kronk]

Duke 64%
CLS 72%

And that difference is mitigated by the fact that CLS has more folks that take school-funded jobs. Duke probably also places more students into regional firms that aren't caught by that biglaw metric but are of similar 'quality'

I agree with this number, but it makes no sense that the difference would be mitigated by school-funded jobs. School-funded jobs would have no bearing on that number at all, obviously. CLS also has a much larger class size.

Yeah, probably not between 8% and 5% - but like you said earlier ITT it's relevant to placement on the whole if a school has a ridiculous number of students taking school-funded jobs.

Nah I just meant the 72% doesn't include school-funded jobs, nor does the 64%. And I agree that those are the two numbers that (should be) important. Unless you're talking about how both of them have 93% of graduates employed in general, in which case it's a negative that a larger percentage of that is school-funded for CLS, which I agree with.

But it doesn't change the fact that they put a larger percentage of a larger class size into the most "desirable" jobs.

[Elston Gunn]

Thats only one aspect of the rankings though...

I'd say "which school gets you a market-paying job?" should be a bigger aspect of the rankings, then. I don't care if both schools put 90% of their graduates into jobs if one school has 75% in 160K jobs and federal clerkships and the other has 60% 160K jobs and federal clerkships with another 15% in midlaw or other private work that they took because they couldn't get one of the other two.

I agree with you on this, but aren't federal clerkships > biglawl on the hierarchy? I mean at a school like Duke is there anyone that gets a federal or high-level state clerkship that either doesn't have biglaw, couldn't have gotten it, or won't be getting it post-clerkship? Basically any federal clerkship is tougher to get than a market paying job.


Related question: when a school like Duke has 10% fed clerks + 50% big firm placement, do the two overlap, or are people who are going clerkship -> firm excluded from that 50% number?

Big law percentage is based on NALP forms or NLJ250 reports, so it only counts the people actually starting as associates that year. So there shouldn't be any overlap.

[beepboopbeep]

Big law percentage is based on NALP forms or NLJ250 reports, so it only counts the people actually starting as associates that year. So there shouldn't be any overlap.

I think the question is whether they're being counted based on past clerkships, not past biglaw - I know they said they counted SCOTUS clerks back to 2008, so presumably at least last year's crop is getting counted again when they transition out to biglaw/gov.

I didn't see whether they're counting fed clerkships just for the present year - in which case NYU in particular had a major down year affecting their rank.

[BigZuck]

So a Berkeley student wants school funded jobs taken out of the equation and for a stupid high cost of attendance to not be held against a school? I find this shocking.