Guess I'd better get ready for Cornell's B- social life.

Lavitz wrote:I just noticed that when you click the school's name, you see how the students and alumni rated it.
Guess I'd better get ready for Cornell's B- social life.
masked kavana wrote:That's what video games are for
romothesavior wrote:3) I'm a little confused by the "Cost" methodology. Are they just using tuition as the metric for cost? Because some schools are incredibly stingy and others very generous. I couldn't really understand what they meant when they explained their methodology here.
laxbrah420 wrote:"we don't use inputs. we consider school costs"...
sabanist wrote:This made me check out Harvard's, and...Notable alumni include: Barack Obama, Michelle Obama, Mitt Romney, John Roberts, Anthony Kennedy, Stephen Breyer, Antonin Scalia, Elena Kagan, Lloyd Blankfein, Rutherford B. Hayes, and most importantly Elie Mystal
TaipeiMort wrote:Problem with these rankings is that they don't correct for self-selection of those with prior work experience into particular schools. That is why Penn and NU occasionally outperform peers.
Lavitz wrote:sabanist wrote:This made me check out Harvard's, and...Notable alumni include: Barack Obama, Michelle Obama, Mitt Romney, John Roberts, Anthony Kennedy, Stephen Breyer, Antonin Scalia, Elena Kagan, Lloyd Blankfein, Rutherford B. Hayes, and most importantly Elie Mystal
I knew there had to be a catch.![]()
Currently reading the student and alumni reviews of the schools. I also noticed you can still click "rate your school" and fill out the survey.
Bronck wrote:Lol, SCOTUS clerkships as a percent of the ranking
Borhas wrote:Bronck wrote:Lol, SCOTUS clerkships as a percent of the ranking
other than that it's pretty reasonable
MikeSpivey wrote:Here is some real quick analysis. Trust me, I am trying to add grids.
ATL v. USNWR @http://spiveyconsulting.com/blog/238/
This was done on the fly, please PM me with errors.
rad lulz wrote:romothesavior wrote:3) I'm a little confused by the "Cost" methodology. Are they just using tuition as the metric for cost? Because some schools are incredibly stingy and others very generous. I couldn't really understand what they meant when they explained their methodology here.
They use cost, and it makes sense until schools start releasing "average tuition paid" numbers
They like to keep that lil cross subsidization thing on the DL
romothesavior wrote:rad lulz wrote:romothesavior wrote:3) I'm a little confused by the "Cost" methodology. Are they just using tuition as the metric for cost? Because some schools are incredibly stingy and others very generous. I couldn't really understand what they meant when they explained their methodology here.
They use cost, and it makes sense until schools start releasing "average tuition paid" numbers
They like to keep that lil cross subsidization thing on the DL
But what is "cost"?
Cost = Tuition + cost of attendance?
That's all well and good, but you really need to factor in scholarships to make it a meaningful metric.
sinfiery wrote:They could probably incorporate a conservative across the board estimation using the data on LSACs website with % of students receiving grant aid, amount of said median aid, % receiving more than half, full tuition, etc. But that's a lot of work..
romothesavior wrote:That's all well and good, but you really need to factor in scholarships to make it a meaningful metric.
sinfiery wrote:They could probably incorporate a conservative across the board estimation using the data on LSACs website with % of students receiving grant aid, amount of said median aid, % receiving more than half, full tuition, etc. But that's a lot of work..
beepboopbeep wrote:romothesavior wrote:That's all well and good, but you really need to factor in scholarships to make it a meaningful metric.
I think ATL is aware of that, but there's just no way to get that information right now.
Is it worth including, given that everyone making an actual decision will be looking at different numbers? Probably not. But I appreciate what they're trying to do.
DorianGray89 wrote:Sure, there is stuff wrong with these rankings, but there is with all of them. People give different weights to different things. Here ATL is telling you based on these things, this is how these schools stack up against each other. If you want to give different weight to different things, do it on your own, they are going by what people told them was more important.
Anyways, I'm happy to see Duke getting the acknowledgement it deserves.
JamesDean1955 wrote:TaipeiMort wrote:Problem with these rankings is that they don't correct for self-selection of those with prior work experience into particular schools. That is why Penn and NU occasionally outperform peers.
Why is Penn being included into your assessment? Just curious, bc I didn't think that relative to V/M/D/C (well, every T14 other than NU basically) they had substantially more people with significant WE (3+ years and/or sought after WE like investment banking). Quality of work experience matters too. From speaking with both Penn and NU students I got the impression NU students had more/better quality WE on average than Penn students.
If there's a compilation anywhere of which schools have what percentage of people with 3+ years of experience, I'd like to see that.
If you're right, guess my WE won't stand out as much as I thought
Return to “Law School Admissions Forum�
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests