2014 ATL Rankings Forum

[zman]

Iowa

[Dredd_2017]

Last year one ATL criteria seemed to include COL. Perhaps ATL eliminated that standard since both NYU and Columbia had big jumps this go-around. Either that or ATL believes NYC COL is a lot less this year compared to ’13.

IIRC, they use tuition rates as an analog for COL. Wildly inaccurate, but that's what they do.

Actually they said if the majority of graduates work in the same market as the law school they adjust COA to reflect the local market. This explains why Fordham was banished from the list entirely, COL in NYC + 50k/year tuition means they had no hope of staying on.

They really need to switch to average student indebtedness instead of tuition though.

[Dafaq]

Sorry to say, I believe this year ATL jumped the shark.

[Dredd_2017]

Sorry to say, I believe this year ATL jumped the shark.

ATL jumped the shark when they went to Disqus comments and allowed contributors to turn comments off on their articles like two years ago.

Having said that, for all its (Many) flaws this ranking is leagues better than US News, so I have to disagree.

[SnakySalmon]

Sorry to say, I believe this year ATL jumped the shark.

ATL jumped the shark when they went to Disqus comments and allowed contributors to turn comments off on their articles like two years ago.

Having said that, for all its (Many) flaws this ranking is leagues better than US News, so I have to disagree.

I would think judge dread would refuse to believe anyone was above the law, much less demand free speech rights.

[californiauser]

Sorry to say, I believe this year ATL jumped the shark.

ATL jumped the shark when they went to Disqus comments and allowed contributors to turn comments off on their articles like two years ago.

Having said that, for all its (Many) flaws this ranking is leagues better than US News, so I have to disagree.

The commentators on Above The Law are without a doubt the worst I've seen on any niche website. I guess it just proves how miserable most lawyers are.

[Dredd_2017]

Sorry to say, I believe this year ATL jumped the shark.

ATL jumped the shark when they went to Disqus comments and allowed contributors to turn comments off on their articles like two years ago.

Having said that, for all its (Many) flaws this ranking is leagues better than US News, so I have to disagree.

I would think judge dread would refuse to believe anyone was above the law, much less demand free speech rights.

https://i.imgur.com/17stZAd.gif

[manu6926]

...

[lawschool22]

While obviously imperfect, this is worlds ahead of US News. I agree that the two main improvements would be to reduce the SCOTUS and Federal Judge allocation (total of 15% is probably a bit high), and take into account actual cost as opposed to tuition. The latter would be somewhat difficult. But I thought on the ABA 509 report schools gave out at least some amount of grant information? I would think they could take that into account in some way.

[jenesaislaw]

While obviously imperfect, this is worlds ahead of US News. I agree that the two main improvements would be to reduce the SCOTUS and Federal Judge allocation (total of 15% is probably a bit high), and take into account actual cost as opposed to tuition. The latter would be somewhat difficult. But I thought on the ABA 509 report schools gave out at least some amount of grant information? I would think they could take that into account in some way.

Somewhat related, but here's a piece I wrote for Law.com yesterday on how law schools can/should game the ATL rankings. http://www.law.com/sites/kylepatrickmce ... -rankings/

Spoiler: lower tuition and reduce/maintain class size.

ETA: here's a non-subscription required link http://www.lawschoolcafe.org/thread/how ... -rankings/

[lawschool22]

While obviously imperfect, this is worlds ahead of US News. I agree that the two main improvements would be to reduce the SCOTUS and Federal Judge allocation (total of 15% is probably a bit high), and take into account actual cost as opposed to tuition. The latter would be somewhat difficult. But I thought on the ABA 509 report schools gave out at least some amount of grant information? I would think they could take that into account in some way.

Somewhat related, but here's a piece I wrote for Law.com yesterday on how law schools can/should game the ATL rankings. http://www.law.com/sites/kylepatrickmce ... -rankings/

Spoiler: lower tuition and reduce/maintain class size.

ETA: here's a non-subscription required link http://www.lawschoolcafe.org/thread/how ... -rankings/

Yeah, lower their tuition but give less in scholarships I imagine? I'm going to give it a read. I think if they could get at net cost somehow that could be avoided.

ETA: The nice thing about your proposal, and gaming ATL in general, is that those things are good for students. In that sense ATL is a positive force.

ETA2: I just read your article and that's exactly what you said lol. Scooped!

[xJD2017x]

lower tuition with smaller scholarship(same end result for schools) and smaller class size should do it.

[lawschool22]

lower tuition with smaller scholarship(same end result for schools) and smaller class size should do it.

1/2 of those things is good for students, at least.

[jenesaislaw]

lower tuition with smaller scholarship(same end result for schools) and smaller class size should do it.

1/2 of those things is good for students, at least.

You don't think that lower tuition is a good thing for students?

[bk1]

Even if real tuition (listed tuition minus scholarships) stays the same, I still think it's better for consumers if listed tuition goes down because it increases transparency (it also likely distributes the debt burden more evenly across the class).

[lawschool22]

lower tuition with smaller scholarship(same end result for schools) and smaller class size should do it.

1/2 of those things is good for students, at least.

You don't think that lower tuition is a good thing for students?

Not lower tuition w/ correspondingly lower scholarships, which is what I though xJD was getting at.

[lawschool22]

Even if real tuition (listed tuition minus scholarships) stays the same, I still think it's better for consumers if listed tuition goes down because it increases transparency (it also likely distributes the debt burden more evenly across the class).

That is a fair point. The available range of net COA would be smaller under this scenario.

[jenesaislaw]

lower tuition with smaller scholarship(same end result for schools) and smaller class size should do it.

1/2 of those things is good for students, at least.

You don't think that lower tuition is a good thing for students?

Not lower tuition w/ correspondingly lower scholarships, which is what I though xJD was getting at.

We definitely disagree there. I have a big problem with those most likely to succeed subsidizing those least likely to succeed. High sticker prices also favor those with more information about negotiating, which favors the connected and disfavors the legal profession noobs. It's a twisted game that educational institutions should be above.

[runinthefront]

.

[lawschool22]

I agree with that J. I was just saying I could see a scenario in which the absolute tuition changes but the scholarship game stayed the same. But I can see your point that at a certain level of tuition that game would be harder to engage in for schools.

[rad lulz]

lower tuition with smaller scholarship(same end result for schools) and smaller class size should do it.

1/2 of those things is good for students, at least.

You don't think that lower tuition is a good thing for students?

How will people know I am prestigious if my Veblen good is not expensive

[jbagelboy]

I like Vanderbilt at 14. With UT bringing up the rear call it the new T15.

ETA: also do they list the numerical values of each school according to their metric so we can see how close each school comes to the next?

[lawschool22]

I like Vanderbilt at 14. With UT bringing up the rear call it the new T15.

ETA: also do they list the numerical values of each school according to their metric so we can see how close each school comes to the next?

Yeah they do. Also most schools increased over last year which I take it is a good sign.

[beepboopbeep]

I like Vanderbilt at 14. With UT bringing up the rear call it the new T15.

ETA: also do they list the numerical values of each school according to their metric so we can see how close each school comes to the next?

You could probably reverse engineer them using http://abovethelaw.com/careers/law-scho ... ew=ratings. They list the total score for each but not what each school scores on each input.

Jenesais, how do you feel about this list (http://abovethelaw.com/careers/law-scho ... all+Rating) taking up a full 10% of the ratings inputs? Would you say that's gameable?

[jenesaislaw]

I like Vanderbilt at 14. With UT bringing up the rear call it the new T15.

ETA: also do they list the numerical values of each school according to their metric so we can see how close each school comes to the next?

You could probably reverse engineer them using http://abovethelaw.com/careers/law-scho ... ew=ratings. They list the total score for each but not what each school scores on each input.

Jenesais, how do you feel about this list (http://abovethelaw.com/careers/law-scho ... all+Rating) taking up a full 10% of the ratings inputs? Would you say that's gameable?

Absolutely, but I didn't want to give them any ideas

If I were a law school, I would contact my most happy and most successful (or most generous) alumni, and have them fill out the survey. No need to guide them with what to say; you already have an idea based on you contacting them in the first place.

I'd be shocked if schools weren't doing this already.

As for it taking up 10%, it's tough to know how annoyed to be over that weight without seeing what would happen if you eliminated it. It's a bit unnerving to not know how many survey respondents there are; it's also unnerving to not know what kind of quality control goes on.