About those US News Ranks Forum

[Former law dean]

Applicants: Good luck on a tough choice, and a long, difficult, but rewarding 3/4 years. Here is a piece, as a former law prof and assistant law dean, that I wrote about the ranks, the state of legal education, and some advice for all of you. It's long, but as I say in the piece, nowhere near as long as the textbooks you will be reading. Use as you see fit. (The site is political ... the piece is not)

http://committedconservative.com/2017/0 ... testament/

[Nebby]

Good article

[dietcoke1]

good read. does anyone have a link to the piece written by the former northwestern dean referenced at the end of this article?

[goldenbear2020]

lol @ "A great example of such a regional powerhouse would be Seton Hall. It has a nationally known name, but far more importantly, it has been a bedrock institution in NJ forever. It’s alumni network is strong, and its graduates are on the bench, in large firms, and practicing all over the New Jersey and New York legal market. It’s a fine school, and it reflects the type of choice one might consider if one wants to practice and stay in the garden state. Indeed, it might be a better choice than picking a school in the top tier, with no alumni connection to the state in which you want to practice."

[AT9]

lol @ "A great example of such a regional powerhouse would be Seton Hall. It has a nationally known name, but far more importantly, it has been a bedrock institution in NJ forever. It’s alumni network is strong, and its graduates are on the bench, in large firms, and practicing all over the New Jersey and New York legal market. It’s a fine school, and it reflects the type of choice one might consider if one wants to practice and stay in the garden state. Indeed, it might be a better choice than picking a school in the top tier, with no alumni connection to the state in which you want to practice."

What's "lol" about that? If you want to work in NJ (perhaps that's lol-worthy), Seton Hall for cheap is certainly better than a "top tier" (T50) school like Iowa or ASU. If you don't have T14 stats and have tried maximizing your LSAT, go to the regional school for cheap that places well where you want to work. That's pretty standard TLS advice.

[KissMyAxe]

Interesting read. I agree that the USNWR needs to stop being considered gospel, and I wouldn't mind an overhaul of the ranking formula.However, I disagree with your overhaul in its entirety, with the exception of your adding second year class strength and your formula for job placement (though I would do some small tweaks to it).

However, you criticize the USNWR for favoring wealthy schools, but your formula reeks of elitism, heavily favoring wealthy students. You openly admit this will punish schools for admitting students falling below medians. You also seem to have this awe of the LSAT, blaming GPAs as being too manipulatable. There is no question wealthy kids do significantly better on the LSAT than poor students. They can afford to dedicate more time to follow a mantra on this forum of taking time off and studying, because the LSAT is likely the most learnable graduate test (though the GRE gives it a run for its money). They can also afford to utilize a lot more resources than their poor counterparts, paying to use top LSAT preparation companies. Even just buying the books and the practice tests can be price prohibitive for some students (let's say you're making minimum wage and are a single mother). Because of that, the poorest students have the least amount of prep, and typically do the poorest, while the wealthy do far better. Because schools are going to be desperate to maintain their rankings, it's going to push out poor students even more than it is at the moment (and the top levels of legal education are already heavily skewed toward wealth). Your attempt to punish schools for admitting "substandard" students will force poor students even more to the wayside, which I find already highly problematic at the top schools.

Finally, with the current rankings, schools like Yale and Stanford (I'm not so sure HLS can admit anyone they want given the falling top LSAT scores and their now accepting GREs) have the ability to find diamonds in the rough, who might have lower LSATs than the others, but have overcome so many adversity in their lives that they never had the chance to take a few months off and retake the LSAT (like the mantra, which is good advice for most applicants here btw). They might have a 160 LSAT, but their story might be so fascinating, that they might still deserve admission. I think this is a good thing, as they bring new experiences and ideas into a classroom, instead of the typical prep school, HYP undergrad, Oxbridge Mphil echochamber that dominates many of the elite classrooms. Your formula will put a heavy dent in this practice, so they can remain #1 and #2. Your bar rankings do the exact same thing.

So, I agree with your concept in general terms, but could not disagree more with your way of accomplishing it.



Oh, I thought your name was familiar. Your twitter account is a fun read too. https://twitter.com/RichKelsey?ref_src= ... r%5Eauthor

This is a nice gem from December 2, 2014:
"Poll claims 85% of blacks think #FergusonDecision was unjust. 58% of whites think it was just or right. Racial divide or reason divide?"

Ooh, and your fascinating article about "Immigrants doing the jobs aborted Americans could have done." Interesting stuff. http://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/richa ... -have-done

[Harvard_Naw]

Interesting read. I agree that the USNWR needs to stop being considered gospel, and I wouldn't mind an overhaul of the ranking formula.However, I disagree with your overhaul in its entirety, with the exception of your adding second year class strength and your formula for job placement (though I would do some small tweaks to it).

However, you criticize the USNWR for favoring wealthy schools, but your formula reeks of elitism, heavily favoring wealthy students. You openly admit this will punish schools for admitting students falling below medians. You also seem to have this awe of the LSAT, blaming GPAs as being too manipulatable. There is no question wealthy kids do significantly better on the LSAT than poor students. They can afford to dedicate more time to follow a mantra on this forum of taking time off and studying, because the LSAT is likely the most learnable graduate test (though the GRE gives it a run for its money). They can also afford to utilize a lot more resources than their poor counterparts, paying to use top LSAT preparation companies. Even just buying the books and the practice tests can be price prohibitive for some students (let's say you're making minimum wage and are a single mother). Because of that, the poorest students have the least amount of prep, and typically do the poorest, while the wealthy do far better. Because schools are going to be desperate to maintain their rankings, it's going to push out poor students even more than it is at the moment (and the top levels of legal education are already heavily skewed toward wealth). Your attempt to punish schools for admitting "substandard" students will force poor students even more to the wayside, which I find already highly problematic at the top schools.

Finally, with the current rankings, schools like Yale and Stanford (I'm not so sure HLS can admit anyone they want given the falling top LSAT scores and their now accepting GREs) have the ability to find diamonds in the rough, who might have lower LSATs than the others, but have overcome so many adversity in their lives that they never had the chance to take a few months off and retake the LSAT (like the mantra, which is good advice for most applicants here btw). They might have a 160 LSAT, but their story might be so fascinating, that they might still deserve admission. I think this is a good thing, as they bring new experiences and ideas into a classroom, instead of the typical prep school, HYP undergrad, Oxbridge Mphil echochamber that dominates many of the elite classrooms. Your formula will put a heavy dent in this practice, so they can remain #1 and #2. Your bar rankings do the exact same thing.

So, I agree with your concept in general terms, but could not disagree more with your way of accomplishing it.



Oh, I thought your name was familiar. Your twitter account is a fun read too. https://twitter.com/RichKelsey?ref_src= ... r%5Eauthor

This is a nice gem from December 2, 2014:
"Poll claims 85% of blacks think #FergusonDecision was unjust. 58% of whites think it was just or right. Racial divide or reason divide?"

Ooh, and your fascinating article about "Immigrants doing the jobs aborted Americans could have done." Interesting stuff. http://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/richa ... -have-done

+1

[cavalier1138]

I knew there was a reason I didn't want to read a blog post on "committedconservative.com".

[Ferrisjso]

Wow, I agree with conservatives on something, who knew.

[rpupkin]

Applicants: Good luck on a tough choice, and a long, difficult, but rewarding 3/4 years. Here is a piece, as a former law prof and assistant law dean, that I wrote about the ranks, the state of legal education, and some advice for all of you. It's long, but as I say in the piece, nowhere near as long as the textbooks you will be reading. Use as you see fit. (The site is political ... the piece is not)

http://committedconservative.com/2017/0 ... testament/

TL; DR

Hey, could you tell me which school has more lay prestige in the midwest: Duke University or UC Berkeley? Thanks in advance.

[Harvard_Naw]

Hey, could you tell me which school has more lay prestige in the midwest: Duke University or UC Berkeley? Thanks in advance.

[proteinshake]

Applicants: Good luck on a tough choice, and a long, difficult, but rewarding 3/4 years. Here is a piece, as a former law prof and assistant law dean, that I wrote about the ranks, the state of legal education, and some advice for all of you. It's long, but as I say in the piece, nowhere near as long as the textbooks you will be reading. Use as you see fit. (The site is political ... the piece is not)

http://committedconservative.com/2017/0 ... testament/

TL; DR

Hey, could you tell me which school has more lay prestige in the midwest: Duke University or UC Berkeley? Thanks in advance.

[KissMyAxe]

Applicants: Good luck on a tough choice, and a long, difficult, but rewarding 3/4 years. Here is a piece, as a former law prof and assistant law dean, that I wrote about the ranks, the state of legal education, and some advice for all of you. It's long, but as I say in the piece, nowhere near as long as the textbooks you will be reading. Use as you see fit. (The site is political ... the piece is not)

http://committedconservative.com/2017/0 ... testament/

TL; DR

Hey, could you tell me which school has more lay prestige in the midwest: Duke University or UC Berkeley? Thanks in advance.

Finally, someone's asking the important questions.

[goldenbear2020]

lol @ "A great example of such a regional powerhouse would be Seton Hall. It has a nationally known name, but far more importantly, it has been a bedrock institution in NJ forever. It’s alumni network is strong, and its graduates are on the bench, in large firms, and practicing all over the New Jersey and New York legal market. It’s a fine school, and it reflects the type of choice one might consider if one wants to practice and stay in the garden state. Indeed, it might be a better choice than picking a school in the top tier, with no alumni connection to the state in which you want to practice."

What's "lol" about that? If you want to work in NJ (perhaps that's lol-worthy), Seton Hall for cheap is certainly better than a "top tier" (T50) school like Iowa or ASU. If you don't have T14 stats and have tried maximizing your LSAT, go to the regional school for cheap that places well where you want to work. That's pretty standard TLS advice.

[AT9]

lol @ "A great example of such a regional powerhouse would be Seton Hall. It has a nationally known name, but far more importantly, it has been a bedrock institution in NJ forever. It’s alumni network is strong, and its graduates are on the bench, in large firms, and practicing all over the New Jersey and New York legal market. It’s a fine school, and it reflects the type of choice one might consider if one wants to practice and stay in the garden state. Indeed, it might be a better choice than picking a school in the top tier, with no alumni connection to the state in which you want to practice."

What's "lol" about that? If you want to work in NJ (perhaps that's lol-worthy), Seton Hall for cheap is certainly better than a "top tier" (T50) school like Iowa or ASU. If you don't have T14 stats and have tried maximizing your LSAT, go to the regional school for cheap that places well where you want to work. That's pretty standard TLS advice.

Ah.

If you define "regional" as the area between the Atlantic and Delaware River, it's not technically incorrect.

[MKC]

At the top of the food chain, tuition discounting rewards admitting applicants who are not qualified to attend that institution. Ironically, there is an ABA regulation that prohibits such a practice. However, since law schools use this practice primarily for affirmative action students, the ABA turns a blind-eye to enforcement.

You might want to ease off of implying (or maybe stating outright?) that affirmative action candidates are unqualified and that admitting them is an ABA violation.

[PrezRand]

At the top of the food chain, tuition discounting rewards admitting applicants who are not qualified to attend that institution. Ironically, there is an ABA regulation that prohibits such a practice. However, since law schools use this practice primarily for affirmative action students, the ABA turns a blind-eye to enforcement.

You might want to ease off of implying (or maybe stating outright?) that affirmative action candidates are unqualified and that admitting them is an ABA violation.

Well he is a committed conservative so that might be hard

[chicagoburger]

At the top of the food chain, tuition discounting rewards admitting applicants who are not qualified to attend that institution. Ironically, there is an ABA regulation that prohibits such a practice. However, since law schools use this practice primarily for affirmative action students, the ABA turns a blind-eye to enforcement.

You might want to ease off of implying (or maybe stating outright?) that affirmative action candidates are unqualified and that admitting them is an ABA violation.

Well he is a committed conservative so that might be hard

Don't be a jerk.

[cavalier1138]

At the top of the food chain, tuition discounting rewards admitting applicants who are not qualified to attend that institution. Ironically, there is an ABA regulation that prohibits such a practice. However, since law schools use this practice primarily for affirmative action students, the ABA turns a blind-eye to enforcement.

You might want to ease off of implying (or maybe stating outright?) that affirmative action candidates are unqualified and that admitting them is an ABA violation.

Well he is a committed conservative so that might be hard

Don't be a jerk.

Maybe we should focus on the OP being an awful, racist human being instead of people calling him out for it.

[chicagoburger]

At the top of the food chain, tuition discounting rewards admitting applicants who are not qualified to attend that institution. Ironically, there is an ABA regulation that prohibits such a practice. However, since law schools use this practice primarily for affirmative action students, the ABA turns a blind-eye to enforcement.

You might want to ease off of implying (or maybe stating outright?) that affirmative action candidates are unqualified and that admitting them is an ABA violation.

Well he is a committed conservative so that might be hard

Don't be a jerk.

Maybe we should focus on the OP being an awful, racist human being instead of people calling him out for it.

So you wanna be a keyboard hero now? Shut down and stick "racist" to anybody who has a different political opinion, sounds legit.

[cavalier1138]

At the top of the food chain, tuition discounting rewards admitting applicants who are not qualified to attend that institution. Ironically, there is an ABA regulation that prohibits such a practice. However, since law schools use this practice primarily for affirmative action students, the ABA turns a blind-eye to enforcement.

You might want to ease off of implying (or maybe stating outright?) that affirmative action candidates are unqualified and that admitting them is an ABA violation.

Well he is a committed conservative so that might be hard

Don't be a jerk.

Maybe we should focus on the OP being an awful, racist human being instead of people calling him out for it.

So you wanna be a keyboard hero now? Shut down and stick "racist" to anybody who has a different political opinion, sounds legit.

Retake.

[Anon.y.mousse.]

At the top of the food chain, tuition discounting rewards admitting applicants who are not qualified to attend that institution. Ironically, there is an ABA regulation that prohibits such a practice. However, since law schools use this practice primarily for affirmative action students, the ABA turns a blind-eye to enforcement.

You might want to ease off of implying (or maybe stating outright?) that affirmative action candidates are unqualified and that admitting them is an ABA violation.

Well he is a committed conservative so that might be hard

Don't be a jerk.

Maybe we should focus on the OP being an awful, racist human being instead of people calling him out for it.

So you wanna be a keyboard hero now? Shut down and stick "racist" to anybody who has a different political opinion, sounds legit.

Stating or implying that affirmative action students aren't qualified to attend the top institutions that are admitting them with discounted tuitions isn't a political opinion, it's a shitty personal one. Maybe "racist" is too strong but it's certainly a distasteful prejudiced opinion to have. As if your LSAT score alone makes one qualified to attend a top institution.

[HYPSM]

At the top of the food chain, tuition discounting rewards admitting applicants who are not qualified to attend that institution. Ironically, there is an ABA regulation that prohibits such a practice. However, since law schools use this practice primarily for affirmative action students, the ABA turns a blind-eye to enforcement.

You might want to ease off of implying (or maybe stating outright?) that affirmative action candidates are unqualified and that admitting them is an ABA violation.

Well he is a committed conservative so that might be hard

Don't be a jerk.

Maybe we should focus on the OP being an awful, racist human being instead of people calling him out for it.

So you wanna be a keyboard hero now? Shut down and stick "racist" to anybody who has a different political opinion, sounds legit.

Retake.

Damn u savage
Right where it hurts

[MKC]

Stating or implying that affirmative action students aren't qualified to attend the top institutions that are admitting them with discounted tuitions isn't a political opinion, it's a shitty personal one. Maybe "racist" is too strong but it's certainly a distasteful prejudiced opinion to have. As if your LSAT score alone makes one qualified to attend a top institution.

You're going to get banned for debating AA unless you do it in here.

[Anon.y.mousse.]

Stating or implying that affirmative action students aren't qualified to attend the top institutions that are admitting them with discounted tuitions isn't a political opinion, it's a shitty personal one. Maybe "racist" is too strong but it's certainly a distasteful prejudiced opinion to have. As if your LSAT score alone makes one qualified to attend a top institution.

You're going to get banned for debating AA unless you do it in here.

I'm not debating AA! I didn't even start that conversation.