kappycaft1 wrote:US News needs to lose "acceptance rate" as one of the criteria for its law school rankings as it currently accounts for 2.5% of a school's score - which is more than things you think would matter more like financial aid (1.5%), library resources (0.75%), and bar passage rate (2.0%). This alone creates crappy YP situations for very qualified applicants just so a school can claim that it is "selective." Anyway, like you all have said, I hope this cycle blows YP out the water for all of you overqualified TLSers (which I am not one of, just for the record).
I hear you on the stupidity of acceptance rate as a metric, mostly because it makes schools like UVA and Penn treat their high-numbers applicants either like gods or they completely ignore or deny them based entirely on whether they might attend, rather than their fit for the school, accomplishments, etc. But after going through the methodology, I think US News does a decent job. Maybe it should be tweaked or updated (like job placement having a much larger share), but it's not as bad when you see it all broken down:Quality Assessment - 40% of total score
Peer assessment (25%)
Assessment by lawyers & judges (15%)Selectivity - 25% of total score
Median LSAT (12.5%)
Median GPA (10%)
Acceptance rate (2.5%)Placement Success - 20% of total score
Employment rate at graduation (4%)
Employment rate at 9 months (14%)
Bar passage rate (2%)Faculty Resources - 15% of total score
Expenditures per student (9.75%)
Other, including financial aid (1.5%)
Student/faculty ratio (3%)
Number of volumes in library (0.75%)
 It makes me think that in a cycle when nearly all schools might take hits to their medians, the law school would be better off shifting its attention to its career office to boost 9 month employment numbers, either artificially through school-funded gigs or through actively trying to get everyone jobs. The percent with jobs at 9 months out is 14% of the score, which is much more substantial than the 2.5% for acceptance rate.