Should BYU Law be ranked No. 2? Forum

[robb0106]

The article actually made some valid points. He did not, however, propose this order as a new ranking, he was merely stating that there are other valid ways to ranks schools based on important factors. US News, for instance, does not include cost of attending, which many prospective students would acknowledge is one of the most important factors in making a decision. He is not actually speaking about law school rankings for the majority of the article, rather he focuses on the formation of US News's ranking systems, (what was decided as important, what not) in order to rank colleges. He argues that the system is biased and he presents the website of an IU Law professor as evidence of this bias. On this website (the name escapes me and the article is not close by, but I am sure someone else knows it), one can play with the percentile importance of factors in order to manufacture different results. This top ten list is just one example, but it is not a new ranking system. The mention of law schools is anecdotal evidence, but not the thesis of the article. It is a quick read, and it has some interesting points. It will not be a factor in my decision, but projected debt will be (hmm...)

[dr123]

Malcolm Gladwell is ludicrously overrated and the rankings system he proposes is terrible.

This.

Here's my ranking system:
Rank based on *real* employment statistics and bar passage rates, LSAT and GPA can be thrown in there too, but stuff like library size and acceptance rate are too easily gamed.

Top 20 schools are ranked as national schools
What is now 21- ~125 would be regionally ranked
All other schools would be demolished or turned into campus food courts

+1 Nice. I would support this plan.

Schools shouild be eliminated by location, nyc and chicago don't need 3 (or however many) T2 schools, but Wyoming does need U Wyoming and North Dakota needs UND, both t3 schools. Every state should have a law school, but I see no reason why any state should have more than 2 or 3.

IMO, there is hardly a difference between t2 and t3

[Hey-O]

Malcolm Gladwell is ludicrously overrated and the rankings system he proposes is terrible.

This.

Here's my ranking system:
Rank based on *real* employment statistics and bar passage rates, LSAT and GPA can be thrown in there too, but stuff like library size and acceptance rate are too easily gamed.

Top 20 schools are ranked as national schools
What is now 21- ~125 would be regionally ranked
All other schools would be demolished or turned into campus food courts

+1 Nice. I would support this plan.

Schools shouild be eliminated by location, nyc and chicago don't need 3 (or however many) T2 schools, but Wyoming does need U Wyoming and North Dakota needs UND, both t3 schools. Every state should have a law school, but I see no reason why any state should have more than 2 or 3.

IMO, there is hardly a difference between t2 and t3

We are making excellent progress. Listen up ABA we are fixing the legal hiring problem.

[3ThrowAway99]

No, BYU should not be ranked number 2 or anywhere close to that IMO.

[casterfield]

Malcolm Gladwell is ludicrously overrated and the rankings system he proposes is terrible.

I don't think he proposes any rankings system. I thought that this was his point in the article.

The point of the article was for him to make some ludicrous claim (BYU as #2) to get publicity.

I don't think that was the point of the article either. I don't think the claim is meant to be taken seriously because, from what I gathered reading the piece, it's not possible to reduce schools into some rankings system with an arbitrary points/values system. Especially when schools have different intentions and serve different types of students. He uses Penn State and Yeshiva (they're ranked closely for undergrad, I believe) to kind of demonstrate the absurdity of a one-size-fit-all rankings system.

I mean, it's something that we pretty much know already, but he just makes the point that these rankings, at a certain point, become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

It's a good read, and Malcolm Gladwell is certainly not arguing that BYU is better than Harvard, it's just an example to prove that these rankings aren't nearly as valuable as they're being treated.

It's certainly worth a read.

[dr123]

Malcolm Gladwell is ludicrously overrated and the rankings system he proposes is terrible.

This.

Here's my ranking system:
Rank based on *real* employment statistics and bar passage rates, LSAT and GPA can be thrown in there too, but stuff like library size and acceptance rate are too easily gamed.

Top 20 schools are ranked as national schools
What is now 21- ~125 would be regionally ranked
All other schools would be demolished or turned into campus food courts

+1 Nice. I would support this plan.

Schools shouild be eliminated by location, nyc and chicago don't need 3 (or however many) T2 schools, but Wyoming does need U Wyoming and North Dakota needs UND, both t3 schools. Every state should have a law school, but I see no reason why any state should have more than 2 or 3.

IMO, there is hardly a difference between t2 and t3

We are making excellent progress. Listen up ABA we are fixing the legal hiring problem.[/quote]

yea it absolutely blows my mind how there are 10 law schools in LA, an area that really only needs UCLA and USC and the state of Alaska doesn't even have one

[CanadianWolf]

"Should BYU Law be ranked No. 2 ?" It already is in the top 2 for the state of Utah.

[adt231]

I don't think that was the point of the article either. I don't think the claim is meant to be taken seriously because, from what I gathered reading the piece, it's not possible to reduce schools into some rankings system with an arbitrary points/values system. Especially when schools have different intentions and serve different types of students. He uses Penn State and Yeshiva (they're ranked closely for undergrad, I believe) to kind of demonstrate the absurdity of a one-size-fit-all rankings system.

This.

faculty publishing is the biggest load of shit.

This. Barely anyone reads their articles except other profs. It's intellectual masturbation at its finest.

This too. The absolute best way to describe it.

[kublaikahn]

The more ranking systems the better. It would diminish the power that USNWR has over the industry.

[esq]

Yes because nothing beats full-body underwear.

Hot!

[Patriot1208]

The more ranking systems the better. It would diminish the power that USNWR has over the industry.

No

USNWR has the power because their rankings closely fit with hiring patterns. If your rankings don't fit with hiring patterns no one will listen to you. That's why none of the other publications that try to rank schools, like this, get any respect while USNWR does.

[kublaikahn]

The more ranking systems the better. It would diminish the power that USNWR has over the industry.

No

USNWR has the power because their rankings closely fit with hiring patterns. If your rankings don't fit with hiring patterns no one will listen to you. That's why none of the other publications that try to rank schools, like this, get any respect while USNWR does.

So schools are good because their students get hired. And their students get hired because they are good schools. WOW. That is some brilliant shit right there. Wouldn't it be better just to rank schools in order of placement rates?

By the way, the USNWR rankings/placement rates are not very well coordinated despite that fact that USNWR rankings and other such "belief systems" perpetuate the myth of superiority. Below the T14 and particularly in a normal economy, USNWR does a weak job of measuring employability. The very reason we have a T14 and not a T25 or whatever is because that is the only range where the predictability is significant.

[Patriot1208]

The more ranking systems the better. It would diminish the power that USNWR has over the industry.

No

USNWR has the power because their rankings closely fit with hiring patterns. If your rankings don't fit with hiring patterns no one will listen to you. That's why none of the other publications that try to rank schools, like this, get any respect while USNWR does.

So schools are good because their students get hired. And their students get hired because they are good schools. WOW. That is some brilliant shit right there. Wouldn't it be better just to rank schools in order of placement rates?

By the way, the USNWR rankings/placement rates are not very well coordinated despite that fact that USNWR rankings and other such "belief systems" perpetuate the myth of superiority. Below the T14 and particularly in a normal economy, USNWR does a weak job of measuring employability. The very reason we have a T14 and not a T25 or whatever is because that is the only range where the predictability is significant.

Wait, your first post was stupid, so you mocked it with me in your second post? Also, "myth of superiority"? It's pretty clear that some schools are superior to others, no matter which rankings system you use. The reason USNWR is much better than rankings systems like this is because USNWR doesn't do stupid shit like place BYU number 2. And, outside of the top schools employment differences are often extremely marginal, which is why it may seem they do a bad job. But, the difference between 3% NLJ placement is so small that it allows for other factors to come into play. Lastly, I could get into ranking schools by placement if we could have verifiable up to date employment statistics on NLJ250, clerkships, academia, prestigious government (DOJ Honors, CIA, DHS), and prestigious PI. But, unfortunately, we don't have all that.

[Informative]

Malcolm Gladwell is ludicrously overrated and the rankings system he proposes is terrible.

This.

Here's my ranking system:
Rank based on *real* employment statistics and bar passage rates, LSAT and GPA can be thrown in there too, but stuff like library size and acceptance rate are too easily gamed.

Top 20 schools are ranked as national schools
What is now 21- ~125 would be regionally ranked
All other schools would be demolished or turned into campus food courts

1. Stanford
2. Yale
3. Harvard
4. Virginia
5. Michigan
6. Columbia
7. Chicago
8. Northwestern
9. Penn
10. Duke
11. Berkeley
12. NYU
13. Vanderbilt
14. Cornell
15. Georgetown
16. Texas
17. USC
18. UCLA
19. Boston College
20. Notre Dame

[kublaikahn]

The more ranking systems the better. It would diminish the power that USNWR has over the industry.

No

USNWR has the power because their rankings closely fit with hiring patterns. If your rankings don't fit with hiring patterns no one will listen to you. That's why none of the other publications that try to rank schools, like this, get any respect while USNWR does.

So schools are good because their students get hired. And their students get hired because they are good schools. WOW. That is some brilliant shit right there. Wouldn't it be better just to rank schools in order of placement rates?

By the way, the USNWR rankings/placement rates are not very well coordinated despite that fact that USNWR rankings and other such "belief systems" perpetuate the myth of superiority. Below the T14 and particularly in a normal economy, USNWR does a weak job of measuring employability. The very reason we have a T14 and not a T25 or whatever is because that is the only range where the predictability is significant.

Wait, your first post was stupid, so you mocked it with me in your second post? Also, "myth of superiority"? It's pretty clear that some schools are superior to others, no matter which rankings system you use. The reason USNWR is much better than rankings systems like this is because USNWR doesn't do stupid shit like place BYU number 2. And, outside of the top schools employment differences are often extremely marginal, which is why it may seem they do a bad job. But, the difference between 3% NLJ placement is so small that it allows for other factors to come into play. Lastly, I could get into ranking schools by placement if we could have verifiable up to date employment statistics on NLJ250, clerkships, academia, prestigious government (DOJ Honors, CIA, DHS), and prestigious PI. But, unfortunately, we don't have all that.

I didnt mock my own post. I was mocking yours. Learn how to read. I mocked you for suggesting that because USNWR is correlated to placement (not true) it is powerful, and bc it is powerful it is valid (gets respect I think is the terms you used). USNWR is powerful because it is a king maker and the kings it has made fight to defend it.

I am also not suggesting BYU should be ranked second, or even that that ranking is worth anything. What I am saying is that in a marketplace of ideas having a gorilla is almost never a good idea. And like you said, USNWR does use hiring info (but also like you say it is unaudited and bogus). I mean this is really the million dollar question and no one seems to want to answer it. If we had other raters who approached the issue from other angles, we would get better schools, better graduates, and greater fairness.

I do realize that the status quo favors certain people and schools (like probably you and me), bc it is a king maker. Law firms make money by doing good legal work, but also by the prestige of the shingles hanging on the wall. It has become important not to devalue those shingles.

[Gleason]

This example ranking system is, of course, not helpful. There is no reason for pretty much any student to care about faculty publications. Value, too, is not something that is very useful in the ranking. For one, if you're using Value, it should balance quality & price. But obviously it can't include quality. That's a ranking system within a single factor within the ranking system. Second, even just thinking in terms of 'price' isn't useful with scholarships, economic classes, employment goals.

Not that USNWR is much better. Sure it's more useful for a prospective student, it being a self-fulfilling prophecy in broad strokes. But that doesn't mean it does a good job of tracking the reality. "Word to world" direction of fit...

Students really care about only two things: (1) employment prospects and (2) student experience.

(1) is a lost cause until law schools report real, unimagined, stats. And (2) can be broken down into stuff like student:teacher ratio, student body (say, LSAT/GPA), opportunities to specialize and be involved in specific groups, competition--and of course a world of other way too subjective or unquantifiable things.

[Kswizzie]

I wouldn't be surprised if the USNEWS rankings started playing a greater role in hiring in the next few years... People have been making decisions about which school to go to based on the rankings for quite awhile... as these people become hiring partners wouldn't they begin to take rankings into account?

[flcath]

The constant bitching about how USNews doesn't take into account "value" and in fact rewards schools that spend a lot of money is overplayed.

Plenty of schools crank up tuition but then give the literally the exact equivalent amount back to the students as "scholarships."

Why do they do this?
(a) allows them to boost per capita expenditure category of USNews... gaming the USNews rankings
(b) gives schools leeway to offer big rewards to certain student to make sure they hit the necessary 25%/75% marks for LSAT/GPA... gaming the USNews rankings, part 2

[Gleason]

I wouldn't be surprised if the USNEWS rankings started playing a greater role in hiring in the next few years... People have been making decisions about which school to go to based on the rankings for quite awhile... as these people become hiring partners wouldn't they begin to take rankings into account?

This wouldn't be new. But it's not so much that the rankings at the time would play a greater role, so much as the rankings circa the hiring partners's law school years would play a greater role.
Just like how older hiring partners love Michigan like it's 18x Yale.

[kublaikahn]

The constant bitching about how USNews doesn't take into account "value" and in fact rewards schools that spend a lot of money is overplayed.

Plenty of schools crank up tuition but then give the literally the exact equivalent amount back to the students as "scholarships."

Why do they do this?
(a) allows them to boost per capita expenditure category of USNews... gaming the USNews rankings
(b) gives schools leeway to offer big rewards to certain student to make sure they hit the necessary 25%/75% marks for LSAT/GPA... gaming the USNews rankings, part 2

+1 Exactly right. The below median GPA/LSAT students subsidize the above median students. But that doesnt mean value is not important. It just means it must be measured net of scholarship money (real cost of attendance).

Schools suck below median kids in at full sticker who end up becoming fodder in the biglaw gambit. Basically, if you are not qualified for a top school with some sort of scholly (a reach so to speak) you are in no different boat than going to a lesser school with money--because at the higher ranked school your relative ranking will be lower. You are the same person with essentially the same training and many studies show you will end up in the same place careerwise.

A 172/3.8 regardless of going to T6 or Vandy ends up in the same place. (Exception for clerkships). And a 168/3.6 from GWU or ASU ends up in the same place. (Exception for regionality). Maybe this is an exaggeration, but basically research proves it true.

And the final caveat, if no decent schools give you a scholarship, you are not meant to be a lawyer. This is their way of telling you, we will train you, but it will be at your own peril.

[ArchRoark]

You are the same person with essentially the same training and many studies show you will end up in the same place careerwise.

I would be interested in reading some of these studies.

[alexb]

These are value based rankings. So, If you had to pay sticker at every school, maybe, but I would tie YHS w/ Chicago at #1, probably.

[whitman]

The constant bitching about how USNews doesn't take into account "value" and in fact rewards schools that spend a lot of money is overplayed.

Plenty of schools crank up tuition but then give the literally the exact equivalent amount back to the students as "scholarships."

Why do they do this?
(a) allows them to boost per capita expenditure category of USNews... gaming the USNews rankings
(b) gives schools leeway to offer big rewards to certain student to make sure they hit the necessary 25%/75% marks for LSAT/GPA... gaming the USNews rankings, part 2

+1 Exactly right. The below median GPA/LSAT students subsidize the above median students. But that doesnt mean value is not important. It just means it must be measured net of scholarship money (real cost of attendance).

Schools suck below median kids in at full sticker who end up becoming fodder in the biglaw gambit. Basically, if you are not qualified for a top school with some sort of scholly (a reach so to speak) you are in no different boat than going to a lesser school with money--because at the higher ranked school your relative ranking will be lower. You are the same person with essentially the same training and many studies show you will end up in the same place careerwise.

A 172/3.8 regardless of going to T6 or Vandy ends up in the same place. (Exception for clerkships). And a 168/3.6 from GWU or ASU ends up in the same place. (Exception for regionality). Maybe this is an exaggeration, but basically research proves it true.

And the final caveat, if no decent schools give you a scholarship, you are not meant to be a lawyer. This is their way of telling you, we will train you, but it will be at your own peril.

wut

[Mickey Quicknumbers]

The more ranking systems the better. It would diminish the power that USNWR has over the industry.

No

USNWR has the power because their rankings closely fit with hiring patterns. If your rankings don't fit with hiring patterns no one will listen to you. That's why none of the other publications that try to rank schools, like this, get any respect while USNWR does.

So schools are good because their students get hired. And their students get hired because they are good schools. WOW. That is some brilliant shit right there. Wouldn't it be better just to rank schools in order of placement rates?

By the way, the USNWR rankings/placement rates are not very well coordinated despite that fact that USNWR rankings and other such "belief systems" perpetuate the myth of superiority. Below the T14 and particularly in a normal economy, USNWR does a weak job of measuring employability. The very reason we have a T14 and not a T25 or whatever is because that is the only range where the predictability is significant.

You're not very good at this.

[Patriot1208]

The more ranking systems the better. It would diminish the power that USNWR has over the industry.

No

USNWR has the power because their rankings closely fit with hiring patterns. If your rankings don't fit with hiring patterns no one will listen to you. That's why none of the other publications that try to rank schools, like this, get any respect while USNWR does.

So schools are good because their students get hired. And their students get hired because they are good schools. WOW. That is some brilliant shit right there. Wouldn't it be better just to rank schools in order of placement rates?

By the way, the USNWR rankings/placement rates are not very well coordinated despite that fact that USNWR rankings and other such "belief systems" perpetuate the myth of superiority. Below the T14 and particularly in a normal economy, USNWR does a weak job of measuring employability. The very reason we have a T14 and not a T25 or whatever is because that is the only range where the predictability is significant.

You're not very good at this.

Ya, I just stopped responding. Easier that way.