lawschool22 wrote:Nelson wrote:Going to NYU on an RTK is one thing, going to NYU as Joe Average law student paying sticker is another. The issue is that we don't have good ways to disaggregate the outcomes of those two situations or know the proportions of those populations at NYU compared to other peer schools. Absent data, there's no point in arguing about it, just take the data we do have for what it is and move on.
I'm not trying to argue the relative quality of the PI outcomes at NYU vs. CCP, etc. My only point is that I think it's fair to assume you have a small, but statistically significant increased number of people at NYU who do not seek biglaw. Sure, they may end up in shitty PI. But the point is that if you have fewer people gunning for biglaw in the first place, your ultimate biglaw placement percentages are likely to be somewhat lower than peer schools.
I'm not saying NYU is a magical PI school that gets everyone top-quality PI outcomes. I'm just saying that it's reasonable to assume you have fewer people gunning for biglaw in the first place.
On the flip side, I think Columbia benefits from the reverse effect. That is, a higher number of people gunning for biglaw than it's peers --> slightly higher biglaw placement.
I'm not going to come flat out and say you are wrong about NYU (although there's no "reverse effect" at CLS...), but I think it might be interesting for you to revisit these "assumptions"/claims as an actual law student. Having never attended law school, where do you draw this type of information from? "The data" doesn't tell you any of this. Is it just regurgitation of adcom stereotypes matched with #s published by the american bar? I'm asking sincerely, not trying to patronize or insult you. You make a lot of valuable admissions contributions on this site, so don't take this the wrong way, but some 0L generated information is dangerous when applied and read carelessly.
Also when you say "peers" you are really referring to the TLS/USNWR-invented groupings, yes? It may surprise you that hiring partners and public interest employers often don't share these machinations. There are schools where some V50s will traditionally hire from most - in new york, that "peer" group tends to be Columbia, Harvard, and NYU. In Chicago, it might be UChi, NU, and Harvard, or in SF, Stanford, Yale, and Cal, ect. You throw around "peer" rather loosely. I think blessedassurance's points wrt student bodies at NYU, Harvard, Berkeley ect are not strawmen here.
