HYSCCN Forum

[studylaw7]

showNprove, I believe you may have confused 75th percentiles and medians for some of those schools.

I may have, but with the exception of NYU, I got all of this information from the schools' websites a few months ago. Someone can double check them if they wish--I don't stand by their absolute accuracy as I do the Assessment data--but I tried to be careful in gathering the information.

you could have just went to this link http://www.leiterrankings.com/new/2009s ... lity.shtml

Stanford is the only outlier in this data, because it favors gpa a bit more than lsat.

I am not confirming the exact ordering of the schools, just the groupings. From this ranking you can see MVPB are closer in quality to DNCG, with Cornell the clear loser in terms of student quality.

[studylaw7]

LOL at studylaw instructing mallard to GET IT RIGHT.

same goes for you, who is lying about going to CCN.

There are dozens, maybe hundreds of TLS members who can attest to dresden's CCN attendance.

why, because dresden said so? well then, I go to Yale!

[dresden doll]

LOL at studylaw instructing mallard to GET IT RIGHT.

same goes for you, who is lying about going to CCN.

There are dozens, maybe hundreds of TLS members who can attest to dresden's CCN attendance.

Please, let the poor fool stew in his own stupidity. He won't be verifying it for himself, certainly. As I said before, gaining acceptance to CCN requires a functional brain. He's clearly deficient in that department.

[mallard]

"Asshole" was not a retort--surely not anymore than you trying to negate my statistics by calling me a troll (which is exactly why I called you an asshole).

Tiers are arbitrary when they have no basis in fact. I simply laid out the plain observation of the groupings in the graph. It wasn't my decision, as is apparently your implication.

Simply because an online community found an easy way to group schools based on the fallible USNWR rankings doesn't mean that's reality. These surveys are more accurate of the opinions of people beyond 0L's and a small collection of students on the internet. If you don't like that it's different, complain to the judges who turn in the surveys.

The fact of the matter is that this is the truest thing that has been said in this thread. This online community has found it's own way of grouping and matching the schools that relies mainly on the overall numerical US News rankings. The fact is that it doesn't make it right. The surveys are obviously far more accurate, but many on here prefer looking at the schools in a certain way.

This is not really true. The prestige-obsessed, rankings-obsessed, neurotic online law school community has actually produced many rankings of its own apart from the US News rankings, and though there's some divergence, they tend to echo the US News tiers. I undertook an elite placement ranking project myself last spring (widely criticized by other TLSers, but pretty decent, I thought).

[studylaw7]

Student quality is a poor way to measure school prestige. If you're a student trying to decide where to go, your own quality is static. You want to know which school will maximize your chances at getting the job you want; this is not really determined by your peers' LSAT scores.

our perception of schools is largely dictated by student quality. We don't think HYP are prestigious colleges just because of their names, it's because when we meet the people who went there, we automatically think they must be very smart. the quality of their students is the main factor we use to determine how good the school is, and therefore how prestigious it is.

talking about maximizing your chances of getting a job is PLACEMENT not PRESTIGE. get it right.

This is a forum for law students and aspiring law students. If you want to talk about law school prestige the way you seem to want to, you should find a forum for cocktail parties or pickup techniques.

nice comeback...

[showNprove]

showNprove, can you explain exactly why assessment scores would be an improvement on placement statistics?

Prestige is opinion, and the assessment scores measure the opinion of people established in the legal community as academics, judges, and lawyers. While the placement statistics are surely representative of prestige to a degree, numerous other factors come into play in a student's choice of school, such as geography, scholarships, placement, and school admission strategy. Then, for example, small schools get a boost twofold: being able to be more selective and by having apparently better placement ability.

The main point is that placement statistics are determined by a conglomeration of factors and, in the end, would still only claim to measure the prestige opinions of applicants who have inferior familiarity with the schools than the professionals who have already been around the block, so to speak.

[Veyron]

"Asshole" was not a retort--surely not anymore than you trying to negate my statistics by calling me a troll (which is exactly why I called you an asshole).

Tiers are arbitrary when they have no basis in fact. I simply laid out the plain observation of the groupings in the graph. It wasn't my decision, as is apparently your implication.

Simply because an online community found an easy way to group schools based on the fallible USNWR rankings doesn't mean that's reality. These surveys are more accurate of the opinions of people beyond 0L's and a small collection of students on the internet. If you don't like that it's different, complain to the judges who turn in the surveys.

The fact of the matter is that this is the truest thing that has been said in this thread. This online community has found it's own way of grouping and matching the schools that relies mainly on the overall numerical US News rankings. The fact is that it doesn't make it right. The surveys are obviously far more accurate, but many on here prefer looking at the schools in a certain way.

This is not really true. The prestige-obsessed, rankings-obsessed, neurotic online law school community has actually produced many rankings of its own apart from the US News rankings, and though there's some divergence, they tend to echo the US News tiers. I undertook an elite placement ranking project myself last spring (widely criticized by other TLSers, but pretty decent, I thought).

Link?

[showNprove]

showNprove, I believe you may have confused 75th percentiles and medians for some of those schools.

I may have, but with the exception of NYU, I got all of this information from the schools' websites a few months ago. Someone can double check them if they wish--I don't stand by their absolute accuracy as I do the Assessment data--but I tried to be careful in gathering the information.

you could have just went to this link http://www.leiterrankings.com/new/2009s ... lity.shtml

Stanford is the only outlier in this data, because it favors gpa a bit more than lsat.

I am not confirming the exact ordering of the schools, just the groupings. From this ranking you can see MVPB are closer in quality to DNCG, with Cornell the clear loser in terms of student quality.

Those are averages of the 75th/25th percentiles, not actual medians. I've collected the medians of schools: the statistics reported to the ABA and used by USNWR in the rankings (which are therefore the stats the schools themselves most care about).

[mallard]

No, because they have literally met her in the flesh, taken classes with her, gotten drunk with her, etc.

The fatal flaw in your argument above, by the way, wasn't that it merely used the wrong metric. It was circular. You say "We say HYP are good because we automatically assume people are smart coming from HYP." But then you make the second assumption, unsupported, that this admittedly automatic assumption emerges from actual high student quality and not, for instance, word of mouth, movies, visibility of high-achieving alumni, or yes, placement in elite positions.

showNprove, I'm not really sure what you're saying. Placement statistics are also measures of people established in the legal community (i.e., those who do the hiring). Since those are the people who actually affect students' futures, why would you prefer the opinion scores?

[dresden doll]

LOL at studylaw instructing mallard to GET IT RIGHT.

same goes for you, who is lying about going to CCN.

There are dozens, maybe hundreds of TLS members who can attest to dresden's CCN attendance.

why, because dresden said so? well then, I go to Yale!

No, numbnut, it's because many of them actually know me IRL. An even greater number of them is friends with me on FB, where they can see I'm a part of U of C's network (hint: joining U of C's network isn't possible for those that aren't in fact students at U of C. Go try and join it, and you'll see it for yourself).

I'd recommend that you quit this debate, but I rather enjoy observing you dig your own grave, so I won't.

[studylaw7]

LOL at studylaw instructing mallard to GET IT RIGHT.

same goes for you, who is lying about going to CCN.

There are dozens, maybe hundreds of TLS members who can attest to dresden's CCN attendance.

Please, let the poor fool stew in his own stupidity. He won't be verifying it for himself, certainly. As I said before, gaining acceptance to CCN requires a functional brain. He's clearly deficient in that department.

tell me, genius, how might I verify it without knowing you personally?

Your response to my post, saying that "I'll be damned" if CCN is better than MVPB does not suggest to me that you go to CCN. I have a hard time seeing how you would use such language to defend MVPB. and don't tell me your spouse goes there, either.

PWNED.

[doyleoil]

I undertook an elite placement ranking project myself last spring (widely criticized by other TLSers, but pretty decent, I thought).

it was your understandable prejudice toward water-dwellers that ultimately did you in

[studylaw7]

LOL at studylaw instructing mallard to GET IT RIGHT.

There are dozens, maybe hundreds of TLS members who can attest to dresden's CCN attendance.

why, because dresden said so? well then, I go to Yale!

No, numbnut, it's because many of them actually know me IRL. An even greater number of them is friends with me on FB, where they can see I'm a part of U of C's network (hint: joining U of C's network isn't possible for those that aren't in fact students at U of C. Go try and join it, and you'll see it for yourself).

I'd recommend that you quit this debate, but I rather enjoy observing you dig your own grave, so I won't.

I wonder, do any of these people who supposedly know you think that you're a b*tch?

[showNprove]

showNprove, I'm not really sure what you're saying. Placement statistics are also measures of people established in the legal community (i.e., those who do the hiring). Since those are the people who actually affect students' futures, why would you prefer the opinion scores?

Excuse me, I was confused. I thought by "statistics," people were referring to incoming class statistics in response to the data I had posted on them.

Placement statistics are certainly to be considered closely, but they again have other factors to consider. The size of the class has a tremendous impact on placement, as does the self-selection of the graduates themselves. I'm not saying placement is not a good indicator--in fact, it's a very good indicator--but IMO, placement is a derivative of popular opinion (prestige) of the professionals that is confounded with other variables. Why not get straight to the point and look directly at the opinions themselves?

[studylaw7]

No, because they have literally met her in the flesh, taken classes with her, gotten drunk with her, etc.

The fatal flaw in your argument above, by the way, wasn't that it merely used the wrong metric. It was circular. You say "We say HYP are good because we automatically assume people are smart coming from HYP." But then you make the second assumption, unsupported, that this admittedly automatic assumption emerges from actual high student quality and not, for instance, word of mouth, movies, visibility of high-achieving alumni, or yes, placement in elite positions.

showNprove, I'm not really sure what you're saying. Placement statistics are also measures of people established in the legal community (i.e., those who do the hiring). Since those are the people who actually affect students' futures, why would you prefer the opinion scores?

I suggest you stop trying to use your low LSAT IQ.

And you can deny all you want that a school's prestige is dictated by student quality, but it's true.

[mallard]

showNprove, I'm not really sure what you're saying. Placement statistics are also measures of people established in the legal community (i.e., those who do the hiring). Since those are the people who actually affect students' futures, why would you prefer the opinion scores?

Excuse me, I was confused. I thought by "statistics," people were referring to incoming class statistics in response to the data I had posted on them.

Placement statistics are certainly to be considered closely, but they again have other factors to consider. The size of the class has a tremendous impact on placement, as does the self-selection of the graduates themselves. I'm not saying placement is not a good indicator--in fact, it's a very good indicator--by IMO, placement is a derivative of popular (prestige) opinion of the professionals that is confounded with other variables. Why not get straight to the point and look directly at the opinions themselves?

I'm just not sure why prestige is "straight to the point" and placement isn't...

and lol at studylaw, attacking people on all the wrong points. Man, you've been here for less than a week, you don't need to try to do this. Just stick around and read posts, get informed, be friendly.

[dresden doll]

Please, let the poor fool stew in his own stupidity. He won't be verifying it for himself, certainly. As I said before, gaining acceptance to CCN requires a functional brain. He's clearly deficient in that department.

tell me, genius, how might I verify it without knowing you personally?

Your response to my post, saying that "I'll be damned" if CCN is better than MVPB does not suggest to me that you go to CCN. I have a hard time seeing how you would use such language to defend MVPB. and don't tell me your spouse goes there, either.

PWNED.

Perhaps you could enlighten me, genius, as to what point there is in making a statement that you freely admit you have no way of verifying.

And, FYI - not everyone around here trolls hardcore for their school. Some of us maintain a modicum of objectivity. Htfh.

Also, my SO is an engineer.

As for your sad attempt at claiming 'victory,' it only serves to bolster my prediction that you won't be going near CCN personally. So, yeah, you truly do not have any way of verifying that I attend Chicago because Chicago won't be admitting idiots (and neither will MPBV, for that matter).

[Nom Sawyer]

This thread has gotten EVEN better since I tagged it.

Multiple arguments criss-crossing back and forth! Random newcomers to add gasoline to the fires! Dresden doll's ongoing deception of persona and acceptances across 10,000+ posts!

And you do have to admit Kurama... this is pretty much a T.O. touchdown + showboat for Renzo:

There are A LOT of firms that pay market rate that are not on the nlj250. Pretty much any firm in the southern markets (Dallas, Austin, Houston, Atlanta, Charlotte, Miami, and the other Florida markets). Firms in the Pacific Northwest, litigation focused elite Cali firms like Munger, Irell, Altschuler, and Keker. Firms like Barlitt Beck in Chicago,Texas firms like Susman Godfrey, Beck Redden, and Gibbs & Bruns. Market paying firms in areas like Arizona would often not be on the nlj250 as well. Don't forget DC firms like Robbins Russell, Kellog Huber, Zuckerman etc.

Munger is #246, Irell is #190.

Altschuler has less than 30 attorneys (sort of missing the "big" in biglaw), and Keker has about 40, so neither will likely really be an employment option for anyone on this board. I acknowledged that there are some IP and lit boutiques that pay associates very well, and Susman and Kellog Huber are good examples. But good luck getting these jobs.

Strasburger & Price, Thompson & Knight, and Haynes & Boone are some of the Dallas-based firms in the NLJ 250, then there are a bunch of branch offices of true "biglaw" firms. By my rough count, 65 out of 250 of the NLJ 250 firms are Southern/Texan firms, so saying "pretty much any firm" from the south isn't on the list is a lie.

Fuel for the flames!!

[maudlinstreet]

man you guys are getting trolled hardcore by studylaw!

[dresden doll]

I wonder, do any of these people who supposedly know you think that you're a b*tch?

Ask them for yourself. If they do, I assure you that my heart won't be broken as a result.

[studylaw7]

Please, let the poor fool stew in his own stupidity. He won't be verifying it for himself, certainly. As I said before, gaining acceptance to CCN requires a functional brain. He's clearly deficient in that department.

tell me, genius, how might I verify it without knowing you personally?

Your response to my post, saying that "I'll be damned" if CCN is better than MVPB does not suggest to me that you go to CCN. I have a hard time seeing how you would use such language to defend MVPB. and don't tell me your spouse goes there, either.

PWNED.

Perhaps you could enlighten me, genius, as to what point there is in making a statement that you freely admit you have no way of verifying.

And, FYI - not everyone around here trolls hardcore for their school. Some of us maintain a modicum of objectivity. Htfh.

Also, my SO is an engineer.

As for your sad attempt at claiming 'victory,' it only serves to bolster my prediction that you won't be going near CCN personally. So, yeah, you truly do not have any way of verifying that I attend Chicago because Chicago won't be admitting idiots (and neither will MPBV, for that matter).

I think you're the fool. You don't know anything about my background, though if you looked at my posts, you would see that I'm going to a T14 school in the fall, though it is below your supposed top 6 school. Unless you got an LSAT score that is a 178, 179, or 180, I own you on the LSAT.

[mallard]

man you guys are getting trolled hardcore by studylaw!

I don't think so.

As for the resuscitated Renzo/kurama argument, I think kurama actually has a good point regarding boutiques. Renzo keeps saying "good luck trying to get those jobs" at Susman, Bartlit Beck, etc., but the fact is that tiered school prestige (which is the point of this thread, right?) has actually a significant role in one's ability to get those elite jobs. So it's actually not off-topic if we're talking about placement stats. Nor is it statistically unimportant given the small size of Yale, Stanford, and Chicago: I'm pretty sure a significant number of people at YS who go to private firms end up at tiny, top-level boutiques.

[studylaw7]

I wonder, do any of these people who supposedly know you think that you're a b*tch?

I assure you that my heart won't be broken as a result.

Well, that's just because you're a b*tch who doesn't care about them! LMAO!

I still think you have some kind of ulterior motive in defending MVPB so strongly when you supposedly go to Chicago.

[GeePee]

This thread was pretty entertaining. Keep it up.

Particularly, I'd like studylaw7 and Veyron to keep posting.

[dresden doll]

Please, let the poor fool stew in his own stupidity. He won't be verifying it for himself, certainly. As I said before, gaining acceptance to CCN requires a functional brain. He's clearly deficient in that department.

tell me, genius, how might I verify it without knowing you personally?

Your response to my post, saying that "I'll be damned" if CCN is better than MVPB does not suggest to me that you go to CCN. I have a hard time seeing how you would use such language to defend MVPB. and don't tell me your spouse goes there, either.

PWNED.

Perhaps you could enlighten me, genius, as to what point there is in making a statement that you freely admit you have no way of verifying.

And, FYI - not everyone around here trolls hardcore for their school. Some of us maintain a modicum of objectivity. Htfh.

Also, my SO is an engineer.

As for your sad attempt at claiming 'victory,' it only serves to bolster my prediction that you won't be going near CCN personally. So, yeah, you truly do not have any way of verifying that I attend Chicago because Chicago won't be admitting idiots (and neither will MPBV, for that matter).

I think you're the fool. You don't know anything about my background, though if you looked at my posts, you would see that I'm going to a T14 school in the fall, though it is below your supposed top 6 school. Unless you got an LSAT score that is a 178, 179, or 180, I own you on the LSAT.

And why should I believe that? Just because you say so? See, it goes both ways.