Top Law Schools

does anyone know?

April 15th, possibly leaked a few days early like usual.
I think.

The question here is more so: what tangible difference will there be?

We can pat ourselves on the back that our school jumped up a spot or two, or despair that it feel a spot or two. But, in reality, what actual difference will it make? Are we going to change out mind about a potentially $100k-$200k decision based on a spot or two difference in ranking from a news organization that we all acknowledge has a flawed system?

Will employers suddenly change their view of students for a school that sneaked up a spot, or fell one or two?

I mean, I'm interested in this, but it seems pretty immaterial given the trends and established reputations schools actually enjoy (or work to overcome) in the real world markets around them.

Just at thought....

Great Satchmo wrote:Are we going to change out mind about a potentially $100k-$200k decision based on a spot or two difference in ranking from a news organization that we all acknowledge has a flawed system?

Yes.




edited for copy/paste fail

Great Satchmo wrote:The question here is more so: what tangible difference will there be?

We can pat ourselves on the back that our school jumped up a spot or two, or despair that it feel a spot or two. But, in reality, what actual difference will it make? Are we going to change out mind about a potentially $100k-$200k decision based on a spot or two difference in ranking from a news organization that we all acknowledge has a flawed system?

Will employers suddenly change their view of students for a school that sneaked up a spot, or fell one or two?

I mean, I'm interested in this, but it seems pretty immaterial given the trends and established reputations schools actually enjoy (or work to overcome) in the real world markets around them.

Just at thought....

I agree this is how it should be but fear the rankings may end of having a big impact on admissions cycles, scholarship offers, even employment. Every school says it doesn't matter, that the USNWR is a negative thing to law schools as a whole, etc. But they all live and die by those rankings.

.

jks289 wrote:

Great Satchmo wrote:The question here is more so: what tangible difference will there be?

We can pat ourselves on the back that our school jumped up a spot or two, or despair that it feel a spot or two. But, in reality, what actual difference will it make? Are we going to change out mind about a potentially $100k-$200k decision based on a spot or two difference in ranking from a news organization that we all acknowledge has a flawed system?

Will employers suddenly change their view of students for a school that sneaked up a spot, or fell one or two?

I mean, I'm interested in this, but it seems pretty immaterial given the trends and established reputations schools actually enjoy (or work to overcome) in the real world markets around them.

Just at thought....

I agree this is how it should be but fear the rankings may end of having a big impact on admissions cycles, scholarship offers, even employment. Every school says it doesn't matter, that the USNWR is a negative thing to law schools as a whole, etc. But they all live and die by those rankings.

Oh, don't get me wrong, I realize the rankings are important for our decisions. However, it's the year to year difference that I am speaking about.

If you are going to attend a school ranked at #22, but it moves to #24 with the update...is it really going to make a difference? What about #49 to #51 - T1 to T2, is it REALLY going to make a difference in employment or your experience? Probably not.

Same goes for an upward move. If you didn't want to attend a school ranked at #43, but it moves up to #40, will it suddenly be attractive?

Jules Winnfield wrote:I can't believe people still live and die by USNWR's rankings. Plus, after the first 14, it really doesn't matter.

I think the argument can be made that it matters more out of the T14. For the elite schools a minor shuffle in the T14 is largely irrelevant. But for the school nipping at its heels (15-20) it is hugely significant to potential applicants. Even more so for schools ranked 25-40. I think it the overall trends in rankings (is your school in the rise or declining) matter to prospective students who want to know if the value of their investment is going to appreciate over the years via increased prestige of the school. The ranking system sucks. Especially for those of us with lots of offer, but not quite good enough numbers. But I am not surprised people are still paying attention.

Great Satchmo wrote:

jks289 wrote:

Great Satchmo wrote:The question here is more so: what tangible difference will there be?

We can pat ourselves on the back that our school jumped up a spot or two, or despair that it feel a spot or two. But, in reality, what actual difference will it make? Are we going to change out mind about a potentially $100k-$200k decision based on a spot or two difference in ranking from a news organization that we all acknowledge has a flawed system?

Will employers suddenly change their view of students for a school that sneaked up a spot, or fell one or two?

I mean, I'm interested in this, but it seems pretty immaterial given the trends and established reputations schools actually enjoy (or work to overcome) in the real world markets around them.

Just at thought....

I agree this is how it should be but fear the rankings may end of having a big impact on admissions cycles, scholarship offers, even employment. Every school says it doesn't matter, that the USNWR is a negative thing to law schools as a whole, etc. But they all live and die by those rankings.

Oh, don't get me wrong, I realize the rankings are important for our decisions. However, it's the year to year difference that I am speaking about.

If you are going to attend a school ranked at #22, but it moves to #24 with the update...is it really going to make a difference? What about #49 to #51 - T1 to T2, is it REALLY going to make a difference in employment or your experience? Probably not.

Same goes for an upward move. If you didn't want to attend a school ranked at #43, but it moves up to #40, will it suddenly be attractive?

I think it is more obvious when you consider it in terms of rival schools. Perfect example is BU vs BC. Everyone knows they are comparable schools in all ways that matter. But I think BU really cares about holding onto its ranking edge, and BC is dying to unseat it. They are fighting over the same applicants at the end of the day. I hate to admit it, but I basically set a T20 line is applying and it is a reason I didn't apply to BC.

.

jks289 wrote:

Great Satchmo wrote:

jks289 wrote:

Great Satchmo wrote:The question here is more so: what tangible difference will there be?

We can pat ourselves on the back that our school jumped up a spot or two, or despair that it feel a spot or two. But, in reality, what actual difference will it make? Are we going to change out mind about a potentially $100k-$200k decision based on a spot or two difference in ranking from a news organization that we all acknowledge has a flawed system?

Will employers suddenly change their view of students for a school that sneaked up a spot, or fell one or two?

I mean, I'm interested in this, but it seems pretty immaterial given the trends and established reputations schools actually enjoy (or work to overcome) in the real world markets around them.

Just at thought....

I agree this is how it should be but fear the rankings may end of having a big impact on admissions cycles, scholarship offers, even employment. Every school says it doesn't matter, that the USNWR is a negative thing to law schools as a whole, etc. But they all live and die by those rankings.

Oh, don't get me wrong, I realize the rankings are important for our decisions. However, it's the year to year difference that I am speaking about.

If you are going to attend a school ranked at #22, but it moves to #24 with the update...is it really going to make a difference? What about #49 to #51 - T1 to T2, is it REALLY going to make a difference in employment or your experience? Probably not.

Same goes for an upward move. If you didn't want to attend a school ranked at #43, but it moves up to #40, will it suddenly be attractive?

I think it is more obvious when you consider it in terms of rival schools. Perfect example is BU vs BC. Everyone knows they are comparable schools in all ways that matter. But I think BU really cares about holding onto its ranking edge, and BC is dying to unseat it. They are fighting over the same applicants at the end of the day. I hate to admit it, but I basically set a T20 line is applying and it is a reason I didn't apply to BC.

Do you honestly believe that the minor differences between BU and BC, and any potential moving one direction or another, will influence your job prospects?

Considering the multitude of more important factors in getting into a career, the change of a rank or two has to be one of the smallest.

The schools have been established with employers and in markets for decades. They have trends in their improvement or decline, and surely that matters, but if the school is holding steady in a range for a while - do you really think an employer really will care about that 1 or 2 spots?


It seems foolish to make an arbitrary cut-off of top 20 and to apply to BU and not BC. For all you know, BC could have provided a better opportunity than BU.

jks289 wrote:

Jules Winnfield wrote:I can't believe people still live and die by USNWR's rankings. Plus, after the first 14, it really doesn't matter.

I think the argument can be made that it matters more out of the T14. For the elite schools a minor shuffle in the T14 is largely irrelevant. But for the school nipping at its heels (15-20) it is hugely significant to potential applicants. Even more so for schools ranked 25-40. I think it the overall trends in rankings (is your school in the rise or declining) matter to prospective students who want to know if the value of their investment is going to appreciate over the years via increased prestige of the school. The ranking system sucks. Especially for those of us with lots of offer, but not quite good enough numbers. But I am not surprised people are still paying attention.

Rise or decline, with a multi-year trend, is one thing. Bumping a spot or two in a shuffle is another.

Great Satchmo wrote:

jks289 wrote:
I think it is more obvious when you consider it in terms of rival schools. Perfect example is BU vs BC. Everyone knows they are comparable schools in all ways that matter. But I think BU really cares about holding onto its ranking edge, and BC is dying to unseat it. They are fighting over the same applicants at the end of the day. I hate to admit it, but I basically set a T20 line is applying and it is a reason I didn't apply to BC.

Do you honestly believe that the minor differences between BU and BC, and any potential moving one direction or another, will influence your job prospects?

Considering the multitude of more important factors in getting into a career, the change of a rank or two has to be one of the smallest.

The schools have been established with employers and in markets for decades. They have trends in their improvement or decline, and surely that matters, but if the school is holding steady in a range for a while - do you really think an employer really will care about that 1 or 2 spots?


It seems foolish to make an arbitrary cut-off of top 20 and to apply to BU and not BC. For all you know, BC could have provided a better opportunity than BU.

I am not arguing for the USNWR ranking, or the wisdom of using them. In fact, I wasn't really considering BU when I started applications. But I knew I needed better safeties with my numbers, so I applied to anyone who gave me a fee waiver in the 15-20 range that I hadn't already. It was a completely arbitrary decision and I am just admitting that in the situation I used the rankings to decide. I did apply to a few lower ranked schools (W&L, ND) based on fee waivers they offered but BC wasn't one of them. I am just pointing out one way in which the rankings affected the applicant pool. The fact that i am seriously considering BU isn't rankings driven, and if I had sent to an app to BC I may be seriously considering them as well. I don't see any difference in quality or prospects for a BU vs BC student (except in specific areas of interest). My point is just that as bad as rankings are for law schools, the difference in a few spots may actually end up mattering (I am assuming my thought process is shared by at least a few others) so I do understand why schools are so focused on it. Especially for people like me, who end up choosing between safeties they applied to on a whim (for me BU vs WUSTL) when they cycle doesn't pan out as well as they hoped (yet!). That's all.

jks289 wrote:

Great Satchmo wrote:

jks289 wrote:
I think it is more obvious when you consider it in terms of rival schools. Perfect example is BU vs BC. Everyone knows they are comparable schools in all ways that matter. But I think BU really cares about holding onto its ranking edge, and BC is dying to unseat it. They are fighting over the same applicants at the end of the day. I hate to admit it, but I basically set a T20 line is applying and it is a reason I didn't apply to BC.

Do you honestly believe that the minor differences between BU and BC, and any potential moving one direction or another, will influence your job prospects?

Considering the multitude of more important factors in getting into a career, the change of a rank or two has to be one of the smallest.

The schools have been established with employers and in markets for decades. They have trends in their improvement or decline, and surely that matters, but if the school is holding steady in a range for a while - do you really think an employer really will care about that 1 or 2 spots?


It seems foolish to make an arbitrary cut-off of top 20 and to apply to BU and not BC. For all you know, BC could have provided a better opportunity than BU.

I am not arguing for the USNWR ranking, or the wisdom of using them. In fact, I wasn't really considering BU when I started applications. But I knew I needed better safeties with my numbers, so I applied to anyone who gave me a fee waiver in the 15-20 range that I hadn't already. It was a completely arbitrary decision and I am just admitting that in the situation I used the rankings to decide. I did apply to a few lower ranked schools (W&L, ND) based on fee waivers they offered but BC wasn't one of them. I am just pointing out one way in which the rankings affected the applicant pool. The fact that i am seriously considering BU isn't rankings driven, and if I had sent to an app to BC I may be seriously considering them as well. I don't see any difference in quality or prospects for a BU vs BC student (except in specific areas of interest). My point is just that as bad as rankings are for law schools, the difference in a few spots may actually end up mattering (I am assuming my thought process is shared by at least a few others) so I do understand why schools are so focused on it. Especially for people like me, who end up choosing between safeties they applied to on a whim (for me BU vs WUSTL) when they cycle doesn't pan out as well as they hoped (yet!). That's all.

Ok, so your applications were driven by fee waivers for safties. That makes sense.

And I can see competing schools caring more, if they are equitable and in the same market. But right there, you then remove the "rankings only" consideration in favor of a more specific analysis: the market and competition within it.

I get the rankings, I get why they are important, and they certainly partially guide my decisions.

I just feel that they need to be considered in a larger context which seems to usually be lost on a lot of people. If you have ANY preference of where you want to go to school, what you want your experience to be like, where you want to live after, etc, etc, etc...the rankings aren't the sole decision maker, and a move of a spot or two, devoid of a trend, shouldn't make much of a difference.

You can't ignore them, but given any personal input/preference, going by the difference of a spot or two, may very well be ill-advised.

A friend and I were just talking about this the other day. The way I see it, minor fluctuations really aren't a big deal. In my mind, all of the T30 schools after, say, USC are on about equal footing. Sure there are minor differences, but they're pretty much all solid regional schools that place well in their respective regions. They're just a rough guideline, not the be all end all.

Why don't they release these rankings before April 1st (when the first seat deposits be due)? How do they expect prospective students to know where to attend school with year old rankings? It's just absurd.

maybe they'll come out, IU will be ranked back in the 30s like they should be, a bunch of people will turn down their acceptances because of it, and dumber people like me on the wait list will get in. That's probably extreme wishful thinking, though.

--LinkRemoved--

They have already come out... CHICAGO AT 7?!

irishman86 wrote:http://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_ ... 2#14281524

They have already come out... CHICAGO AT 7?!

Blatant pro-UCLA trolling.

jks289 wrote:

Great Satchmo wrote:The question here is more so: what tangible difference will there be?

We can pat ourselves on the back that our school jumped up a spot or two, or despair that it feel a spot or two. But, in reality, what actual difference will it make? Are we going to change out mind about a potentially $100k-$200k decision based on a spot or two difference in ranking from a news organization that we all acknowledge has a flawed system?

Will employers suddenly change their view of students for a school that sneaked up a spot, or fell one or two?

I mean, I'm interested in this, but it seems pretty immaterial given the trends and established reputations schools actually enjoy (or work to overcome) in the real world markets around them.

Just at thought....

I agree this is how it should be but fear the rankings may end of having a big impact on admissions cycles, scholarship offers, even employment. Every school says it doesn't matter, that the USNWR is a negative thing to law schools as a whole, etc. But they all live and die by those rankings.

I think administrations just understand that it's a necessary evil. For example, we all agree that our criminal justice system is highly flawed as well; the fact that we live and die by it doesn't change that. As is the case with many systems and institutions, we live and die by it because we are forced to. Changes can only come incrimentally when a system is so deeply entrenched. Education is a "for cost consumption", and that, along with economic factors such as scarcity (which implies competition) and consumers' desire to get maximum ROI, creates pressure(s) to devise a way of determining who is doing it best, even if the ultimate result is mythical rather than real. In the end, do we have anything better?

irishman86 wrote:http://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_ ... 2#14281524

They have already come out... CHICAGO AT 7?!

Chicago was #7 in 2008 (tied with Penn, actually, so 7.5). Those are almost certainly fake, but it wouldn't be surprising.

PDaddy wrote:I think administrations just understand that it's a necessary evil. For example, we all agree that our criminal justice system is highly flawed as well; the fact that we live and die by it doesn't change that. As is the case with many systems and institutions, we live and die by it because we are forced to. Changes can only come incrimentally when a system is so deeply entrenched.

This is a truly bizarre statement. There are people who regard the criminal justice system itself as an "evil"? We don't all agree with that, and I don't think I'd agree that it's "highly flawed" either, at least to the extent that you're suggesting.

We don't live and die by the criminal justice system because we're forced to, or because it's entrenched. We do it because we benefit from it. If we stopped benefiting from it we'd probably stop supporting it and replace it with something better; the problem is that nothing better exists. It's the same thing with the USNWR rankings. The schools benefit from such a rankings system, it works out favorably for many of them, and most importantly it's actually at least somewhat accurate as a predictor of a degree's value, giving it benefit to applicants as well.

People take these things too literally, and go "OMG this school moved from #6 to #7 now I shouldn't go there!!!1!11ONE" but that's the fault of the people reading the data, not the people providing it. Anyone who changes their mind about a school because it moves a spot, or even several spots, in a single year is making a mistake. Overall, though, the consistent data that rankings provide allows for people to make a more informed decision about what they're doing, and the competition between schools to improve their rankings also benefits students. At least, it benefits those with higher LSAT scores and/or higher GPAs, helping make things more of a meritocracy than it used to be. Those who are most qualified to go to law school get to go to the best law schools as a result, which is honestly how it should be.

irishman86 wrote:http://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_ ... 2#14281524

They have already come out... CHICAGO AT 7?!

Same thing (or similar version) was posted on there around this time last year. HTH.

Jules Winnfield wrote:I can't believe people still live and die by USNWR's rankings. Plus, after the first 14, it really doesn't matter.

Does no one else see the incredible irony in this statement? I agree with you Jules but this just made me scratch my head.

I wish Yale, Harvard, and Stanford would just man up and refuse to participate one year. Once they set the precedent, the rest of the T14 would want to be like the cool kids and voila, USNWR hegemony done.

--ImageRemoved--