Should BYU Law be ranked No. 2? Forum

[kublaikahn]

.

[Mickey Quicknumbers]

I think the facts support my position. Others want to nit pick my agrument. You should decide for yourself. You should notice that the only evidence those who disagree have presented is ad hominem attacks and their own life experience. Yeah, I am stupid. I don't understand logic. Blah blah blah

The facts don't support your position at all... Prestige is of extraordinary importance in the legal profession, anyone with any experience at a large firm can tell you that. More prestigious schools place more individuals into prestigious jobs; an argument that claims the placement of a tier 1 and a T10 are comparable is completely untenable. I am just going to assume you're a flame.

I am just going to assume you can't read. You keep comparing schools. School don't get placed in firms, students do. Of course higher ranked schools get more placements THEY HAVE BETTER STUDENTS. But any given individual is the same caliber student regardless of which school they attend (within reason). I am sorry you can't grasp my point.

One more quote about what some mystical people with legal experience (that you don't know, can't cite, and have never spoken to) is all we need. Yeah, it is my argument that lacks factual bases. WTF?

You're point is so retarded though, it keeps slipping through our fingers.

What I think you're trying to suggest is that given any student whether they go to a higher school or a lower school will have the same job opportunities because he will naturally rise in class rank the lower the school he goes to so his prospects will remain equal. Not only has this not been supported by any of the data you've presented so far in this thread, but that kind of data couldn't possible exist, unless we somehow find a way to tap into a multi-verse system and run the same kid through a dozen different law schools.
Simply put, the LSAT and GPA have a relatively low correlation to success in law school, but they do have a little bit of predictive value.
the c/o 2009 Vanderbilt students put 47% in NLJ, and Emory 23.5%. Are you really going to tell me that a 3 lsat point difference between them is a proper reflection of twice as many kids getting good jobs out the school?

[98234872348]

I am just going to assume you can't read. You keep comparing schools. School don't get placed in firms, students do. Of course higher ranked schools get more placements THEY HAVE BETTER STUDENTS. But any given individual is the same caliber student regardless of which school they attend (within reason). I am sorry you can't grasp my point.

My initial argument was that it is impossible and masturbatory to speculate about how one candidate would do if placed in one school or another. It is pointless and absurd to assume that if student A goes to X top 10 school he'll end up placing in the top 25%, but if he goes to Y top 50 school that he'll definitely be a lock on the top 5%. There is no, I repeat, no verifiable data which can prove this. If you look at any of the critiques of the article you initially posted you'll realize that the authors made these exact assumptions (i.e. students will do significantly better at one school than another). The fact is, you can't just say "because A has better stats, he'll automatically do better." There aren't studies on this because they are impossible to conduct. Even if they were, there is no way in hell that any of the data collected would be definite or verifiable because there are simply too many variables.

[fatduck]

Interestingly, kublaikhan's insane ramblings would make sense if we implemented my idea of one giant law school.

[kublaikahn]

.

[fakemoney]

Wow... I thought this was going to be a BYU vs Utah thread

[98234872348]

Nop you r are getting somewhere. But let me refute.

First there is massive evidence that LSAT/GPA predict ones placement in law school. The correlation is higher for LSAT than any other known predictor. That is the whole point in defense of the LSAT test itself. You must know this.

And if this were not true, think about what you would be suggesting. A student would achieve a higher rank at a more elite school? Doesn't that in itself negate the concept of eliteness?

The published studies on point find a slight correlation between success on the LSAT and in law school - there is not "massive evidence" on the point. In addition, a student with admission to Vanderbilt could likely get into W&M with close to a full ride - you're going to suggest that a school with a median of 3 less points on the LSAT is going to translate into a substantially better probability of success at that school? Laughable. I would argue that almost anyone who scored a 164 on the LSAT is capable of scoring a 167.

[kublaikahn]

.

[Mickey Quicknumbers]

Nop you r are getting somewhere. But let me refute.

First there is massive evidence that LSAT/GPA predict ones placement in law school. The correlation is higher for LSAT than any other known predictor. That is the whole point in defense of the LSAT test itself. You must know this.

And if this were not true, think about what you would be suggesting. A student would achieve a higher rank at a more elite school? Doesn't that in itself negate the concept of eliteness?

The published studies on point find a slight correlation between success on the LSAT and in law school - there is not "massive evidence" on the point. In addition, a student with admission to Vanderbilt could likely get into W&M with close to a full ride - you're going to suggest that a school with a median of 3 less points on the LSAT is going to translate into a substantially better probability of success at that school? Laughable. I would argue that almost anyone who scored a 164 on the LSAT is capable of scoring a 167.

When you add the word Laughable, does that make your argument stronger?

So you are saying there is no measurable difference in the quality of student at WM and Vandy?

There is massive evidence that there is a slight correlation. If by slight you mean one variable with a correlation of .42. Taken with grades, students in the 75th percentile will achieve LGPA above the median about 75% of the time. It also means that students near the mean in LSAT/UGPA will be scattered about the mean for LGPA 75% of the time, and will only land in the top quartile about 20-25% of the time. Yeah, its a good predictor. It is even better when you expand to the full range of students (e.g. lower LSAT scores).

r of .42 = r^2 of .1764, hth.

[Patriot1208]

When you add the word Laughable, does that make your argument stronger?

So you are saying there is no measurable difference in the quality of student at WM and Vandy?

There is massive evidence that there is a slight correlation. If by slight you mean one variable with a correlation of .42. Taken with grades, students in the 75th percentile will achieve LGPA above the median about 75% of the time. It also means that students near the mean in LSAT/UGPA will be scattered about the mean for LGPA 75% of the time, and will only land in the top quartile about 20-25% of the time. Yeah, its a good predictor. It is even better when you expand to the full range of students (e.g. lower LSAT scores).

Have you ever taken a statistics class? an r^2 of .18 is not good, nor is it very predictive. In laymens terms, that means it's only predictice of success 18% of the time. And, no, mathematically that does not mean that they will be above the 75th percentile 75% of the time? That refutes your argument that the person will end up in the some place from the same school. I'm not sure how you can argue against yourself for an entire post and not realize it. Seriously? You may want to retake a math and statistics class before you post things like this.

EDIT: Mickey beat me to it.

[kublaikahn]

.

[stratocophic]

When you add the word Laughable, does that make your argument stronger?

So you are saying there is no measurable difference in the quality of student at WM and Vandy?

There is massive evidence that there is a slight correlation. If by slight you mean one variable with a correlation of .42. Taken with grades, students in the 75th percentile will achieve LGPA above the median about 75% of the time. It also means that students near the mean in LSAT/UGPA will be scattered about the mean for LGPA 75% of the time, and will only land in the top quartile about 20-25% of the time. Yeah, its a good predictor. It is even better when you expand to the full range of students (e.g. lower LSAT scores).

Have you ever taken a statistics class? an r^2 of .18 is not good, nor is it very predictive. In laymens terms, that means it's only predictice of success 18% of the time. And, no, mathematically that does not mean that they will be above the 75th percentile 75% of the time? That refutes your argument that the person will end up in the some place from the same school. I'm not sure how you can argue against yourself for an entire post and not realize it. Seriously? You may want to retake a math and statistics class before you post things like this.

EDIT: Mickey beat me to it.

With grades added in it does mean they will be above the 50th percentile 75% of the time. I didnt say above the 75th percentile rank I said median.

Rsquared of .18 is a .18 predictor by itself. The good news is most the other variables are held almost constant (same student). And so an r^2=.18, combine with UGPA, allows us to scatter fairly effectively. So a 75/75 will scatter about about 75/25 above/below median.

I was a double major, math/econ.

Bad news champ: at 90% of law schools, "above median" won't do jack for 50+% of the law students who fit that description.

[Patriot1208]

Where are you getting the data that gives the predictive value of gpa+ugpa on performance because I haven't seen it. A link would be appreciated.

[kublaikahn]

.

[OGR3]

I will hate law school.

FTFY

[aPosseAdEsse]

Echoing comments above.

GPA should count for something.


Publishing is B.S.

[Mickey Quicknumbers]

Where are you getting the data that gives the predictive value of gpa+ugpa on performance because I haven't seen it. A link would be appreciated.

I got it off a youtube video that someone posted of some dean from UVa. It seemed reliable. You win. I submit.

But if LGPA really is so arbitrary, maybe I will hate law school.

It's only arbitrary because kids can be above their schools 75% and just be lazy as hell (me), and botch the whole correlation.

Take that, statistics!

[Ragnar]

So, in true TLS fashion, this topic has been co-opted by a few nerds who are seriously arguing about accuracy in statistics. I seriously hope all of you guys end up as law school faculty somewhere and exchange endless emails about each others' publishing. Talk about masturbatory.

Back to the real purpose of this thread (and to masturbate a little, myself), I think, having not read the article, that Gladwell was demonstrating that rankings can be based on anything, and the most valuable ranking to any individual is the one that heavily weights the criteria they care about most.

USNWR are good for some people, and since there could be as many different ranking systems as there are 0Ls, it is a good place to start to figure out how some other people feel about it. For those of us who haven't even looked at the T14 because it wasn't ever realistically an option, USNWR is good for little more than feeling good about ourselves and giving us latitude to make snide comments to our friends at lower ranked schools. For instance, in FL, we psychologically eliminate all non-FL schools from USNWR and then look at what's left and say to ourselves, "I am so glad that UF is number 1." I'm sure in other regions it is similar, but someone who went to YHS probably isn't competing with us for jobs at FL firms, and the stray Vandy grad doesn't seem like much of a threat because the managing partner is a UF alum.

And I reckon that's how it will stay as long as USNWR has UGA and Alabama ahead of UF. Then, if we ever become the highest ranked public in the SEC, we might add that to our resume. The point is, once you're at the school that will define your career, you can make it number 1 in the rankings as long as your can define the criteria. That's why rankings mostly matter to 0Ls.

So with that said, I feel superior to all the rest of you who aren't at the #1 ranked University of Florida Levin College of Law. SUCKAS!

[98234872348]

Nop you r are getting somewhere. But let me refute.

First there is massive evidence that LSAT/GPA predict ones placement in law school. The correlation is higher for LSAT than any other known predictor. That is the whole point in defense of the LSAT test itself. You must know this.

And if this were not true, think about what you would be suggesting. A student would achieve a higher rank at a more elite school? Doesn't that in itself negate the concept of eliteness?

The published studies on point find a slight correlation between success on the LSAT and in law school - there is not "massive evidence" on the point. In addition, a student with admission to Vanderbilt could likely get into W&M with close to a full ride - you're going to suggest that a school with a median of 3 less points on the LSAT is going to translate into a substantially better probability of success at that school? Laughable. I would argue that almost anyone who scored a 164 on the LSAT is capable of scoring a 167.

When you add the word Laughable, does that make your argument stronger?

So you are saying there is no measurable difference in the quality of student at WM and Vandy?

There is massive evidence that there is a slight correlation. If by slight you mean one variable with a correlation of .42. Taken with grades, students in the 75th percentile will achieve LGPA above the median about 75% of the time. It also means that students near the mean in LSAT/UGPA will be scattered about the mean for LGPA 75% of the time, and will only land in the top quartile about 20-25% of the time. Yeah, its a good predictor. It is even better when you expand to the full range of students (e.g. lower LSAT scores).

First of all, where are you getting these numbers from? Plugging in hypothetical numbers to make a point is a futile effort. Even if I concede that there is a slight correlation between LSAT/UGPA and law school success (which I have not denied, since I don't claim to have done any research - I have only asked for hard evidence supporting this assertion), is it really justifiable to go to a school where you'll have a better chance of landing in the top quarter when people at that school in the top quarter aren't getting jobs? I don't know about you, but I'd take my chances going to UVA and landing close to median than going to GW and praying that I land in the top 15%.

[kublaikahn]

So, in true TLS fashion, this topic has been co-opted by a few nerds who are seriously arguing about accuracy in statistics. I seriously hope all of you guys end up as law school faculty somewhere and exchange endless emails about each others' publishing. Talk about masturbatory.

Back to the real purpose of this thread (and to masturbate a little, myself), I think, having not read the article, that Gladwell was demonstrating that rankings can be based on anything, and the most valuable ranking to any individual is the one that heavily weights the criteria they care about most.

USNWR are good for some people, and since there could be as many different ranking systems as there are 0Ls, it is a good place to start to figure out how some other people feel about it. For those of us who haven't even looked at the T14 because it wasn't ever realistically an option, USNWR is good for little more than feeling good about ourselves and giving us latitude to make snide comments to our friends at lower ranked schools. For instance, in FL, we psychologically eliminate all non-FL schools from USNWR and then look at what's left and say to ourselves, "I am so glad that UF is number 1." I'm sure in other regions it is similar, but someone who went to YHS probably isn't competing with us for jobs at FL firms, and the stray Vandy grad doesn't seem like much of a threat because the managing partner is a UF alum.

And I reckon that's how it will stay as long as USNWR has UGA and Alabama ahead of UF. Then, if we ever become the highest ranked public in the SEC, we might add that to our resume. The point is, once you're at the school that will define your career, you can make it number 1 in the rankings as long as your can define the criteria. That's why rankings mostly matter to 0Ls.

So with that said, I feel superior to all the rest of you who aren't at the #1 ranked University of Florida Levin College of Law. SUCKAS!

[romothesavior]

There is massive evidence that there is a slight correlation.

And just like that, without even realizing it, you've conceded your argument.

[Mickey Quicknumbers]

USNWR are good for some people, and since there could be as many different ranking systems as there are 0Ls, it is a good place to start to figure out how some other people feel about it. For those of us who haven't even looked at the T14 because it wasn't ever realistically an option, USNWR is good for little more than feeling good about ourselves and giving us latitude to make snide comments to our friends at lower ranked schools. For instance, in FL, we psychologically eliminate all non-FL schools from USNWR and then look at what's left and say to ourselves, "I am so glad that UF is number 1." I'm sure in other regions it is similar, but someone who went to YHS probably isn't competing with us for jobs at FL firms, and the stray Vandy grad doesn't seem like much of a threat because the managing partner is a UF alum.

Enjoy your bliss while it lasts.

[Ragnar]

USNWR are good for some people, and since there could be as many different ranking systems as there are 0Ls, it is a good place to start to figure out how some other people feel about it. For those of us who haven't even looked at the T14 because it wasn't ever realistically an option, USNWR is good for little more than feeling good about ourselves and giving us latitude to make snide comments to our friends at lower ranked schools. For instance, in FL, we psychologically eliminate all non-FL schools from USNWR and then look at what's left and say to ourselves, "I am so glad that UF is number 1." I'm sure in other regions it is similar, but someone who went to YHS probably isn't competing with us for jobs at FL firms, and the stray Vandy grad doesn't seem like much of a threat because the managing partner is a UF alum.

Enjoy your bliss while it lasts.

Crossing my fingers that it lasts long enough.

[ballpop]

Malcolm Gladwell is a pseudo scientific blowhard and frankly, a moron in almost all things

[Mickey Quicknumbers]

USNWR are good for some people, and since there could be as many different ranking systems as there are 0Ls, it is a good place to start to figure out how some other people feel about it. For those of us who haven't even looked at the T14 because it wasn't ever realistically an option, USNWR is good for little more than feeling good about ourselves and giving us latitude to make snide comments to our friends at lower ranked schools. For instance, in FL, we psychologically eliminate all non-FL schools from USNWR and then look at what's left and say to ourselves, "I am so glad that UF is number 1." I'm sure in other regions it is similar, but someone who went to YHS probably isn't competing with us for jobs at FL firms, and the stray Vandy grad doesn't seem like much of a threat because the managing partner is a UF alum.

Enjoy your bliss while it lasts.

Crossing my fingers that it lasts long enough.

It never does, sorry to hear. I'll be drowning out my own misery with Jack if you care to join.