Top Law Schools

I believe educated guesses about 2012 rankings can be made based on the recent letter from USNWR. Note the following language: "Specifically, employment after graduation is relevant data that prospective students and other consumers should be entitled to. ... [W]e have changed the way we compute employment rates for the rankings due out March 15." http://www.usnews.com/education/blogs/c ... yment-data.

Employment at graduation ("M0"), which currently accounts for 4% of a school's raw score, will likely see an increase in weight. And employment after 9 months ("M9"), currently 14%, will decrease in weight. http://www.usnews.com/education/article ... ethodology.

The magnitude of any changes is impossible to know, but we can make generalizations about what schools might go up or down based on this hypothesis. What schools have a relatively high M0? And what schools have a relatively low M0? http://cache.abovethelaw.com/uploads/20 ... -large.jpg. These schools are likely to increase, or decrease, respectively. What schools would see the biggest change? The top 5 in each category are below, with raw score delta if the M0/M9 distribution is inverted:

Positive Change
Emory +.14
Duke +0
Stanford -.01
NYU -.02
Columbia -.07

Negative change
UNC -1.99
UWM -1.75
Iowa -1.51
UMN -1.27
UIUC & BC -1.14

Let's assume Stanford and Columbia aren't going to move, and remove them. (Stanford would have to leapfrog Harvard, which is unlikely to change by this measure, and Columbia would have to beat one of HYS, which seems unlikely.) Then, the top 5 gainers would be:

Emory +.14
Duke +0
NYU -.02
UCD -.08
UT-Austin -.14

Note: I only did this analysis through Fordham, #34.

The weights might not be altered drastically (or at all--heh), in which case the effect would be minor. USNWR could increase the total employment percentage from its current 18% (4% M0 + 14% M9). While this would make no change by itself, any effect of altering the M0/M9 distribution would be magnified. Ultimately, the relative performance of each school is what counts, and we can test that if we assume some change in the M0/M9 distribution is made, no matter how large it is.

Thoughts?

I have a thought. Chill out for 5 days until the rankings come out.

I think I can wait 5 days... I wish I had your free time though

I for one appreciate your thoughtful speculation. Thankfully we'll all know what's changed pretty soon.

rad law wrote:I have a thought. Chill out for 5 days until the rankings come out.

Well I guess I did ask for thoughts, so I'll begrudge your attitude, but I am quite chill. I'm actually at one of these schools, so couldn't care less about a move up or down in the rankings. These sorts of analyses just interest me: it's more about seeing if I can formulate a workable hypothesis and if it ends up being correct than having some vested interest in the ranks. But, snark away if it's your bag.

3 Year Old Data + 1st ever TLS post = Emory Troll

bigmonster110 wrote:

rad law wrote:I have a thought. Chill out for 5 days until the rankings come out.

Well I guess I did ask for thoughts, so I'll begrudge your attitude, but I am quite chill. I'm actually at one of these schools, so couldn't care less about a move up or down in the rankings. These sorts of analyses just interest me: it's more about seeing if I can formulate a workable hypothesis and see if it ends up being right than having some vested interest in the ranks. But, snark away.

Respectable efforts. Should be interesting to see if your work holds any water. Now I just hope I have your kind of free time come this fall!

I tend to believe this take on the blog from Morse Code the other day. Toggle down to US News Changes Methodology:

http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/

I think we are all just speculating, though.

Cade McNown wrote:3 Year Old Data + 1st ever TLS post = Emory Troll

Ha! You read my mind. Moreover, I think Emory will slip a spot or three in the standings.

cj2k14 wrote:I think I can wait 5 days... I wish I had your free time though

I too think patience is required. However, I'll bite and say if this is in fact the methodology they chose to use, it would be just as useless. Who cares what the numbers are at graduation or at 9 months after graduation? Both of these numbers are supplied by the schools and often leave a vast amount of graduates in statistical limbo. For example, Emory, with its lofty 95% employment statistic 9 months after graduation, only reports salary for approximately 64% of its graduates. This is where the problem lies, and its why schools like Hofstra have a median salary of $160,000.

We have no idea what the people who do not report are making. Doc review can count as employed in private practice, right? I'm hoping USNWR went another route, because they did say they agree with the efforts of lawschooltransparency. Punish schools that only manage to report meager amounts of detailed salary data, reward those who audit thoroughly.

Cade McNown wrote:3 Year Old Data + 1st ever TLS post = Emory Troll

It's my understanding that 2008 graduation data is the most recent data available to USNWR, and is what is reflected in the 2010 rankings. If I'm mistaken, please point me to the updated data and I'll use that instead. And for what it's worth, not an Emory troll at all. I actually go to one of the schools in the middle of the pack, with little expected change.

bigmonster110 wrote:

Cade McNown wrote:3 Year Old Data + 1st ever TLS post = Emory Troll

It's my understanding that 2008 graduation data is the most recent data available to USNWR, and is what is reflected in the 2010 rankings. If I'm mistaken, please point me to the updated data and I'll use that instead. And for what it's worth, not an Emory troll at all. I actually go to one of the schools in the middle of the pack, with little expected change.

Did you not just say in your previous post you are at one of those schools that you outlined should be moving?

ignore the hate.

good stuff here. i'm curious what the new rankings will be, if it will change much at all

I have a hyperthesis.

tourdeforcex wrote:ignore the hate.

good stuff here. i'm curious what the new rankings will be, if it will change much at all

There has been some hate, but there isn't much good stuff here in my opinion. I think the OP is ignoring the fundamental flaw in the way USNWR deals with employment data.

So I'll bump my own post and ask for the OP's thoughts on this statement.

I too think patience is required. However, I'll bite and say if this is in fact the methodology they chose to use, it would be just as useless. Who cares what the numbers are at graduation or at 9 months after graduation? Both of these numbers are supplied by the schools and often leave a vast amount of graduates in statistical limbo. For example, Emory, with its lofty 95% employment statistic 9 months after graduation, only reports salary for approximately 64% of its graduates. This is where the problem lies, and its why schools like Hofstra have a median salary of $160,000.

We have no idea what the people who do not report are making. Doc review can count as employed in private practice, right? I'm hoping USNWR went another route, because they did say they agree with the efforts of lawschooltransparency. Punish schools that only manage to report meager amounts of detailed salary data, reward those who audit thoroughly.

justathought, your thoughts are credited too

--ImageRemoved--

From the Tax Law blog, it sounds like the changes are mainly going to impact how US News deals with schools not disclosing "employed at graduation" data. So it would seem the bigger impact would be felt at the lower end of the rankings.

why do people give so much of fuck about this nonsense

I can get Stat geeks having a hard-on for the rankings, but for everyone else-who gives a shit? You all know what the tiers and mini-tiers are. YHS will always be YHS even if their order fluctuates. Ditto for CCN. Duke, UVa, Boalt and the usual suspects will always be up there. USC and UCLA will always feed into SoCal, GW will always be in DC, BC will always be in Boston... What I'm really interested in is GULC and Vandy, but how they are faring can be better gleaned from other sources, so who gives a flying fuck? The only valuable thing the rankings represent are maybe medians so you know how you stack up, but every school has that information available. They're dubious at best anyway.

dr123 wrote:why do people give so much of fuck about this nonsense

Because they think they're going to beat the system.

fakemoney wrote:From the Tax Law blog, it sounds like the changes are mainly going to impact how US News deals with schools not disclosing "employed at graduation" data. So it would seem the bigger impact would be felt at the lower end of the rankings.

That is how I read tax law blog, and basically what US News has been all along. Then again, tax law blog is just speculating like all of us. The letter to the Deans from a few days ago was so oddly vague...probably intentionally so.

bigmonster110 wrote: Emory +.14

Wait, more Emory alums are employed at graduation, then 9 months after graduation? How does that work?

JusticeHarlan wrote:

bigmonster110 wrote: Emory +.14

Wait, more Emory alums are employed at graduation, then 9 months after graduation? How does that work?

Apparently showing up for casual friday in the nude is frowned upon.