School rank vs. Class Rank Forum

[FiveSermon]

Thing about Cornell is that since it's class sizes are so small, even an extra 8-10 people can mean the difference from 40 to 45%.

[ahduth]

Thing about Cornell is that since it's class sizes are so small, even an extra 8-10 people can mean the difference from 40 to 45%.

This is why I have a huge problem with using these NLJ250 percentages as some sort of gospel. We aren't talking about 40 or 45% of a billion people. Even NYU's alarming drop amounted to what, 40 kids? I'm not saying it doesn't mean anything, you do however need to realize the sample size we're talking about.

[Lawlcat]

Thing about Cornell is that since it's class sizes are so small, even an extra 8-10 people can mean the difference from 40 to 45%.

This is why I have a huge problem with using these NLJ250 percentages as some sort of gospel. We aren't talking about 40 or 45% of a billion people. Even NYU's alarming drop amounted to what, 40 kids? I'm not saying it doesn't mean anything, you do however need to realize the sample size we're talking about.

+1


E.g. Cornell had dropped down to 40 in that year...and then spiked up. DF (a fine contributor) offers one possible explanation (lucked out with a particular firm or whatever) ... but I don't see any non-anecdotal, non-speculative evidence that "CCN" (or CCP or whatever) has started meaning something actually significant in terms of job placement since the downturn.

Absent such evidence, it seems questionable to me to tell 0Ls, "Well, you have a full ride at Duke, and sticker at Columbia and NYU ... but Duke is so much more precarious that even with the money it is NOT worth it". That logic might apply to someone deciding between a T14 (or whatever) and a much more regional school, where the average difference is something like that between 60% biglaw + article III and 30% biglaw + article III. Going to the T14 means (in that case) that you're twice as likely to get one of these types of jobs.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying there's no apparent difference. It seems pretty clear (at least based on past years) that CCP gives you as much as 10% or so, at least compared to some schools, and that's worth considering. But to me that would just be one factor.

[09042014]

Thing about Cornell is that since it's class sizes are so small, even an extra 8-10 people can mean the difference from 40 to 45%.

This is why I have a huge problem with using these NLJ250 percentages as some sort of gospel. We aren't talking about 40 or 45% of a billion people. Even NYU's alarming drop amounted to what, 40 kids? I'm not saying it doesn't mean anything, you do however need to realize the sample size we're talking about.

+1


E.g. Cornell had dropped down to 40 in that year...and then spiked up. DF (a fine contributor) offers one possible explanation (lucked out with a particular firm or whatever) ... but I don't see any non-anecdotal, non-speculative evidence that "CCN" (or CCP or whatever) has started meaning something actually significant in terms of job placement since the downturn.

Absent such evidence, it seems questionable to me to tell 0Ls, "Well, you have a full ride at Duke, and sticker at Columbia and NYU ... but Duke is so much more precarious that even with the money it is NOT worth it". That logic might apply to someone deciding between a T14 (or whatever) and a much more regional school, where the average difference is something like that between 60% biglaw + article III and 30% biglaw + article III. Going to the T14 means (in that case) that you're twice as likely to get one of these types of jobs.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying there's no apparent difference. It seems pretty clear (at least based on past years) that CCP gives you as much as 10% or so, at least compared to some schools, and that's worth considering. But to me that would just be one factor.

You don't see the evidence of it because NLJ numbers lag by several years. Next year will show the first class who did OCI since the recession.

For OCI-2009 (or class of 2011) 67.5% of people from CLS got an offer from OCI. NYU claimed 70%, Chicago claimed similar numbers.

Northwestern claims 60%. Cornell placed about 45% but that was of all students. The other schools were claimed % of people who attended OCI. Which means Cornell's 45% is probably more like 50-55% compared the other numbers.

So there is a gap, it's significant but it's not huge. I think the gap in placement is only worth 30-45K in scholarship money. Though some of it depends on region where you want to work.

[thexfactor]

cornell median= ND/wustl top 1/3?
ND/Wustl top 10% = michshitgan median?

[FiveSermon]

Thing about Cornell is that since it's class sizes are so small, even an extra 8-10 people can mean the difference from 40 to 45%.

This is why I have a huge problem with using these NLJ250 percentages as some sort of gospel. We aren't talking about 40 or 45% of a billion people. Even NYU's alarming drop amounted to what, 40 kids? I'm not saying it doesn't mean anything, you do however need to realize the sample size we're talking about.

+1


E.g. Cornell had dropped down to 40 in that year...and then spiked up. DF (a fine contributor) offers one possible explanation (lucked out with a particular firm or whatever) ... but I don't see any non-anecdotal, non-speculative evidence that "CCN" (or CCP or whatever) has started meaning something actually significant in terms of job placement since the downturn.

Absent such evidence, it seems questionable to me to tell 0Ls, "Well, you have a full ride at Duke, and sticker at Columbia and NYU ... but Duke is so much more precarious that even with the money it is NOT worth it". That logic might apply to someone deciding between a T14 (or whatever) and a much more regional school, where the average difference is something like that between 60% biglaw + article III and 30% biglaw + article III. Going to the T14 means (in that case) that you're twice as likely to get one of these types of jobs.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying there's no apparent difference. It seems pretty clear (at least based on past years) that CCP gives you as much as 10% or so, at least compared to some schools, and that's worth considering. But to me that would just be one factor.

You don't see the evidence of it because NLJ numbers lag by several years. Next year will show the first class who did OCI since the recession.

For OCI-2009 (or class of 2011) 67.5% of people from CLS got an offer from OCI. NYU claimed 70%, Chicago claimed similar numbers.

Northwestern claims 60%. Cornell placed about 45% but that was of all students. The other schools were claimed % of people who attended OCI. Which means Cornell's 45% is probably more like 50-55% compared the other numbers.

So there is a gap, it's significant but it's not huge. I think the gap in placement is only worth 30-45K in scholarship money. Though some of it depends on region where you want to work.

DF you are my favorite poster but sometimes your analysis is wrong. I remember it was you who said before 2010 NLJ numbers came out in reference to 2009 Vandy NLJ numbers that southern markets weathered the economic crash better than NYC firms which is why Vandy did so well.

[09042014]

DF you are my favorite poster but sometimes your analysis is wrong. I remember it was you who said before 2010 NLJ numbers came out in reference to 2009 Vandy NLJ numbers that southern markets weathered the economic crash better than NYC firms which is why Vandy did so well.

If I said that I was definitely wrong. For class of 2009 the crash didn't hit the south yet. But for 2010, they had the worst offer rates. Southern firms no offered 50% of their SA's.

[swc65]

Let’s assume that your performance will be the same at both the schools. However, the levels of people at the two schools are different. Median LSAT 172 vs. 168 does make difference. And median GPAs are also different at both schools. If your LSAT and GPA are at the median in Cornell, and will be lower than those at Columbia. I believe you will feel more competitive at Columbia compared with at Cornell because the two populations are not the same. And not only LSAT/GPA, also people at Columbia might be more aggressive than those at Cornell. Thus, I think although your performance is the same, you might get the rank with big difference. If you graduate from Cornell, you might be at the top 25%; however, if you graduate from Columbia, you might be about 50%. Do they make difference for your placement and future career development? Is the school rank more important than your class rank?

If you truly think ~4 questions on the LSAT is determinative of your ability you are sorely mistaken.

So im not specialer than the Cornell kids cuz I got 99th%tile and they only got 98th?? That's not what my mom says

[Other25BeforeYou]

We have to think about in which school we could have the best performance.

Did you miss the entire first page of this thread?

But dbshjb is right about this in the sense that if a person knows things that affect their performance (proximity to family, weather, city/rural), then that should be taken into account, since class rank is very important. The only thing he or she is incorrect about it assuming that schools with lower medians are less competitive.

So if OP is choosing between Cornell & Columbia, and Cornell is close to OP's family and rural, which OP thinks he or she will feel more comfortable with and therefore will able to do well and be less distracted, then OP might reasonably believe he or she will have a better class rank at Cornell, and reasonably choose that option.

[swc65]

Also FWIW, and I don't know what the value of this info is. There were 313 accepted offers at CLS' EIP last Summer (class of '12). With about 400 people participating in OCI (accounting for xfers and those that just don't do EIP), I think that is a pretty good number. it also does not account for people who got jobs outside the EIP process, though this number is probably small. We also have a lot more firms and interview slots this coming year.

[TaipeiMort]

I will repost what was just posted in the Yale or Chicago Robenstein thread because I believe it dispells some of the offbase posts in this thread:

Sorry to drop in out of the blue. I'm V20 partner involved in firm recruiting. I've lurked off and on for a while; with employer roundtables and interviews on the horizon I've been catching up. I'm writing on a phone watching NBA playoffs; pardon the many typos and grammar issues I'm bound to make. I'm observing and providing some insight. Not answering questions. Hope you'll forgive me that.

First, an observation: prospective students have much more information now and are assessing options in a more thoughtful and methodical way than I could have 13 years ago. That's great. (Though polling strangers that don't have the same options or information as you has marginal value except as entertainment.).

Some key misconceptions/uncertainties prevail in the discussion here. I'll try to be thread-specific. I'm only addressing big firm behavior here and I'm basing this on personal experience plus discussions with partners at other firms.

First, let me confirm that each top firm (at least in the markets where I mostly practice - NY, DC, Chi, Bos) essentially saves summer spots for kids from each of Y-Chi. (NYU is a bit different in a couple of markets for historical reasons. UM or UVA get spots held for Chi and DC, for example. NYU is golden in NY and the grads tend to stay there, so not much thought is given to it in some other markets, relatively speaking, IME. Cal is a similar example.

(The flip side of this point is that, yes, T6 (with minor variations at the "bottom") is real. Be very careful with the common wisdom I see here that "after HYS T14 is mostly the same". For the tippy-top firms, that's just not true.)

So, as a law student you are not competing with other schools so much as your classmates. Once an SA and then an associate, you are generally judged on your individual merits and you compete with your peers at the firm.)

While a top firm (or USAO or judge) might be go "deeper" into Yale's class than UofC's, now would seem to be an odd time for the OP to bet against himself and pay a lot of money for that cushion just in case he doesn't do splendidly his first year at Chi (or Harvard or Colombia for that matter).

Also, since the very most OP can make as a first year is capped at 160k plus bonuses, I don't understand arguments about the marginal extra earning value of the Y degree. OP has little reason to think he won't be at least mediocre at a non-Y T6, which is in fact all he needs to get in the game at a big firm. Not getting a good job in 2014 from a T6 is a remote and I'd say unlikely risk. The debt, a risk in its own right, is real and much more certain.

Finally, anyone who thinks there's more "prestige" in the name Yale than in Hamilton or Rubenstein is nuts. People get into Yale (and Stanford) for all sorts of quirky and good reasons. But the top full ride T6 scholarships are rare and signify top credentials.