T14s on the rise ? Forum

[Bronte]

So you're saying that Michigan never really was "third?"
I guess I can understand that

Right. I do not think Michigan was ever a peer to Harvard and Yale. But even if you take the US News rankings at face value, any "decline" took place between the years 1987 and 1988 and immediately flat lined, so the discussion of it is not relevant.

[IAFG]

WRT to IAFGs statement about a 4% difference in placement between CCN and DNC: Do you mean overall placement? because Biglaw placement is a bit further apart.

I was referring to how people differentiate between the rankings, because I think they take data that's meaning is limited and extrapolate too much. Here's the change that each school experience btw 2010 and 2011:

CLS +0.8
Chi +5.87
NYU -6.83
Mich -7.53
UVA -6.01
Penn +2.51
Boalt -4.39
Duke -11.5
Cornell +16.83
NU -11.53

I suppose I don't know for sure that Cornell students didn't become 16% more valuable, and Duke students 11% less, but that doesn't seem terribly likely to me. I take from this data that these schools are all terribly similar in the opportunities they give their students, and a few students choosing to clerk, or go to secondary markets, or go straight to gov't, can move the data a lot without saying anything meaningful about they school's placement power.

[hyakku]

Thanks for all these incredible points everyone, this is exactly the type of discussion I was looking for, especially other metrics to measure relative quality by. I'm especially interested in how the placement changes are effected so greatly between years. Im likely going to spend some time trying to understand them more.

Thanks for the compliment as well grizz, much appreciated.

[worldtraveler]

No one besides neurotic 0Ls cares if your school falls from #7 to #8 in a year. Seriously, no one.

Nobody wants their school to fall. My guess is that the #7 school (this year Penn and Mich) would LOVE to crack the T-6. No idea why T-6 is such a big deal, but apparently it is.

The 6 schools in today’s T-6 have been there since ’09 (maybe longer but that is all the data I have). One school [UCB] dropped out of the T-6 a couple of years ago (back when the T-6 had 7 schools. . .like today where the T-14 has fifteen schools).

Seriously. No one cares. Once you actually start as a 1L, no one picks up the USNWR. It's a big deal to applicants and the admissions office. No one else cares.

[Renzo]

No one besides neurotic 0Ls cares if your school falls from #7 to #8 in a year. Seriously, no one.

Nobody wants their school to fall. My guess is that the #7 school (this year Penn and Mich) would LOVE to crack the T-6. No idea why T-6 is such a big deal, but apparently it is.

The 6 schools in today’s T-6 have been there since ’09 (maybe longer but that is all the data I have). One school [UCB] dropped out of the T-6 a couple of years ago (back when the T-6 had 7 schools. . .like today where the T-14 has fifteen schools).

Seriously. No one cares. Once you actually start as a 1L, no one picks up the USNWR. It's a big deal to applicants and the admissions office. No one else cares.

This is 99% true. However; the year after I started NYU dropped from 5 to 6, and there were a few of my classmates who had their tiny pink feelings hurt by falling out of the 'top 5'. Granted, they're all douches for caring, but they still cared.

[Rotor]

I think Berkeley's prospect for a fall are exaggerated on TLS. The dean has jacked up our tuition specifically to isolate us from the impacts of the state budget. We aren't quite "public in name only" but we are close. We are the #1-#2 IP school, the #1-#3 Public interest school, have a vastly improved business law curriculum/faculty, place with our MVPB peers in NLJ and clerkships and getting there in academia, and get a degree that travels nationally (for those who choose to leave the state).

No one is arguing we are a top-6 school like we were when I applied. We are a top-10 school. It's just that the MVPB tier is so tight, it's possible to drop two spots when the USNWR raw score remains the same (as happened with the 2012 rankings).

Edit to add: http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 1&t=150329 link to 2012 data thread.

[johansantana21]

I think Berkeley's prospect for a fall are exaggerated on TLS. The dean has jacked up our tuition specifically to isolate us from the impacts of the state budget. We aren't quite "public in name only" but we are close. We are the #1-#2 IP school, the #1-#3 Public interest school, have a vastly improved business law curriculum/faculty, place with our MVPB peers in NLJ and clerkships and getting there in academia, and get a degree that travels nationally (for those who choose to leave the state).

No one is arguing we are a top-6 school like we were when I applied. We are a top-10 school. It's just that the MVPB tier is so tight, it's possible to drop two spots when the USNWR raw score remains the same (as happened with the 2012 rankings).

Edit to add: http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 1&t=150329 link to 2012 data thread.

WHOOSH

[hyakku]

Seriously. No one cares. Once you actually start as a 1L, no one picks up the USNWR. It's a big deal to applicants and the admissions office. No one else cares.

Well I mean, this section is dubbed Choosing a Law School. Regardless though, it's not as if this makes a school any worse, but like some others are pointing out, the methodology behind the rankings can help inform where a school is going / intends to go.

[Grizz]

Seriously. No one cares. Once you actually start as a 1L, no one picks up the USNWR. It's a big deal to applicants and the admissions office. No one else cares.

Well I mean, this section is dubbed Choosing a Law School. Regardless though, it's not as if this makes a school any worse, but like some others are pointing out, the methodology behind the rankings can help inform where a school is going / intends to go.

It's a decent starting point, but still so incredibly shitty.

[t15orbust]

It seems to me that it makes a lot of sense to care now and to not care later. It's not that we're delusional for caring about rankings now. We need some sort of metric to make fine distinctions between the top schools. Granted the USNWR ranks may not be the best way to judge, but they're better than nothing.

After you get in, it's not like you suddenly realize it never mattered. It just doesn't matter because you've already taken the plunge and committed to a school.

175 / 3.8 and haven't heard back from anywhere, BTW. I am going to explode if I don't hear back soon!

[johansantana21]

It seems to me that it makes a lot of sense to care now and to not care later. It's not that we're delusional for caring about rankings now. We need some sort of metric to make fine distinctions between the top schools. Granted the USNWR ranks may not be the best way to judge, but they're better than nothing.

After you get in, it's not like you suddenly realize it never mattered. It just doesn't matter because you've already taken the plunge and committed to a school.

175 / 3.8 and haven't heard back from anywhere, BTW. I am going to explode if I don't hear back soon!

I get what you are saying but all data indicates that there is no substantial difference between lower T14.

[IAFG]

We need some sort of metric to make fine distinctions between the top schools.

Things you should use to distinguish between schools with significantly similar placement power:
* Scholarship money
* How many firms come to the school's OCI from the market you want to work in most
* Access to internships and programs you have an interest in (if it's specialized)

Things you could use:
* How close you are to the amenities that are important to you (skiing, opera, whatever)
* Physical proximity to the market you want to work in

Things you shouldn't use:
*Short term rises and drops in USNWR rankings

[Helmholtz]

We need some sort of metric to make fine distinctions between the top schools.

How selective firms are at specific schools in terms of class rank.

It's actually really interesting to look at how far down some biglaw firms will dip down into a specific class's ranking as compared to the level at a different school. OCSs usually pass around that info to the students at their school with strict instructions not to share, but they get out anyway and people are swapping them behind the scenes with other people at different schools. The most in-depth data I have is from one of CCN and one of MVP. It's pretty wild to see how one firm will routinely hire from median at the MVP, but will want to typically hire around top third at the CCN (even though there are a number of firms that will typically not touch anybody below, say, top quarter at the MVP, but will be quite willing to take some people below median at the CCN).

Also, re: Michigan as third. I remember reading a book or an article or something about how it was clearly HYM at the top, at least during part of the '70s. Will try to find (maybe after finals are done).

[kwais]

what's douchier than caring about short term rises and falls in USNEWS?
Getting on people for discussing it in top law school.com. People like Worldtraveler always end up sounding so self-conscious

[hyakku]

We need some sort of metric to make fine distinctions between the top schools.

How selective firms are at specific schools in terms of class rank.

It's actually really interesting to look at how far down some biglaw firms will dip down into a specific class's ranking as compared to the level at a different school. OCSs usually pass around that info to the students at their school with strict instructions not to share, but they get out anyway and people are swapping them behind the scenes with other people at different schools. The most in-depth data I have is from one of CCN and one of MVP. It's pretty wild to see how one firm will routinely hire from median at the MVP, but will want to typically hire around top third at the CCN (even though there are a number of firms that will typically not touch anybody below, say, top quarter at the MVP, but will be quite willing to take some people below median at the CCN).

Also, re: Michigan as third. I remember reading a book or an article or something about how it was clearly HYM at the top, at least during part of the '70s. Will try to find (maybe after finals are done).

That's the type of information I think would be most useful, but as it stands, we only have the metrics that USNWR and other publications use to try to infer this type of data.

I think a lot of people are mistaking my title to mean "T14s on the rise in numbers on USNWR." I think that the discussion will inevitably involve a discussion of their methodology, but I'm more interested in exactly the type of things posters already in LS are telling us to look for: Placement, amount of firms that are willing to dip lower compared to peer institutions, national placement, effects of federal budget cuts, etc. Everything else is information that personal research can answer.

I think it's perfectly legitimate to think that the rankings are flawed, but for many of us applying this semester, especially those looking at public schools like Mich, Berkeley, UCLA, UVA, etc., these rankings, talking with others already expereienced in these things and inferring this info. is all that can be done, besides going through all of the steps IAFG outlined. Again though, I guess I just want to stress that I meant T14s in a "substantive" rise rather than simply a numerical one achieved through gaming the system (not that any of the T14s are that guilty of this as far as I'm aware).

Thanks again for all the advice from the older heads up here.

[IAFG]

We need some sort of metric to make fine distinctions between the top schools.

How selective firms are at specific schools in terms of class rank.

It's actually really interesting to look at how far down some biglaw firms will dip down into a specific class's ranking as compared to the level at a different school. OCSs usually pass around that info to the students at their school with strict instructions not to share, but they get out anyway and people are swapping them behind the scenes with other people at different schools. The most in-depth data I have is from one of CCN and one of MVP. It's pretty wild to see how one firm will routinely hire from median at the MVP, but will want to typically hire around top third at the CCN (even though there are a number of firms that will typically not touch anybody below, say, top quarter at the MVP, but will be quite willing to take some people below median at the CCN).

Also, re: Michigan as third. I remember reading a book or an article or something about how it was clearly HYM at the top, at least during part of the '70s. Will try to find (maybe after finals are done).

I am not sure the information you're comparing is really very valuable. Any given firm's callback or offer median for any given year will be wildly thrown off by taking one or two people with a certain GPA, since we are almost always talking about small populations. This could skew both ways of course. Also, each firm's hiring practice is going to vary from year to year depending on who is on the hiring committee. Furthermore, data that's been averaged over multiple years can only fairly be compared to data from the same set of years.

I am not accusing you of failing to take these things into account, but the data sets I've seen are all but worthless for comparing schools. Each school finds a new and special way to fail us in giving us meaningful data.

[Helmholtz]

We need some sort of metric to make fine distinctions between the top schools.

How selective firms are at specific schools in terms of class rank.

It's actually really interesting to look at how far down some biglaw firms will dip down into a specific class's ranking as compared to the level at a different school. OCSs usually pass around that info to the students at their school with strict instructions not to share, but they get out anyway and people are swapping them behind the scenes with other people at different schools. The most in-depth data I have is from one of CCN and one of MVP. It's pretty wild to see how one firm will routinely hire from median at the MVP, but will want to typically hire around top third at the CCN (even though there are a number of firms that will typically not touch anybody below, say, top quarter at the MVP, but will be quite willing to take some people below median at the CCN).

Also, re: Michigan as third. I remember reading a book or an article or something about how it was clearly HYM at the top, at least during part of the '70s. Will try to find (maybe after finals are done).

I am not sure the information you're comparing is really very valuable. Any given firm's callback or offer median for any given year will be wildly thrown off by taking one or two people with a certain GPA, since we are almost always talking about small populations. This could skew both ways of course. Also, each firm's hiring practice is going to vary from year to year depending on who is on the hiring committee. Furthermore, data that's been averaged over multiple years can only fairly be compared to data from the same set of years.

I am not accusing you of failing to take these things into account, but the data sets I've seen are all but worthless for comparing schools. Each school finds a new and special way to fail us in giving us meaningful data.

Data I have is averaged over multiple years and compared to those same years for the other school.

[bilbobaggins]

what's douchier than caring about short term rises and falls in USNEWS?
Getting on people for discussing it in top law school.com. People like Worldtraveler always end up sounding so self-conscious

Nah, you're still worse.

Small rankings changes really don't matter. I didn't think Boalt was better than Michigan when we were ranked higher my first year and didn't believe my school was now worse when we switched places my second year. You're splitting hairs by focusing on tiny differences between the two.

[FUBAR]

Yale is on the rise.

[t15orbust]

We need some sort of metric to make fine distinctions between the top schools.

Things you should use to distinguish between schools with significantly similar placement power:
* Scholarship money
* How many firms come to the school's OCI from the market you want to work in most
* Access to internships and programs you have an interest in (if it's specialized)

Things you could use:
* How close you are to the amenities that are important to you (skiing, opera, whatever)
* Physical proximity to the market you want to work in

Things you shouldn't use:
*Short term rises and drops in USNWR rankings

Good points. I still don't think that small differences in USNWR rankings are TOTALLY unimportant though. I agree that they should be at the bottom of the list, but I don't think it's fair to say that they have zero importance. It shows at least how things stand at a snapshot moment. In the unusual case where all other factors end up being equal or close to equal, then I would go with the higher ranked school. I don't think it would be a noticeable difference, but if everything else is really equal, then why not?

Yale is on the rise.

Brilliant.

[IAFG]

I still don't think that small differences in USNWR rankings are TOTALLY unimportant though.

How they change from year to year? Oh, they are.

I agree that they should be at the bottom of the list, but I don't think it's fair to say that they have zero importance.

More than fair, even.

It shows at least how things stand at a snapshot moment.

Sure, but not in any way that's remotely meaningful for applicants. It shows things like which school is spending a bunch on new construction and therefore has higher per-student spending in one particular year. Or that an unusual number of Duke grads turned in their "assessment score" surveys. Or that the school started leaning more heavily on their ED applicants to drive down their acceptance rate.

Nothing that should be used to choose a school.

In the unusual case where all other factors end up being equal or close to equal, then I would go with the higher ranked school. I don't think it would be a noticeable difference, but if everything else is really equal, then why not?

Well that's a silly hypo since it never actually shakes out that way.