Yale and Harvard pulling out US News ranking, thoughts? Forum

[Anonymous User]

My tiers:

Tier 1: Yale, Stanford, Chicago

Tier 2: Harvard, Columbia, NYU

Tier 3: Rest of T14 minus Georgetown

Tier 4: Georgetown - USC

Tier 5: errybody until like Texas A&M

Rest

Just wanted to elaborate on my tier one, I feel like these are the academic institutions that actually are selective in nearly all aspects, and take small classes. Harvard is like rolex with brand equity (No. 1 without a doubt) but is also super commercial (massive classes every year), so I'm bumping them down with Columbia and NYU who also just pump out money on tuition. Also as someone who transferred, there is a material difference between getting into Tier 1 vs Tier two, not only on GPA and origin school reqs but also just odds. Harvard NYU Columbia all take massive transfer classes every year to *GET THAT BAG*. This has shifted my perception of these schools a lot.

i have Chicago as a tier 5 b/c of posts like this

The original post here is so stupid. Chicago has a lower median entering class LSAT, lower median entering class UGPA, and is less selective compared to Harvard. Source: https://7sage.com/top-law-school-admissions/

[Anonymous User]

I love the way a bunch of law schools are planning to flagrantly violate constitutional law. I mean, Michigan and Berkley currently flagrantly violate state law, but still.

Massachusetts also has a state law against asking about race and i have always wondered how it just gets so widely ignored. https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralL ... C/Section2 2(c)

Do we know that this is true? Like it seems like the plaintiffs in the recent AA cases could find at least one whistleblower from the admissions department if that were the case.

Know that what is true? That Harvard or BC or BU or MIT ask about race on their application, even though Massachusetts state law expressly prohibits an educational institution from asking an applicant about race on applications? Yeah, we know thats true-- their applications are public and they all ask about race.

So don't quote me on this, but I got curious, and it looks like there might be some old authority out there suggesting that MA schools can collect this information because they're obligated to provide it to the federal government to keep their federal funding.

[Anonymous User]

As a practicing attorney who is more than five years out of school, this is how I view schools:

Top tier: T14, Vandy, WUSTL (Vandy and WUSTL have more National cache because their home markets aren’t large)

Next tier: ND, USC, UCLA, UT Austin, Emory, BU, BC, Fordham (mostly brand name schools who place very well (~50% in biglaw and federal clerkships) but aren’t top tier) - GW may go here but it places significantly worse; same goes for BYU

Next tier: UF, UNC, Georgia, Illinois, Ohio State, Indiana, UCI and other non-t14 public schools. Placement is usually good at these schools, but well below the ~50% placement at the schools right above them.

Then, the rest. Obviously Wake Forest is better than Syracuse, but the gap isn’t as big as people would think.

[Anonymous User]

As a practicing attorney who is more than five years out of school, this is how I view schools:

Top tier: T14, Vandy, WUSTL (Vandy and WUSTL have more National cache because their home markets aren’t large)

Next tier: ND, USC, UCLA, UT Austin, Emory, BU, BC, Fordham (mostly brand name schools who place very well (~50% in biglaw and federal clerkships) but aren’t top tier) - GW may go here but it places significantly worse; same goes for BYU

Next tier: UF, UNC, Georgia, Illinois, Ohio State, Indiana, UCI and other non-t14 public schools. Placement is usually good at these schools, but well below the ~50% placement at the schools right above them.

Then, the rest. Obviously Wake Forest is better than Syracuse, but the gap isn’t as big as people would think.

Minus WUSTL, I agree with this. I definitely think WUSTL is lower if not at the same tier at UCLA/USC/UT Austin (but better/similar as ND, BU, and BC) and higher than Fordham and Emory and definitely don't consider it in the T-14/Vandy tier.

[Anonymous User]

My tiers:

Tier 1: Yale, Stanford, Chicago

Tier 2: Harvard, Columbia, NYU

Tier 3: Rest of T14 minus Georgetown

Tier 4: Georgetown - USC

Tier 5: errybody until like Texas A&M

Rest

Just wanted to elaborate on my tier one, I feel like these are the academic institutions that actually are selective in nearly all aspects, and take small classes. Harvard is like rolex with brand equity (No. 1 without a doubt) but is also super commercial (massive classes every year), so I'm bumping them down with Columbia and NYU who also just pump out money on tuition. Also as someone who transferred, there is a material difference between getting into Tier 1 vs Tier two, not only on GPA and origin school reqs but also just odds. Harvard NYU Columbia all take massive transfer classes every year to *GET THAT BAG*. This has shifted my perception of these schools a lot.

There's no way you think it's easier to get into Harvard than Chicago

[Anonymous User]

Plenty of people who regard Yale as the top law school won’t change their opinion based on what conservative justices do, though.

Ho and Branch are just jealous because they didn't get into Yale (probably). Why bother publicly announcing that you're "boycotting" hiring from a school unless the school already lives rent-free in your head and you have some bizarre chip on your shoulder about it?

The boycott is dumb, but a boycott can’t work if it’s private…

[Anonymous User]

Plenty of people who regard Yale as the top law school won’t change their opinion based on what conservative justices do, though.

Ho and Branch are just jealous because they didn't get into Yale (probably). Why bother publicly announcing that you're "boycotting" hiring from a school unless the school already lives rent-free in your head and you have some bizarre chip on your shoulder about it?

The boycott is dumb, but a boycott can’t work if it’s private…

Couldn’t you just never hire from Yale without announcing it?

[Anonymous User]

My tiers:

Tier 1: Yale, Stanford, Chicago

Tier 2: Harvard, Columbia, NYU

Tier 3: Rest of T14 minus Georgetown

Tier 4: Georgetown - USC

Tier 5: errybody until like Texas A&M

Rest

Just wanted to elaborate on my tier one, I feel like these are the academic institutions that actually are selective in nearly all aspects, and take small classes. Harvard is like rolex with brand equity (No. 1 without a doubt) but is also super commercial (massive classes every year), so I'm bumping them down with Columbia and NYU who also just pump out money on tuition. Also as someone who transferred, there is a material difference between getting into Tier 1 vs Tier two, not only on GPA and origin school reqs but also just odds. Harvard NYU Columbia all take massive transfer classes every year to *GET THAT BAG*. This has shifted my perception of these schools a lot.

i have Chicago as a tier 5 b/c of posts like this

The original post here is so stupid. Chicago has a lower median entering class LSAT, lower median entering class UGPA, and is less selective compared to Harvard. Source: https://7sage.com/top-law-school-admissions/

It's only stupid by your criteria if all that matters are entering class numbers and not, like, learning outcomes or clerkship placements, etc. Emphasis on the criteria you list is part of the reason people criticize the rankings in the first place.

[Anonymous User]

This is clearly a stunt for these schools to downplay objective measures (LSAT & GPA) to increase URM admissions and continue Asian discrimination. The Court should address this clear attempt by schools to skirt the soon to come SFFA holding

[Anonymous User]

My tiers:

Tier 1: Yale, Stanford, Chicago

Tier 2: Harvard, Columbia, NYU

Tier 3: Rest of T14 minus Georgetown

Tier 4: Georgetown - USC

Tier 5: errybody until like Texas A&M

Rest

Just wanted to elaborate on my tier one, I feel like these are the academic institutions that actually are selective in nearly all aspects, and take small classes. Harvard is like rolex with brand equity (No. 1 without a doubt) but is also super commercial (massive classes every year), so I'm bumping them down with Columbia and NYU who also just pump out money on tuition. Also as someone who transferred, there is a material difference between getting into Tier 1 vs Tier two, not only on GPA and origin school reqs but also just odds. Harvard NYU Columbia all take massive transfer classes every year to *GET THAT BAG*. This has shifted my perception of these schools a lot.

i have Chicago as a tier 5 b/c of posts like this

The original post here is so stupid. Chicago has a lower median entering class LSAT, lower median entering class UGPA, and is less selective compared to Harvard. Source: https://7sage.com/top-law-school-admissions/

It's only stupid by your criteria if all that matters are entering class numbers and not, like, learning outcomes or clerkship placements, etc. Emphasis on the criteria you list is part of the reason people criticize the rankings in the first place.

And what evidence do you have for the proposition that Chicago is better at learning outcomes and clerkship placement than Harvard? A single year change in the rankings?

[Anonymous User]

My tiers:

Tier 1: Yale, Stanford, Chicago

Tier 2: Harvard, Columbia, NYU

Tier 3: Rest of T14 minus Georgetown

Tier 4: Georgetown - USC

Tier 5: errybody until like Texas A&M

Rest

Just wanted to elaborate on my tier one, I feel like these are the academic institutions that actually are selective in nearly all aspects, and take small classes. Harvard is like rolex with brand equity (No. 1 without a doubt) but is also super commercial (massive classes every year), so I'm bumping them down with Columbia and NYU who also just pump out money on tuition. Also as someone who transferred, there is a material difference between getting into Tier 1 vs Tier two, not only on GPA and origin school reqs but also just odds. Harvard NYU Columbia all take massive transfer classes every year to *GET THAT BAG*. This has shifted my perception of these schools a lot.

i have Chicago as a tier 5 b/c of posts like this

The original post here is so stupid. Chicago has a lower median entering class LSAT, lower median entering class UGPA, and is less selective compared to Harvard. Source: https://7sage.com/top-law-school-admissions/

It's only stupid by your criteria if all that matters are entering class numbers and not, like, learning outcomes or clerkship placements, etc. Emphasis on the criteria you list is part of the reason people criticize the rankings in the first place.

And what evidence do you have for the proposition that Chicago is better at learning outcomes and clerkship placement than Harvard? A single year change in the rankings?

I didn't make that proposition. I said the post is only stupid if all that matters are LSAT/GPA/etc., the criteria you picked. I didn't offer a ranking myself or purport to weigh other suggested criteria one way or another.

But since you asked, here are clerkship placements, for instance: https://abovethelaw.com/2021/05/the-law ... hips-2020/

I guess I could ask the same of you. What evidence do you have that Harvard is better than Chicago other than admissions numbers? You could find some random statistic, and we could go back and forth. Or we can just accept that Harvard and Chicago outrank each other in different respects. The point being, though, that admissions criteria are not the be-all and end-all.

[Anonymous User]

This is clearly a stunt for these schools to downplay objective measures (LSAT & GPA) to increase URM admissions and continue Asian discrimination. The Court should address this clear attempt by schools to skirt the soon to come SFFA holding

The schools have largely announced they have no respect for constitutional law and shouldn’t have to follow it. I don’t think they care much what the Supreme Court will say.

[Anonymous User]

My tiers:

Tier 1: Yale, Stanford, Chicago

Tier 2: Harvard, Columbia, NYU

Tier 3: Rest of T14 minus Georgetown

Tier 4: Georgetown - USC

Tier 5: errybody until like Texas A&M

Rest

Just wanted to elaborate on my tier one, I feel like these are the academic institutions that actually are selective in nearly all aspects, and take small classes. Harvard is like rolex with brand equity (No. 1 without a doubt) but is also super commercial (massive classes every year), so I'm bumping them down with Columbia and NYU who also just pump out money on tuition. Also as someone who transferred, there is a material difference between getting into Tier 1 vs Tier two, not only on GPA and origin school reqs but also just odds. Harvard NYU Columbia all take massive transfer classes every year to *GET THAT BAG*. This has shifted my perception of these schools a lot.

i have Chicago as a tier 5 b/c of posts like this

The original post here is so stupid. Chicago has a lower median entering class LSAT, lower median entering class UGPA, and is less selective compared to Harvard. Source: https://7sage.com/top-law-school-admissions/

It's only stupid by your criteria if all that matters are entering class numbers and not, like, learning outcomes or clerkship placements, etc. Emphasis on the criteria you list is part of the reason people criticize the rankings in the first place.

And what evidence do you have for the proposition that Chicago is better at learning outcomes and clerkship placement than Harvard? A single year change in the rankings?

I didn't make that proposition. I said the post is only stupid if all that matters are LSAT/GPA/etc., the criteria you picked. I didn't offer a ranking myself or purport to weigh other suggested criteria one way or another.

But since you asked, here are clerkship placements, for instance: https://abovethelaw.com/2021/05/the-law ... hips-2020/

I guess I could ask the same of you. What evidence do you have that Harvard is better than Chicago other than admissions numbers? You could find some random statistic, and we could go back and forth. Or we can just accept that Harvard and Chicago outrank each other in different respects. The point being, though, that admissions criteria are not the be-all and end-all.

Fair enough! I call a truce.

[AAPLTSLADIS]

This is clearly a stunt for these schools to downplay objective measures (LSAT & GPA) to increase URM admissions and continue Asian discrimination. The Court should address this clear attempt by schools to skirt the soon to come SFFA holding

TITCR. They could always stop taking federal bucks and discriminate to their heart's content against Asians.

[AAPLTSLADIS]

This is clearly a stunt for these schools to downplay objective measures (LSAT & GPA) to increase URM admissions and continue Asian discrimination. The Court should address this clear attempt by schools to skirt the soon to come SFFA holding

The schools have largely announced they have no respect for constitutional law and shouldn’t have to follow it. I don’t think they care much what the Supreme Court will say.

Correct.

[Anonymous User]

Well … based on the outcome today, Yale is still ranked #1 at beating Harvard in football.

[Anonymous User]

My tiers:

Tier 1: Yale, Stanford, Chicago

Tier 2: Harvard, Columbia, NYU

Tier 3: Rest of T14 minus Georgetown

Tier 4: Georgetown - USC

Tier 5: errybody until like Texas A&M

Rest

Just wanted to elaborate on my tier one, I feel like these are the academic institutions that actually are selective in nearly all aspects, and take small classes. Harvard is like rolex with brand equity (No. 1 without a doubt) but is also super commercial (massive classes every year), so I'm bumping them down with Columbia and NYU who also just pump out money on tuition. Also as someone who transferred, there is a material difference between getting into Tier 1 vs Tier two, not only on GPA and origin school reqs but also just odds. Harvard NYU Columbia all take massive transfer classes every year to *GET THAT BAG*. This has shifted my perception of these schools a lot.

i have Chicago as a tier 5 b/c of posts like this

The original post here is so stupid. Chicago has a lower median entering class LSAT, lower median entering class UGPA, and is less selective compared to Harvard. Source: https://7sage.com/top-law-school-admissions/

It's only stupid by your criteria if all that matters are entering class numbers and not, like, learning outcomes or clerkship placements, etc. Emphasis on the criteria you list is part of the reason people criticize the rankings in the first place.

And what evidence do you have for the proposition that Chicago is better at learning outcomes and clerkship placement than Harvard? A single year change in the rankings?

I didn't make that proposition. I said the post is only stupid if all that matters are LSAT/GPA/etc., the criteria you picked. I didn't offer a ranking myself or purport to weigh other suggested criteria one way or another.

But since you asked, here are clerkship placements, for instance: https://abovethelaw.com/2021/05/the-law ... hips-2020/

I guess I could ask the same of you. What evidence do you have that Harvard is better than Chicago other than admissions numbers? You could find some random statistic, and we could go back and forth. Or we can just accept that Harvard and Chicago outrank each other in different respects. The point being, though, that admissions criteria are not the be-all and end-all.

Fair enough! I call a truce.

Haha you both make great points! Original anon here. My post is stupid compared to the arguments you guys make, I'm basing my opinions of these schools off of my own experience applying twice to these schools and based on the people I know who got into both schools (my sibling attends one of the two LOL). Purely anecdotal and not at ALL objective or even data based. Thank you guys for even responding

[Anonymous User]

My tiers:

Tier 1: Yale, Stanford, Chicago

Tier 2: Harvard, Columbia, NYU

Tier 3: Rest of T14 minus Georgetown

Tier 4: Georgetown - USC

Tier 5: errybody until like Texas A&M

Rest

Just wanted to elaborate on my tier one, I feel like these are the academic institutions that actually are selective in nearly all aspects, and take small classes. Harvard is like rolex with brand equity (No. 1 without a doubt) but is also super commercial (massive classes every year), so I'm bumping them down with Columbia and NYU who also just pump out money on tuition. Also as someone who transferred, there is a material difference between getting into Tier 1 vs Tier two, not only on GPA and origin school reqs but also just odds. Harvard NYU Columbia all take massive transfer classes every year to *GET THAT BAG*. This has shifted my perception of these schools a lot.

There's no way you think it's easier to get into Harvard than Chicago

Based purely on experience applying and anecdotal knowledge, I do think so but not in some super significant way. Both are obviously great schools, and I did acknowledge that Harvard is undisputed #1 in brand equity. Chicago doesn't come close. So please don't think I'm saying that Chicago is leagues beyond Harvard, because I'm not.

The angle I'm taking is just commercial vs non-commercial. Stanford and Chicago are both sub 200 in class size a year, whereas Harvard is more than double. I think if you're a classic KJD with no softs and just good stats you have a shot at Harvard (not a good one... maybe let's say 10%?). But Chicago and Stanford seem to look for more unique applicants, and just good grades and LSAT probably only gives you like a 5-6% chance. This is purely anecdotal from my own experience though. Totally understand if you disagree!

[Anonymous User]

My tiers:

Tier 1: Yale, Stanford, Chicago

Tier 2: Harvard, Columbia, NYU

Tier 3: Rest of T14 minus Georgetown

Tier 4: Georgetown - USC

Tier 5: errybody until like Texas A&M

Rest

Just wanted to elaborate on my tier one, I feel like these are the academic institutions that actually are selective in nearly all aspects, and take small classes. Harvard is like rolex with brand equity (No. 1 without a doubt) but is also super commercial (massive classes every year), so I'm bumping them down with Columbia and NYU who also just pump out money on tuition. Also as someone who transferred, there is a material difference between getting into Tier 1 vs Tier two, not only on GPA and origin school reqs but also just odds. Harvard NYU Columbia all take massive transfer classes every year to *GET THAT BAG*. This has shifted my perception of these schools a lot.

There's no way you think it's easier to get into Harvard than Chicago

Based purely on experience applying and anecdotal knowledge, I do think so but not in some super significant way. Both are obviously great schools, and I did acknowledge that Harvard is undisputed #1 in brand equity. Chicago doesn't come close. So please don't think I'm saying that Chicago is leagues beyond Harvard, because I'm not.

The angle I'm taking is just commercial vs non-commercial. Stanford and Chicago are both sub 200 in class size a year, whereas Harvard is more than double. I think if you're a classic KJD with no softs and just good stats you have a shot at Harvard (not a good one... maybe let's say 10%?). But Chicago and Stanford seem to look for more unique applicants, and just good grades and LSAT probably only gives you like a 5-6% chance. This is purely anecdotal from my own experience though. Totally understand if you disagree!

Harvard is more selective than Chicago by a significant margin. This is all publicly available data.

Acceptance rates available here: https://7sage.com/top-law-school-admissions/

It could nevertheless be the case that Chicago seeks more “unique” applicants and relies less on numerical stats.

[Ultramar vistas]

When I was in law school, I wanted my school to be more selective with a smaller class to make myself look better

5 years into practice, I am so glad I attended a school with large classes - alumni network has been critical, and I think that keeping class years small for perceived selectivity does a disservice to students.

Something to think about for 0Ls considering what matters.

[Anonymous User]

This is clearly a stunt for these schools to downplay objective measures (LSAT & GPA) to increase URM admissions and continue Asian discrimination. The Court should address this clear attempt by schools to skirt the soon to come SFFA holding

The schools have largely announced they have no respect for constitutional law and shouldn’t have to follow it. I don’t think they care much what the Supreme Court will say.

I mean the EPC only applies to Virginia, Michigan etc. although there is the question of federal funding going into private schools.

[Anonymous User]

This is clearly a stunt for these schools to downplay objective measures (LSAT & GPA) to increase URM admissions and continue Asian discrimination. The Court should address this clear attempt by schools to skirt the soon to come SFFA holding

The schools have largely announced they have no respect for constitutional law and shouldn’t have to follow it. I don’t think they care much what the Supreme Court will say.

I mean the EPC only applies to Virginia, Michigan etc. although there is the question of federal funding going into private schools.

I thought it was largely accepted that schools accepting federal funding were bound just the same. Harvard could likely discriminate to their hearts content if they didn’t, but they aren’t going to give up that cash, so it’s a moot point.

[RedNewJersey]

I thought it was largely accepted that schools accepting federal funding were bound just the same. Harvard could likely discriminate to their hearts content if they didn’t, but they aren’t going to give up that cash, so it’s a moot point.

The bigger problem for HLS is that it's not enough for the law school to give up federal funding (which they could probably do)--my understanding is that Harvard University would need to give it up. That means no federal grants for their science and medical research, which is unthinkable.

[Anonymous User]

So YLS realized they would officially fall behind SLS this year and threw a hissy fit, and HLS took the opportunity to thumb their nose at USNWR for putting them below Chicago? LMFAO what crybabies.

What evidence does anyone have for the proposition that Yale "would officially fall behind" Stanford this year? Virtually everyone regards Yale as better than Stanford. Just look at the stark difference between each school's yield on admitted students.

YLS’s “peer reputation” score fell a lot last year and likely would have fallen again this year given the issues there

I don't know if SLS would have passed YLS this year, but it was coming. In addition to hits to YLS's reputation score, SLS has gotten significant infusions of tech money bridging the expenditure/student gap. At this point, the two main factors propping up YLS's continued prominence are its academic placements and its SCOTUS clerkship rate. The former may persist, campus culture issues notwithstanding. The latter has already begun to slide with the rise of Chicago and the replacement of older justices on SCOTUS who often hired from YLS (like RBG) with younger ones who do not (like ACB).

This is complete nonsense. Yale was still ahead if Stanford in every metric. The gap in expenditure per student was still enormous and Stanford would need those donations on an ongoing basis to close the gap. I'm sure you were hopeful as a Stanford student, but that's out of touch with reality.

[Anonymous User]

So YLS realized they would officially fall behind SLS this year and threw a hissy fit, and HLS took the opportunity to thumb their nose at USNWR for putting them below Chicago? LMFAO what crybabies.

What evidence does anyone have for the proposition that Yale "would officially fall behind" Stanford this year? Virtually everyone regards Yale as better than Stanford. Just look at the stark difference between each school's yield on admitted students.

YLS’s “peer reputation” score fell a lot last year and likely would have fallen again this year given the issues there

I don't know if SLS would have passed YLS this year, but it was coming. In addition to hits to YLS's reputation score, SLS has gotten significant infusions of tech money bridging the expenditure/student gap. At this point, the two main factors propping up YLS's continued prominence are its academic placements and its SCOTUS clerkship rate. The former may persist, campus culture issues notwithstanding. The latter has already begun to slide with the rise of Chicago and the replacement of older justices on SCOTUS who often hired from YLS (like RBG) with younger ones who do not (like ACB).

This is complete nonsense. Yale was still ahead if Stanford in every metric. The gap in expenditure per student was still enormous and Stanford would need those donations on an ongoing basis to close the gap. I'm sure you were hopeful as a Stanford student, but that's out of touch with reality.

Who knew Yalies were so sensitive? Every metric? C'mon. SLS and Chicago have both had recent years with higher overall clerkship percentages (https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigatio ... 022-04-21/). That's something that never would have happened 20 years ago. YLS's reputation scores have taken a real pounding, as commentators here and elsewhere have noted. All that adds up to the USNWR raw points gap shrinking from 4 to 2. If YLS hadn't exited the rankings, I wouldn't have been surprised if it either tied for 1st or slipped to 2nd within 10 years. Whether that means the rankings are broken, I'll leave for you to decide.