Latest employment data Forum

[runinthefront]

holy shit

stop shitting up this thread with trivial arguments

[Serett]

Y'all are ruining UT's moment of glory!

[youtube]2RoVwtqRcMM[/youtube]

plz post in every UT topic for the next year

[03152016]

Anyone want to put forth an explanation for H's mediocre numbers?

this is flat out incorrect
H does not have mediocre numbers. H's numbers are almost certainly explained by students opting out of biglaw/fedclerk.
certain schools have historically had stronger placement in PI, prestigious gov't, boutique firms, etc. these are all not accounted for in the 101+/fc figure, and are almost certainly the reason H's numbers are where they are. this demonstrates the point i've been making for days in this thread, that this bl/fc figure is a subset of a subset of a subset, and isn't indicative of placement power in more than a broad sense

[storpappa]

Y'all are ruining UT's moment of glory!

plz post in every UT topic for the next year

ftfy
[youtube]rPM7zzElj-Q[/youtube]

[071816]

Anyone want to put forth an explanation for H's mediocre numbers?

this is flat out incorrect
H does not have mediocre numbers. H's numbers are almost certainly explained by students opting out of biglaw/fedclerk.
certain schools have historically had stronger placement in PI, prestigious gov't, boutique firms, etc. these are all not accounted for in the 101+/fc figure, and are almost certainly the reason H's numbers are where they are. this demonstrates the point i've been making for days in this thread, that this bl/fc figure is a subset of a subset of a subset, and isn't indicative of placement power in more than a broad sense

FUCK YOU

[Sachem]

Why GW, Notre Dame, Fordham, BU, BC are not T20?
Their data are better than WashU, Emory and UMN.

[Moneytrees]

Anyone want to put forth an explanation for H's mediocre numbers?

this is flat out incorrect
H does not have mediocre numbers. H's numbers are almost certainly explained by students opting out of biglaw/fedclerk.
certain schools have historically had stronger placement in PI, prestigious gov't, boutique firms, etc. these are all not accounted for in the 101+/fc figure, and are almost certainly the reason H's numbers are where they are. this demonstrates the point i've been making for days in this thread, that this bl/fc figure is a subset of a subset of a subset, and isn't indicative of placement power in more than a broad sense

You put forth a good explanation, which is what I was looking for. Plus, "mediocre" is obviously a relative term. Nobody (I hope) on this thread believes that Harvard has mediocre numbers, but I think some were surprised by the relatively low federal clerkship rates compared to S and Chicago.

[03152016]

Y'all are ruining UT's moment of glory!

woops
yay ut!

[Rigo]

Why GW, Notre Dame, Fordham, BU, BC are not T20?
Their data are better than WashU, Emory and UMN.

As if US News cares mainly about outcomes.

[Moneytrees]

Why GW, Notre Dame, Fordham, BU, BC are not T20?
Their data are better than WashU, Emory and UMN.

As if US News cares mainly about outcomes.

This. Also, one year of employment data does not make or break a school.

[BigZuck]

Was the year UT was a "T14" the year it had the worst employment numbers in recent memory?

lol

[rokiv]

0L here(obligatory preface), this thread has been highly entertaining today

[03152016]

@zuck
in the 2011 rankings they must have been relying on 2010 data
which was pre ft/lt/jd, iirc
was pretty easy to cook the books back then, but maybe usnwr had some other, more robust disclosure regime than aba 509

[starry eyed]

Why GW, Notre Dame, Fordham, BU, BC are not T20?
Their data are better than WashU, Emory and UMN.

bc DAT SCHOLLY $$$

[03152016]

@zuck
in the 2011 rankings they must have been relying on 2010 data
which was pre ft/lt/jd, iirc
was pretty easy to cook the books back then, but maybe usnwr had some other, more robust disclosure regime than aba 509

also
yes, i recognize the irony of that last sentence

[03152016]

Why GW, Notre Dame, Fordham, BU, BC are not T20?
Their data are better than WashU, Emory and UMN.

bc DAT SCHOLLY $$$

absolutely not.
scholarship money does not factor into the usnwr methdology
if anything, it cuts the other way, bc expenditures per student are calculated

[Tiago Splitter]

Scholly money brings the numbers tho

[JFO1833]

Updated statistics:

All statistics might have errors. All statistics exclude solo practitioners.

In parenthesis is a comparison to 2013. Keep in mind that in 2014 this was a ten month period, it was only nine months last year.

1: Yale - BL+FC-60.4% (-5.1%), FTLTBR-72.6% (-6.2%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-69.6% (-4.8%)
2: Harvard - BL+FC-71.2% (-.8%), FTLTBR-89.9% (2.6%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-85.5% (.0%)
2: Stanford - BL+FC-76.5% (-1.4%), FTLTBR-90.9% (3.3%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-85.6% (.5%)
4: Chicago - BL+FC-75.7% (3.2%), FTLTBR-91.9% (-.2%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-86.7% (.6%)
4: Columbia - BL+FC-78.8% (.8%), FTLTBR-93.8% (-1.2%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-87.2% (-1.2%)
6: NYU - BL+FC-71.4% (4.4%), FTLTBR-93.5% (-.1%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-86.0% (.2%)
7: Penn - BL+FC-78.1% (8.9%), FTLTBR-94.2% (3.5%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-91.0% (5.3%)
8: Berkeley - BL+FC-62.4% (6.6%), FTLTBR-92.0% (5.3%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-85.0% (6.6%)
8: Duke - BL+FC-70.2% (10.1%), FTLTBR-90.2% (4.3%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-87.9% (2.8%)
8: UVA - BL+FC-67.6% (4.7%), FTLTBR-94.3% (-1.3%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-84.8% (5.1%)
11: Michigan - BL+FC-53.8% (-3.3%), FTLTBR-90.3% (8.3%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-81.8% (.6%)
12: Northwestern - BL+FC-64.9% (1.6%), FTLTBR-81.1% (1.9%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-78.0% (.5%)
13: Cornell - BL+FC-74.3% (6.0%), FTLTBR-95.8% (7.2%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-90.1% (9.7%)
14: Georgetown - BL+FC-48.4% (1.9%), FTLTBR-79.7% (-4.0%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-69.5% (-2.9%)
15: Texas - BL+FC-46.4% (4.1%), FTLTBR-77.8% (.5%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-71.2% (-2.8%)
16: UCLA - BL+FC-39.6% (.1%), FTLTBR-80.4% (4.8%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-71.1% (4.9%)
17: Vanderbilt - BL+FC-41.2% (-3.9%), FTLTBR-84.5% (-1.4%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-73.2% (-4.5%)
18: WUSTL - BL+FC-31.4% (-.9%), FTLTBR-78.3% (11.3%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-72.9% (7.2%)
19: Emory - BL+FC-29.1% (3.4%), FTLTBR-82.5% (-1.1%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-63.1% (.7%)
20: Minnesota - BL+FC-20.1% (2.9%), FTLTBR-75.3% (6.3%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-73.0% (5.8%)
20: USC - BL+FC-41.0% (7.3%), FTLTBR-79.3% (15.1%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-65.0% (5.1%)
22: Alabama - BL+FC-17.5% (-4.7%), FTLTBR-70.2% (-.3%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-69.6% (-.9%)
22: George Washington - BL+FC-32.4% (-.5%), FTLTBR-78.8% (1.3%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-65.4% (2.6%)
22: Iowa - BL+FC-18.8% (-1.8%), FTLTBR-77.3% (1.0%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-77.3% (1.5%)
22: Notre Dame - BL+FC-37.4% (3.7%), FTLTBR-78.8% (7.6%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-66.5% (-3.6%)
26: Arizona-State - BL+FC-14.1% (3.4%), FTLTBR-68.7% (8.4%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-67.7% (7.4%)
26: Boston University - BL+FC-36.2% (9.6%), FTLTBR-72.8% (5.9%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-67.9% (7.1%)
28: Washington - BL+FC-16.0% (.7%), FTLTBR-61.0% (-3.5%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-61.0% (-3.5%)
29: William and Mary - BL+FC-20.9% (-4.4%), FTLTBR-72.1% (-3.5%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-63.3% (7.5%)
30: Irvine - BL+FC-28.0% (-5.4%), FTLTBR-73.1% (8.8%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-62.4% (-1.9%)
31: Davis - BL+FC-17.8% (1.4%), FTLTBR-77.5% (7.6%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-66.3% (1.5%)
31: Georgia - BL+FC-19.6% (-.1%), FTLTBR-70.6% (2.3%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-70.6% (2.3%)
31: Wisconsin - BL+FC-16.1% (4.2%), FTLTBR-63.6% (6.4%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-63.6% (6.8%)
34: Boston College - BL+FC-36.6% (2.6%), FTLTBR-75.1% (11.1%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-74.4% (10.3%)
34: BYU - BL+FC-18.8% (7.3%), FTLTBR-75.4% (12.1%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-67.4% (4.1%)
34: Fordham - BL+FC-37.0% (.4%), FTLTBR-67.8% (4.3%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-67.8% (4.3%)
34: Indiana (Bloomington) - BL+FC-18.9% (2.5%), FTLTBR-64.4% (1.6%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-63.5% (1.1%)
34: Ohio State - BL+FC-19.5% (-1.8%), FTLTBR-73.3% (14.2%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-71.9% (13.7%)
34: UNC - BL+FC-25.5% (2.5%), FTLTBR-69.1% (-.2%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-68.3% (.2%)
40: Colorado - BL+FC-14.5% (2.6%), FTLTBR-69.7% (.4%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-66.7% (.2%)
41: Illinois - BL+FC-28.6% (.5%), FTLTBR-72.4% (.1%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-64.3% (.7%)
42: Arizona - BL+FC-8.3% (-2.6%), FTLTBR-71.5% (14.4%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-65.3% (8.1%)
42: George Mason - BL+FC-11.4% (-.4%), FTLTBR-55.4% (6.4%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-51.6% (4.2%)
42: Utah - BL+FC-7.3% (1.8%), FTLTBR-62.6% (1.2%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-62.6% (1.2%)
42: Washington and Lee - BL+FC-20.5% (.9%), FTLTBR-64.6% (7.9%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-63.8% (7.1%)
46: SMU - BL+FC-23.2% (-1.1%), FTLTBR-66.9% (-2.7%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-66.9% (-2.7%)
47: Florida - BL+FC-16.8% (1.9%), FTLTBR-68.3% (2.7%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-68.3% (2.7%)
47: Maryland - BL+FC-9.5% (-4.6%), FTLTBR-57.4% (5.5%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-57.1% (9.3%)
47: Wake Forest - BL+FC-17.6% (1.9%), FTLTBR-68.4% (11.8%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-66.8% (10.2%)
50: Florida State - BL+FC-7.1% (-3.0%), FTLTBR-66.0% (-2.7%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-66.0% (-2.3%)
50: Tulane - BL+FC-17.6% (1.7%), FTLTBR-61.3% (9.3%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-60.5% (8.5%)
52: Pepperdine - BL+FC-9.1% (-3.1%), FTLTBR-46.5% (-5.2%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-46.5% (-5.2%)
52: Richmond - BL+FC-13.4% (6.4%), FTLTBR-56.4% (.0%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-56.4% (.0%)
52: Temple has not yet reported for 2014
52: Tennessee - BL+FC-12.6% (-.6%), FTLTBR-55.0% (-6.7%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-55.0% (-6.7%)
56: Baylor - BL+FC-11.0% (1.4%), FTLTBR-67.6% (.0%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-66.9% (-.1%)
56: Georgia State - BL+FC-15.7% (6.9%), FTLTBR-68.7% (4.6%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-68.7% (4.6%)
56: Nebraska - BL+FC-7.7% (2.9%), FTLTBR-66.7% (2.2%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-66.7% (2.2%)
59: Case Western - BL+FC-11.9% (.3%), FTLTBR-54.8% (-3.9%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-54.2% (-4.5%)
59: Hastings - BL+FC-14.4% (-.6%), FTLTBR-50.5% (8.9%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-50.0% (9.0%)
59: Houston - BL+FC-18.0% (-1.6%), FTLTBR-62.9% (-.3%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-61.7% (-.7%)
59: Missouri - BL+FC-14.1% (4.2%), FTLTBR-64.4% (7.2%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-64.4% (7.2%)
63: Connecticut - BL+FC-12.3% (1.6%), FTLTBR-51.9% (10.7%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-51.9% (10.7%)
63: Kentucky - BL+FC-16.7% (-.6%), FTLTBR-79.4% (8.7%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-79.4% (8.7%)
63: Miami - BL+FC-10.0% (-.6%), FTLTBR-67.5% (7.0%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-66.7% (7.2%)
63: Seton Hall - BL+FC-6.7% (-3.4%), FTLTBR-71.6% (2.6%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-71.6% (2.6%)
67: Denver - BL+FC-6.9% (-1.8%), FTLTBR-55.2% (.9%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-54.9% (.9%)
67: Kansas - BL+FC-11.8% (1.9%), FTLTBR-66.4% (6.3%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-66.4% (6.3%)
67: Oklahoma - BL+FC-10.5% (5.1%), FTLTBR-66.4% (2.3%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-66.4% (2.3%)
67: UNLV - BL+FC-6.5% (1.9%), FTLTBR-65.5% (3.3%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-64.0% (1.9%)
71: American - BL+FC-12.4% (.2%), FTLTBR-54.6% (10.0%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-45.0% (7.7%)
71: Penn State - BL+FC-10.8% (4.8%), FTLTBR-65.3% (20.8%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-64.8% (20.3%)
71: New Mexico - BL+FC-2.7% (.9%), FTLTBR-78.4% (5.6%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-78.4% (5.6%)
71: San Diego - BL+FC-12.0% (2.2%), FTLTBR-46.8% (-5.1%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-46.4% (-5.4%)
75: Arkansas-Fayetteville - BL+FC-8.5% (-.6%), FTLTBR-52.7% (-13.2%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-52.7% (-13.2%)
75: Loyola Marymount - BL+FC-15.4% (2.6%), FTLTBR-59.8% (9.7%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-57.6% (8.2%)
75: Yeshiva (Cardozo) - BL+FC-13.0% (-1.6%), FTLTBR-56.1% (1.9%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-55.9% (1.6%)
78: Brooklyn has not yet reported for 2014
78: Illinois-Tech (Kent) - BL+FC-8.2% (-2.1%), FTLTBR-49.7% (-4.6%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-49.7% (-4.6%)
78: Loyola Chicago - BL+FC-11.5% (-2.5%), FTLTBR-55.0% (6.7%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-54.6% (6.3%)
78: Pittsburgh - BL+FC-11.3% (-.7%), FTLTBR-50.7% (-4.3%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-50.7% (-3.0%)
82: Cincinnati - BL+FC-16.8% (4.0%), FTLTBR-60.0% (7.0%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-60.0% (7.0%)
82: Hawaii - BL+FC-.0% (.0%), FTLTBR-54.4% (3.4%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-54.4% (5.3%)
82: Oregon - BL+FC-3.8% (-2.2%), FTLTBR-45.7% (-1.4%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-45.1% (-1.9%)
82: St. John's - BL+FC-10.1% (.7%), FTLTBR-60.7% (5.0%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-60.7% (5.0%)
82: Tulsa - BL+FC-3.1% (1.3%), FTLTBR-66.3% (8.3%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-65.3% (9.1%)
87: New Hampshire - BL+FC-7.9% (-3.3%), FTLTBR-62.7% (-4.6%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-62.7% (-4.6%)
87: Northeastern - BL+FC-7.9% (-.4%), FTLTBR-51.4% (6.0%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-50.9% (6.0%)
87: Rutgers-Newark - BL+FC-15.0% (4.2%), FTLTBR-63.9% (8.0%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-61.7% (7.6%)
87: St. Louis - BL+FC-13.5% (2.9%), FTLTBR-61.0% (10.6%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-61.0% (10.6%)
87: SUNY-Buffalo - BL+FC-8.4% (2.8%), FTLTBR-59.2% (-1.4%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-59.2% (-1.4%)
87: Syracuse - BL+FC-10.9% (2.6%), FTLTBR-57.3% (2.9%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-57.3% (2.9%)
87: Vilanova - BL+FC-16.4% (1.4%), FTLTBR-65.0% (11.7%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-65.0% (11.7%)
94: Lewis & Clark - BL+FC-5.6% (3.2%), FTLTBR-51.7% (-.3%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-51.7% (5.7%)
94: Louisiana State - BL+FC-9.6% (-1.4%), FTLTBR-68.4% (3.3%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-68.4% (3.3%)
94: Louisville - BL+FC-8.9% (.3%), FTLTBR-63.4% (1.7%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-63.4% (1.7%)
94: Michigan State - BL+FC-7.3% (2.3%), FTLTBR-44.7% (7.8%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-44.1% (7.2%)
94: Mississippi - BL+FC-7.3% (.9%), FTLTBR-50.8% (-7.6%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-50.8% (-7.6%)
94: Santa Clara - BL+FC-10.0% (-4.3%), FTLTBR-35.2% (-7.0%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-35.2% (-7.0%)
94: South Carolina - BL+FC-10.4% (-1.1%), FTLTBR-64.9% (-2.9%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-64.9% (-2.4%)
94: West Virginia - BL+FC-17.8% (7.1%), FTLTBR-57.4% (.4%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-57.4% (.4%)
102: Florida International - BL+FC-3.2% (-2.2%), FTLTBR-58.4% (3.0%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-58.4% (4.2%)
102: Indiana (McKinney) has not yet reported for 2014
102: Rutgers-Camden - BL+FC-8.4% (-.2%), FTLTBR-60.5% (-2.2%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-60.5% (-1.8%)
105: Marquette - BL+FC-13.1% (6.3%), FTLTBR-49.1% (-2.4%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-49.1% (-2.4%)
105: Stetson - BL+FC-5.5% (.9%), FTLTBR-54.4% (-6.4%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-54.4% (-6.4%)
105: Wayne State - BL+FC-14.2% (3.9%), FTLTBR-51.5% (2.6%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-50.3% (1.4%)
108: Catholic (Columbus) - BL+FC-6.1% (-4.8%), FTLTBR-45.8% (-.8%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-45.8% (-.8%)
108: Wyoming - BL+FC-1.4% (-3.9%), FTLTBR-49.3% (-15.2%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-49.3% (-15.2%)
110: Gonzaga - BL+FC-1.9% (.0%), FTLTBR-53.1% (-7.2%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-53.1% (-7.2%)
110: Howard has not yet reported for 2014
110: Maine - BL+FC-4.2% (-1.0%), FTLTBR-46.3% (7.8%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-46.3% (7.8%)
113: Creighton - BL+FC-6.8% (2.0%), FTLTBR-60.2% (6.6%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-60.2% (6.6%)
113: CUNY has not yet reported for 2014
113: Drake - BL+FC-.8% (-2.1%), FTLTBR-63.1% (8.7%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-63.1% (8.7%)
113: Montana - BL+FC-12.5% (1.4%), FTLTBR-66.3% (-2.9%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-66.3% (-2.9%)
113: Seattle - BL+FC-4.1% (-2.7%), FTLTBR-45.1% (3.6%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-44.7% (3.9%)
118: Duquesne - BL+FC-12.4% (3.1%), FTLTBR-55.9% (4.7%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-55.9% (4.7%)
118: Mercer - BL+FC-7.0% (-1.3%), FTLTBR-67.8% (2.9%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-67.8% (2.9%)
118: Texas Tech - BL+FC-7.5% (-.1%), FTLTBR-58.2% (3.2%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-58.2% (3.2%)
118: Willamette - BL+FC-.0% (-1.6%), FTLTBR-57.4% (2.9%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-57.4% (2.9%)
122: Baltimore - BL+FC-1.6% (-3.6%), FTLTBR-50.0% (2.4%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-50.0% (2.4%)
122: DePaul - BL+FC-7.7% (1.0%), FTLTBR-53.5% (8.1%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-53.5% (8.4%)
122: Hofstra - BL+FC-5.0% (-.6%), FTLTBR-57.1% (9.8%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-56.2% (8.8%)
122: Vermont - BL+FC-3.1% (1.1%), FTLTBR-48.5% (-6.0%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-48.5% (-6.0%)
122: Washburn - BL+FC-2.7% (-.6%), FTLTBR-63.4% (3.8%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-63.4% (3.8%)
127: Akron - BL+FC-2.4% (-.6%), FTLTBR-46.8% (.4%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-46.8% (.4%)
127: Chapman - BL+FC-2.9% (-3.6%), FTLTBR-47.1% (11.6%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-47.1% (11.6%)
127: Cleveland State - BL+FC-9.3% (1.7%), FTLTBR-47.0% (2.4%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-46.4% (1.7%)
127: Drexel - BL+FC-7.8% (-3.1%), FTLTBR-60.3% (12.5%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-60.3% (12.5%)
127: Idaho - BL+FC-.8% (-.9%), FTLTBR-64.2% (9.5%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-64.2% (9.5%)
127: Missouri KC - BL+FC-4.9% (-.3%), FTLTBR-60.1% (15.0%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-60.1% (15.0%)
127: New York Law - BL+FC-6.7% (-.2%), FTLTBR-42.9% (-1.1%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-42.9% (-1.1%)
127: Quinnipiac - BL+FC-1.8% (-.3%), FTLTBR-42.5% (8.0%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-41.6% (7.1%)
135: Arkansas-Little Rock - BL+FC-1.6% (.2%), FTLTBR-53.6% (8.8%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-53.6% (8.8%)
135: Loyola New Orleans - BL+FC-5.0% (-1.2%), FTLTBR-49.1% (.3%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-47.7% (-1.1%)
135: St. Thomas (MN) - BL+FC-6.3% (1.2%), FTLTBR-47.6% (5.8%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-47.6% (5.8%)
138: Albany - BL+FC-3.4% (-3.2%), FTLTBR-61.8% (1.6%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-61.8% (2.6%)
138: North Dakota - BL+FC-3.9% (-.1%), FTLTBR-56.6% (-2.9%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-56.6% (-2.9%)
138: Pace - BL+FC-4.1% (.1%), FTLTBR-56.2% (15.4%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-53.9% (15.1%)
138: San Francisco - BL+FC-5.6% (.6%), FTLTBR-32.0% (-2.0%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-32.0% (-1.5%)
142: Memphis - BL+FC-6.9% (-2.0%), FTLTBR-52.7% (-7.8%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-52.7% (-7.8%)
142: Toledo - BL+FC-4.9% (-1.9%), FTLTBR-37.4% (-10.9%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-37.4% (-10.9%)
142: William Mitchell - BL+FC-4.9% (1.2%), FTLTBR-53.8% (-3.1%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-53.8% (-3.1%)
145: Dayton - BL+FC-2.9% (1.5%), FTLTBR-49.3% (-8.2%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-49.3% (-8.2%)
145: Hamline - BL+FC-1.5% (-.6%), FTLTBR-45.6% (3.5%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-45.6% (3.5%)
145: Ohio Northern - BL+FC-3.2% (-1.0%), FTLTBR-45.7% (-13.6%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-45.7% (-13.6%)
145: South Dakota - BL+FC-2.5% (1.1%), FTLTBR-66.7% (6.1%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-66.7% (6.1%)
149: Oklahoma City - BL+FC-2.5% (.7%), FTLTBR-58.0% (1.6%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-58.0% (1.6%)
149: Samford - BL+FC-5.9% (.7%), FTLTBR-53.7% (-4.1%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-53.7% (-4.1%)
149: Southern Illinois - BL+FC-1.9% (-2.0%), FTLTBR-61.9% (-8.6%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-61.0% (-9.6%)
149: South Texas - BL+FC-5.1% (.8%), FTLTBR-55.4% (-5.8%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-55.4% (-5.8%)
149: Texas A&M - BL+FC-1.3% (.7%), FTLTBR-46.1% (8.1%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-46.1% (8.1%)
RNP: Appalachian - BL+FC-3.2% (.9%), FTLTBR-32.6% (-9.4%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-32.6% (-9.4%)
RNP: Arizona Summit - BL+FC-1.2% (.5%), FTLTBR-38.7% (-1.9%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-36.8% (-2.6%)
RNP: Atlanta's John Marshall has not yet reported for 2014
RNP: Ave Maria - BL+FC-.0% (-3.8%), FTLTBR-35.5% (5.3%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-34.5% (4.4%)
RNP: Barry - BL+FC-1.4% (-.1%), FTLTBR-39.7% (6.9%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-39.7% (6.9%)
RNP: California Western - BL+FC-4.1% (3.0%), FTLTBR-45.2% (13.9%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-45.2% (13.9%)
RNP: Campbell - BL+FC-3.2% (1.0%), FTLTBR-57.8% (5.2%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-57.8% (5.2%)
RNP: Capital - BL+FC-1.9% (-2.4%), FTLTBR-34.4% (-4.0%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-34.4% (-4.0%)
RNP: Charleston - BL+FC-3.0% (2.1%), FTLTBR-49.3% (-2.3%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-49.3% (-2.3%)
RNP: Charlotte - BL+FC-.5% (-.9%), FTLTBR-28.8% (-1.5%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-28.8% (.8%)
RNP: Detroit Mercy - BL+FC-4.4% (-2.7%), FTLTBR-34.4% (2.7%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-34.4% (2.7%)
RNP: District of Columbia - BL+FC-1.0% (-.3%), FTLTBR-26.2% (2.5%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-24.3% (1.8%)
RNP: Elon - BL+FC-2.9% (1.2%), FTLTBR-37.5% (5.5%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-37.5% (5.5%)
RNP: Faulkner - BL+FC-.0% (-2.0%), FTLTBR-37.3% (-11.2%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-37.3% (-11.2%)
RNP: Florida A&M - BL+FC-1.7% (1.7%), FTLTBR-29.3% (-5.5%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-29.3% (-5.5%)
RNP: Florida Costal - BL+FC-.8% (.1%), FTLTBR-33.5% (3.9%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-33.3% (3.7%)
RNP: Golden Gate - BL+FC-3.3% (1.5%), FTLTBR-25.1% (2.8%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-24.0% (2.1%)
RNP: Inter-American - BL+FC-.5% (-1.3%), FTLTBR-9.3% (-12.7%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-9.3% (-12.7%)
RNP: John Marshall (Chicago) - BL+FC-5.0% (.8%), FTLTBR-55.1% (6.3%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-54.7% (5.8%)
RNP: Liberty - BL+FC-1.3% (-.8%), FTLTBR-42.1% (13.1%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-40.8% (12.8%)
RNP: McGeroge - BL+FC-3.7% (1.2%), FTLTBR-42.8% (6.6%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-42.2% (6.4%)
RNP: Mississippi College - BL+FC-5.1% (.3%), FTLTBR-47.4% (-4.4%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-47.4% (-4.4%)
RNP: New England Law - BL+FC-2.3% (.0%), FTLTBR-38.5% (1.6%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-38.5% (2.2%)
RNP: North Carolina Central - BL+FC-2.1% (1.5%), FTLTBR-37.3% (22.5%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-37.3% (22.5%)
RNP: Northern Illinois - BL+FC-2.0% (-3.1%), FTLTBR-58.6% (8.2%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-57.6% (7.1%)
RNP: Northern Kentucky - BL+FC-6.4% (2.0%), FTLTBR-42.3% (4.8%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-42.3% (4.8%)
RNP: Nova Southeastern - BL+FC-6.1% (.2%), FTLTBR-59.6% (1.1%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-59.6% (1.1%)
RNP: Pontifical Catholic - BL+FC-.0% (.0%), FTLTBR-1.4% (-2.8%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-1.4% (-2.8%)
RNP: Puerto Rico - BL+FC-2.0% (.5%), FTLTBR-15.4% (-2.9%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-15.4% (-2.9%)
RNP: Regent - BL+FC-4.1% (-.2%), FTLTBR-45.1% (-10.0%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-45.1% (-10.0%)
RNP: Roger Williams - BL+FC-.6% (-2.9%), FTLTBR-43.9% (3.4%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-43.9% (3.4%)
RNP: Southern University - BL+FC-1.8% (1.3%), FTLTBR-27.3% (4.5%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-27.3% (4.5%)
RNP: Southwestern - BL+FC-4.2% (-.8%), FTLTBR-35.8% (-2.6%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-35.5% (-2.9%)
RNP: St. Mary's - BL+FC-2.3% (.9%), FTLTBR-50.0% (-2.4%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-50.0% (-2.1%)
RNP: St. Thomas (FL) - BL+FC-2.3% (.6%), FTLTBR-44.0% (.1%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-44.0% (.1%)
RNP: Suffolk - BL+FC-7.7% (1.0%), FTLTBR-46.2% (10.5%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-46.0% (10.3%)
RNP: Texas Southern - BL+FC-.7% (.7%), FTLTBR-33.6% (-.4%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-33.6% (-.4%)
RNP: Thomas Jefferson - BL+FC-1.4% (.3%), FTLTBR-26.3% (.3%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-26.3% (.3%)
RNP: Touro - BL+FC-.0% (.0%), FTLTBR-55.1% (3.4%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-55.1% (3.4%)
RNP: Valparaiso - BL+FC-2.3% (-.7%), FTLTBR-44.8% (6.4%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-44.2% (6.4%)
RNP: Western New England - BL+FC-2.0% (1.3%), FTLTBR-35.7% (2.6%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-35.7% (2.6%)
RNP: Western State - BL+FC-2.0% (1.2%), FTLTBR-28.0% (-5.3%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-28.0% (-5.3%)
RNP: Whittier - BL+FC-2.1% (.6%), FTLTBR-25.8% (-.9%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-25.8% (-.9%)
RNP: Widener-DE - BL+FC-2.1% (-2.2%), FTLTBR-44.1% (-2.2%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-44.1% (-2.2%)
RNP: Widener-Harrisburg - BL+FC-1.8% (-1.5%), FTLTBR-52.2% (.1%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-52.2% (.1%)
RNP: WMU-Cooley - BL+FC-.9% (.0%), FTLTBR-25.9% (3.0%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-25.9% (3.0%)
UNR: Belmont has not yet reported for 2014.
UNR: Duncan - BL+FC-0%, FTLTBR-0%, FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-51%
UNR: LaVerne - BL+FC-.0% (.0%), FTLTBR-38.6% (9.6%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-38.6% (9.6%)
UNR: UMass-Dartmouth - BL+FC-2.5% (2.5%), FTLTBR-22.2% (-1.1%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-22.2% (1.8%)


Here are totals for the 196 reporting schools for 2014 and a comparison to 195 of those schools from 2013 (Duncan, included this year, did not report 2013 statistics).
Totals: BL+FC-16.9% (1.1%), FTLTBR-58.2% (3.0%), FTLTBR (w/o LSF)-56.2% (2.8%)

[cookiejar1]

If you're still in law school you can have a meaningful affect on your school's employment numbers come 9-mo after graduation. Every PI person you convince to go to biglaw, every M/B/B consulting interview you sabotage, and every student going to a boutique <101 lawyer firm you murder will bring your numbers closer to the Cornell and Penn.

Stop arguing on TLS and do god's work. 80%! 80%! 80%!

[starry eyed]

....anxiously waiting on brut's reply to Tiago

[03152016]

wait no longer tater

bu and wustl have the same inputs, so your argument about indirect effects, in addition to being poorly stated, doesn't make any sense in the context of the listed schools
(also, as is obv from this thread, i'm pessimistic about prospective law students, so i think the scholly scam has less effect than ppl assume)
other things are doing the heavy lifting in all likelihood
inertia for umn, high bl/fc/jd for emory

[Moneytrees]

....anxiously waiting on brut's reply to Tiago

Huge blunder committed by Brut.

[03152016]

To be fair, UCLA and USC have always been pretty close in terms of outcomes. The posters who say otherwise have only been paying attention to the past couple years of data.

makes no sense whatsoever
2011 was the first year of lt/ft/jd. so the "past data" is literally 3 years
so idk how anyone could pay attention to more than the "past couple years", unless they're relying on schools' marketing numbers and anecdata

[Tiago Splitter]

To be fair, UCLA and USC have always been pretty close in terms of outcomes. The posters who say otherwise have only been paying attention to the past couple years of data.

makes no sense whatsoever
2011 was the first year of lt/ft/jd. so the "past data" is literally 3 years
so idk how anyone could pay attention to more than the "past couple years", unless they're relying on schools' marketing numbers and anecdata

Come on brut you're better than this. We've got data going back a decade. The new stuff is better, but the old stuff is still data.

[03152016]

it was trivially easy to manipulate. that's something you'd rely on?