US News Recruiter Rankings Forum

[paulinaporizkova]

Actually, Yale, Chicago, Penn, Berkeley all underperformed their ranking, and they all have relatively small class sizes. All this survey did was regurgitate USNews rankings with a tilt toward large class sizes.

Cornell has a class of 190

i loled.

but Chicago's class is small......?

[gens1tb]

Based on these rankings I think I might consider applying to Harvard now

[bigben]

This is just the opinions of those 750 hiring partners at law firms who returned the survey form.

nice

[LLB2JD]

Northwestern twitted this info out already. Talk about efficiency

http://twitter.com/#!/nulawadmissions

[FiveSermon]

Northwestern twitted this info out already. Talk about efficiency

http://twitter.com/#!/nulawadmissions

Are you serious LOL

[danquayle]

Northwestern twitted this info out already. Talk about efficiency

http://twitter.com/#!/nulawadmissions

still unclear on "twit" versus tweet".

[sarahlawg]

another problem with this survey is making it out of 5. I wonder why they chose that.

[LLB2JD]

Northwestern twitted this info out already. Talk about efficiency

http://twitter.com/#!/nulawadmissions

still unclear on "twit" versus tweet".

[prezidentv8]

These rankings = herp derp

[mths]

another problem with this survey is making it out of 5. I wonder why they chose that.

you're right, that's a huge flaw

[rman1201]

another problem with this survey is making it out of 5. I wonder why they chose that.

Because they use 5 for all the other rankings (Peer rankings, judge/lawyer rankings)

[dc1s]

The logic is sound, but the question is simply whether or not this is an editorial oversight &/or poor fact checking. If the logic is not sound, then why leave out Virginia, Duke & Northwestern from the line noting Cornell & Michigan's superior rankings over their overall USNews rankings ?

P.S. Regardless, whether it is an editorial error or not, we'll all know on March 15th when the new USNews overall rankings are released.

You are denying the sufficient (there are remarks about Cornell and Michigan, therefore this represents actual rankings), but there are no remarks about Northwestern or whatever school you said, therefore this doesn't represent actual rankings. The logic is not sound.

EDIT to acknowledge how awful my sentence is. I hope you get my point.

[rayiner]

another problem with this survey is making it out of 5. I wonder why they chose that.

Because any larger number of gradations would be total artificial precision?

[sarahlawg]

another problem with this survey is making it out of 5. I wonder why they chose that.

Because they use 5 for all the other rankings (Peer rankings, judge/lawyer rankings)

I see. Thanks.

Because any larger number of gradations would be total artificial precision?

Eh, disagree. Unless of course the argument is that the schools are close enough anyway that they don't need to be more precise to be meaningful. I could see that.

[buckilaw]

another problem with this survey is making it out of 5. I wonder why they chose that.

Because any larger number of gradations would be total artificial precision?

I think what sarah is trying to say is that having a wider set of numbers to rank from, say 1-100, makes it easier to see variation between schools. But, I wouldn't call using a 1-5 scale a problem. Regardless of scale the variance between schools should remain constant.

[09042014]

These rankings = herp derp

[Big Shrimpin]

These rankings = herp derp

[sarahlawg]

another problem with this survey is making it out of 5. I wonder why they chose that.

Because any larger number of gradations would be total artificial precision?

I think what sarah is trying to say is that having a wider set of numbers to rank from, say 1-100, makes it easier to see variation between schools. But, I wouldn't call using a 1-5 scale a problem. Regardless of scale the variance between schools should remain constant.

well, 1-100 would be excessive. it may be possible to break up the ties with 1-9 or 1-7 even.

Regardless:

These rankings = herp derp

[calvmpv]

Northwestern twitted this info out already. Talk about efficiency

http://twitter.com/#!/nulawadmissions

For once, I didn't find out the "news" through TLS. HLS tweeted about coming in first in these rankings about 3 hours before Northwestern did.

[FiveSermon]

Who the fuck checks law school twitters? That's the real question.

[rayiner]

Because any larger number of gradations would be total artificial precision?

Eh, disagree. Unless of course the argument is that the schools are close enough anyway that they don't need to be more precise to be meaningful. I could see that.

It's not a matter of being more precise, it's a matter of not being able to be more precise. If the scale were, say, 1-100, what would be the difference between a 97 and a 98?

If you've got a ruler with only 1" markings, can you measure your penis and say it's 3.76" long? No --- your measuring device is not precise enough for you to honestly report a result with that much precision.

[rayiner]

another problem with this survey is making it out of 5. I wonder why they chose that.

Because any larger number of gradations would be total artificial precision?

I think what sarah is trying to say is that having a wider set of numbers to rank from, say 1-100, makes it easier to see variation between schools. But, I wouldn't call using a 1-5 scale a problem. Regardless of scale the variance between schools should remain constant.

There is no point in making it easier to see finer variations when your measurement method can't measure finer variations. If you asked people to guestimate their height they would report it as 5-6" or 5-11". It would be scientifically dishonest of you to then report or results as 5.500', 5.9267', etc.

To put things more simply the fact that there is a big tie at 8th isn't from the reporting method, but from the measurement method. It simply reflects the underlying fact that hiring partners can't readily distinguish between these schools.

[existenz]

Michigan #4? Hell yeah!

/Fist pumps

[sarahlawg]

To put things more simply the fact that there is a big tie at 8th isn't from the reporting method, but from the measurement method. It simply reflects the underlying fact that hiring partners can't readily distinguish between these schools.

In those exact words, that's what I thought your argument was.

[rman1201]

I dont see the reason for the negative reactions to these rankings. I think its safe to assume these will be factored into the 2012 US News Rankings along with the peer school / lawyer & judge ratings which already exist, however recruiter ratings actually mean something since these are the people who will employ you.