US News rankings coming March 10th Forum

[InTheHouse]

If you really want to use USNWR to tackle the cost problem, ask them to a) get rid of the expenditures/student category and b) get rid of the academic peer rating. Without b) there's no USNWR rankings boost from hiring "star" faculty. If schools want to pay the Bainbridges $400k/yr, they're going to have to have to do it for intrinsic reasons. For the life of me, I could never figure out how people whose research no one in the world deems worth funding can command $200k+ in annual compensation. If they taught more than a class per semester, I might be able to understand.

I mean, take a look at this - (http://database.collegemedia.com/databa ... orm=Submit)

University of Michigan Law has 10 faculty salaries higher than $580k!!!

[Johann]

I hope that US News does not follow the lead of Above the Law and include cost in its ratings. Since many people do not pay sticker including cost can damage the usefulness of the ratings.

For example:

Imagine a student is choosing between two schools, a highly prestigious school at sticker, a less prestigious school at half price. This is not an uncommon scenario and renders the ratings useless for comparing these choices, if the sticker price is a factor. The appropriate question to ask is if the difference in price is worth the additional prestige.

There is no indication from US News that it will include anything to do with costs. Indeed, I've urged them not to because no cost number really means anything on its own.

I'm hesitant to even talk about this stuff, though. US News is a toxic influence on prospective students and law schools, and is doing serious damage to the legal profession and the people who eventually join it.

Yep pretty much. **I'm so intrigued to see where my graduate school ranks between 50-150, this year.** I'm pretty sure since I paid my seat deposit 6-7 years ago it's bounced around from 60-120. None of that matters though. All that matters is I got a job doing what I wanted to do where I wanted to do it. All that matters for my friends is they did/didn't get a job doing what they wanted to do where they wanted to do it.

[Iagreetotheseterms]

Good news depending on how it's structured I and other people could use it to help choose which college to attend, as it becomes before the deposit deadline.

[pamphleteer]

Good news depending on how it's structured I and other people could use it to help choose which college to attend, as it becomes before the deposit deadline.

Do not use US News to decide which law school to attend.

[North]

IT'S THAT TIME OF YEAR

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 2&t=243939

[JFO1833]

I think that including average indebtedness in the US News ranking is not that much more helpful than the sticker price. The same problem still exists, for a given student they will be paying different amounts at different schools and what they pay may have no relation to the average indebtedness. How much of a discount the other students are paying isn't helpful when there are offers on the table.

(If US News was supposed to be some kind of social responsibility ranking then indebtedness ratings could be relevant).

The US News does include average spending per student as a criteria which, I think ahead of all others, encourages schools to raise tuition (since it only scores the amount and not the usefulness of the spending).

[bugsy33]

I'm interested to see if Illinois will finally get past its punishment ranking.

[Rigo]

I'm interested to see if Illinois will finally get past its punishment ranking.

I think it will rise given +1 LSAT median and good employment. Illinois is doing all the right things by focusing on medians and decreasing class sizes.

[Skool]

I'm interested to see if Illinois will finally get past its punishment ranking.

I think it will rise given +1 LSAT median and good employment. Illinois is doing all the right things by focusing on medians and decreasing class sizes.

I am imagining you as a sportscaster. "This team has good fundamentals, they're going places, Jim."

[Moneytrees]

I'm interested in UC Irvine. I know these rankings don't have all that much credibility on TLs (nor should they), but as far as rankings go you can at least argue that they present a rough image of how schools are perceived, prestige-wise, in the legal community. If UC Irvine debuts in the top, say, 25 or 30, it would be insulting to every other school in the country (no offense UCI).

[BigZuck]

I'm interested in UC Irvine. I know these rankings don't have all that much credibility on TLs (nor should they), but as far as rankings go you can at least argue that they present a rough image of how schools are perceived, prestige-wise, in the legal community. If UC Irvine debuts in the top, say, 25 or 30, it would be insulting to every other school in the country (no offense UCI).

I don't think they present a rough image of how schools are perceived, prestige-wise, in the legal community

I doubt some rando small firm partner in Florida ever thinks about Hastings or SMU or which is better when compared to the other

Maybe the partner thinks SMU is better than Cooley because SMU has a football team and lol what's Cooley, I dunno. But that would be a super rough tracking. Maybe that's what you meant?

But yeah, I don't think the rankings track much of anything other than their own self-stimulation

[rpupkin]

I'm interested in UC Irvine. I know these rankings don't have all that much credibility on TLs (nor should they), but as far as rankings go you can at least argue that they present a rough image of how schools are perceived, prestige-wise, in the legal community.If UC Irvine debuts in the top, say, 25 or 30, it would be insulting to every other school in the country (no offense UCI).

Why?

[Moneytrees]

I'm interested in UC Irvine. I know these rankings don't have all that much credibility on TLs (nor should they), but as far as rankings go you can at least argue that they present a rough image of how schools are perceived, prestige-wise, in the legal community.If UC Irvine debuts in the top, say, 25 or 30, it would be insulting to every other school in the country (no offense UCI).

Why?

Because UCI basically has no reputation. It has no alumni base, and has played no role in shaping the legal field. So sure, maybe rankings don't mean anything, but it just seems silly to me that a school like UCI could be considered "better" than solid regional schools that have been around for 100+ years.

[Moneytrees]

I'm interested in UC Irvine. I know these rankings don't have all that much credibility on TLs (nor should they), but as far as rankings go you can at least argue that they present a rough image of how schools are perceived, prestige-wise, in the legal community. If UC Irvine debuts in the top, say, 25 or 30, it would be insulting to every other school in the country (no offense UCI).

I don't think they present a rough image of how schools are perceived, prestige-wise, in the legal community

I doubt some rando small firm partner in Florida ever thinks about Hastings or SMU or which is better when compared to the other

Maybe the partner thinks SMU is better than Cooley because SMU has a football team and lol what's Cooley, I dunno. But that would be a super rough tracking. Maybe that's what you meant?

But yeah, I don't think the rankings track much of anything other than their own self-stimulation

BigZuck-

Yeah, outside of the top 50 (or I don't know, top 40?) rankings probably start to lose all meaning.

[pamphleteer]

After the top 13 schools (and even within them), rankings lose all meaning. If you want to practice in Chicago you're much better off attending 41st-ranked UIUC than 19th-ranked Emory. If you want to practice in Boston you're much better off attending #36 Boston College than #18 WUSTL. Et cetera.

[baal hadad]

I hope that US News does not follow the lead of Above the Law and include cost in its ratings. Since many people do not pay sticker including cost can damage the usefulness of the ratings.

For example:

Imagine a student is choosing between two schools, a highly prestigious school at sticker, a less prestigious school at half price. This is not an uncommon scenario and renders the ratings useless for comparing these choices, if the sticker price is a factor. The appropriate question to ask is if the difference in price is worth the additional prestige.

There is no indication from US News that it will include anything to do with costs. Indeed, I've urged them not to because no cost number really means anything on its own.

I'm hesitant to even talk about this stuff, though. US News is a toxic influence on prospective students and law schools, and is doing serious damage to the legal profession and the people who eventually join it.

Agree USNWR rankings are shit and should have no bearing on ones law school decision

[Moneytrees]

After the top 13 schools (and even within them), rankings lose all meaning. If you want to practice in Chicago you're much better off attending 41st-ranked UIUC than 19th-ranked Emory. If you want to practice in Boston you're much better off attending #36 Boston College than #18 WUSTL. Et cetera.

Egregious Cornell trolling.

[pamphleteer]

After the top 13 schools (and even within them), rankings lose all meaning. If you want to practice in Chicago you're much better off attending 41st-ranked UIUC than 19th-ranked Emory. If you want to practice in Boston you're much better off attending #36 Boston College than #18 WUSTL. Et cetera.

Egregious Cornell trolling.

It was actually meant to be egregious GULC trolling. It's a good school but its employment prospects are indistinguishable from Texas and Vanderbilt so it feels weird to lump it in with Cornell and above.

[michwolv]

If you really want to use USNWR to tackle the cost problem, ask them to a) get rid of the expenditures/student category and b) get rid of the academic peer rating. Without b) there's no USNWR rankings boost from hiring "star" faculty. If schools want to pay the Bainbridges $400k/yr, they're going to have to have to do it for intrinsic reasons. For the life of me, I could never figure out how people whose research no one in the world deems worth funding can command $200k+ in annual compensation. If they taught more than a class per semester, I might be able to understand.

I mean, take a look at this - (http://database.collegemedia.com/databa ... orm=Submit)

University of Michigan Law has 10 faculty salaries higher than $580k!!!

Sorry to derail but wanted to correct this. The highest earner last year was the dean at $470k. All the salaries listed on that page are what those profs would make if they were full-time for 12 months. But all the people listed are adjuncts, they aren’t even close to full time. For example, Hirschel, listed at $774,000, only has a .06 appointment. So she only made $46k. Kethledge is listed at $594k but is only a .09, so he made $54k. http://www.umsalary.info/deptsearch.php ... 0&Campus=0

[Moneytrees]

After the top 13 schools (and even within them), rankings lose all meaning. If you want to practice in Chicago you're much better off attending 41st-ranked UIUC than 19th-ranked Emory. If you want to practice in Boston you're much better off attending #36 Boston College than #18 WUSTL. Et cetera.

Egregious Cornell trolling.

It was actually meant to be egregious GULC trolling. It's a good school but its employment prospects are indistinguishable from Texas and Vanderbilt so it feels weird to lump it in with Cornell and above.

Not really. GULC is still a notch above Texas and Vanderbilt (both excellent schools) due to its raw placement power. Georgetown rightfully receives a lot of criticism due to its bloated class sizes and track record of stinginess with scholarship money, but let's not forget the sheer amount of students it places into elite jobs. Last year it placed 270 people into Biglaw jobs; another 40 or so got federal clerkships. Cornell's class size is only around 200 people (as is Vanderbilt's). Those numbers give you an idea of Georgetown's raw placement power.

If Georgetown trimmed its incoming class size by about 100 or 150 people it could easily have one of the best employment outcome rates in the country. Its employment numbers should already begin to noticeably improve in the next couple years given that class sizes have been slowly shrinking.

[chuckbass]

After the top 13 schools (and even within them), rankings lose all meaning. If you want to practice in Chicago you're much better off attending 41st-ranked UIUC than 19th-ranked Emory. If you want to practice in Boston you're much better off attending #36 Boston College than #18 WUSTL. Et cetera.

Egregious Cornell trolling.

It was actually meant to be egregious GULC trolling. It's a good school but its employment prospects are indistinguishable from Texas and Vanderbilt so it feels weird to lump it in with Cornell and above.

Not really. GULC is still a notch above Texas and Vanderbilt (both excellent schools) due to its raw placement power. Georgetown rightfully receives a lot of criticism due to its bloated class sizes and track record of stinginess with scholarship money, but let's not forget the sheer amount of students it places into elite jobs. Last year it placed 270 people into Biglaw jobs; another 40 or so got federal clerkships. Cornell's class size is only around 200 people (as is Vanderbilt's). Those numbers give you an idea of Georgetown's raw placement power.

If Georgetown trimmed its incoming class size by about 100 or 150 people it could easily have one of the best employment outcome rates in the country. Its employment numbers should already begin to noticeably improve in the next couple years given that class sizes have been slowly shrinking.

Plus GULC is more national than Vandy or UT fwiw.

[foles]

.

[rpupkin]

I'd love if they cut their class sizes to match what they can actually place. Can anyone explain why they don't/why they take 113 transfers besides the obvious reason ($$$)?

They just want to provide more opportunity. Don't hate.

[Moneytrees]

I'd love if they cut their class sizes to match what they can actually place. Can anyone explain why they don't/why they take 113 transfers besides the obvious reason ($$$)?

They just want to provide more opportunity. Don't hate.

Law school is essentially a business and Georgetown is one of the best around at doing business. It has a huge name brand and can get away with having gigantic class sizes because its job placement is still better than all but 13 other schools in the country.

[chuckbass]

GULC also has a really low endowment and is strapped for cash