US News 2017 Forum

[Maplesyrup]

damn they went tie crazy, 54 schools in the top 50! yeehaw

[Biglaw1990]

I bet Berkeley drops...considering its average LSAT is now a 166.....

Berkeley is not dropping any time in the near future. It has amazing clerkship placement, and it has a great PI program as well. Also, just so you know, Berkeley's median (50th percentile) LSAT score is 166. Most law schools don't publish the average (mean) LSAT score because it isn't very valuable to prospective students.

[SLS_AMG]

I bet Berkeley drops...considering its average LSAT is now a 166.....

Berkeley is not dropping any time in the near future. It has amazing clerkship placement, and it has a great PI program as well. Also, just so you know, Berkeley's median (50th percentile) LSAT score is 166. Most law schools don't publish the average (mean) LSAT score because it isn't very valuable to prospective students.

Berkeley is a great school, but it certainly has its weaknesses. In addition to being stingy as hell, some of what you said is either misleading or also applicable to other schools. Berkeley's clerkship placement last year was great, but if you look at recent history it is, at best, on par with its peer schools and sometimes lagged behind them. One year does not a pattern make. And yes, it places well in PI, but so does Michigan, if slightly less so.

I also think that a 166 median is objectively low for a top-ten school. Berkeley can (and should) get in range with its peers.

[Biglaw1990]

I bet Berkeley drops...considering its average LSAT is now a 166.....

Berkeley is not dropping any time in the near future. It has amazing clerkship placement, and it has a great PI program as well. Also, just so you know, Berkeley's median (50th percentile) LSAT score is 166. Most law schools don't publish the average (mean) LSAT score because it isn't very valuable to prospective students.

Berkeley is a great school, but it certainly has its weaknesses. In addition to being stingy as hell, some of what you said is either misleading or also applicable to other schools. Berkeley's clerkship placement last year was great, but if you look at recent history it is, at best, on par with its peer schools and sometimes lagged behind them. One year does not a pattern make. And yes, it places well in PI, but so does Michigan, if slightly less so.

I also think that a 166 median is objectively low for a top-ten school. Berkeley can (and should) get in range with its peers.

All I'm saying is that Berkeley deserves to be in the T10, since it has great clerkship placement and PI resources. I never said that Berkeley is better than its peers, only that it can hold its own.

[rpupkin]

I bet Berkeley drops...considering its average LSAT is now a 166.....

Berkeley is not dropping any time in the near future. It has amazing clerkship placement, and it has a great PI program as well. Also, just so you know, Berkeley's median (50th percentile) LSAT score is 166. Most law schools don't publish the average (mean) LSAT score because it isn't very valuable to prospective students.

Berkeley is a great school, but it certainly has its weaknesses. In addition to being stingy as hell, some of what you said is either misleading or also applicable to other schools. Berkeley's clerkship placement last year was great, but if you look at recent history it is, at best, on par with its peer schools and sometimes lagged behind them. One year does not a pattern make. And yes, it places well in PI, but so does Michigan, if slightly less so.

I also think that a 166 median is objectively low for a top-ten school. Berkeley can (and should) get in range with its peers.

All I'm saying is that Berkeley deserves to be in the T10, since it has great clerkship placement and PI resources. I never said that Berkeley is better than its peers, only that it can hold its own.

I don't know why you guys are quibbling about Berkeley. The real story here is Duke. Just LOL @ that TTT. How long do you think it will be before Cornell passes it? I say that happens in 2018 at the latest. Don't worry, Duke students, you will still be T14--by which I mean you will be tied for 14th place with GULC.

[Alive97]

what a rag

[Biglaw1990]

I bet Berkeley drops...considering its average LSAT is now a 166.....

Berkeley is not dropping any time in the near future. It has amazing clerkship placement, and it has a great PI program as well. Also, just so you know, Berkeley's median (50th percentile) LSAT score is 166. Most law schools don't publish the average (mean) LSAT score because it isn't very valuable to prospective students.

Berkeley is a great school, but it certainly has its weaknesses. In addition to being stingy as hell, some of what you said is either misleading or also applicable to other schools. Berkeley's clerkship placement last year was great, but if you look at recent history it is, at best, on par with its peer schools and sometimes lagged behind them. One year does not a pattern make. And yes, it places well in PI, but so does Michigan, if slightly less so.

I also think that a 166 median is objectively low for a top-ten school. Berkeley can (and should) get in range with its peers.

All I'm saying is that Berkeley deserves to be in the T10, since it has great clerkship placement and PI resources. I never said that Berkeley is better than its peers, only that it can hold its own.

I don't know why you guys are quibbling about Berkeley. The real story here is Duke. Just LOL @ that TTT. How long do you think it will be before Cornell passes it? I say that happens in 2018 at the latest. Don't worry, Duke students, you will still be T14--by which I mean you will be tied for 14th place with GULC.

I was actually surprised that Duke dropped, considering its placement has improved and it held its median, unlike UVA. Why do you predict another drop?

[whysoseriousbiglaw]

I bet Berkeley drops...considering its average LSAT is now a 166.....

Berkeley is not dropping any time in the near future. It has amazing clerkship placement, and it has a great PI program as well. Also, just so you know, Berkeley's median (50th percentile) LSAT score is 166. Most law schools don't publish the average (mean) LSAT score because it isn't very valuable to prospective students.

Now kids, is statistics 101. First up is the definition of "average": a single value (as a mean, mode, or median) that summarizes or represents the general significance of a set of unequal values

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/average

PI programs don't factor into rankings - in fact it probably hurts a school's rankings....An LSAT score of 166 is pretty damn shit for a T-14 school, even worse than Cornell (that festering TTTurd).

[Alive97]

Accidentally posted early to their site...confirmed rag.

[pterodactyls]

I bet Berkeley drops...considering its average LSAT is now a 166.....

Berkeley is not dropping any time in the near future. It has amazing clerkship placement, and it has a great PI program as well. Also, just so you know, Berkeley's median (50th percentile) LSAT score is 166. Most law schools don't publish the average (mean) LSAT score because it isn't very valuable to prospective students.

Berkeley is a great school, but it certainly has its weaknesses. In addition to being stingy as hell, some of what you said is either misleading or also applicable to other schools. Berkeley's clerkship placement last year was great, but if you look at recent history it is, at best, on par with its peer schools and sometimes lagged behind them. One year does not a pattern make. And yes, it places well in PI, but so does Michigan, if slightly less so.

I also think that a 166 median is objectively low for a top-ten school. Berkeley can (and should) get in range with its peers.

Haha no, you clearly don't understand Berkeley.

Berkeley is one of the only schools that actually cares about factors other than numbers, and the data shows. Berkeley easily could make their median LSAT higher, but they choose not to. You can't be a rich white kid with a private tutor and just assume you'll be admitted to Berkeley. You actually have to build your resume and do things outside the classroom, in addition to having the numbers.

Most law schools will do anything to improve their USNWR rankings. Berkeley is one of the only schools that says "We'll admit the students we want to, and we don't care if we're #10 instead of #6." Saying that Berkeley should improve its LSAT median just to cater to Robert Morse is, I think, silly.

[pterodactyls]

I bet Berkeley drops...considering its average LSAT is now a 166.....

Berkeley is not dropping any time in the near future. It has amazing clerkship placement, and it has a great PI program as well. Also, just so you know, Berkeley's median (50th percentile) LSAT score is 166. Most law schools don't publish the average (mean) LSAT score because it isn't very valuable to prospective students.

Now kids, is statistics 101. First up is the definition of "average": a single value (as a mean, mode, or median) that summarizes or represents the general significance of a set of unequal values

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/average

+1

The word "average" can refer to any of the three. Though it's most commonly used in conversation to refer to the mean, if I published median employment data and told you "Our average starting salary is $X" I wouldn't be wrong. Something to keep in mind.

[Cochran]

I bet Berkeley drops...considering its average LSAT is now a 166.....

Berkeley is not dropping any time in the near future. It has amazing clerkship placement, and it has a great PI program as well. Also, just so you know, Berkeley's median (50th percentile) LSAT score is 166. Most law schools don't publish the average (mean) LSAT score because it isn't very valuable to prospective students.

Berkeley is a great school, but it certainly has its weaknesses. In addition to being stingy as hell, some of what you said is either misleading or also applicable to other schools. Berkeley's clerkship placement last year was great, but if you look at recent history it is, at best, on par with its peer schools and sometimes lagged behind them. One year does not a pattern make. And yes, it places well in PI, but so does Michigan, if slightly less so.

I also think that a 166 median is objectively low for a top-ten school. Berkeley can (and should) get in range with its peers.

Haha no, you clearly don't understand Berkeley.

Berkeley is one of the only schools that actually cares about factors other than numbers, and the data shows. Berkeley easily could make their median LSAT higher, but they choose not to. You can't be a rich white kid with a private tutor and just assume you'll be admitted to Berkeley. You actually have to build your resume and do things outside the classroom, in addition to having the numbers.

Most law schools will do anything to improve their USNWR rankings. Berkeley is one of the only schools that says "We'll admit the students we want to, and we don't care if we're #10 instead of #6." Saying that Berkeley should improve its LSAT median just to cater to Robert Morse is, I think, silly.

Yeah, but Berkeley isn't the only school that does that. Many other schools will reject numbers for qualities like work experience and other soft factors. Berkeley is a great school, but all of the T-14s are great schools. There is nothing that Berkeley, UVA or Michigan has accomplished within the last 5 years that makes me think they're even marginally better than Cornell, NU or Duke. I think the rankings are just numerical toss ups with very little value, that's why it sucks that they play such a prominent role to prospective students and in the industry.

[pterodactyls]

Yeah, but Berkeley isn't the only school that does that. Many other schools will reject numbers for qualities like work experience and other soft factors. Berkeley is a great school, but all of the T-14s are great schools. There is nothing that Berkeley, UVA or Michigan has accomplished within the last 5 years that makes me think they're even marginally better than Cornell, NU or Duke. I think the rankings are just numerical toss ups with very little value, that's why it sucks that they play such a prominent role to prospective students and in the industry.

Other schools reject applicants with high LSATs as well, but I think the data we have available show that Berkeley values the LSAT less than its peer schools.

I agree that the rankings can be a numerical toss up. Which is why I had a hard time with the other poster's statement that "Berkeley should improve it's median LSAT," basically implying that every school should only cater to the US News rankings and nothing else.

[Cochran]

Yeah, but Berkeley isn't the only school that does that. Many other schools will reject numbers for qualities like work experience and other soft factors. Berkeley is a great school, but all of the T-14s are great schools. There is nothing that Berkeley, UVA or Michigan has accomplished within the last 5 years that makes me think they're even marginally better than Cornell, NU or Duke. I think the rankings are just numerical toss ups with very little value, that's why it sucks that they play such a prominent role to prospective students and in the industry.

Other schools reject applicants with high LSATs as well, but I think the data we have available show that Berkeley values the LSAT less than its peer schools.

I agree that the rankings can be a numerical toss up. Which is why I had a hard time with the other poster's statement that "Berkeley should improve it's median LSAT," basically implying that every school should only cater to the US News rankings and nothing else.

You're right, if Berkeley continues to churn out quality lawyers in great jobs, why the hell should a median LSAT score drop their rank? What I really don't understand is why schools, prospective students, and those within the field of law have allowed USNWR's trivial ranking to pinpoint a school's value.

[pterodactyls]

You're right, if Berkeley continues to churn out quality lawyers in great jobs, why the hell should a median LSAT score drop their rank? What I really don't understand is why schools, prospective students, and those within the field of law have allowed USNWR's trivial ranking to pinpoint a school's value.

It's sort of a chicken or the egg thing.

Why do the best students choose to go the USNWR top ranked schools? Because that's where the best employers hire from. Why do the top employers higher from the top USNWR ranked schools? Because that's where the best students go.

[krads153]

You're right, if Berkeley continues to churn out quality lawyers in great jobs, why the hell should a median LSAT score drop their rank? What I really don't understand is why schools, prospective students, and those within the field of law have allowed USNWR's trivial ranking to pinpoint a school's value.

It's sort of a chicken or the egg thing.

Why do the best students choose to go the USNWR top ranked schools? Because that's where the best employers hire from. Why do the top employers higher from the top USNWR ranked schools? Because that's where the best students go.

I don't think employers track it as carefully as TLSers though (so minute changes don't really matter)....,most partners (who make the ultimate decisions for hiring) don't keep up to date with rankings.

[woodchuck78]

Top 50 rankings also leaked: http://abovethelaw.com/2016/03/the-2017 ... he-top-50/

[baal hadad]

Someone please tell me where the DROVES of employers are heading to oci and from which schools employers are leaving in DROVES

[SLS_AMG]

I bet Berkeley drops...considering its average LSAT is now a 166.....

Berkeley is not dropping any time in the near future. It has amazing clerkship placement, and it has a great PI program as well. Also, just so you know, Berkeley's median (50th percentile) LSAT score is 166. Most law schools don't publish the average (mean) LSAT score because it isn't very valuable to prospective students.

Berkeley is a great school, but it certainly has its weaknesses. In addition to being stingy as hell, some of what you said is either misleading or also applicable to other schools. Berkeley's clerkship placement last year was great, but if you look at recent history it is, at best, on par with its peer schools and sometimes lagged behind them. One year does not a pattern make. And yes, it places well in PI, but so does Michigan, if slightly less so.

I also think that a 166 median is objectively low for a top-ten school. Berkeley can (and should) get in range with its peers.

Haha no, you clearly don't understand Berkeley.

Berkeley is one of the only schools that actually cares about factors other than numbers, and the data shows. Berkeley easily could make their median LSAT higher, but they choose not to. You can't be a rich white kid with a private tutor and just assume you'll be admitted to Berkeley. You actually have to build your resume and do things outside the classroom, in addition to having the numbers.

Most law schools will do anything to improve their USNWR rankings. Berkeley is one of the only schools that says "We'll admit the students we want to, and we don't care if we're #10 instead of #6." Saying that Berkeley should improve its LSAT median just to cater to Robert Morse is, I think, silly.

I matriculated at Berkeley and was on the student admissions committee. I think it's safe to assume I understand Berkeley better than you do. And I stand by my statement that a 166 LSAT median is unacceptably low for a top-ten school.

[rpupkin]

Someone please tell me where the DROVES of employers are heading to oci and from which schools employers are leaving in DROVES

The rush of employers from Durham to Ann Arbor is so dramatic that it's actually affecting weather patterns in the Northern Hemisphere.

[pterodactyls]

Most law schools will do anything to improve their USNWR rankings. Berkeley is one of the only schools that says "We'll admit the students we want to, and we don't care if we're #10 instead of #6." Saying that Berkeley should improve its LSAT median just to cater to Robert Morse is, I think, silly.

I matriculated at Berkeley and was on the student admissions committee. I think it's safe to assume I understand Berkeley better than you do. And I stand by my statement that a 166 LSAT median is unacceptably low for a top-ten school.

I am still missing the part where LSAT median has any affect on employment outcomes. What does "unacceptably low" even mean? It's literally one guy, sitting in an office somewhere, that makes these rankings. If you think a median of 93rd percentile is "unacceptably low" then maybe you should have went to a different school.

[SLS_AMG]

Most law schools will do anything to improve their USNWR rankings. Berkeley is one of the only schools that says "We'll admit the students we want to, and we don't care if we're #10 instead of #6." Saying that Berkeley should improve its LSAT median just to cater to Robert Morse is, I think, silly.

I matriculated at Berkeley and was on the student admissions committee. I think it's safe to assume I understand Berkeley better than you do. And I stand by my statement that a 166 LSAT median is unacceptably low for a top-ten school.

I am still missing the part where LSAT median has any affect on employment outcomes. What does "unacceptably low" even mean? It's literally one guy, sitting in an office somewhere, that makes these rankings. If you think a median of 93rd percentile is "unacceptably low" then maybe you should have went to a different school.

Not sure why you're setting up this false dilemma whereby Berkeley must either kowtow to Robert Morse or say "to hell with" the USNWR rankings. Obviously Berkeley cares to some degree, or its LSAT median wouldn't have stayed at 167 for several straight years and remain at 166 this year. That shows some planning in the admissions department. It certainly isn't the case that the school is just admitting whomever it wants regardless of LSATs and GPAs.

As to why LSAT should matter more to the school, well, that should be obvious. LSAT is a major factor in a school's rank and Berkeley could improve its ranking if it made a concerted effort to improve in that arena. Improved rankings undoubtedly fuel alumni giving, which in turn makes more scholarship money available to future students and helps improve facilities and hire new faculty. It's really not that complicated. Improved rankings over time also increase a school's overall prestige. Penn is now widely considered one of the top schools in the country, nearly on par with Columbia, Chicago, and NYU. That wasn't the case even fifteen years ago.

What's funny is that you think Berkeley doesn't care about its USNWR ranking and just admits whomever it wants. It absolutely cares.

[SLS_AMG]

Yeah, but Berkeley isn't the only school that does that. Many other schools will reject numbers for qualities like work experience and other soft factors. Berkeley is a great school, but all of the T-14s are great schools. There is nothing that Berkeley, UVA or Michigan has accomplished within the last 5 years that makes me think they're even marginally better than Cornell, NU or Duke. I think the rankings are just numerical toss ups with very little value, that's why it sucks that they play such a prominent role to prospective students and in the industry.

Other schools reject applicants with high LSATs as well, but I think the data we have available show that Berkeley values the LSAT less than its peer schools.

I agree that the rankings can be a numerical toss up. Which is why I had a hard time with the other poster's statement that "Berkeley should improve it's median LSAT," basically implying that every school should only cater to the US News rankings and nothing else.

You're right, if Berkeley continues to churn out quality lawyers in great jobs, why the hell should a median LSAT score drop their rank? What I really don't understand is why schools, prospective students, and those within the field of law have allowed USNWR's trivial ranking to pinpoint a school's value.

Because students (and people in general) have a hard time making decisions when they must weigh several conflicting factors. The fact that a "reputable" publisher has ranked schools in an ordinal fashion assuages some of the anxiety felt by students. It's literally how humans think.

[pterodactyls]

Not sure why you're setting up this false dilemma whereby Berkeley must either kowtow to Robert Morse or say "to hell with" the USNWR rankings. Obviously Berkeley cares to some degree, or its LSAT median wouldn't have stayed at 167 for several straight years and remain at 166 this year. That shows some planning in the admissions department. It certainly isn't the case that the school is just admitting whomever it wants regardless of LSATs and GPAs.

As to why LSAT should matter more to the school, well, that should be obvious. LSAT is a major factor in a school's rank and Berkeley could improve its ranking if it made a concerted effort to improve in that arena. Improved rankings undoubtedly fuel alumni giving, which in turn makes more scholarship money available to future students and helps improve facilities and hire new faculty. It's really not that complicated.

What's funny is that you think Berkeley doesn't care about its USNWR ranking and just admits whomever it wants. It absolutely cares.

We have both agreed in this thread that Berkeley could improve its LSAT median if it wanted to. But it hasn't. I'm not saying Berkeley doesn't care about the LSAT, I'm just saying that the data suggest that Berk doesn't weight the LSAT as heavy as its peer schools, and it places greater emphasis on softs than its peer schools.

You said that Berkeley can and should improve its LSAT median. I'm saying that there are obviously reasons why it chooses not to.

[Cochran]

I bet Berkeley drops...considering its average LSAT is now a 166.....

Berkeley is not dropping any time in the near future. It has amazing clerkship placement, and it has a great PI program as well. Also, just so you know, Berkeley's median (50th percentile) LSAT score is 166. Most law schools don't publish the average (mean) LSAT score because it isn't very valuable to prospective students.

Berkeley is a great school, but it certainly has its weaknesses. In addition to being stingy as hell, some of what you said is either misleading or also applicable to other schools. Berkeley's clerkship placement last year was great, but if you look at recent history it is, at best, on par with its peer schools and sometimes lagged behind them. One year does not a pattern make. And yes, it places well in PI, but so does Michigan, if slightly less so.

I also think that a 166 median is objectively low for a top-ten school. Berkeley can (and should) get in range with its peers.

Haha no, you clearly don't understand Berkeley.

Berkeley is one of the only schools that actually cares about factors other than numbers, and the data shows. Berkeley easily could make their median LSAT higher, but they choose not to. You can't be a rich white kid with a private tutor and just assume you'll be admitted to Berkeley. You actually have to build your resume and do things outside the classroom, in addition to having the numbers.

Most law schools will do anything to improve their USNWR rankings. Berkeley is one of the only schools that says "We'll admit the students we want to, and we don't care if we're #10 instead of #6." Saying that Berkeley should improve its LSAT median just to cater to Robert Morse is, I think, silly.

I matriculated at Berkeley and was on the student admissions committee. I think it's safe to assume I understand Berkeley better than you do. And I stand by my statement that a 166 LSAT median is unacceptably low for a top-ten school.

For one, this distinction of a "top-ten" school is pointless. Duke didn't get worse and Michigan didn't get better, they are as they have always been: part of a group of top law schools.

Secondly, how important do you think LSAT scores should be when assessing a law school's value? I get the correlation that schools with lower LSAT medians bring in lower quality students. But If the school provides the same level of elite results regarding employment, why would an LSAT median factor into their ranking?