Top Law Schools

Schools like Cornell, NU, and Chicago, have smaller class size. Would it be difficult to hit median in these schools in comparison to schools like Michigan and Columbia?

1. Columbia vs. Chicago
2. Michigan vs. NU

Some thoughtful opinions would be greatly appreciated:D

Statistically it's obviously the same. That being said the larger the class size the greater chance that there will be an equal division of poor performing, average performing and well performing students across the class. So in a smaller class you'll potentially have an easier or harder chance of hitting median depending on the roll of the dice. That being said its a stupid metric to pick a school. If you want an easier chance of hitting the median then go to an easier school or just study hard and don't worry about.

theuserdylan wrote:Statistically it's obviously the same. That being said the larger the class size the greater chance that there will be an equal division of poor performing, average performing and well performing students across the class. So in a smaller class you'll potentially have an easier or harder chance of hitting median depending on the roll of the dice. That being said its a stupid metric to pick a school. If you want an easier chance of hitting the median then go to an easier school or just study hard and don't worry about.

+1

a smaller class doesn't mean it's 'easier' to hit median per se, instead it means that there is increased variance in getting an 'average' sort of class.

Yup, exactly, you got it. The fewer people there are the harder it is to do well, because, uh, er...

Why, God, must everyone with even a passing interest in the legal profession be so bad at math?

disco_barred wrote:Yup, exactly, you got it. The fewer people there are the harder it is to do well, because, uh, er...

Why, God, must everyone with even a passing interest in the legal profession be so bad at math?

Well, in OP's defense, there may be reasons unrelated to statistics why a smaller class size might be more competitive. It might be more difficult for a student to fall by the wayside at a place like Chicago than at a place like Georgetown, and knowing every student in your class might make you markedly more competitive with one another than being more of a face in the crowd. I'm not saying that is definitely the case (though it is definitely plausible), but not everything boils down to statistics either.

AngryAvocado wrote:

disco_barred wrote:Yup, exactly, you got it. The fewer people there are the harder it is to do well, because, uh, er...

Why, God, must everyone with even a passing interest in the legal profession be so bad at math?

Well, in OP's defense, there may be reasons unrelated to statistics why a smaller class size might be more competitive. It might be more difficult for a student to fall by the wayside at a place like Chicago than at a place like Georgetown, and knowing every student in your class might make you markedly more competitive with one another than being more of a face in the crowd. I'm not saying that is definitely the case (though it is definitely plausible), but not everything boils down to statistics either.

I was already aware of the statistical evidence that people would offer in support of there being virtually no difference in terms of class size. It seems to be the case that I've angered a lot of people in asking this question.

I know that this thread might have appeared as a "which type of school is easiest" post, but I somewhat posted the question so that I could discern the differences in terms of the overall experiences of competitiveness as well.

For reasons unrelated to the difficulty of hitting median (odds are the same either way), I gotta put in a vote for a small class size. I *love* having a small class where you can get to know nearly everyone.

rayiner wrote:For reasons unrelated to the difficulty of hitting median (odds are the same either way), I gotta put in a vote for a small class size. I *love* having a small class where you can get to know nearly everyone.

Which is probably why I'd rather go to NU than Michigian, despite the rankings. Is it just me, or is it pretty likely that Michigan's rankings will plummet in the future?

EdmundBurke23 wrote:

rayiner wrote:For reasons unrelated to the difficulty of hitting median (odds are the same either way), I gotta put in a vote for a small class size. I *love* having a small class where you can get to know nearly everyone.

Which is probably why I'd rather go to NU than Michigian, despite the rankings. Is it just me, or is it pretty likely that Michigan's rankings will plummet in the future?

It's just you.

disco_barred wrote:

EdmundBurke23 wrote:

rayiner wrote:For reasons unrelated to the difficulty of hitting median (odds are the same either way), I gotta put in a vote for a small class size. I *love* having a small class where you can get to know nearly everyone.

Which is probably why I'd rather go to NU than Michigian, despite the rankings. Is it just me, or is it pretty likely that Michigan's rankings will plummet in the future?

It's just you.

Definetely will plummet....

I like the mixed responses that I'm getting. I feel that Michigan's place in the T10 is like IUB's position in the T30 (to a smaller degree, of course...). Any others?

EdmundBurke23 wrote:I like the mixed responses that I'm getting. I feel that Michigan's place in the T10 is like IUB's position in the T30 (to a smaller degree, of course...). Any others?

OK, time to drop the pretense and crank up the ad-hominem: You're a fucking moron. As recently as a few decades ago Michigan was easily a top three university. It's placement in firm jobs, clerkships, academia, and prestigious PI gigs across the country have always been, remain, and look to be strong. It has a strong faculty, and recruits a solid class of incoming 1Ls every year in terms of softs, LSAT, and GPA.

I'm not saying HYSM, but to talk about Michigan's upcoming 'rankings plummet' is completely out of left field and not supported by any data, at all, anywhere.

disco_barred wrote:

EdmundBurke23 wrote:I like the mixed responses that I'm getting. I feel that Michigan's place in the T10 is like IUB's position in the T30 (to a smaller degree, of course...). Any others?

OK, time to drop the pretense and crank up the ad-hominem: You're a fucking moron. As recently as a few decades ago Michigan was easily a top three university. It's placement in firm jobs, clerkships, academia, and prestigious PI gigs across the country have always been, remain, and look to be strong. It has a strong faculty, and recruits a solid class of incoming 1Ls every year in terms of softs, LSAT, and GPA.

I'm not saying HYSM, but to talk about Michigan's upcoming 'rankings plummet' is completely out of left field and not supported by any data, at all, anywhere.

It was top 3 during its golden days. Now it's ranked 9th. Michigan is easier to gain admission to than the three schools tied for #10; UVA, NU, and Duke - I think it's very possible for the trend to continue.

Also: I'm not a moron. You are! GOD I love you disco_barred...

EdmundBurke23 wrote:I like the mixed responses that I'm getting. I feel that Michigan's place in the T10 is like IUB's position in the T30 (to a smaller degree, of course...). Any others?

No, Michigan is, and will be for the foreseeable future, in the MVBP bracket of the t10...the only top T14 i could see dropping is Berkley sliding behind Chicago again

underachiever wrote:

EdmundBurke23 wrote:I like the mixed responses that I'm getting. I feel that Michigan's place in the T10 is like IUB's position in the T30 (to a smaller degree, of course...). Any others?

No, Michigan is, and will be for the foreseeable future, in the MVBP bracket of the t10...the only top T14 i could see dropping is Berkley sliding behind Chicago again

A much more humane response:D Could you offer some evidence to support that claim? I keep thinking that they could easily be placed in a kind of Duke/NU/Michigan bracket.