Top Law Schools

http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNL ... hbxlogin=1

Compare with:

Class of 2009: http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNL ... 2443758843

Class of 2008: http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNL ... 2428438260

Class of 2008 every T14 school except Gtown place > 50% in the NLJ 250, and Gtown placed 49%. Class of 2010 (which did OCI in 2008, pre-crash) sees only four schools with more than 50% placed.

And keep in mind that class of 2011 will likely be even worse.

Somebody much smarter than I am will put these numbers in context, but I am a bit surprised by Cornell's showing.

Wtf? Cornell placed almost 58%? Is this pre ITE?

Yes yes, this is all very depressing. However, at least my likely school cracked the list at #49! Yay, for small victories.

Also, damn you Seton Hall, and your 2% higher placement and closer proximity to the path train!

FiveSermon wrote:Wtf? Cornell placed almost 58%? Is this pre ITE?

This is the first data FROM ite. It's class of 2010 first year associates, which means they summered in 2009 and did hiring in fall 2008. All data we've had prior to now has been from pre-ITE.

The reason Cornell and Chicago look so good is likely their small class sizes. Easier to find places for your students when you have half, or even a third, as many heads to worry about.

In my opinion the divide between Cornell and Vandy is the most shocking aspect of the data.

If this data is accurate it just throws half of TLS wisdom out the dust. Vandy good because it's markets wasn't affected as much? Guess not. lolcornell? Guess not.

thesealocust wrote:

FiveSermon wrote:Wtf? Cornell placed almost 58%? Is this pre ITE?

This is the first data FROM ite. It's class of 2010 first year associates, which means they summered in 2009 and did hiring in fall 2008. All data we've had prior to now has been from pre-ITE.

The reason Cornell and Chicago look so good is likely their small class sizes. Easier to find places for your students when you have half, or even a third, as many heads to worry about.

In my opinion the divide between Cornell and Vandy is the most shocking aspect of the data.

OCI 2008 happened pre ITE, but they got their summers ITE. It's kind of a mix. This data is mostly about who survived no offers.

Very interesting data. I'm waiting for someone to explain this. Cornell kicked arse, Duke dropped, NU dropped alot, Vandy and cornell are worlds apart, Columbia and Chicago also did alot better than NYU...etc

Anyone know why these trends occurred?

W&L got hit hard apparently... I'm surprised

BeachandRun23 wrote:Very interesting data. I'm waiting for someone to explain this. Cornell kicked arse, Duke dropped, NU dropped alot, Vandy and cornell are worlds apart, Columbia and Chicago also did alot better than NYU...etc

Anyone know why these trends occurred?

These arent trends, this is a snapshot. It is pretty useless because it didnt really occur in a stable environment. Its just a static demonstration of placement in a given year. Unfortunately, we wont have access to useful data. A lot of this data likely had to do with the markets where the schools placed. Schools that placed in NYC killed. Schools that place everywhere else didnt do so hot. This dynamic was pretty well discussed the last couple of years.

Borhas wrote:W&L got hit hard apparently... I'm surprised

Not sure whats so surprising. Its one of a number of schools that fight for the leftovers of a very saturated legal market (by all accounts). With GULC, GW, UVA, etc. it wouldn't seem reasonable to expect schools like W&M, W&L, etc. to keep pace.

BeachandRun23 wrote:Very interesting data. I'm waiting for someone to explain this. Cornell kicked arse, Duke dropped, NU dropped alot, Vandy and cornell are worlds apart, Columbia and Chicago also did alot better than NYU...etc

Anyone know why these trends occurred?

1) Don't try to make trends off one year to year change. Last year everyone was laughing at Cornell for not being a t14, and look what happened. It should be obvious that these scores aren't an accurate measure of the placement of each school relative to each other. There is just too much moving around, even before ITE the data was pretty fluid. Firms don't update their hiring matrices each year.

2) It was a chaotic time for law firm recruiting. This class was hired during the last stage of the boom era, but got their full time offers after the crash.

3) Different markets handled no offers differently. NYC was the first hit (and you can see that in the 2009 data) but had already stopped the bleeding(comparatively in 2010). The South had no problems in 2009, but had really terrible offer rates for the C/O 2010 SA's. That's why Vandy did so poorly.

The only thing that I can't explain is NYU. All the other NYC schools did amazing. And they got burned. Who knows.

So all of these firm hiring datas are useless? I seriously do not get how Cornell placed so high and schools like Vandy dropped from 45%....and like DF said...what's up with NYU? If NYC was the reason for Cornell's high %'s wouldn't that make NYU perform even HIGHER? I mean it's located in NYC and is probably the #1 or #2 school for NYC biglaw.

Hey I'm just glad Tulane is in the T50. Last year was rather embarrassing...

The university of georgia students must be pissed at georgia state.

Overall, I do like that fact that the data throws all of those T30 ideals out of the window. That and Emory outdoing WashU.

This is amazing water cooler material. If only I played sports with other students from the law school.

Also, it appears that once you reach below 25%ish into biglaw, the rest of the schools are pretty much in the same boat.

Desert Fox wrote:
The only thing that I can't explain is NYU. All the other NYC schools did amazing. And they got burned. Who knows.

TTT in decline?

Aberzombie1892 wrote:Hey I'm just glad Tulane is in the T50. Last year was rather embarrassing...

The university of georgia students must be pissed at georgia state.

Overall, I do like that fact that the data throws all of those T30 ideals out of the window. That and Emory outdoing WashU.

This is amazing water cooler material. If only I played sports with other students from the law school.

How does it do that?? 28 of the top 30 are top 30 schools. That would confirm the "ideals" if anything.

tkgrrett wrote:

Aberzombie1892 wrote:Hey I'm just glad Tulane is in the T50. Last year was rather embarrassing...

The university of georgia students must be pissed at georgia state.

Overall, I do like that fact that the data throws all of those T30 ideals out of the window. That and Emory outdoing WashU.

This is amazing water cooler material. If only I played sports with other students from the law school.

How does it do that?? 28 of the top 30 are top 30 schools. That would confirm the "ideals" if anything.

People pretend that the T30 is a meaningful distinction.

FiveSermon wrote:So all of these firm hiring datas are useless? I seriously do not get how Cornell placed so high and schools like Vandy dropped from 45%....and like DF said...what's up with NYU? If NYC was the reason for Cornell's high %'s wouldn't that make NYU perform even HIGHER? I mean it's located in NYC and is probably the #1 or #2 school for NYC biglaw.

OCI 2008 was still white hot. The difference between the lower t14 and CCN wasn't as huge. The main difference was placement at top firms.

Desert Fox wrote:

BeachandRun23 wrote:Very interesting data. I'm waiting for someone to explain this. Cornell kicked arse, Duke dropped, NU dropped alot, Vandy and cornell are worlds apart, Columbia and Chicago also did alot better than NYU...etc

Anyone know why these trends occurred?

1) Don't try to make trends off one year to year change. Last year everyone was laughing at Cornell for not being a t14, and look what happened. It should be obvious that these scores aren't an accurate measure of the placement of each school relative to each other. There is just too much moving around, even before ITE the data was pretty fluid. Firms don't update their hiring matrices each year.

2) It was a chaotic time for law firm recruiting. This class was hired during the last stage of the boom era, but got their full time offers after the crash.

3) Different markets handled no offers differently. NYC was the first hit (and you can see that in the 2009 data) but had already stopped the bleeding(comparatively in 2010). The South had no problems in 2009, but had really terrible offer rates for the C/O 2010 SA's. That's why Vandy did so poorly.

The only thing that I can't explain is NYU. All the other NYC schools did amazing. And they got burned. Who knows.

I don't care what anyone says, I've bee saying it for years and I stick by it because the data supports it, NYU is NOT on the same level as CLS and UChicago. CC are their own tier. NYU is the NYC focused peer of MVBP. And from what I've seen of Penn's NYC placement, as well as what people familiar with Penn, I don't even know if NYU trumps Penn like that. Basically firms in NYC see NYU as being special because it's in the city, but everywhere else sees NYU as the same as MVBP. I think that's why you see CC year after year outdoing NYU (and UVA and Penn outdoing them frequently as well). They do get a boost in NYC like C and C do, but outside of that C and C are definitely more respected. Basically they're NYU+.

Desert Fox wrote:

BeachandRun23 wrote:Very interesting data. I'm waiting for someone to explain this. Cornell kicked arse, Duke dropped, NU dropped alot, Vandy and cornell are worlds apart, Columbia and Chicago also did alot better than NYU...etc

Anyone know why these trends occurred?

1) Don't try to make trends off one year to year change. Last year everyone was laughing at Cornell for not being a t14, and look what happened. It should be obvious that these scores aren't an accurate measure of the placement of each school relative to each other. There is just too much moving around, even before ITE the data was pretty fluid. Firms don't update their hiring matrices each year.

2) It was a chaotic time for law firm recruiting. This class was hired during the last stage of the boom era, but got their full time offers after the crash.

3) Different markets handled no offers differently. NYC was the first hit (and you can see that in the 2009 data) but had already stopped the bleeding(comparatively in 2010). The South had no problems in 2009, but had really terrible offer rates for the C/O 2010 SA's. That's why Vandy did so poorly.

The only thing that I can't explain is NYU. All the other NYC schools did amazing. And they got burned. Who knows.

I see, thanks. Well how do we know schools relative placements? I thought texas would be doing pretty well because most people say the texas ecnomoy is decent/there are biglaw jobs in texas...etc. But texas didnt even outplace GW here. And most people siad GW would get slammed because its in DC and I heard reports of only 20-25% of people getting biglaw at gulc, so i thought gw would be even lower...maybe 15%? Any idea?

BeachandRun23 wrote: I see, thanks. Well how do we know schools relative placements? I thought texas would be doing pretty well because most people say the texas ecnomoy is decent/there are biglaw jobs in texas...etc. But texas didnt even outplace GW here. And most people siad GW would get slammed because its in DC and I heard reports of only 20-25% of people getting biglaw at gulc, so i thought gw would be even lower...maybe 15%? Any idea?

DC firms weren't as bad with not offering their summer classes.

A lot of people at these schools got 2L jobs at NLJ firms then after the economy crashed, they didn't give them a full time job. This means that there were some top 10% t14 students who ended up with no job because their firm couldn't keep them on. When a below median t14 student got to keep their job because their firm wasn't in trouble.

Next years data will show placement power ITE.

Cornell historically sends lots of kids to NLJ250 firms, specifically firms outside biglaw but still within the 250. The name has cachet with those firms, but biglaw won't touch that many cornellians. When kids from NYU show up at those firms for interviews they are viewed with suspicion. The firms assume they will jump to biglaw just as soon as they can. Not so with the cornell students! So more of them get a foot in.

BeachandRun23 wrote:
I see, thanks. Well how do we know schools relative placements? I thought texas would be doing pretty well because most people say the texas ecnomoy is decent/there are biglaw jobs in texas...etc. But texas didnt even outplace GW here. And most people siad GW would get slammed because its in DC and I heard reports of only 20-25% of people getting biglaw at gulc, so i thought gw would be even lower...maybe 15%? Any idea?

It isnt something that is very clear cut like tls makes it seem. Think of the schools more like you think of sports recruits. There are 5 star schools, 4.5 star schools and then 4 star schools. Within a certain star range other random factors come into play with placement so in any given year the order could be different.

WTF happened with Duke?

Aberzombie1892 wrote:WTF happened with Duke?

why is that surprising to you?