Top Law Schools

Exact date

3/11 See this thread for more details.
http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 2&t=224971

m

What constitutes worthless? You must be more specific. Are ATL rankings superior? Should rankings just be based on LST rankings? Thanks.

m

redbull12 wrote:What constitutes worthless? You must be more specific. Are ATL rankings superior? Should rankings just be based on LST rankings? Thanks.

The USNWR rankings are useless. Employment prospects v. cost are much more useful measures of a school's worth.

rad lulz wrote:

redbull12 wrote:What constitutes worthless? You must be more specific. Are ATL rankings superior? Should rankings just be based on LST rankings? Thanks.

USNWR rankings are worthless when you can look at lsn

Which, by the way, is not a ranking

Rad, assuming you mean LST here?

Rad and nony, I mean this genuinely. Feel free to ridicule me.

I understand that employment prospects v. cost is the only way to realistically evaluate schools. I understand that USNWR means close to nothing. It may mean absolutely nothing for regional T1s where secondary markets aren't likely to (or can't) adjust their hiring based on small differences in the rankings.

However, for semi-regional t15-25 schools, might USNWR effect employment on the margins? I'm thinking about USC, Vandy, WUSTL, ND, and maybe even Emory. These schools function similarly to regional T1s, but they place slightly more nationally and slightly more in biglaw. Will employers adjust their preferences for these schools based on USNWR? I know this may mean the difference in 2-5 students from each school getting a desirable employment outcome. I'm talking marginal enough that it probably shouldn't really effect the decision-making process.

But do you think a drop for ND or a bump for WUSTL might mean large firms would higher slightly deeper or give a few more call backs or just preference the school a bit more?

(Again, I know one shouldn't choose one of those schools for big law. I know that even if one did the 1-3% marginal effect is probably not even a factor.)

Dude, employers aren't carrying printouts of USNWR into interviews. They hire kids they like from schools they're familiar with. That's it.

A better reputation leads to a better ranking. Not the other way around.

m

Tiago Splitter wrote:A better reputation leads to a better ranking. Not the other way around.

North wrote:Dude, employers aren't carrying printouts of USNWR into interviews. They hire kids they like from schools they're familiar with. That's it.

Tcrs

North wrote:Dude, employers aren't carrying printouts of USNWR into interviews. They hire kids they like from schools they're familiar with. That's it.

Judges do - and on top of that they have requirements like say top 5% or 10% of your class otherwise don't apply. Don't be fooled school rankings matter a great deal especially going to a t14 - portability is no insignificant aspect of your JD either.

PrideandGlory1776 wrote:

North wrote:Dude, employers aren't carrying printouts of USNWR into interviews. They hire kids they like from schools they're familiar with. That's it.

Judges do - and on top of that they have requirements like say top 5% or 10% of your class otherwise don't apply. Don't be fooled school rankings matter a great deal especially going to a t14 - portability is no insignificant aspect of your JD either.

JFC guys.

ETA: The judges aren't consulting USNWR dude. They are hiring, wait for it, kids they like... from schools they're familiar with. Judges know Yale's a good school. If Yale dropped out of the T14 tomorrow because Robert Morse decided to factor in the number of chairs in the library into the algorithm do you think judges would stop hiring kids from Yale? No. Because they hire kids they like, from schools they're familiar with. This is some basic shit.

m

Thanks north Tiago and rad. Really appreciate it. That makes sense.

yossarian71 wrote:But do you think a drop for ND or a bump for WUSTL might mean large firms would higher slightly deeper or give a few more call backs or just preference the school a bit more?

No, I really don't. In part, that's because all the schools you listed - USC, Vandy, WUSTL, ND, and Emory - are basically regional schools not in competition with each other. They're excellent regionals, much stronger than, say, Loyola, UT (Knoxville), SLU, Valparaiso, or Georgia State, but they're still regionals. If you want to work in the upper midwest you're going to go to ND, not Emory. If you want to work in the midsouth you're going to go to Vandy, not USC. So drops or bumps in relation to each other, which is what you're really talking about when you talk about those schools changing their positions in the USNWR, isn't going to make any significant difference.

Plus, I don't think most employers care at all about the things that USNWR factors into the rankings (see North's chairs-in-the-library point).

And no, judges are not consulting the USNWR. Well, okay, maybe there's the odd judge here or there who does - I can't guarantee they don't, because judges are totally idiosyncratic and maybe you have one or two who's the equivalent of a rankings-obsessed-TLSer. But generally speaking, a judge's opinion of UT v. Georgetown isn't going to be shaped by whether UT surpasses Georgetown in the rankings - it's shaped by where the judge grew up/went to school, who the judge has worked with, where the judge works. Now, this doesn't mean judges don't have opinions about tiers of schools, and yes, they have different grade requirements based on those understandings. Those tiers probably roughly correlate with USNWR rankings. But the precise placement within those rankings doesn't matter at all. A judge who graduated from Georgetown will probably always hire from Georgetown (unless they had a miserable time there and then maybe they never hire from Georgetown).

rad lulz wrote:

PrideandGlory1776 wrote: Judges do - and on top of that they have requirements like say top 5% or 10% of your class otherwise don't apply. Don't be fooled school rankings matter a great deal especially going to a t14 - portability is no insignificant aspect of your JD either.

lol

What's so funny the fact that rankings matter, only t14 has portability, or that judges discriminate based on your school's reputation + your grades?

PrideandGlory1776 wrote:

rad lulz wrote:

PrideandGlory1776 wrote: Judges do - and on top of that they have requirements like say top 5% or 10% of your class otherwise don't apply. Don't be fooled school rankings matter a great deal especially going to a t14 - portability is no insignificant aspect of your JD either.

lol

What's so funny the fact that rankings matter, only t14 has portability, or that judges discriminate based on your school's reputation + your grades?

Because the rankings aren't the reason for any of that you rube.

Rankings matter for two reasons:

(1) Because they convince prestige-obsessed 0Ls to attend wildly overpriced schools with horrible employment outcomes.

(2) Because (1) gives law school administrators a reason to beg their central administration overlords to let them keep raising law school budgets faster than inflation every single year.

No employer in the history of legal employment has ever looked at USNWR.

The legend Paul Campos.

I think law school rankings matter less because of the T14 and the fact that the schools in it do not change as a whole. On the other hand, take B-School rankings where I am pretty sure there is a lot of shuffling going on like I saw Kelley School of Business go from being ranked ~20 three years ago to being tied with Cornell at 10 which I would think would actually impact employment at least over the course of time

Paul Campos wrote:No employer in the history of legal employment has ever looked at USNWR.

As one who selected a free ride over sticker at much higher ranked schools, I agree to a point. My employer offered me in spite of my school’s USNRW ranking.

Nevertheless, your claim doesn’t take into account why higher ranked schools have much better employment stats?

Paul Campos wrote:Rankings matter for two reasons:

(1) Because they convince prestige-obsessed 0Ls to attend wildly overpriced schools with horrible employment outcomes.

(2) Because (1) gives law school administrators a reason to beg their central administration overlords to let them keep raising law school budgets faster than inflation every single year.

No employer in the history of legal employment has ever looked at USNWR.

Hey Paul,

Strongly agree with (1).

Agree with (2) and it works both ways, e.g. "Chancellor Smith, we took a hit this year so can we get $10 Mil to fight off Princeton Law and give out full-scholarship?" see WUSTL last year...

The statement about employers I would disagree with -- as I have seen employers google USNWR rankings when meeting with them. Particularly at BigLaw, people are still hung up on prestige and, as an extension, rankings. Heck I had lunch last Tuesday with someone at Gibson Dunn who asked about rankings.

Rankings have a tremendous impact on perception and behavior, and that is why they matter IMO. They shouldn't, but boy do they ever.

Hope all is well!

Mike

twenty 8 wrote:

Paul Campos wrote:No employer in the history of legal employment has ever looked at USNWR.

As one who selected a free ride over sticker at much higher ranked schools, I agree to a point. My employer offered me in spite of my school’s USNRW ranking.

Nevertheless, your claim doesn’t take into account why higher ranked schools have much better employment stats?

Mike Spivey knows more about what employers do/don't do than I do, so I can't comment on that. But it could easily be that schools have better employment stats for the *same reasons* they have higher rankings (average student scores, reputation in the legal community), without the rankings *causing* those better stats.