I know they're supposed to reflect the employment outcomes for law school graduates in different years, but those reports fluctuate year-to-year almost randomly, and no one know what the economy (or the legal market in general) will look like in the three years after someone starts law school.
Can anyone shed light on how trustworthy LST is and whether it's worth considering their reports before making a decision on law school? Maybe I'm missing something.
Is it a waste of time to research law schools on LST (law school transparency)? Forum
-
ALCA1920
- Posts: 55
- Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2019 8:42 pm
-
dvlthndr
- Posts: 184
- Joined: Mon Jun 24, 2019 10:34 pm
Re: Is it a waste of time to research law schools on LST (law school transparency)?
LST repackages the information available form ABA disclosures and NALP reports. You might come across a "misleading" data point here and there (e.g., salaries might seem lower for Yale graduates because so many of them start-off clerking), but the information is pretty accurate overall. If you want a more "authoritative" source of information, you can just pick through the ABA/NALP information directly.
Unless you graduate into the middle of a recession, I'm not sure how much employment numbers really "fluctuate" year-to-year. If you are going to a fancy school where 80-90% graduates work in big-law, it will probably be the same story three years from now. If you go to some regional school where half the class works in the surrounding area making $60k, chances are that will still be the case 3 years from now.
Whether you use LST or some other source, the one thing I would keep in mind is the cost of attendance, versus the typical employment outcome from a given school.
Unless you graduate into the middle of a recession, I'm not sure how much employment numbers really "fluctuate" year-to-year. If you are going to a fancy school where 80-90% graduates work in big-law, it will probably be the same story three years from now. If you go to some regional school where half the class works in the surrounding area making $60k, chances are that will still be the case 3 years from now.
Whether you use LST or some other source, the one thing I would keep in mind is the cost of attendance, versus the typical employment outcome from a given school.
-
nixy
- Posts: 4479
- Joined: Fri Feb 16, 2018 8:58 am
Re: Is it a waste of time to research law schools on LST (law school transparency)?
Why would it be a waste of time to research what percentage of grads get jobs, and what kinds of jobs they get?
LST Reports aren't "supposed" to reflect employment outcomes - they *do* reflect employment outcomes. They take their information from disclosures that schools are now required to make to the ABA (which, for the record, schools did not disclose in any reliable fashion before LST came along and lobbied for them to be required to do so).
Yes, there are fluctuations year to year, yes, often based on the economy, but there are still really obvious trends. Like if you want to obsess over the merits of going to Columbia vs. going to Penn there may not be too much benefit in getting caught up in the weeds of LST fluctuations - LST makes clear that both are excellent schools - but there are still differences that may matter to you. Like if you're considering Columbia and Penn but want to work in Chicago or California, you can see if, historically, looking at several years' data, one of the two places better where you want to end up. You may still decide that your chances even from the school that places worse are good enough that you're happy to go there, but at least you can make an informed decision. Or if you want to clerk, you can look at clerkship rates - LST doesn't capture everything (lots of people clerk after working for a year or so), but still, some schools punch a bit higher clerkship-wise, and some lower, and that can be helpful to know.
There are a lot of people who don't know much about law schools, for whom LST is definitely helpful. It's helpful for people who want to go to the University of Nebraska and then work for the Hague, or who get into Cal Western and think they're going to get a big law job, or, to be a bit more charitable, who are weighing scholarship options at T20s v. somewhere in the T14 at sticker, and really want to drill down on the employment numbers.
And sure, an applicant can't know what the economy will look like when they graduate. But they can still compare one school's employment numbers against another's. Even if, say, School X's big law employment rate is 70% now but dips to 55% by the time someone's doing OCI, it's still worth being able to compare School X to School Y. If School Y has historically had worse employment outcomes than School X, and the economy tanks, you can pretty much assume that School Y's outcomes will drop lower than School X's will. Etc.
tl;dr - of course it's not a waste of time to research schools on LST.
LST Reports aren't "supposed" to reflect employment outcomes - they *do* reflect employment outcomes. They take their information from disclosures that schools are now required to make to the ABA (which, for the record, schools did not disclose in any reliable fashion before LST came along and lobbied for them to be required to do so).
Yes, there are fluctuations year to year, yes, often based on the economy, but there are still really obvious trends. Like if you want to obsess over the merits of going to Columbia vs. going to Penn there may not be too much benefit in getting caught up in the weeds of LST fluctuations - LST makes clear that both are excellent schools - but there are still differences that may matter to you. Like if you're considering Columbia and Penn but want to work in Chicago or California, you can see if, historically, looking at several years' data, one of the two places better where you want to end up. You may still decide that your chances even from the school that places worse are good enough that you're happy to go there, but at least you can make an informed decision. Or if you want to clerk, you can look at clerkship rates - LST doesn't capture everything (lots of people clerk after working for a year or so), but still, some schools punch a bit higher clerkship-wise, and some lower, and that can be helpful to know.
There are a lot of people who don't know much about law schools, for whom LST is definitely helpful. It's helpful for people who want to go to the University of Nebraska and then work for the Hague, or who get into Cal Western and think they're going to get a big law job, or, to be a bit more charitable, who are weighing scholarship options at T20s v. somewhere in the T14 at sticker, and really want to drill down on the employment numbers.
And sure, an applicant can't know what the economy will look like when they graduate. But they can still compare one school's employment numbers against another's. Even if, say, School X's big law employment rate is 70% now but dips to 55% by the time someone's doing OCI, it's still worth being able to compare School X to School Y. If School Y has historically had worse employment outcomes than School X, and the economy tanks, you can pretty much assume that School Y's outcomes will drop lower than School X's will. Etc.
tl;dr - of course it's not a waste of time to research schools on LST.
