Top 50 go-to law schools 2012 Forum

[071816]

I love how TLSers rightly laugh at employment stats published by law schools that are based small respondent pools but then piss their chinos over a report with no respondent data at all.

are you high?

[pugilistjd]

I love how TLSers rightly laugh at employment stats published by law schools that are based small respondent pools but then piss their chinos over a report with no respondent data at all.

What? They get the data from firms... add up the number for each school... and then divide by class size.

It's not like this is unreliable data.

What percentage of the NLJ250 responded to the survey? Did I miss something?

[Bronck]

I love how TLSers rightly laugh at employment stats published by law schools that are based small respondent pools but then piss their chinos over a report with no respondent data at all.

What? They get the data from firms... add up the number for each school... and then divide by class size.

It's not like this is unreliable data.

What percentage of the NLJ250 responded to the survey? Did I miss something?

This same exact discussion happened on page 3 of this thread: http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 8&start=50

Hell, if not all of the firms responded to the survey, then these are conservative estimates. That's completely different than looking at the liberal use of employment data by law schools.

[pugilistjd]

I love how TLSers rightly laugh at employment stats published by law schools that are based small respondent pools but then piss their chinos over a report with no respondent data at all.

What? They get the data from firms... add up the number for each school... and then divide by class size.

It's not like this is unreliable data.

What percentage of the NLJ250 responded to the survey? Did I miss something?

This same exact discussion happened on page 3 of this thread: http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 8&start=50

Hell, if not all of the firms responded to the survey, then these are conservative estimates. That's completely different than looking at the liberal use of employment data by law schools.

I still don't see why anyone should assume these are conservative estimates besides the fact that NLJ doesn't have prima facie reasons to abuse data.

[de5igual]

I still don't see why anyone should assume these are conservative estimates besides the fact that NLJ doesn't have prima facie reasons to abuse data.

because these are based on actual numbers. meaning, even if you didn't have the entire NLJ250 reporting, the percentage number can only possibly be higher not lower.

[laxbrah420]

I still don't see why anyone should assume these are conservative estimates besides the fact that NLJ doesn't have prima facie reasons to abuse data.

because these are based on actual numbers. meaning, even if you didn't have the entire NLJ250 reporting, the percentage number can only possibly be higher not lower.

i'm thinking you were an English major?

[de5igual]

I still don't see why anyone should assume these are conservative estimates besides the fact that NLJ doesn't have prima facie reasons to abuse data.

because these are based on actual numbers. meaning, even if you didn't have the entire NLJ250 reporting, the percentage number can only possibly be higher not lower.

i'm thinking you were an English major?

nah, brah. but ya see, "negative employment" figures don't exist, so with each additional person that was potentially excluded, the numerator can only increase while the denominator stays constant.

[laxbrah420]

good point

[Antilles Haven]

I still don't see why anyone should assume these are conservative estimates besides the fact that NLJ doesn't have prima facie reasons to abuse data.

because these are based on actual numbers. meaning, even if you didn't have the entire NLJ250 reporting, the percentage number can only possibly be higher not lower.

i'm thinking you were an English major?

I'm thinking you have the cognitive faculties of a lemon.

[pugilistjd]

nah, brah. but ya see, "negative employment" figures don't exist, so with each additional person that was potentially excluded, the numerator can only increase while the denominator stays constant.

Nice! So when UMiami claims they have 96% employment at 9 months with only 30% of grads responding, that only means there can only be MORE employed UMiami grads out there. The percentage can ONLY be higher!

[laxbrah420]

I'm thinking the poster didnt get mad so you can chill

[laxbrah420]

nah, brah. but ya see, "negative employment" figures don't exist, so with each additional person that was potentially excluded, the numerator can only increase while the denominator stays constant.

Nice! So when UMiami claims they have 96% employment at 9 months with only 30% of grads responding, that only means there can only be MORE employed UMiami grads out there. The percentage can ONLY be higher!

Well, that's not calculated the same

[Trina Johnson]

No UGA or UF?

[20130312]

There is so much math failure going on right now.

[stillwater]

nah, brah. but ya see, "negative employment" figures don't exist, so with each additional person that was potentially excluded, the numerator can only increase while the denominator stays constant.

Nice! So when UMiami claims they have 96% employment at 9 months with only 30% of grads responding, that only means there can only be MORE employed UMiami grads out there. The percentage can ONLY be higher!

No. The NLJ250 rankings are against a fixed number (the total size of the class) and the school's employment data is against the number of respondents. And the rest should be obvious.

[Trina Johnson]

There is so much math failure going on right now.

Did I miss them??? I don't see UGA or UF?

[071816]

nah, brah. but ya see, "negative employment" figures don't exist, so with each additional person that was potentially excluded, the numerator can only increase while the denominator stays constant.

Nice! So when UMiami claims they have 96% employment at 9 months with only 30% of grads responding, that only means there can only be MORE employed UMiami grads out there. The percentage can ONLY be higher!

Stop posting, guy.

[JusticeHarlan]

nah, brah. but ya see, "negative employment" figures don't exist, so with each additional person that was potentially excluded, the numerator can only increase while the denominator stays constant.

Nice! So when UMiami claims they have 96% employment at 9 months with only 30% of grads responding, that only means there can only be MORE employed UMiami grads out there. The percentage can ONLY be higher!

[Bronck]

There is so much math failure going on right now.

This ain't even complex math either.

[Sherwood2014]

There is so much math failure going on right now.

+1. So much so, it is comical, in a sad way.

[Trina Johnson]

lawyers only have to know how to divide by 3 right?

[Sherwood2014]

lawyers only have to know how to divide by 3 right?

Tell me it ain't so. . . not 3 too.

[pugilistjd]

No. The NLJ250 rankings are against a fixed number (the total size of the class) and the school's employment data is against the number of respondents. And the rest should be obvious.

The NLJ250 rankings are based on an annual survey sent out to NLJ250 firms. So, their rankings are determined by the respondents just like law school employment data the difference being law schools publish respondent percentages.

[emkay625]

nah, brah. but ya see, "negative employment" figures don't exist, so with each additional person that was potentially excluded, the numerator can only increase while the denominator stays constant.

Nice! So when UMiami claims they have 96% employment at 9 months with only 30% of grads responding, that only means there can only be MORE employed UMiami grads out there. The percentage can ONLY be higher!

You are speaking about the way ABA data for USNWR data is compiled. This is much different.

The NLJ rankings are not calculated based upon only the people who respond. The NLJ takes the total number of people in the class and that serves as the bottom portion of the ratio, or the whole. Then, firms send in their class information. The NLJ divides it up, and how ever many a school has is the top portion of the ratio. Divide, move your decimal over two places, and you have your percentage.

Using the entire class as your total makes it so that only a negative bias could happen in this situation. If a firm doesn't respond, it would lower all of the school's percentages, not raise them.

[emkay625]

No. The NLJ250 rankings are against a fixed number (the total size of the class) and the school's employment data is against the number of respondents. And the rest should be obvious.

The NLJ250 rankings are based on an annual survey sent out to NLJ250 firms. So, their rankings are determined by the respondents just like law school employment data the difference being law schools publish respondent percentages.

Is this some kind of trolling effort?