Top Law Schools

Stats are posted at: http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNL ... 2443758843
Article is: http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNL ... OLS_REPORT

What do you think?

I think this has been posted 15 times. Also, why are you posting anonymously?

Both of these posters should be outed. Mods really need to start de-anonymizing posts that abuse the anonymous feature to convince people to stop doing it.

Poster #1 is Black-Blue. Poster #2 is generally wise, so I'll let him make his point.

If these numbers are legit, why do people say that only like the top 2% of like Loyola Chicago grads can get biglaw? It says that 15% gets NLJ 250. These stats are not legit, right?

A'nold wrote:If these numbers are legit, why do people say that only like the top 2% of like Loyola Chicago grads can get biglaw? It says that 15% gets NLJ 250. These stats are not legit, right?

They are, but the class of '09 did OCI in 2007, before all hell broke loose. Numbers for NYC schools are depressed because of the large number of no offers which occurred after said breaking loose of hell.

OperaSoprano wrote:

A'nold wrote:If these numbers are legit, why do people say that only like the top 2% of like Loyola Chicago grads can get biglaw? It says that 15% gets NLJ 250. These stats are not legit, right?

They are, but the class of '09 did OCI in 2007, before all hell broke loose. Numbers for NYC schools are depressed because of the large number of no offers which occurred after said breaking loose of hell.

Ah. This list still suprises me because I remember researching law schools back then and people generally said you had to be in the top 5% to have a shot at biglaw from a Loyola-Chicago kind of school. According to this list, at that time 15% got NLJ 250 and who knows how many got decent midlaw kind of jobs. 30% of the class could have possibly done well as far as starting salary goes.

I wonder if Vandy really does place a higher percentage of its students in NLJ 250 firms than Georgetown. I know Georgetown has a crap ton of students but that still surprised me.

A'nold wrote:

OperaSoprano wrote:

A'nold wrote:If these numbers are legit, why do people say that only like the top 2% of like Loyola Chicago grads can get biglaw? It says that 15% gets NLJ 250. These stats are not legit, right?

They are, but the class of '09 did OCI in 2007, before all hell broke loose. Numbers for NYC schools are depressed because of the large number of no offers which occurred after said breaking loose of hell.

Ah. This list still suprises me because I remember researching law schools back then and people generally said you had to be in the top 5% to have a shot at biglaw from a Loyola-Chicago kind of school. According to this list, at that time 15% got NLJ 250 and who knows how many got decent midlaw kind of jobs. 30% of the class could have possibly done well as far as starting salary goes.

I wonder if Vandy really does place a higher percentage of its students in NLJ 250 firms than Georgetown. I know Georgetown has a crap ton of students but that still surprised me.

I congratulated Observationalist earlier on some very effective trolling. It doesn't surprise me, though. That place is on fire, and it's small enough that the CSO can take time with every student, according to Vandy's biggest fan.

OperaSoprano wrote:

A'nold wrote:

OperaSoprano wrote:

A'nold wrote:If these numbers are legit, why do people say that only like the top 2% of like Loyola Chicago grads can get biglaw? It says that 15% gets NLJ 250. These stats are not legit, right?

They are, but the class of '09 did OCI in 2007, before all hell broke loose. Numbers for NYC schools are depressed because of the large number of no offers which occurred after said breaking loose of hell.

Ah. This list still suprises me because I remember researching law schools back then and people generally said you had to be in the top 5% to have a shot at biglaw from a Loyola-Chicago kind of school. According to this list, at that time 15% got NLJ 250 and who knows how many got decent midlaw kind of jobs. 30% of the class could have possibly done well as far as starting salary goes.

I wonder if Vandy really does place a higher percentage of its students in NLJ 250 firms than Georgetown. I know Georgetown has a crap ton of students but that still surprised me.

I congratulated Observationalist earlier on some very effective trolling. It doesn't surprise me, though. That place is on fire, and it's small enough that the CSO can take time with every student, according to Vandy's biggest fan.

Hmmm....that's interesting. I wonder how the school is faring in this market. Not to derail the thread, but how mobile is a Vandy degree?

A'nold wrote: Hmmm....that's interesting. I wonder how the school is faring in this market. Not to derail the thread, but how mobile is a Vandy degree?

Where is he? I was his apprentice in fine trollcraft (er, I mean school boosting), but I'm not going to do all his trolling for him. The answer is, pretty mobile, within the south and mid-Atlantic, anyway, and also in New York and DC. Vandy actually publishes full employment lists, unlike 99% of other schools, so you can have a look. The school is very worth your transfer app, IMO.

OperaSoprano wrote:

A'nold wrote: Hmmm....that's interesting. I wonder how the school is faring in this market. Not to derail the thread, but how mobile is a Vandy degree?

Where is he? I was his apprentice in fine trollcraft (er, I mean school boosting), but I'm not going to do all his trolling for him. The answer is, pretty mobile, within the south and mid-Atlantic, anyway, and also in New York and DC. Vandy actually publishes full employment lists, unlike 99% of other schools, so you can have a look. The school is very worth your transfer app, IMO.

That's good to know, thanks for the info. So, when do the new stats come out?

vanwinkle wrote:Both of these posters should be outed. Mods really need to start de-anonymizing posts that abuse the anonymous feature to convince people to stop doing it.

lol who cares if someone posts anonymously or not?

jay115 wrote:

vanwinkle wrote:Both of these posters should be outed. Mods really need to start de-anonymizing posts that abuse the anonymous feature to convince people to stop doing it.

lol who cares if someone posts anonymously or not?

The anonymous feature exists in a very limited fashion to allow anonymity when disclosing potentially damaging facts regarding employment. Outside of that context, anonymity lowers accountability and disrupts the flow of conversation.

Kohinoor wrote:

jay115 wrote:

vanwinkle wrote:Both of these posters should be outed. Mods really need to start de-anonymizing posts that abuse the anonymous feature to convince people to stop doing it.

lol who cares if someone posts anonymously or not?

The anonymous feature exists in a very limited fashion to allow anonymity when disclosing potentially damaging facts regarding employment. Outside of that context, anonymity lowers accountability and disrupts the flow of conversation.

OP posted two links and solicited opinions. What exactly do you believe he or she ought to be held accountable for?

Also, how do anonymous postings "disrupt the flow of conversation"? This is an on-line forum, which means most of the people you're conversing with are substantially anonymous and will remain anonymous to you unless you know them outside of the TLS forum.

jay115 wrote:

Kohinoor wrote:

jay115 wrote:

vanwinkle wrote:Both of these posters should be outed. Mods really need to start de-anonymizing posts that abuse the anonymous feature to convince people to stop doing it.

lol who cares if someone posts anonymously or not?

The anonymous feature exists in a very limited fashion to allow anonymity when disclosing potentially damaging facts regarding employment. Outside of that context, anonymity lowers accountability and disrupts the flow of conversation.

OP posted two links and solicited opinions. What exactly do you believe he or she ought to be held accountable for?

It's not necessarily that OP did anything wrong per say in using the anonymous feature, but that the potential for abuse exists and therefore the moderators are keeping the use of the feature limited in order that such abuse does not ensue.

jay115 wrote:

Kohinoor wrote:

jay115 wrote:

vanwinkle wrote:Both of these posters should be outed. Mods really need to start de-anonymizing posts that abuse the anonymous feature to convince people to stop doing it.

lol who cares if someone posts anonymously or not?

The anonymous feature exists in a very limited fashion to allow anonymity when disclosing potentially damaging facts regarding employment. Outside of that context, anonymity lowers accountability and disrupts the flow of conversation.

OP posted two links and solicited opinions. What exactly do you believe he or she ought to be held accountable for?

Also, how do anonymous postings "disrupt the flow of conversation"? This is an on-line forum, which means most of the people you're conversing with are substantially anonymous and will remain anonymous to you unless you know them outside of the TLS forum.

If you would like to know why TLS does not permit abuse of the anonymous feature, please visit AutoAdmit and JDU. (It's a similar dynamic, and both these sites are good examples of what we don't want TLS to become.)

Furthermore, if your logic is correct, you shouldn't need an anonymous feature, as you ought to be amply protected under your username. The community here is welcoming precisely because posters are held to high standards; those who are rude, cruel, or obvious flames find homes on other message boards. TLS is a network of friends who are in law school or currently in the application process. Sometimes we recognize that extra anonymity is necessary (I've used the anonymous feature myself, since I'm not exactly anonymous when posting as OS), but this is done only when I have to write about something job or GPA related. When people post using their regular usernames, it creates a community in which friendships and even relationships (there have been three TLS weddings to date) get formed, as trust is fostered.

OperaSoprano wrote:

jay115 wrote:

Kohinoor wrote: The anonymous feature exists in a very limited fashion to allow anonymity when disclosing potentially damaging facts regarding employment. Outside of that context, anonymity lowers accountability and disrupts the flow of conversation.

OP posted two links and solicited opinions. What exactly do you believe he or she ought to be held accountable for?

Also, how do anonymous postings "disrupt the flow of conversation"? This is an on-line forum, which means most of the people you're conversing with are substantially anonymous and will remain anonymous to you unless you know them outside of the TLS forum.

If you would like to know why TLS does not permit abuse of the anonymous feature, please visit AutoAdmit and JDU. (It's a similar dynamic, and both these sites are good examples of what we don't want TLS to become.)

Furthermore, if your logic is correct, you shouldn't need an anonymous feature, as you ought to be amply protected under your username. The community here is welcoming precisely because posters are held to high standards; those who are rude, cruel, or obvious flames find homes on other message boards. TLS is a network of friends who are in law school or currently in the application process. Sometimes we recognize that extra anonymity is necessary (I've used the anonymous feature myself, since I'm not exactly anonymous when posting as OS), but this is done only when I have to write about something job or GPA related. When people post using their regular usernames, it creates a community in which friendships and even relationships (there have been three TLS weddings to date) get formed, as trust is fostered.

No, the logic of the argument does not follow. I distinguished between "substantial" anonymity and "unsubstantial" anonymity by which I mean the former to mean one does not know who the pseudonym corresponds to in the real world whereas the latter one could be identified when sufficient information exists (eg. - IP address, past solicited/offered information, links, etc). In other words, a pseudonym is not sufficient but necessary to achieve complete anonymity that your argument suggests. Thus, the "anonymous posting" option on TLS.

Regardless, I understand - community of peers who don't slander/cuss out each other as on xoxo.

And TLS weddings? oh my.

OperaSoprano wrote:

jay115 wrote:

Kohinoor wrote:

jay115 wrote:
lol who cares if someone posts anonymously or not?

The anonymous feature exists in a very limited fashion to allow anonymity when disclosing potentially damaging facts regarding employment. Outside of that context, anonymity lowers accountability and disrupts the flow of conversation.

OP posted two links and solicited opinions. What exactly do you believe he or she ought to be held accountable for?

Also, how do anonymous postings "disrupt the flow of conversation"? This is an on-line forum, which means most of the people you're conversing with are substantially anonymous and will remain anonymous to you unless you know them outside of the TLS forum.

If you would like to know why TLS does not permit abuse of the anonymous feature, please visit AutoAdmit and JDU. (It's a similar dynamic, and both these sites are good examples of what we don't want TLS to become.)

Furthermore, if your logic is correct, you shouldn't need an anonymous feature, as you ought to be amply protected under your username. The community here is welcoming precisely because posters are held to high standards; those who are rude, cruel, or obvious flames find homes on other message boards. TLS is a network of friends who are in law school or currently in the application process. Sometimes we recognize that extra anonymity is necessary (I've used the anonymous feature myself, since I'm not exactly anonymous when posting as OS), but this is done only when I have to write about something job or GPA related. When people post using their regular usernames, it creates a community in which friendships and even relationships (there have been three TLS weddings to date) get formed, as trust is fostered.

"Moderating" the anonymous feature seems to derail threads more than anything. Practically every other thread on this forum has someone asking "why is this anonymous" or bitching about it in someway. Mods should just start temp-banning people, which aren't mods, who bitch about others abusing the anonymous feature.

EDIT- If this is c/o 2009 (which were hired as SAs in 2007), I can't wait to see what the c/o 2011 numbers look like.

.

TTT-LS wrote:

Black-Blue wrote:Stats are posted at: http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNL ... 2443758843
Article is: http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNL ... OLS_REPORT

What do you think?

I think that Northwestern is doing an excellent job staying in tune with what legal employers want and the data bears this out.

+1.

this data is borderline too old to be relevant.

wiseowl wrote:this data is borderline too old to be relevant.

Would you rather we use the C/O 2008 data?

disco_barred wrote:

wiseowl wrote:this data is borderline too old to be relevant.

Would you rather we use the C/O 2008 data?

no, but people sitting around cheerleading their schools based on interviews that happened in August 2007 seems pretty silly.

Oh man, I almost teared up looking at those notre dame stats. Never forget - OCI 2009. Rest in peace friend.

XxSpyKEx wrote:
EDIT- If this is c/o 2009 (which were hired as SAs in 2007), I can't wait to see what the c/o 2011 numbers look like.

ditto. I'm going to guess, top 1/3 SA placement for top 10s outside of HYS? hahaha