Top Law Schools

http://www.nationallawjournal.com/home/ ... 0123095453

So which giant firms didn't report this year?

Damn, Howard killed it this year. Not bad for a TTT

Takeaways:
USC beat UCLA
Yale is now a TTT
Irvine did pretty well

looks like generally better than c/o 2013, as expected.

2013 for reference

moonman157 wrote:Damn, Howard killed it this year. Not bad for a TTT

Howard has decent BL placement. You just have to be AA or employers won't even look at you.

eriedoctrine wrote:

moonman157 wrote:Damn, Howard killed it this year. Not bad for a TTT

Howard has decent BL placement. You just have to be AA or employers won't even look at you.

I don't think Howard-grad and former K&E associate Dean Andre Pond Douglas Cummings would agree

bearsfan23 wrote:

eriedoctrine wrote:

moonman157 wrote:Damn, Howard killed it this year. Not bad for a TTT

Howard has decent BL placement. You just have to be AA or employers won't even look at you.

I don't think Howard-grad and former K&E associate Dean Andre Pond Douglas Cummings would agree

That's andré douglas pond cummings to you!
K&E also needed hip hop lawyers at the time.

Suprised Loyola LA made top 50

Also, Michigan.... sigh, you were once part of the trinity.

eriedoctrine wrote:

moonman157 wrote:Damn, Howard killed it this year. Not bad for a TTT

Howard has decent BL placement. You just have to be AA or employers won't even look at you.

At least from 2013 to 2014 they more than doubled BL placement. They've definitely always significantly outperformed their ranking, but to be essentially in the band of schools just outside of the T14 when it comes to BL placement (depending on how big we make that band) seems pretty remarkable.

When you account for self selection into public service at UVA (seems like 25-30% of the class), that's a pretty high percentage of people who got biglaw out of the ones who wanted it.

Also UVA has a lot who clerk and then go back to their firms. So probably even higher.

It's cute, though, that they think UVA tuition is $51,800

The whole NLJ thing seems less and less useful every year. If you're concerned about employment I'd wait til the ABA reports come out.

shadowofjazz wrote:When you account for self selection into public service at UVA (seems like 25-30% of the class), that's a pretty high percentage of people who got biglaw out of the ones who wanted it.

Also UVA has a lot who clerk and then go back to their firms. So probably even higher.

It's cute, though, that they think UVA tuition is $51,800

This isn't any different for any of UVA's peer schools. The only T14's whose employment reality isn't at least somewhat accurately represented in the NLJ250 are HYS

Cobretti wrote:looks like generally better than c/o 2013, as expected.

2013 for reference

S&C's New York office didn't respond to the survey last year and that probably accounts for most of the difference. It looks like all the big names are accounted for this year.

Wow...Howard beat GW, WUSTL, Emory and Minnesota...that's astonishing. Good for them.

Annnd my school drops to a 3 year low and out of the top 50 at around 8.something percent, in an improving market, while our in-state "peer" continues to make gains and is now ahead by 10%.

What a confidence booster. Transferring seems more and more attractive.

i find these results difficult to believe
even if accurate, it's a useless measurement, as are all national rankings of law schools
this isn't more instructive or accurate than just sorting schools by 101+ placement on lst
not that it'll happen, but the right way to do this would be region specific, measuring placement by oci success rate and selectivity (maybe gpa cutoffs, placement in top firms, etc), factoring in a3 and other sought-after positions, including non-nlj250 firms that pay market

Brut wrote:i find these results difficult to believe
even if accurate, it's a useless measurement, as are all national rankings of law schools
this isn't more instructive or accurate than just sorting schools by 101+ placement on lst
not that it'll happen, but the right way to do this would be region specific, measuring placement by oci success rate and selectivity (maybe gpa cutoffs, placement in top firms, etc), factoring in a3 and other sought-after positions, including non-nlj250 firms that pay market

You do realize these aren't "rankings", this is just raw placement data among NLJ250 firms. It's not determinative of anything on its own

bearsfan23 wrote:

Brut wrote:i find these results difficult to believe
even if accurate, it's a useless measurement, as are all national rankings of law schools
this isn't more instructive or accurate than just sorting schools by 101+ placement on lst
not that it'll happen, but the right way to do this would be region specific, measuring placement by oci success rate and selectivity (maybe gpa cutoffs, placement in top firms, etc), factoring in a3 and other sought-after positions, including non-nlj250 firms that pay market

You do realize these aren't "rankings", this is just raw placement data among NLJ250 firms. It's not determinative of anything on its own

how silly of me, how could anyone think these are rankings when the very first header says "Rank" and the text below the chart refers to "The rankings"

bowser wrote:The whole NLJ thing seems less and less useful every year. If you're concerned about employment I'd wait til the ABA reports come out.

Do you know when these will be coming out?

also, the fact they chose a single stupid measurement instead of several stupid measurements for their rankings means literally nothing

Brut wrote:

bearsfan23 wrote:

Brut wrote:i find these results difficult to believe
even if accurate, it's a useless measurement, as are all national rankings of law schools
this isn't more instructive or accurate than just sorting schools by 101+ placement on lst
not that it'll happen, but the right way to do this would be region specific, measuring placement by oci success rate and selectivity (maybe gpa cutoffs, placement in top firms, etc), factoring in a3 and other sought-after positions, including non-nlj250 firms that pay market

You do realize these aren't "rankings", this is just raw placement data among NLJ250 firms. It's not determinative of anything on its own

how silly of me, how could anyone think these are rankings when the very first header says "Rank" and the text below the chart refers to "The rankings"

No problem, you learn something new everyday

i love watching idiots lean in

don't taze me romo

Why do you find them difficult to believe? Is there a problem with the data?