Top Law Schools

Out of sheer boredom of a lazy 2L year, I decided to compile the data of CLS's summer firm placement for the Class of 2017 (summer 2015). Columbia releases a self-reported survey of what firms students are working at I tallied the numbers of every vault firm. Out of a class of approximately 430, 342 students responded. 88% of the Class of 2016 summered at a firm (2017 data is not available yet), for an estimate total of 378. This means that the survey should constitute around 90% of all summers. The lower value below is the actual ratio of reported placement to the total class size. The upper value is after adjusting for the 90% response rate. In reality, the real values are somewhere in between, although likely much closer to the upper values.


V10 = 28.5% to 31.5%
V50 = 67.1% to 74.1%
V100 = 77.3% to 85.4%

Note that this holds up quite well to pre-recession years, where the actual numbers were 38%, 74%, and 80%.

inb4 vault is a useless ranking.

Do they seriously release it by vault range? That seems like the opposite of useful.

ETA: also, am I understanding the ranges correctly? I'm seeing over 100% placement in the lower bound.

dabigchina wrote:inb4 vault is a useless ranking.

Do they seriously release it by vault range? That seems like the opposite of useful.

ETA: also, am I understanding the ranges correctly? I'm seeing over 100% placement in the lower bound.

You're not. The % that are in V100 encompass the % in V50 and V10, because a "V50" firm is by definition within the set of "V100" firms.

dabigchina wrote:inb4 vault is a useless ranking.

Do they seriously release it by vault range? That seems like the opposite of useful.

ETA: also, am I understanding the ranges correctly? I'm seeing over 100% placement in the lower bound.

I never said Vault was the most appropriate ranking. However, two points. First, really the only other way I could organized it would be using firm size, but we already have public data on that for graduates and it has its own faults as well. Second, I agree that using Vault rankings is stupid if you're trying to compare two firms and one is ranked #12 and the other #30. But I think it has some value as an aggregate list as some measure of desirable firms, since we really have nothing better to base that on.

dabigchina wrote: Do they seriously release it by vault range? That seems like the opposite of useful.
.

No. If it's the list I'm thinking of it's
Name of student | Firm

MCFC wrote:

dabigchina wrote: Do they seriously release it by vault range? That seems like the opposite of useful.
.

No. If it's the list I'm thinking of it's
Name of student | Firm

Did they email it to us? I'm curious.

kingpin101 wrote:

dabigchina wrote:inb4 vault is a useless ranking.

Do they seriously release it by vault range? That seems like the opposite of useful.

ETA: also, am I understanding the ranges correctly? I'm seeing over 100% placement in the lower bound.

I never said Vault was the most appropriate ranking. However, two points. First, really the only other way I could organized it would be using firm size, but we already have public data on that for graduates and it has its own faults as well. Second, I agree that using Vault rankings is stupid if you're trying to compare two firms and one is ranked #12 and the other #30. But I think it has some value as an aggregate list as some measure of desirable firms, since we really have nothing better to base that on.

Personally, I would have just posted a spreadsheet with # of people going to each firm. On the other hand, I'm very lazy and you're the one doing the legwork so I don't really have room to complain.

dabigchina wrote:

MCFC wrote:

dabigchina wrote: Do they seriously release it by vault range? That seems like the opposite of useful.
.

No. If it's the list I'm thinking of it's
Name of student | Firm

Did they email it to us? I'm curious.

Not when I was there. I believe it's on the password protected OCI page called something like "Who Worked Where."

rpupkin is convinced that Penn is a festering TTT in decline. Yesterday, a 0L was begging for reassurance about Cornell because they managed to place only one 2L at Skadden this year. Wish we had data for those schools.

NYU's Class of 2017 Placement:

V5: 51 students
V10: 109 students (51+58)
V25: 196 students (51+58+87)
V50: 291 students (51+58+87+95)

BUMP RE: Cornell trolling in the 2017 SA Class thread.

Wild Card wrote:rpupkin is convinced that Penn is a festering TTT in decline. Yesterday, a 0L was begging for reassurance about Cornell because they managed to place only one 2L at Skadden this year. Wish we had data for those schools.

NYU's Class of 2017 Placement:

V5: 51 students
V10: 109 students (51+58)
V25: 196 students (51+58+87)
V50: 291 students (51+58+87+95)

Penn Class of 2017 (250 according to class profile) SA stats

V5: 30 students


Don't really feel like looking at the rest.

UChicago Class of 2017 (219 students total, including transfers)
V5: 29
V10: 63
V50: 143
V100: 180

Kinda curious about Cornell's vault placement. I heard the 2Ls did pretty well last year.