Do the Rankings 'Punish' Law Schools?

Amigos dela vien to tempos

Surcho mekes todo vede en Karen solevestra. Best price propecia Todos piedes bone Petra en connent

how do you select between a law school,

i need to make a selection between 3-4 tier 2 schools

how do i make that decision

The Real Deal?

USNWR "ranks" the law schools not to present information but to sell magazines and generate controversy, which in turn generates stories to sell more magazines. If their purpose was to present information, they would do just that for all the law schools -- present the basic facts relative to each school in alphabetical or regional order and allow the schools, the public, and the students to draw their own conclusions. Instead, they use an annually changing arbitrarily weighted scale to say that "this" law school is better than "that" one.

The truth is that a quality legal education is obtainable at any of the ABA approved law schools. If it were not, they would be placed on probation or lose their accredidation. Whether a particular school is better for a certain student depends upon numerous factors, the least important of which is the particular "ranking" given to that school by USNWR or any other "ranking" system.

And yes, I've taught at institutions that are in the top 25 as "ranked" by USNWR, in the 4th tier, and some in between.

Rankings

Following up on Rankings also punish students, biglaw firms use the rankings to perpetuate a mythical upper class of lawyers. Bottom line is most legal educations are very similar and good and bad lawyers come from law schools across the board.

Rankings also punish students

Not only do students seek out the rankings in choosing a school, but employers gauge prospective hires on it too.

Some biglaw firms only hire students from the T14 or only the Tier 1 schools.

Maybe there should be two different rankings that weigh different criteria more than the others to benefit students and employers.

More on intent

I agree with Rick G. So does the law. In law, if one knows with substantial certainty that one's actions will bring about a particular result, then one is said to intend that result. There's no getting around it. What USN does is tremendously corrosive to the entire law school enterprise and especially to the applicants gullible enough to believe that what they read is truth.

Intent

I want to challenge this now-routine USNews defense that the known bad effects of the USN rankings on law school behavior "couldn't be further from our intent." I've always thought that if you know for sure that something you do is going to cause a particular effect, then you have pretty clearly "intended" that effect. Why not just say that the effects described by Sauder and Espeland are well known to USNews (based on having published and received feedback on the annual ranking for 20 years), but that you've decided that the benefits of the published information to law school applicants, in your view, outweigh the detrimental effects on legal education. Knowing what you know about the effects of your actions on legal education, it really seems silly and disingenuous to fall back on the old "I didn't mean to" defense at this point.

Part time programs & transfers

Bob, you have to recognize the power & responsibility that USNWR holds in law rankings. You've known for years that even some T1 schools steer lower index students into the PT program. Ranking the quality of the PT program isn't enough of a response - the only fair action is to include those part time students in the data mix with the JDs. When it comes to job placement, the school doesn't make a distinction.

I fear that you will just rank the quality of PT, without forcing the JD programs to include ALL JD students, FT or PT. That would actually reward the schools that have been the most egregious over the years.

We all know that 2L transfers are a problem too. Some schools transfer in more than 10%, which is very disruptive all across legal ed. At the very least, you should publish the LSAT/UGPA stats of the inbound transfers, and the numbers (%) of inbound and outbound transfers.