Have the U.S. News Law School Rankings Been Game-Changers in Law School Admissions?

What in the hell are all of you commenting about?

Shocked of XX says:

"Your final paragraph is a disgrace and evinces a complete lack of understanding of how standardized tests prejudice poor people from all racial categories"

The final paragraph says nothing about the shortcomings of people from "all racial categories." It merely states that the rankings leave room to accommodate more diversity without punishing the institution. While it does imply that these beneficiaries tend to be "racially diverse" (i.e not white), this is not an opinion, it is a fact - and it is a good one if you want to actually have any mexican american or african americans attending top law schools.

Loretta of WA says:

"US News has certainly had an effect on the ratio of women at top law schools. LSAC data reports that men outscore women at LSAT scores over 170 in a nearly 2 to 1 ratio, and that at 165 and higher, more than two-thirds of all applicants are male. In fact, the number of men with LSAT scores of 165 to 169 was higher last year than the number of women with LSAT scores from 165 to 180!"

The ability to perform under timed, high-pressure test is apparently a benchmark which favors men over women. The law schools / US News apparently think that performing under such circumstances is an important skill for attorneys, which is one of the reasons why the LSAT is heavily weighted. The test helps to match ability to institution.. the fact that women are not (apparently) as strong in this area does not make the law school admission process biased. The converse is true - if the LSAT were under-weighted to accommodate women, THAT would be the real injustice.

Stephen of WA 10:23PM June 03, 2010

Your comments fail to mention the many documented problems that your ranking system creates. These include the misallocation of resources by law schools, the perpetration and reinforcement of bias in the legal community, and pressure on applicants to attend "highly ranked" schools over schools providing a better fit for the student and society. You have ensconced certain schools (your chosen few) as the "best" schools, as measured by your subjectivly chosen objective criteria. The bias in your methods result in biased results, favoring East Coast over West Coast, private over public, urban over rural, entrenched over new, and Ivy League over other. Your views are at best provincial, and possibly deliberately misleading.

bam of CA 6:39PM March 30, 2010

Your final paragraph is a disgrace and evinces a complete lack of understanding of how standardized tests prejudice poor people from all racial categories. Low GPA/LSAT scores track with poverty level, not race. It is true that poverty often merges along racial lines, but that can be explained by generations of institutional racism that have prevented minorities from succeeding.

I graduated from an Ivy League undergrad and went to a top 10 law school. My LSAT/GPA were well above the average, and I attribute it to the fact that despite being a first generation Mexican-American (growing up in a single parent household, no less), a teacher took an interest in me and helped me navigate AP class selection, college applications, and all the other things my mom knew nothing about.

Shocked 9:57PM March 17, 2010

Diversity is important but not the only thing that matters. If USN&WR wants to improve its rankings credibility it should revisit its 'specialties' rankings which range from reasonable to laughable. Having Stetson and Pepperdine first in the nation undermines....credibility.

Franklin Pierce of CA 5:17AM March 13, 2010