Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - hastingsOK2008

Pages: [1] 2 3
1
Hastings is fine and getting better.
I am  bottom of the 1/3 or close to 1/2 and got a job at top 50 BIGLAW
starting 165K + bonus.

Good luck.

2
Reviews, Visits, and Rankings / Re: Davis vs. Hastings
« on: May 17, 2008, 03:18:34 PM »
RE: Changes in Graduation Honors and Grade Normalization Guidelines (Grading Curve)


I am happy to report two recent decisions made by the faculty that will increase recognition of the academic achievements of Hastings students. As explained below, the faculty has significantly expanded the academic honors to be granted upon graduation, effective with the Class of 2008, and the faculty also voted to change the grade normalization guidelines (or grading curve) to increase the grades of A- and above and to decrease the number of grades below B-, effective beginning the 2008-2009 academic year.
2. Revision of Grade Normalization Standards
Over the past school year, the Hastings Academic Standards Committee conducted a detailed study of how the Hastings grade normalization standards (or grading curve) compared with those at peer schools. The Committee concluded that the Hastings standards were more restrictive than most other schools and that most other schools did not apply their grading standards to classes with relatively small enrollment. The Committee also found that in recent years more than 40% of upper-division course grades at Hastings have deviated from the guidelines by giving more grades of A- or higher and by giving fewer grades below B- than called for by the Hastings normalization standards, based on waivers granted by the Academic Dean's Office. (Deviations are not allowed for first-year classes.)


For the above reasons, the Committee recommended and the faculty recently voted to adopt several changes to the College痴 grade normalization guidelines. Briefly summarized, the changes have the following effect:


Increase the number of A- and above grades that instructors must give from 10% - 20% (the current requirement) to 15% - 25%;


Decrease the number of grades below B- that instructors must give from 20% -35% (the current requirement) to 12% - 17%;


Abolish the normalization restrictions for all classes with fewer than 30 students, except to require that such classes shall have a range of grades;



3
TO: All Students

FROM: H. G. Prince, Associate Academic Dean


RE: Changes in Graduation Honors and Grade Normalization Guidelines (Grading Curve)


I am happy to report two recent decisions made by the faculty that will increase recognition of the academic achievements of Hastings students. As explained below, the faculty has significantly expanded the academic honors to be granted upon graduation, effective with the Class of 2008, and the faculty also voted to change the grade normalization guidelines (or grading curve) to increase the grades of A- and above and to decrease the number of grades below B-, effective beginning the 2008-2009 academic year.
2. Revision of Grade Normalization Standards
Over the past school year, the Hastings Academic Standards Committee conducted a detailed study of how the Hastings grade normalization standards (or grading curve) compared with those at peer schools. The Committee concluded that the Hastings standards were more restrictive than most other schools and that most other schools did not apply their grading standards to classes with relatively small enrollment. The Committee also found that in recent years more than 40% of upper-division course grades at Hastings have deviated from the guidelines by giving more grades of A- or higher and by giving fewer grades below B- than called for by the Hastings normalization standards, based on waivers granted by the Academic Dean's Office. (Deviations are not allowed for first-year classes.)


For the above reasons, the Committee recommended and the faculty recently voted to adopt several changes to the College痴 grade normalization guidelines. Briefly summarized, the changes have the following effect:


Increase the number of A- and above grades that instructors must give from 10% - 20% (the current requirement) to 15% - 25%;


Decrease the number of grades below B- that instructors must give from 20% -35% (the current requirement) to 12% - 17%;


Abolish the normalization restrictions for all classes with fewer than 30 students, except to require that such classes shall have a range of grades;


Limit the discretion of the Academic Dean to grant waivers to the normalization regulations with respect to upper-division classes to certain enumerated circumstances; and


Increase the grade point value of the grade of A+ from 4.0 to 4.3.


Please note that deviations from the grading guidelines will still not be allowed in first-year classes and that the changes to the grade normalization guidelines will go into effect beginning with the 2008-2009 academic year.


4
Hastings will hire 35 profs.   
the change of Student/Faculty ratio will make Hastings in Top 30.
 

5
Hastings >>>Davis

6
Hastings >>>Davis


7
Where should I go next fall? / Re: Tough Choice: Davis vs. Hastings
« on: July 28, 2007, 11:22:50 AM »
Considering SF Job market recovery, It might be a revers of the rankings.


More Employment Stats Differences
If the new U.S. News approach to employment statistics had been used for last Spring's ranking, a number of schools outside the top ranks would have also had rather big differences between the scores they reported then and what they would have to report under the new method:

UC Davis (93.3 to 86.9)          - 6.4% 
UC Hastings (96.3 to 90.0)      - 6.3% 

from Brian Leiter on July 24, 2007 in Rankings


8
Law School Rankings / Re: Will Hastings overtake Davis in 2009?
« on: July 28, 2007, 11:14:58 AM »
From Leiter
Hastings gained ground against Davis
So it might be a reverse about rankings.
More Employment Stats Differences
If the new U.S. News approach to employment statistics had been used for last Spring's ranking, a number of schools outside the top ranks would have also had rather big differences between the scores they reported then and what they would have to report under the new method:

Pepperdine (97.2 to 84.1)         -13%
Dist.of Col. (92.9 to 80.1)        -12.8%
Santa Clara (95.5 to 87.0)        -8.5%
Vermont (98.0 to 90.5)            - 7.5%   
Buffalo (97.8 to 90.8)              -7.0% 
Regent (89.0 to 82.1)             - 6.9% 
Richmond (96.8 to 90.1)         -  6.7% 
St. Johns (96.5 to 89.9)          - 6.6
UC Davis (93.3 to 86.9)          - 6.4% 
UC Hastings (96.3 to 90.0)      - 6.3% 
Drake (98.4 to 92.4)               -  6% 
Chicago-Kent (93.2 to 87.3)                   - 5.9% 
Iowa (98.6 to 92.9)                - 5.7% 
Brooklyn (98.3 to 92.7)           - 5.6%
Hawaii (91.8 to 86.4)             - 5.4%
(Thanks to a colleague for supplying these figures.)
Posted by Brian Leiter on July 24, 2007 in Rankings | Permalink


9
Law School Rankings / Re: Will Hastings overtake Davis in 2009?
« on: July 17, 2007, 10:52:29 PM »
U.S. News Changes Placement Component of Rankings "to Reduce Gamesmanship by Law Schools"
Robert Morse, Director of Data Research at U.S. News & World Report, reports that the placement component of the law school rankings (employment nine months after graduation (14% of the overall ranking) and employed at graduation (4%)) will be changed this year to mirror changes in the ABA's questionnaire "to reduce gamesmanship by law schools":

From Leiter

What the Employment Stats from the Last US News Rankings Would Have Looked Like Under the New Approach
A colleague sent me a revealing chart, showing what the employment stats for the top law schools would have looked like if U.S. News had already been employing the new policy of treating those unemployed but allegedly "not seeking employment" as part of the stats.  UCLA's placement would have fallen from the reported 99.7% to 94.4%, while USC's stats would have fallen from 98.2% to 93.3%!  Those were the biggest changes (5.3 and 4.9 percentage points, respectively), though Michigan and Vanderbilt were close:  Michigan's employmente rate would have dropped from 99.7% to 95.8%, while Vanderbilt's would have gone from 99.0% to 95.5%.  Only Cornell and Stanford would have been unaffected by this change, though the differences for Penn, Duke, Yale, and Columbia would all have been less than 1%.  (Texas, for those curious, would have reported an employment rate 1.2% lower.)

To be sure, there are some graduates of law school who are genuinely not seeking employment--but it has surely not been in the numbers that some schools have been reporting. 



10
Law School Rankings / Will Hastings overtake Davis in 2009?
« on: July 16, 2007, 11:12:12 AM »
Eventually yes.  Year 2009 I donít know.

Year 1992 Hastings (19th ranked) was higher than U Texas 20th)


Former Dean K refused to send in data to US NEWS resulted Hastings rankings as low as 50th.
although Judges and Lawyers Reputations were always in the top 30.

Dean K didnít like USNEWS, and she graduated from Michigan Law.


Now Hastings got new deans N, it will be better.

1.       Dean N graduated from Hastings.
2.   Dean N tried to get donations. (Money talks)
3.   Submitted accurate data, which made Hastings to 34th.
4.   Bar passing rate(84%) is far better than Davis(73%).  Actually better than SC
5.   New library


Pages: [1] 2 3