1) I never said SMU was better at the Texas bar. I said that SMU trains people to pass the Texas bar. I don't know how WUSTL does at the Texas bar, so I didn't comment on it. I supported my argument.
3) SMU has a 98% employment rate. They find jobs. LOL!!!!
Jeez. It's scary that people like you are giving advice.
1) If you simply meant to say that SMU does a good job at preparing people to take the bar and did not mean to say that it does a better job than WUSTL, then you are basically saying neither school has a clear advantage over the other in preparing students to take the Texas bar
2) SMU doesn't even publish their "employed at graduation" numbers.
Do you know how shady and embarrassing this is? No serious school does this. They are basically saying that so few people are employed at graduation that they would rather not give the number than be humiliated.
The 98% number comes from "employed 9 months after graduation"
questionnaire. This number is notoriously inaccurate as it relies on ONLY the people who respond. Moreover, SMU doesn't even publish the percent of people who responded to the questionnaire.
It could be 25% of the class. It could be that only the people with jobs responded. Maybe you can find one, but I haven't seen any other school in Teir 1 which doesn't publish their "employed at graduation" numbers and doesn't publish the percent of people who responded to their "employed 9 months after graduation" poll. It's just shady.
If you believe that garbage "employed 9 months after graduation" figure, you must believe that SainTTTT Mary's Law school has the 92% employment that it claims. I also have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.