Law School Discussion

Poll

No money from either school, full details below... Which should I choose?

University of Michigan
105 (65.2%)
Northwestern University
56 (34.8%)

Total Members Voted: 140

Poll - Where do YOU think I should go?

Re: Poll - Where do YOU think I should go?
« Reply #130 on: May 20, 2005, 06:19:15 AM »
Yes, but Michigan says the same thing. ;D

I do think NU has the most mature student body because its admission process really factors in work experience. 

St. Shaun

  • ****
  • 885
  • Yes, I am this pretty.
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Poll - Where do YOU think I should go?
« Reply #131 on: May 20, 2005, 11:05:26 AM »
I won't disagree with you there, but I don't believe that maturity = collaboration.  In my experience the more "mature" people become the more dependant and often less collaborative they become.

St. Shaun

  • ****
  • 885
  • Yes, I am this pretty.
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Poll - Where do YOU think I should go?
« Reply #132 on: May 20, 2005, 12:58:53 PM »
I'll agree with you there too, but disagreeing politely doesn't equal collaboration either.

DodgerLaw

Re: Poll - Where do YOU think I should go?
« Reply #133 on: May 20, 2005, 02:14:37 PM »
You two can shove it up your _ _ _!  ;) ;) ;)

DodgerLaw

Re: Poll - Where do YOU think I should go?
« Reply #134 on: May 20, 2005, 02:24:15 PM »
You two can shove it up your _ _ _!  ;) ;) ;)


"I will politely decline, but would like to offer you the same opportunity."

See? It's like a big, virtual high five!


Re: Poll - Where do YOU think I should go?
« Reply #135 on: May 21, 2005, 12:02:11 AM »
Also, Michigan has a per-capita edge in SCOTUS placement, along with its absolute edge.  (Michigan's edge is even more impressive in relation to schools like NYU, Penn, Georgetown and Duke.)  And this reputational edge also probably extends to other prestigious clerkships and top jobs.  

Either you flunked your math course or I flunked my math course. 

Duke's current student body is about 650 and UM is 1149.  So UM is almost twice as large. 

Since I have so many free minutes remaining on my cell I called the career offices at UM and Duke.  For the past ten years Duke has 10 SCOTUS clerks and Michigan has 16. 

Given that UM is so much bigger, you call that an "impressive edge."  That is fuzzy math pure and simple.   


According to Leiter's survey, from 1991-2001, Michigan placed 16 clerks, Northwestern placed 7, and Duke placed 7.  http://www.utexas.edu/law/faculty/bleiter/rankings02/clerkships.html

Leiter also notes, in his academic placement survey, that the average class size during this period was around 350 for Michigan, 200 for NU, and 250 for Duke.  So Michigan was generally less than 50% larger than Duke on a class basis, but placed over twice as many SCOTUS clerks.  I would consider that an impressive edge, in terms of both absolute and per-capita placement.  (Adjusting for the class differential, UM placed about 60% more clerks on a per-capita basis than Duke.)

NU also placed somewhat better than Duke over this period, of course, given their smaller average class size.

If Duke has really increased their 10-year SCOTUS placement by 43% since the survey, that would certainly be an impressive (and surprising) achievement, especially since they seem to have decreased their class size.  But even if we accept those figures as valid, UM would still have a per-capita placement edge.

None of this, of course, is really relevant to the issue at hand.

Re: Poll - Where do YOU think I should go?
« Reply #136 on: May 21, 2005, 12:14:13 AM »


Earlier in the thread she was using Leiter try to show UM was better.  Here is one Leiter ranking that shows NU as superior: http://www.utexas.edu/law/faculty/bleiter/rankings/studentquality2005.html

Also, Leiter seems to think that the Judges and Lawyers rankings are darn:

(2) 15% of the overall score is based on reputation among lawyers and judges.  Not Manipulable.  These results reflect a survey of lawyers at large firms and federal and state judges.  The response rate is low:  less than one-third complete the surveys.  Because U.S. News only surveys large firms, the survey is also dramatically skewed towards the Northeast (especially New York City):  schools that have large alumni contingents in New York City perform, shall we say, suspiciously well in this survey by comparison to schools that are otherwise comparable.  Schools have little control over the results of this survey.

http://www.utexas.edu/law/faculty/bleiter/rankings/guide.html

Great choice Burghblast!

Actually, I used a number of surveys and rankings to illustrate the basic fact that Michigan is considered a better school, and tends to place somewhat better.  (There really isn't any dispute about this among people who know top law schools, although there are of course differences in terms of personal geographic preference, etc.)

The one survey you cite only shows that NU has higher LSAT #'s than UM. (Which, of course, is also true of Chicago and NYU vs. Stanford.)  The truth is that the traditional 11-14 schools are indeed more LSAT focused, as this is the only way they can improve their rankings.  (Georgetown also has high LSAT ranges, of course.)  In fact, NU's LSAT range isn't far behind Stanford's.  However, as long as their overall reputation and placement is below schools like Stanford, Michigan or UVa, all this really means (in the short/medium term) is that it will be harder to place well in the class -- thus compounding the reputational/placement disadvantage. 

(Where two schools have comparable student numbers, it generally makes sense to attend the school with the better reputation, faculty and placement -- e.g., Texas over BYU.  Where one school, like NYU/NU, actually has more competitive numbers than a school with a better rep and stronger placement, like Stanford/UM, it probably makes even more sense to attend the second school, unless you have a strong personal preference for the first school.)

As for the other point, Leiter of course dislikes any rating or ranking that hurts Texas relative to other top schools, and reputation rating is one such measure.  However, this is in fact the only national reputation survey taken of top schools, and it consistently rates Michigan significantly higher than schools like NU. 

Moreover, even Leiter notes that this is one of the few aspects of the rankings that are "not manipulable" by schools, and is therefore presumably more valid than other factors that are self-reported, like employment stats, LSAT medians, acceptance rates, etc.

(Note that Michigan is not an east coast school, either, though it does appear to be more respected in the Northeast than most T-14 schools.)

Re: Poll - Where do YOU think I should go?
« Reply #137 on: May 21, 2005, 12:26:25 AM »
I just think these rankings attempting the order the top programs are a bit ridiculous. 

I just came across a ranking table by American Lawyer which places Duke at #8 and Michigan at #11.  That same ranking places Chicago first and Harvard #5. 

And I frankly pity those who religiously buy these ranking games and make statements like school A is clearly better than school B (I mean the top ten programs).   


I think it would indeed be questionable to simply look at one ranking and conclude that, say, NYU is better than Chicago.  (I actually think the reverse, even if NYU has slightly higher LSAT medians, because Chicago has a stronger faculty, better SCOTUS placement, better academic placement, and more national placement.)  The same is true of Stanford vs. NYU, even though NYU is ranked higher in Leiter's LSAT ranking.

And the Amlaw survey is clearly flawed if it places Chicago above Harvard. 

However, if you look at a number of rankings and surveys, and they consistently say the same thing, I think that's another matter entirely.  Again, Michigan is ranked higher than NU (and most other top 14 schools) in pretty much every relevant category, aside from student body competitiveness (which is actually a negative in terms of class-rank and placement, once you control for reputation.) 


As I've noted repeatedly, this doesn't mean that NU won't be a better choice for some people, just like Michigan might be a better school than Columbia for some people, Columbia better than Stanford for some people, etc. It just means the faculty/reputation/placment differential is one factor to keep in mind.


Re: Poll - Where do YOU think I should go?
« Reply #138 on: May 21, 2005, 03:05:10 PM »
I did not assume any numbers.  I called the placement offices at both UM and Duke for real numbers.  Again for the past ten years it was 16 UM and 10 Duke. 

And any objective person in the legal academic and employment worlds would think you are crazy if you tell them Duke is in decline.  I will have a good weeknd of laugh. 


Also, Michigan has a per-capita edge in SCOTUS placement, along with its absolute edge.  (Michigan's edge is even more impressive in relation to schools like NYU, Penn, Georgetown and Duke.)  And this reputational edge also probably extends to other prestigious clerkships and top jobs.  

Either you flunked your math course or I flunked my math course. 

Duke's current student body is about 650 and UM is 1149.  So UM is almost twice as large. 

Since I have so many free minutes remaining on my cell I called the career offices at UM and Duke.  For the past ten years Duke has 10 SCOTUS clerks and Michigan has 16. 

Given that UM is so much bigger, you call that an "impressive edge."  That is fuzzy math pure and simple.   


According to Leiter's survey, from 1991-2001, Michigan placed 16 clerks, and Duke placed 7.  http://www.utexas.edu/law/faculty/bleiter/rankings02/clerkships.html

This means that Michigan had an even larger per-capita edge over Duke than it had over Northwestern during that period, since Duke had a larger class than NU.  (>30% advantage.) 

Since Duke has essentially been in decline since that time (in terms of student numbers, faculty quality, and overall rank), I find it hard to believe that it has actually increased its rate of SCOTUS clerkships vs. UM.  (Michigan has placed 21 since 1991.  If we assume that Duke has placed .75 a year, which is a generous assumption in light of their prior record, that would leave them with around 10 during that entire period. This is lower on a per-captia basis as well as an absolute basis.)

This is of course also irrelevant to the point at issue, which is NU vs. Michigan.

king

  • ****
  • 220
    • View Profile
Re: Poll - Where do YOU think I should go?
« Reply #139 on: May 21, 2005, 03:19:03 PM »
Do not waste your time with her.  All legal employers from sea to shining sea know that Duke Law is one of the top programs in the nation and that its graduates are among the most capable in the legal market.  Nothing will change this fact. 

And for the record, I was not successful in my application to Duke.   


I did not assume any numbers.  I called the placement offices at both UM and Duke for real numbers.  Again for the past ten years it was 16 UM and 10 Duke. 

And any objective person in the legal academic and employment worlds would think you are crazy if you tell them Duke is in decline.  I will have a good weeknd of laugh. 


Also, Michigan has a per-capita edge in SCOTUS placement, along with its absolute edge.  (Michigan's edge is even more impressive in relation to schools like NYU, Penn, Georgetown and Duke.)  And this reputational edge also probably extends to other prestigious clerkships and top jobs.  

Either you flunked your math course or I flunked my math course. 

Duke's current student body is about 650 and UM is 1149.  So UM is almost twice as large. 

Since I have so many free minutes remaining on my cell I called the career offices at UM and Duke.  For the past ten years Duke has 10 SCOTUS clerks and Michigan has 16. 

Given that UM is so much bigger, you call that an "impressive edge."  That is fuzzy math pure and simple.   


According to Leiter's survey, from 1991-2001, Michigan placed 16 clerks, and Duke placed 7.  http://www.utexas.edu/law/faculty/bleiter/rankings02/clerkships.html

This means that Michigan had an even larger per-capita edge over Duke than it had over Northwestern during that period, since Duke had a larger class than NU.  (>30% advantage.) 

Since Duke has essentially been in decline since that time (in terms of student numbers, faculty quality, and overall rank), I find it hard to believe that it has actually increased its rate of SCOTUS clerkships vs. UM.  (Michigan has placed 21 since 1991.  If we assume that Duke has placed .75 a year, which is a generous assumption in light of their prior record, that would leave them with around 10 during that entire period. This is lower on a per-captia basis as well as an absolute basis.)

This is of course also irrelevant to the point at issue, which is NU vs. Michigan.