Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Author Topic: 2009 US News & Vandy  (Read 2661 times)

lut1

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 4
    • View Profile
Re: 2009 US News & Vandy
« Reply #20 on: May 19, 2008, 08:15:47 PM »

The 2006 NLJ survey data can also be found at: http://mblog.lib.umich.edu/OCSlawcareers/archives/2007/02/largest_law_fir_1.html

Comparing pure NLJ 250 employment percentage:

             2005   2006   2007 
GULC     42      53     48.5%
Vandy    42      48     40.3%


JeNeSaisLaw

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 1945
    • View Profile
Re: 2009 US News & Vandy
« Reply #21 on: May 19, 2008, 08:54:19 PM »
LSN
Vanderbilt Class of 2011

whartonn

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 125
    • View Profile
Re: 2009 US News & Vandy
« Reply #22 on: May 19, 2008, 08:57:04 PM »
Why use the 2005 NLJ graphic when the 2007 NLJ numbers are available? The newest numbers show Georgetown placing nearly 10% more of its class at NLJ 250 firms. In real numbers, Georgetown places over 225 more students at NLJ250 firms than does Vandy.

More importantly, the NLJ 250 numbers do not give the total picture of the opportunities open to students at the T14. For instance, Vanderbilt places a higher percentage of its students at NLJ 250 firms than does Yale. But you canít seriously argue that Vandy has better BigLaw options than Yale.

Part of what is going on here is the availability of certain jobs (academia, clerking, government, consulting, etc..) to T14 graduates which are unavailable to most non-T14 graduates. Such a phenomen likely depresses the percentage of the class at Georgetown choosing to enter BigLaw.

At the end of the day, the T14 are only truly national schools. BUT, Vanderbilt is certainly among the best of the non-T14 options.   

I used the 2005 numbers for that point because that is the only data I've seen where the aggregate of all the schools is together. I used it in such a way because the NLJ numbers do not paint the right picture (which is why I posted my graphic which ordered by the aggregate of clerkships and NLJ 250). If you can find the total NLJ 250 placement and clerkship placement for all the relevant schools, go ahead and show me. I'd be interested to see it for sure. After all, they're the two easiest tokens we can use to compare because it's clearly defined (unlike public interest, gov't, etc that should count as impressive or not impressive).

I don't understand why you keep pointing to "real numbers" to bolster the argument. GULC has 550+ students. It's a stupid comparison to make to a class of 220.

The "real numbers matter" because the NL250 is composed of a set number of firms. Placing 315 students at 250 select firms is a lot more difficult and impressive than placing 89.

I posted the link to the 2007 NLJ 250 below. As I stated beefore, the NLJ 250 numbers do not give the total picture of the opportunities (government, academia, clerkships, consulting, etc) open to students at the T14. For instance, Vanderbilt places a higher percentage of its students at NLJ 250 firms than does Yale. Would you seriously argue that Vandy has better BigLaw options than Yale?

http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNLJ.jsp?id=1207904889529

whartonn

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 125
    • View Profile
Re: 2009 US News & Vandy
« Reply #23 on: May 19, 2008, 09:01:04 PM »
Another interesting link, for what it's worth. http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2008/05/law_professor_hiring.html

Georgetown placed more than 5 times as many students in academia from 2003-2007 than did Vandy

http://www.leiterrankings.com/jobs/2008job_teaching.shtml

JeNeSaisLaw

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 1945
    • View Profile
Re: 2009 US News & Vandy
« Reply #24 on: May 19, 2008, 09:16:19 PM »
Are you serious? I guess it's also equally fine to say that it's significant that GULC didn't place the same amount of students in large firms as there are students in Vandy's entire class...and then some.

In reality, it's silly to talk in terms of raw numbers because they tell the wrong story. It presupposes a quota system, for one, which is very very likely a false assumption. But even ignoring that, firms choose their associates from schools based on a GPA created by a curve. Curves are percentage based and limit prospects relative to the opinion of the hiring firm.

You've missed three separate posts (apparently) of mine in this thread where I agree fully with your sentiments about the NLJ 250 not giving the total picture of opportunities. So of course (for the third time) I am not suggesting that Vandy has better biglaw prospects than Yale. The graphic (which I have referred to three times or more) I posted underscores this and shows that Yale has superior placement to everybody. The data needs to be altered (aggregate clerkships + biglaw paints a clearer picture).

Moreover, you're moving the discussion beyond GULC v. Vanderbilt (or UCLA), which is where I am arguing. As I explained, the argument I am making is that the T14 cutoff that you're dying to upkeep is misinformed. This is not to say that schools in your T14 do not place tremendously better than Vandy. Clearly HYS, for instance, do. However, when you talk in terms of T14 opportunities, you obfuscate the issue. The issue is whether or not there is this strict cutoff that warrants prospectives and others talking in such a manner.  The questions are whether GULC deserves to be included in this elite list, if more schools should be included, or if fewer schools should be included.

So far you've spent your time showing that GULC has better placement than Vandy. As I said much earlier in this thread to you, I am not arguing that the prospects are better for the GULC grad. I am arguing that the difference is not so large that the T14-talk is warranted. You keep missing this.

Edit: On academia, again, placement needs to be looked at in terms of %s and GULC is almost 3 times larger. GULC places better in academia, but this is not the discussion.
LSN
Vanderbilt Class of 2011

whartonn

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 125
    • View Profile
Re: 2009 US News & Vandy
« Reply #25 on: May 19, 2008, 10:09:11 PM »
Are you serious? I guess it's also equally fine to say that it's significant that GULC didn't place the same amount of students in large firms as there are students in Vandy's entire class...and then some. In reality, it's silly to talk in terms of raw numbers because they tell the wrong story. It presupposes a quota system, for one, which is very very likely a false assumption. But even ignoring that, firms choose their associates from schools based on a GPA created by a curve. Curves are percentage based and limit prospects relative to the opinion of the hiring firm.

You've missed three separate posts (apparently) of mine in this thread where I agree fully with your sentiments about the NLJ 250 not giving the total picture of opportunities. So of course (for the third time) I am not suggesting that Vandy has better biglaw prospects than Yale. The graphic (which I have referred to three times or more) I posted underscores this and shows that Yale has superior placement to everybody. The data needs to be altered (aggregate clerkships + biglaw paints a clearer picture).

Moreover, you're moving the discussion beyond GULC v. Vanderbilt (or UCLA), which is where I am arguing. As I explained, the argument I am making is that the T14 cutoff that you're dying to upkeep is misinformed. This is not to say that schools in your T14 do not place tremendously better than Vandy. Clearly HYS, for instance, do. However, when you talk in terms of T14 opportunities, you obfuscate the issue. The issue is whether or not there is this strict cutoff that warrants prospectives and others talking in such a manner.  The questions are whether GULC deserves to be included in this elite list, if more schools should be included, or if fewer schools should be included.

So far you've spent your time showing that GULC has better placement than Vandy. As I said much earlier in this thread to you, I am not arguing that the prospects are better for the GULC grad. I am arguing that the difference is not so large that the T14-talk is warranted. You keep missing this.

Edit: On academia, again, placement needs to be looked at in terms of %s and GULC is almost 3 times larger. GULC places better in academia, but this is not the discussion.

It's not silly to talk in terms of raw numbers when we are dealing with a limited pool of firms. It is far easier to spread 89 students over 250 firms than it is to spread 315 students over 250 firms.

It's not simply that Georgetown has better career opportunities than Vandy, it is that the difference is significant. 10% more at NLJ 250, 5x the number of new academia from 2003-2007, 4x the number of Supreme Court clerks from 2000-2007, and double the percentage of students placing at V100 firms in 2006. These numbers do not even take into account the alternative and non-traditional career choices made by Georgetown students which would be unavailable to most students at Vanderbilt.

Your unofficial spreadsheet purportedly indicates that Vandy might have improved employment prospects from previous years. That might turn out to be impressive news once it is more widely disseminated. But until that information can be compared with the corresponding information from the T14, it is not relevant in disproving the differences or similarities between Vandy and the T14.