Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Author Topic: Paran0id's Ranking Methodology  (Read 1962 times)

paran0id

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 138
    • View Profile
Paran0id's Ranking Methodology
« on: February 11, 2006, 03:53:47 PM »
When double checking stuje1's average ranking data, I developed a terrible case of number crunching. As you watch schools float up and down, swap places with each other, etc, you begin to get sucked in. The result? I've calculated two 're-rankings'. The first is based entirely on the institution's Peer Assessment average over the past 8 years (since they began doing it by 5.0):
Rank   School
1   Harvard University
2   Yale
3   Stanford University
4   Columbia University
5   Chicago, University of
6   Michigan, University of
7   California-Berkeley, University of
8   New York University
9   Virginia, University of
10   Pennsylvania, University of
11   Duke University
12   Cornell University
13   Northwestern University
14   Georgetown University
15   Texas-Austin, University of
16   California-L.A., University of
17   Vanderbilt University
18   Minnesota, University of
19   Southern California, University of
20   Wisconsin, University of
21   North Carolina, University of
22   Iowa, University of
23   Illinois, University of
24   Washington University (Mo.)
25   George Washington
26   Boston University
27   California-Hastings, University of
28   California-Davis, University of
29   Emory University
30   Boston College
31   Washington and Lee
32   William and Mary
33   Notre Dame, University of
34   Indiana-Bloomington, University of
35   Washington, University of
36   Ohio State University
37   Tulane University
38   Arizona, University of
39   Georgia, University of
40   Fordham University
41   Colorado-Boulder, University of
42   Wake Forest
43   Utah, University of
44   Brigham Young University
45   Connecticut, University of

I'll post the second ranking and methodology as a reply since I don't know what the max post size is.

paran0id

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 138
    • View Profile
Re: Paran0id's Ranking Methodology
« Reply #1 on: February 11, 2006, 04:12:08 PM »
This second reranking basically cuts the crap out of USNWR's methodology. I removed Faculty Resources completely (why should I care if HLS's library has 2.5 million volumes and NYU only has 2.3 million? I aint reading em all and they both got Lexis), I cut out the GPA median (without knowing the major or insitution this is worthless data), and I cut out the bar placement rate (they don't make the ratios they calculate available and it's only worth 2/100 so who cares). I then recalculated the remaining factors so as to maintain their proportions. So:
47.058 - Quality Assessment ( 29.412 Peer / 17.647 Pros)
29.412 - Selectivity ( 24.510 Median LSAT / 4.902 Acceptance Rate)
23.530 - Placement Success ( 9.4118 @ grad / @ 14.118 9 mo)

So that gives me a methodology with things I care about: Reputation, a standardized measure of students accepted, and the success of a school's recent graduates. The result:
New Rank   Old Rank   Name   Score
N/A      Test   1
1   2   Harvard University(MA)   0.962108715
2   1   Yale University(CT)   0.957380828
3   3   Stanford University(CA)   0.956682571
4   4   Columbia University(NY)   0.943469717
5   6   University of Chicago   0.939253159
6   5   New York University   0.92206732
7   8   University of Michigan-Ann Arbor   0.920803922
8   8   University of Virginia   0.915597821
9   7   University of Pennsylvania   0.914291939
10   11   University of California-Berkeley   0.910557081
11   11   Duke University(NC)   0.898522658
12   11   Cornell University(NY)   0.895760349
13   10   Northwestern University(IL)   0.894685621
14   14   Georgetown University(DC)   0.893793464
15   15   University of Texas-Austin   0.877833551
16   15   University of California-Los Angeles   0.860836383
17   17   Vanderbilt University(TN)   0.852073203
18   18   University of Southern California(Gould)   0.834612418
19   19   University of Minnesota-Twin Cities   0.828904793
20   20   George Washington University(DC)   0.821433115
21   24   Washington University in St. Louis   0.809400218
22   27   University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill   0.805933987
23   20   Boston University   0.805862092
24   32   University of Wisconsin-Madison   0.803775817
25   26   University of Illinois-Urbana-Champaign   0.801788671
26   22   University of Iowa   0.800515468
27   24   University of Notre Dame(IN)   0.794625708
28   22   Washington and Lee University(VA)   0.792823747
29   27   College of William and Mary(Marshall-Wythe)(VA)   0.791872985
30   32   University of California-Davis   0.788623529
31   27   Boston College   0.786452723
32   27   Fordham University(NY)   0.784286928
33   36   Indiana   0.779044227
34   27   University of Washington   0.774727887
35   32   Emory University(GA)   0.771675381
36   39   University of California(Hastings)   0.76863573
37   36   Wake Forest University(NC)   0.768620044
38   41   George Mason University(VA)   0.763845534
39   41   Tulane University(LA)   0.758498693
40   39   Ohio State University(Moritz)   0.755703268
41   47   American Univ.(Washington College of Law)(DC)   0.752026144
42   36   University of Georgia   0.750839869
43   41   University of Florida(Levin)   0.750815033
44   35   Brigham Young University(UT)   0.747732244
45   41   University of Arizona(Rogers)   0.745812418
46   49   Case Western Reserve University(OH)   0.740779739
47   41   University of Maryland   0.739155773
48   41   University of Alabama-Tuscaloosa   0.731081481
49   49   University of Utah   0.72930719
50   49   University of Connecticut   0.722896078
51   48   University of Colorado-Boulder   0.718399564

There are a few significant jumps/falls. Unfortunately, Wisconsin seems to be the biggest gainer (die Bucky die!) but the numbers don't lie.

98765432

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 672
    • View Profile
Re: Paran0id's Ranking Methodology
« Reply #2 on: February 11, 2006, 04:20:12 PM »
I also messed with the USNews methodology a while back and came up with my own rankings.  What I did was take the peer assesment score out and replace it with the peer assessment score on Lieter's site.  That made sense to me because, as Lieter says, USNews doesn't tell the voters about who is teaching at the schools, but Lieter does.  So anyway, I made a spreadsheet of that but can't seem to find it anymore.

Actual 1L

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 318
    • View Profile
Re: Paran0id's Ranking Methodology
« Reply #3 on: February 11, 2006, 04:37:02 PM »
This second reranking basically cuts the crap out of USNWR's methodology.

Unfortunately, you really can't do that as USNEWS uses almost 100% crap in formulating their rankings.

paran0id

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 138
    • View Profile
Re: Paran0id's Ranking Methodology
« Reply #4 on: February 11, 2006, 04:39:15 PM »
This second reranking basically cuts the crap out of USNWR's methodology.

Unfortunately, you really can't do that as USNEWS uses almost 100% crap in formulating their rankings.

Yah if I had to pick a list to go by, I'd choose Leiter's too. There's no real way to mess with that one though and USNWR seems to be the most popular around here.

Actual 1L

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 318
    • View Profile
Re: Paran0id's Ranking Methodology
« Reply #5 on: February 11, 2006, 04:41:30 PM »
This second reranking basically cuts the crap out of USNWR's methodology.

Unfortunately, you really can't do that as USNEWS uses almost 100% crap in formulating their rankings.

Yah if I had to pick a list to go by, I'd choose Leiter's too. There's no real way to mess with that one though and USNWR seems to be the most popular around here.

Leiter's rankings do not really make any sense for a student to follow, either.  He focuses on professors and how much they are published, IIRC.  That has almost no relevance to a law student's education. 

The ONLY rankings that matter are those internal rankings that each law firm has.  And no one here sees those.

RocketBot

  • Guest
Re: Paran0id's Ranking Methodology
« Reply #6 on: February 11, 2006, 04:57:40 PM »
For what it's worth, I think your second re-ranking is pretty damn good.  Covers all we want to know about schools (how good are the students, the school, and the jobs?)

SuicideNixon

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 1183
    • View Profile
Re: Paran0id's Ranking Methodology
« Reply #7 on: February 20, 2006, 05:26:31 PM »
This second reranking basically cuts the crap out of USNWR's methodology.

Unfortunately, you really can't do that as USNEWS uses almost 100% crap in formulating their rankings.

Yah if I had to pick a list to go by, I'd choose Leiter's too. There's no real way to mess with that one though and USNWR seems to be the most popular around here.

Leiter's rankings do not really make any sense for a student to follow, either.  He focuses on professors and how much they are published, IIRC.  That has almost no relevance to a law student's education. 

The ONLY rankings that matter are those internal rankings that each law firm has.  And no one here sees those.

actually, the ciolli study measures law school large firm placement pretty well.

http://www.autoadmit.com/studies/ciolli/ciolli.final.pdf
When a President does it, that means that it is not illegal. -Richard Nixon

http://www.lawschoolnumbers.com/display.php?cycle=0405&user=SuicideNixon

Actual 1L

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 318
    • View Profile
Re: Paran0id's Ranking Methodology
« Reply #8 on: February 20, 2006, 05:36:19 PM »
actually, the ciolli study measures law school large firm placement pretty well.

In general, I'd agree.  However, the vast majority of law students do not go to big firms, so for the vast majority of law students, that won't help too much.

SuicideNixon

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 1183
    • View Profile
Re: Paran0id's Ranking Methodology
« Reply #9 on: February 20, 2006, 05:55:39 PM »
actually, the ciolli study measures law school large firm placement pretty well.

In general, I'd agree.  However, the vast majority of law students do not go to big firms, so for the vast majority of law students, that won't help too much.


fair enough
When a President does it, that means that it is not illegal. -Richard Nixon

http://www.lawschoolnumbers.com/display.php?cycle=0405&user=SuicideNixon