W&L Job placement

[LitDoc]

right so i offer up a couple possible things i think you might be saying and then ask if you could clarify whether i am right or going the right directino with some of them- you respond telling me im the one with a communication problem......ok

If you were merely asking for clarification, then you didn't make that very clear. (Ironic, no?) The bulk of your post sounded like you were trying to dismiss everything I said as mere opinion. The only request for clarification I saw was when you asked if I was simply lipsyncing to Leiter. I thought it was merely a rhetorical way of (again) dismissing my arguments, as you were implicitly dismissing Leiter. If it was a sincere request for clarification, then here's my answer: No. I'm not just a stand-in for what Leiter says. I agree with a lot of what he has to say, but I also disagree with him, too. (For example, he thinks much less of Duke than I do, and perhaps more of Chicago than I do.)

Don't dismiss what I have to say just because you don't like it, or because you don't like Leiter, or because you feel the need to defend W&L. Either accept some of what I have to say as valid, or come up with more than personal opinion and hearsay to support your rebuttal.

And I wasn't throwing your cred under a bus. I simply noted that you have a vested interest in defending W&L, and this ought to be noted, because it does speak to your pov. I've noted that I'm coming from the West, and obviously this colors my perspective, too. Don't be so touchy about your "cred" -- it will cause you to lose it.

[Fred Hits]

right about that last part- it just seemed a bit funny to me that its obvious i go to w&L and you felt the need to hammer on that several times- and im usually very unsenstiive to anything- in fact this may be the first time on here someone has bugged me with some snappy remarks-----either way- we've gone off point--- i still don't think you have given any reason and prefer to simply make remarks trying to sound like a smart ass and you think i'm just not listenting and doing nothing but responding negative to everything you say- whatever, i've had enough of this nonsense

[LitDoc]

right about that last part- it just seemed a bit funny to me that its obvious i go to w&L and you felt the need to hammer on that several times- and im usually very unsenstiive to anything- in fact this may be the first time on here someone has bugged me with some snappy remarks-----either way- we've gone off point--- i still don't think you have given any reason and prefer to simply make remarks trying to sound like a smart ass and you think i'm just not listenting and doing nothing but responding negative to everything you say- whatever, i've had enough of this nonsense

Hmmm. Have you actually read my posts? And yours? I DID offer reasons, and you HAVE simply dismissed it all and responded negatively. I never meant to piss anyone off -- go back and you'll see that my first post was simply offering some info to think about. Your first response was that I was "drinking the Leiter Kool Aid," if I remember correctly. Honestly, I can't see that you have any ground to stand on at this point.

[Fred Hits]

Oh god I so wanted this stupid discussion but I guess my ‘lets just drop it’ attempt failed-  Since you think I’m not listening to you I will now prove that you are mistaken:

Your first post: To save space, you note w&l doesn’t do as well on other rankings (citing leiter and consus- not sure what the second is)- you say us news overvalues for size

Next:
1- You make a very bold claim- W&L is nothing like BU or ND and if anything is closer to w&m and george mason ---no evidence yet presented
2- You mention small size for course offerings- that’s fine- i think this goes without saying but that’s why I left it alone
3- BU, Iowa, and ND have a name that will travel to almost anywhere in the country- W&L does not
4- basically you go back to the overrated claim due to size

To summarize- so W&L is overrated because it has much less national recognition- you offer up the leiter rankings and the leiter explanation on the flaws of usnews- not really convincing info to me.  I then responded making a quick remark about the size method and why I think letier is wrong (without going into detail), note why I think his faculty rankings are bs to an extent and ask you to explain yourself further.

Your next post-
You first start off stating another obvious point- I go to w&l, not that it isn’t obvious from the giant letters in bold- you seem to imply since I go to w&l I am hiding the ball- maybe I overreact to this comment a bit but what you said seems unnecessary as I deliberately make it obvious where I go to school

Stepping onto the campus- you seem to think that this only tells you about atmosphere and neighborhood- to an extent you are correct but it seems very naïve that some numbers or lists tell you all you need to know
Then you go to the ‘whatever you want in your experience’ criteria- this would be fine by me- as I responded, what a person wants does play a role- at this point I thought you were simply saying that each person has their own preference based on what they want

The thing is you don’t do this.  Next you decide to go back to your ‘overrated’ claim.  Not overrated for you, which is a personal opinion, but overrated.  You mention the vault list.  I assume you mean the leiter vault rankings?  You never really say.  Hard to make a point without any facts.  Then you say again it doesn’t have the national rep those other schools do in the west.  Again, however, no facts.

Now you go to the faculty point.  You have some personal experience here so I can’t say your claim is 100% baseless on this point but you do conclude that publications reveal faculty quality.  Now while you obviously have more experience then most of us here, this still seems like a pretty strong claim.

So again, you make a strong assertation that w&l is nowhere near as national as its peer schools.  You back this up with some US News data and what leiter says about big schools being given a bump.  You think the faculty isn’t as good because publications are important to finding out quality.  I don’t think anything I said was baseless.  I was trying to see what you were trying to say because you jump around a bit.  At one point, you discuss what an individual wants and another how w&l isn’t really as good as most people think.  Is this two arguments, or one?  That is what I was trying to figure out.  I don’t see how anything I said ‘wasn’t listening’ especially when you make some major claims that go against what most people think and offer weak support for those claims.  So there you have it.  If you have a specific point and backup for it, then fine, I will gladly agree to disagree.  I just don’t see anything that justifies the very strong stance you are making.

now can we please drop this- if you have some points- make another post and ill be sure to listen- but everything in this thread has been ridiculous

[aufhebung]

So... what's up with W&L's job placements, anyway?

[Alamo]

So... what's up with W&L's job placements, anyway?

LOL that's what I'm asking!  The three relevant points I've heard:

-many people go into government work, which requires you to pass the bar before you start work
-the class included in the year USNWR data was lame; these stats should go up in the future
-W&L doesn't lie, cheat and steal its way into better stats the way some schools do

Yep, that's it.  Assuming I go there, I just plan on making sure I don't end up in the bottom quartile - those who do well from W&L will have a ton of opportunities in the east, although transferrability to the west coast without any job experience has been called into question.

[aufhebung]

So... what's up with W&L's job placements, anyway?

LOL that's what I'm asking!  The three relevant points I've heard:

-many people go into government work, which requires you to pass the bar before you start work
-the class included in the year USNWR data was lame; these stats should go up in the future
-W&L doesn't lie, cheat and steal its way into better stats the way some schools do

Yep, that's it.  Assuming I go there, I just plan on making sure I don't end up in the bottom quartile - those who do well from W&L will have a ton of opportunities in the east, although transferrability to the west coast without any job experience has been called into question.

What's the old saw?  everyone thinks they'll be in the top half of their class, just half of us are wrong.

[LitDoc]

Oh god I so wanted this stupid discussion but I guess my ‘lets just drop it’ attempt failed-  Since you think I’m not listening to you I will now prove that you are mistaken:

Your first post: To save space, you note w&l doesn’t do as well on other rankings (citing leiter and consus- not sure what the second is)- you say us news overvalues for size

Next:
1- You make a very bold claim- W&L is nothing like BU or ND and if anything is closer to w&m and george mason ---no evidence yet presented
2- You mention small size for course offerings- that’s fine- i think this goes without saying but that’s why I left it alone
3- BU, Iowa, and ND have a name that will travel to almost anywhere in the country- W&L does not
4- basically you go back to the overrated claim due to size

To summarize- so W&L is overrated because it has much less national recognition- you offer up the leiter rankings and the leiter explanation on the flaws of usnews- not really convincing info to me.  I then responded making a quick remark about the size method and why I think letier is wrong (without going into detail), note why I think his faculty rankings are bs to an extent and ask you to explain yourself further.

Your next post-
You first start off stating another obvious point- I go to w&l, not that it isn’t obvious from the giant letters in bold- you seem to imply since I go to w&l I am hiding the ball- maybe I overreact to this comment a bit but what you said seems unnecessary as I deliberately make it obvious where I go to school

Stepping onto the campus- you seem to think that this only tells you about atmosphere and neighborhood- to an extent you are correct but it seems very naïve that some numbers or lists tell you all you need to know
Then you go to the ‘whatever you want in your experience’ criteria- this would be fine by me- as I responded, what a person wants does play a role- at this point I thought you were simply saying that each person has their own preference based on what they want

The thing is you don’t do this.  Next you decide to go back to your ‘overrated’ claim.  Not overrated for you, which is a personal opinion, but overrated.  You mention the vault list.  I assume you mean the leiter vault rankings?  You never really say.  Hard to make a point without any facts.  Then you say again it doesn’t have the national rep those other schools do in the west.  Again, however, no facts.

Now you go to the faculty point.  You have some personal experience here so I can’t say your claim is 100% baseless on this point but you do conclude that publications reveal faculty quality.  Now while you obviously have more experience then most of us here, this still seems like a pretty strong claim.

So again, you make a strong assertation that w&l is nowhere near as national as its peer schools.  You back this up with some US News data and what leiter says about big schools being given a bump.  You think the faculty isn’t as good because publications are important to finding out quality.  I don’t think anything I said was baseless.  I was trying to see what you were trying to say because you jump around a bit.  At one point, you discuss what an individual wants and another how w&l isn’t really as good as most people think.  Is this two arguments, or one?  That is what I was trying to figure out.  I don’t see how anything I said ‘wasn’t listening’ especially when you make some major claims that go against what most people think and offer weak support for those claims.  So there you have it.  If you have a specific point and backup for it, then fine, I will gladly agree to disagree.  I just don’t see anything that justifies the very strong stance you are making.

now can we please drop this- if you have some points- make another post and ill be sure to listen- but everything in this thread has been ridiculous

Oversimplifying and misrepresenting everything I said doesn't prove you listened, nor does it do anything for credibility. I'm tired of repeating myself, but I will just one more time, briefly:

1. Rankings, or claims of "better" or "worse" or "comparable," are all a matter of criteria.

2. Under certain (perfectly valid) criteria, W&L is an excellent school that is "better" even than many top-20 schools, as well as "better" than its so-called peer institutions (not top 20).

3. Under other (perfectly valid) criteria, W&L is not "better" than, and perhaps even less than comparable to, some of its so-called peer institutions.

4. This thread was about job placement -- originating with a question about why W&L's job placement didn't look so hot.

5. I offered some possible reasons for and evidence of W&L being "worse" than some of its so-called peer institutions at national job placement. I have acknowledged every step of the way that W&L does very well in the South and the mid-Atlantic regions.

6. Along the way, I also offered my opinion that W&L might be a little overrated on the USN rankings, favored by its small size; that faculty quality does matter; that scholarship does have something to do with faculty quality; and that Leiter doesn't know everything, but that he does make some good arguments in critique of USN. I also pointed out a few times that you are from W&L yourself, and thus have a vested interest in defending W&L. I, on the other hand, am from the West, thus have a Western pov -- but I also have no vested interest in trashing W&L, nor have I tried to do so.

I think #5 is what everyone is really interested in, and I think if you review my previous posts, you'll see that I did offer more than just empty "opinion" on this matter. For example, I cited employment numbers from a few schools. I also cited the Vault list. I'm very surprised that you don't know about Vault (www.vault.com) -- no, it has nothing to do with Leiter. I couldn't find the article I cited, to give you a link, but in it they ranked the top 40 (if I remember correctly) law schools for BigLaw job placement. W&L was not on the list; Illinois was.

I had not intended to get snarky here -- I started out simply offering some things to think about. I didn't get snarky until you started cursorily dismissing everything I had to say.

I think W&L is a great school -- hell, I applied to W&L. But I withdrew before a decision was made, because I was already accepted to some schools that I think -- for me -- are better. Like Illinois and Minnesota. And one of the reasons I think these schools are better is their national job placement.

[philibusters]

This is like a legal dispute, both sides offer different set of facts that are both self-interested and rooted in the truth.  I would sum it up like this, LitDoc, whether she admits it or not, set off the thread with the provocative statement that W&L was not comparable to schools like Iowa, ND, BU, or ILL.  Some people, including myself criticized that stance and then everybody dug their heels in and starting trying to justify their position.  Then when people started saying they were being too adversial, we started pleading our case that the other person started it.  In conclusion saying "Iowa, ND, BU, or ILL aren't comparable to W&L probably was not a smart thing to say because its based to much on opinion (and the first post def did not say it as an opinion, but said it rather matter of factly.)  After that people probably over-reacted.

[LitDoc]

This is like a legal dispute, both sides offer different set of facts that are both self-interested and rooted in the truth.  I would sum it up like this, LitDoc, whether she admits it or not, set off the thread with the provocative statement that W&L was not comparable to schools like Iowa, ND, BU, or ILL.  Some people, including myself criticized that stance and then everybody dug their heels in and starting trying to justify their position.  Then when people started saying they were being too adversial, we started pleading our case that the other person started it.  In conclusion saying "Iowa, ND, BU, or ILL aren't comparable to W&L probably was not a smart thing to say because its based to much on opinion (and the first post def did not say it as an opinion, but said it rather matter of factly.)  After that people probably over-reacted.

I agree with much of this. But I'll add that I said W&L "wasn't comparable" to those other schools in the context of a conversation about job placement. As I've asserted all along, the numbers simply do not support the claim that W&L is as "national" as those other schools. When 82% of your grads take jobs in the South or mid-Atlantic regions, only some of that can be explained as the result of self-selection. I apologize if my claim seemed overly strong, but I stand by the claim that W&L is not as "national" as those other schools. It just doesn't compare.

Allow me to share some "evidence," which I just shared with someone in a PM. (He PM'd me to tell me further why I don't know what I'm talking about; I hope that after I shared this with him he was at least partially persuaded that I might know a LITTLE bit.) This evidence, combined with other rankings and reasons, underlies my claim about W&L's lack of "national" pull.

I am from Oregon. My primary desire is for a career in academia -- so I have to go to the best school I can get into -- but I also have a desire, should academia not work out, to end up back in the West. So, I have researched extensively the legal markets in cities such as Portland, Seattle, San Francisco, Salt Lake City, and Denver. In each city, I randomly selected half-a-dozen or so mid- to large firms, and I went through their roster of associates -- tallying up the number of associates who graduated from the law schools I had applied to. The goal? To find out roughly how many alums from each school were in that market. Also, I inferred that these numbers spoke somewhat to the respective school's ability to place law grads in those markets. (Of course, I recognize that this is only an inference, as it isn't possible to tell whether the associates came to these markets straight from law school or not.)

I applied to W&L, as well as to other "comparable" schools such as Illinois, Minnesota, WUStL, and Iowa. I kept an associate tally for each of these schools, in each of the cities I mentioned. And though I did not keep an official tally on BU and ND, I did keep an eye out for those schools, as I had considered applying to them.

In the end, W&L was SERIOUSLY outperformed by the other schools. Illinois and Minnesota performed the best, with Iowa close behind, and WUStL a little further behind. BU and ND also did fairly well, though I can't say how well in comparison, because I didn't keep the hard numbers. W&L, though, was hardly on the map. In Portland and Seattle, for example, after scanning the rosters of over a dozen firms, I had found ZERO W&L grads. Not a single one. Zero.

I realize fully the limitations of this "study" -- don't start attacking my methodology. I offer this only to show that what I've been saying is not "baseless" or mere "opinion." My findings, combined with the reasonable placement that schools like Illinois and Minnesota have in the East, leads me to conclude that they are at least moderately "national" schools. They are, by my measure, much more national than W&L, which places well only in the East (including the South).

Take from all this what you will. I repeat: I think W&L is a great school. I simply think that it has trouble comparing to the abovementioned schools in terms of "national" job placement. For someone like me, in particular, interested in jobs west of the Mississippi, there is simply no comparison.