Quote from: SouthSide on April 12, 2006, 06:44:35 AMHere are my ideas:1) Decrease the weight given to entering GPA, and increase both the entering LSAT and the acceptance rate weightings. GPA is just too random to be very useful.The LSAT may be standard, but it's pretty useless on its own.Besides, there's a fairly easy solution to this that some UG admissions offices use: you keep track of students' grades in law school, and see if any institutional trends pop out. You then alter your index formula to account for it.It was a pain in the ass before computers were in wide use, but now all you need is a work-study gopher and a copy of Excel.
Here are my ideas:1) Decrease the weight given to entering GPA, and increase both the entering LSAT and the acceptance rate weightings. GPA is just too random to be very useful.
Quote2) Only measure employment ratio nine months after graduation. Give people a little bit more time. Not everyone wants to get a job right after law school.That's not quite how legal employment works: generally, you wind up working for one of the two firms you worked at your 2L summer. If you get a job 9 months after graduation, you're at the bottom of your class. Having both gives you an idea about how many firms are really willing to hire a school's students, and if so, how many students have a fairly easy time getting hired.[
2) Only measure employment ratio nine months after graduation. Give people a little bit more time. Not everyone wants to get a job right after law school.
Quote3) Do not measure financial aid at all. This should be considered separately in terms of which law schools offer the most value, but should not affect the consideration of a school's inherent quality.Why not?
3) Do not measure financial aid at all. This should be considered separately in terms of which law schools offer the most value, but should not affect the consideration of a school's inherent quality.
QuoteThese are starters for a better process. Any others?Stop using Yale as the benchmark and tinkering the formula every year to ensure that it comes out at #1. Pick the criteria and their relative importance first, and then see where the schools fall.
These are starters for a better process. Any others?
Excellent points, Lily, although they have analyzed UGPA and found it to be a pretty insignificant factor of predicting success in law school, compared to the LSAT solely.[ My feeling is that if we are going to have representative rankings, perhaps we should act the way the schools do-LSAT above all. Even alone, it's the most predictive factor in law school success.
They do sort of use Yale as a benchmark, but it's not by assigning Yale #1 and figuring out how to do that. They assign the highest overall school a score of 100, and all other schools get rough percentages compared to the top law school, which has always been Yale.
Congratulations Lily!! That's awesome!
The reason incoming LSATs say something about a school is because they speak to the quality of the student body, which most people would say is a huge factor in the quality of a school.
Financial aid just doesn't do this.
I actually think US News would love to dislodge Yale from the top spot, but it would be hard to devise a system that would do that without screwing up the overall rankings too much. The reason the CalTech ranking was so controversial was because the public wouldn't accept that CalTech is the best college in the country.
In the case of law schools, I think the public would definitely accept Harvard or Stanford in the top spot, and a shakeup at the top would sell a lot more magazines. They tinker with the college rankings all the time to shift around the top schools, just to keep it interesting.
The problem is that any ranking just has to give weight to admit rate and student/faculty ratio. These will always privilege a smaller school like Yale over a larger one like Harvard. The fact is that these two schools are offering slightly different products. I don't think one is better than the other, I think it depends on what you want in a school.
Interesting points, Lily. Could you provide me with some specifics? Sorry, I'm not much of an Excel genius so it would help to be hand-held through mucking around the create your own rankings.
Page created in 0.235 seconds with 17 queries.