Law School Discussion

Michigan 1L Taking Questions

hollowman988

  • ****
  • 739
  • I took her home after midnight...
    • View Profile
Re: Michigan 1L Taking Questions
« Reply #930 on: December 03, 2007, 02:18:31 PM »
Tag.

pikey

  • *****
  • 10967
  • Did ya do it? Then why are ya sorry?
    • View Profile
Re: Michigan 1L Taking Questions
« Reply #931 on: December 03, 2007, 02:25:59 PM »

Re: Michigan 1L Taking Questions
« Reply #932 on: December 03, 2007, 05:11:14 PM »
tag

jwd03

Re: Michigan 1L Taking Questions
« Reply #933 on: July 27, 2008, 08:20:36 PM »
Finally - I agree with Jolie.  Second semester 1Ls take 17 credits which is more than we are ever allowed to take any other semester (the limit then is 15).  For some reason my legal practice professor seems to think that's our only class.  Plus I was swamped with a moot court brief that just got submitted.  So sorry for our delays.  Don't forget to check out the school's website for answers though - because for factual stuff it's probably your best bet.

17 credits during the second semester?  Wow.  What is the fall and spring schedule like for summer starters?

Gengiswump

  • ****
  • 4591
  • "she's a tough mfer, but she knows how to party"
    • View Profile
Re: Michigan 1L Taking Questions
« Reply #934 on: July 27, 2008, 09:19:07 PM »
In the fall you take three regular courses and legal practice without the elective requirement, in the spring you're required to take your remaining foundation course (this past year it was crim law) plus whatever electives suit your fancy.  Depending on one's graduation date plans, it might behoove someone to take at least a certain number of credits, but no one's gonna make you take any particular amount beyond the requisite minimum of 10.

hollowman988

  • ****
  • 739
  • I took her home after midnight...
    • View Profile
Re: Michigan 1L Taking Questions
« Reply #935 on: July 28, 2008, 06:19:08 AM »
what do you think Mich would have to do in order to be mentioned in the same breath as Columbia/NYU/Chi?

Last time I checked, it already was.  Michigan's rep ratings (reflecting its perception in the legal community) are comparable to UC and CLS, and above NYU's.  Talk to any partner at a major firm, and you'll see this.

In fact, a better question is what does NYU have to do to be mentioned in the same breath as UM, given that they've already jacked up their student numbers, etc. 

I think what you really mean is what does UM have to do to move back up to the top 6 in USNews. And the answer is raise their LSAT scores, and thus move up a couple spots.

Raising their LSAT scores wouldn't do a thing.

Gengiswump

  • ****
  • 4591
  • "she's a tough mfer, but she knows how to party"
    • View Profile
Re: Michigan 1L Taking Questions
« Reply #936 on: July 31, 2008, 09:37:34 AM »
I'm sorry, I must've missed the part where Lindbergh is a Michigan 1L . . . what section were you in, precisely?

Re: Michigan 1L Taking Questions
« Reply #937 on: August 04, 2008, 11:36:46 PM »
Why not?  Their rep ratings are already comparable with CCN, as noted, and far better than Penn's. Rep ratings, along with LSAT, constitute most of the USNews ranking weight.

The only difference between UM and CLS/NYU is a few points on the LSAT.

A Loyola LA professor put out a paper on this last year.  Michigan pumping their LSAT would literally make no difference.  If Michigan's median LSAT was 180 it would not raise their ranking a single point.

flyaway

  • ****
  • 2343
    • View Profile
Re: Michigan 1L Taking Questions
« Reply #938 on: August 05, 2008, 05:08:51 AM »
Why not?  Their rep ratings are already comparable with CCN, as noted, and far better than Penn's. Rep ratings, along with LSAT, constitute most of the USNews ranking weight.

The only difference between UM and CLS/NYU is a few points on the LSAT.

A Loyola LA professor put out a paper on this last year.  Michigan pumping their LSAT would literally make no difference.  If Michigan's median LSAT was 180 it would not raise their ranking a single point.

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=937017

" I begin with my conclusions. First, U.S. News’ law school “ranks” are
unreliable – that is, they are subject to significant random error.32 Second,
its “overall scores,” if read with a “±2” appended, appear to be relatively
reliable – with caveats.
 
My first conclusion can be illustrated by a simple example involving
a change in the numbers of U.S. News’ lowest-ranked school – which I
will call the “bottom anchor” but otherwise leave unnamed. Assume that
the reported 9-month employment rate for graduates of the bottom anchor
falls by just 1 percentage point and nothing else changes at any school in
the country. In a reliable ranking system, one would hope that such a
change would not affect the rank of any other school. After all, this is a
miniscule change in one statistic at a school that few lawyers, law
professors, or law students have heard of.

As you might expect, nothing happens to the bottom anchor’s overall
score (by definition, zero) or rank (180th). But this tiny change wreaks
havoc on the relative ranking of the top 100 law schools. Seattle and San
Francisco jump six ranks, Fordham jumps from 32nd to 27th, and Rutgers
Camden, San Diego, and Indiana Indianapolis each jump four. Houston,
Kansas, Nebraska, and Oregon, by contrast, each drop three ranks. Overall,
41 of the top 100 schools change rank. Fordham’s dean gets a bonus.
Fingers are pointed and voices raised at Houston. All because of a trivial
change in the employment statistics of a single school far away in the
spreadsheet. Stranger still, if the bottom anchor’s 9-month employment
rate falls an additional 4 percentage points (that is, a total of 5 percentage
points) – and nothing else changes at any school in the country – most of
these effects disappear, but the reordering moves into the Top Ten. UC
Berkeley and Virginia both drop from 8th to 9th place. At the other schools
named above, it is as if nothing had ever happened."

Gengiswump

  • ****
  • 4591
  • "she's a tough mfer, but she knows how to party"
    • View Profile
Re: Michigan 1L Taking Questions
« Reply #939 on: August 05, 2008, 10:49:21 AM »
Lindbergh, since you aren't a Michigan student, unless you have a question about being a Michigan student, can you please take your LSAT mongering and/or blatant prestige whoring elsewhere?  I think I can speak for a number of people when I say it's not on thread topic, not helpful, and not wanted - you're basically making actual Michigan people look bad by your mere presence.