Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Author Topic: BC vs. BU  (Read 9472 times)

iscoredawaitlist

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 2575
  • The beagle puppy of anticipation
    • View Profile
Re: BC vs. BU
« Reply #110 on: April 13, 2007, 01:50:00 PM »
FWIW, I talked to some of the administration/faculty on the day the rankings came out. One thing they pointed out to me is that BC gets hurt in the rankings because of the large number of folks we have dedicated to careers in public interest (government and non-profit). These positions run on tight budgets so that they can't formally offer employment until one passes the bar (typically taken in late July after you graduate with results delivered in November). As a result, unlike those who get firm offers in early fall after their 2L summer associateships, the public interest crowd is counted as "unemployed at graduation" for USNWR ranking purposes. Thus, even if one has an informal handshake agreement of a job in the public sector, USNWR won't count it until the "employed nine months after graduation" total.

As a former government civil servant, I'm proud that BC still encourages this line of work through scholarships, LRAP, and PILF without regard to the rankings.

yeah? It looks like 3.6% went into PI and 9.2% into governement for BC while Boston University sent 4% and 11% respectively.

I'm not sure nuke's theory explains it. Perhaps there's some other factor that I'm not thinking of, but since it looks like BU actually sends MORE into these fields (albeit only a few more), it would make more sense that BU would be the one hurt by it -- not BC.

You know the theory makes sense, i am just wondering if for some reason there is a difference in the reporting practices between the two school.   It certainly makes sense that students going into PI/Gov. (as well as small firms) would not have official offers until they pass the bar.   What doesn't make sense is why BU would be able to report these informal offers as "employment" and BC wouldn't.  I am wondering if there is some misunderstanding BCs end on what exactly we can report or maybe if BU found some way to count these informal offers as employment.   I am going to speak to the Career services at my school and get some more details on the process.  I'll let you know what I find out (might be after finals).

keep in mind that the employment rates are for 9 months after graduation. the majority of people HAVE passed the bar by then.

Penelope

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 252
    • View Profile
Re: BC vs. BU
« Reply #111 on: April 13, 2007, 03:13:58 PM »
keep in mind that the employment rates are for 9 months after graduation. the majority of people HAVE passed the bar by then.

I believe there are two statistics: employed at graduation and employed 9 months after graduation.

The theory does explain why BC jumps from like ~72% at grad to ~95% at 9 months (can't remember the exact numbers).. doesn't explain why BU is different if they have similar PI rates. Let us know what you discover..
woo-hoo (accept): BC, GULC, Northwestern, Cornell, Vanderbilt ($), WUStL ($$), GW, BU ($)
d'oh (reject): Harvard, Stanford, Columbia, UChicago, NYU, Boalt
meh (defer/wl): Penn, Duke, UVa

iscoredawaitlist

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 2575
  • The beagle puppy of anticipation
    • View Profile
Re: BC vs. BU
« Reply #112 on: April 13, 2007, 03:16:01 PM »
keep in mind that the employment rates are for 9 months after graduation. the majority of people HAVE passed the bar by then.

I believe there are two statistics: employed at graduation and employed 9 months after graduation.

The theory does explain why BC jumps from like ~72% at grad to ~95% at 9 months (can't remember the exact numbers).. doesn't explain why BU is different if they have similar PI rates. Let us know what you discover..

not to mention US News used the 9-months after graduation tally for their ranking, not the at graduation one.

Penelope

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 252
    • View Profile
Re: BC vs. BU
« Reply #113 on: April 13, 2007, 03:24:36 PM »
not to mention US News used the 9-months after graduation tally for their ranking, not the at graduation one.

from the US News website:
Quote
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/edu/grad/rankings/about/08law_meth_brief.php
Placement Success (weighted by .20)
    * Employment Rates for Graduates
The employment rates for 2005 graduating class. Graduates who are working or pursuing graduate degrees are considered employed. Those graduates not seeking jobs are excluded. Employment rates are measure at graduation (.04) and nine months after graduation (.14). For the nine-month employment rate, 25 percent of those whose status is unknown are counted as employed.
    * Bar Passage Rate (.02)
The ratio of the school's bar passage rate of the 2005 graduating class to that jurisdiction's overall state bar passage rate for first-time test takers in summer 2005 and winter 2006. The jurisdiction listed is the state where the largest number of 2005 graduates took the state bar exam. The state's bar passage rates were supplied by the National Conference of Bar Examiners.

Granted the 9-month stat counts for 14% of the total ranking while the at-graduation rate counts for 4% but they do use both!
woo-hoo (accept): BC, GULC, Northwestern, Cornell, Vanderbilt ($), WUStL ($$), GW, BU ($)
d'oh (reject): Harvard, Stanford, Columbia, UChicago, NYU, Boalt
meh (defer/wl): Penn, Duke, UVa

bamf

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 3381
  • legal eagle
    • View Profile
Re: BC vs. BU
« Reply #114 on: April 13, 2007, 03:27:41 PM »
I was looking at the numbers on the LSAC sheets (which I believe have been updated for the last year) ... while BC has no one in the "Academia" section, BU has 9 (4.2 % of the class) ... are these the supposed "research ast." positions that BU uses to bump their employment #s?
2L, Boston College Law

http://lawschoolnumbers.com/bamf

Around from time to time.  Always willing to answer any Qs about BC, my '06/'07 cycle or law school in general ... PMs work better ...

muffin83

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 160
    • View Profile
Re: BC vs. BU
« Reply #115 on: April 13, 2007, 03:56:19 PM »
3-4 BU grads interested in academia stay on for an additional year to complete projects with professors at bu.  hardly enough to seriously fudge the employment numbers. the rest in the academia stats go into law school administration and counseling.  this is what their career services told me (who i just talked to 30 minutes ago).  they are nice people committed to their students employment so i don't think they are lying to cover up their plan of boosting 3 or 4 grads a year in order to fudge the usnwr stats. its unfair to pin hole these handful of graduates, my hunch is that they weren't the bottom 4 of the university who didn't get jobs so they were stuck wtih BU but are rather people with strong academic intersts in law who stayed with their professors completing research they began in their 3rdyear.  seriously, i think bc is a great school and there is all the reason in the world to share with people who are on the fence why you chose it over bu but giving out false or partial info based on something you read on a law discussion board does not help anyone.   

bamf

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 3381
  • legal eagle
    • View Profile
Re: BC vs. BU
« Reply #116 on: April 13, 2007, 04:02:07 PM »
See, this is what I'm talking about ... people get SO defensive and just assume another poster is looking to rip on the other school ... M, go back and read my post again ... A) I gave out no false or incomplete information B) it was a QUESTION ... I used the word "supposed" to indicate that I was skeptical of the claim that you feel I am perpetuating.  I was just wondering why there were more than double the number of BU grads going into academia than Harvard reports ... and the first half of your post was exactly what I was looking for.  So thank you, and chill out.
2L, Boston College Law

http://lawschoolnumbers.com/bamf

Around from time to time.  Always willing to answer any Qs about BC, my '06/'07 cycle or law school in general ... PMs work better ...

ChiSox07

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 45
    • View Profile
    • LSN Site
    • Email
Re: BC vs. BU
« Reply #117 on: April 13, 2007, 05:41:00 PM »
I find this whole rivalry pretty humorous.  Both schools are fantastic and have great reputations.  Each has its own strengths and weaknesses.  The schools are so comparable, this endless bickering about which school is better is just nonsense.  The best advice to give is to just check out each of the schools, then decide which school is a better fit for you.  You'll know after giving each school a fair shot.  Personally, I like BC.  But you can't go wrong with either school.
Boston College 2010!

Staying on WL at UIUC and ND

http://www.lawschoolnumbers.com/display.php?user=DaveFox05

bamf

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 3381
  • legal eagle
    • View Profile
Re: BC vs. BU
« Reply #118 on: April 15, 2007, 08:03:08 PM »
FWIW, I talked to some of the administration/faculty on the day the rankings came out. One thing they pointed out to me is that BC gets hurt in the rankings because of the large number of folks we have dedicated to careers in public interest (government and non-profit). These positions run on tight budgets so that they can't formally offer employment until one passes the bar (typically taken in late July after you graduate with results delivered in November). As a result, unlike those who get firm offers in early fall after their 2L summer associateships, the public interest crowd is counted as "unemployed at graduation" for USNWR ranking purposes. Thus, even if one has an informal handshake agreement of a job in the public sector, USNWR won't count it until the "employed nine months after graduation" total.

As a former government civil servant, I'm proud that BC still encourages this line of work through scholarships, LRAP, and PILF without regard to the rankings.

yeah? It looks like 3.6% went into PI and 9.2% into governement for BC while Boston University sent 4% and 11% respectively.

I'm not sure nuke's theory explains it. Perhaps there's some other factor that I'm not thinking of, but since it looks like BU actually sends MORE into these fields (albeit only a few more), it would make more sense that BU would be the one hurt by it -- not BC.

I hate to bump this thread and continue a pointless fight but I was looking at some numbers and recalled this post.  I don't know where Iscoreda's #s came from but according to LSAC they are wrong.  The numbers on LSAC do in fact at least partially support Nuke's (or rather the professors') theory

BC: Government: 10.8% ... Public Interest: 5.4%
BU: Government: 8.0% ... Public Interest: 3.8%

BC had about 59% employed in firms while BU had 67%
2L, Boston College Law

http://lawschoolnumbers.com/bamf

Around from time to time.  Always willing to answer any Qs about BC, my '06/'07 cycle or law school in general ... PMs work better ...

iscoredawaitlist

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 2575
  • The beagle puppy of anticipation
    • View Profile
Re: BC vs. BU
« Reply #119 on: April 15, 2007, 09:04:20 PM »
mine just came from the US news thing. i can't vouch for them.

actually, looking at it, i think what explains it is that LSAC's % is calculated differently than US News.


Possibly?
LSAC: (# of Students in a field)/(# Employed)
US News: (# of students in a field)/(Total # of students)

So actually this doesn't get us much nearer the truth, does it? LSAC's data would already calculate into the equation employed vs. unemployed.

Actually, I have no idea where US News gets its information since either way, the numbers seem wrong. Maybe because they're from different years?

Anyway, the relevant information was quoted before. If the argument is about US News rank, then the US News numbers have to be used, right?