GO BLUE!!!

Looks like the parties over at Yale. Everyone get those Michigan transfer apps ready.

Finally, confirmation that Indiana Bloomington > Georgetown.

Someone needed to say it.

Any ranking that has each of Harvard, Yale and Columbia outside of the top 5 is bogus.

Check out UCLA's page:

"The Fordham of the West Coast"

Unintentional insult, but hilarious nonetheless.

@7:38 -- Incredible. From your grammar and spelling ability it is clear that you had no chance of getting into Yale, let alone passing fifth grade.

Seriously, "parties"? Pathetic.

Please go back to your TTT and leave the real comments to the big boys.

Penn sucks

7:41=blatant Columbia trolling.

Michigan should be #1.

the NYU thing IS bogus.

Is this your first time on the internet 7:47?

Who knew New York Law School would be so impressive to Vault?

Yeah GW! Just better than mediocre no matter who does the list!

Vault must be a state school grad with a 3.0 GPA and a 160 LSAT. I mean, they're the only people who think NYU is a good law school.

Oh, and thank god somebody at Vault figured out that PENN Law is NOT IVY!

"that put too many factors above GPA and LSAT averages of the incoming class"

LSAT is an exclusionary poll tax that excludes poor/lower middle income and minority students from law school. The LSAT can be "gamed" through time consuming study of byzantine logic games and the purchase of high priced LSAT consultants.

Michigan is like a married couple with one hot person and one fugly. Their kids could be nasty, hot, or most likely, pretty average.

wahoo-wa!

"Good lawyers, but many are unnecessarily arrogant."

I love commentary like this.

Awww children bickering about rankings. Very cute.

I agree with 7:41, a ranking without H, Y, and C in the top 5 is flawed.

How is this survey different from the more complete and accurate attorney ranking score that US News releases?

First, it makes sense that top schools do not produce the absolute best students ready to practice in the big firm environment. Students from Harvard and Yale probably have a greater sense of entitlement on the whole than students from Michigan or other slightly less elite schools. A sense of entitlement is a bad thing for 1st year law associates who really don't know anything. There is also the reality that students from Yale, Harvard, & Columbia are more likely to go into academics (or elite government positions or think tanks), and we all know those types are not generally suited for life at the big firm.

Secondly, the vault survey will not have the impact of the USNWR rankings. I think this is because a lot of incoming students go straight from undergrad to law school, and they are already familiar with the USNWR from their undergrad searching days. Far fewer students have any real familiarity with Vault until they reach law school.

As for the BU/BC debate jab by the second reader opinion quoted above: Be serious. Despite recent ranking trends BU Law is a joke. For circumstantial support interview a few BU Law students.

fuck vault and fuck the whole ranking system. its all fallout from this bullshit thing called prestige where socially inept retards feel better about themselves

As for the BU/BC debate jab by the second reader opinion quoted above: Be serious. Despite recent ranking trends BU Law is a joke. For circumstantial support interview a few BU Law students.

Indiana? Seriously? I wonder who a Biglaw partner would choose, all things being equal, when comparing a 2L whose at the 50th percentile at Indiana and another who is at the 50th percentile at Georgetown. We all know the answer, so Vaults emphasis on "employability" is bull.

Let me get this straight, the question is which law schools firms prefer to hire from and Vault does a survey of "[n]early 400 hiring partners, associate interviewers and professional recruiting staff"?

Umm, newsflash, everyone on this board knows which schools place the best at top law firms; Michigan is not No. 2 and Yale is not No. 10.

Vault's ranking should include an asterisk noting that all surveys were conducted at firms in downtown Bloomington and Minneapolis.

Let me get this straight, the question is which law schools firms prefer to hire from and Vault does a survey of "[n]early 400 hiring partners, associate interviewers and professional recruiting staff"?

Umm, newsflash, everyone on this board knows which schools place the best at top law firms; Michigan is not No. 2 and Yale is not No. 10.

The point is, if you want to see which schools law firms value, see who they hire from. That would seem a lot more probative than some survey thhat gets filled out by the summer intern in the recruiting dept.

How about ranking schools by their average GPA cutoff at Vault firms????

8:18 -- you must be right about that. How could UCLA be 18th, most UCLA grads stay in southern Cali where the local law schools suck.

Average assessment/peer assessment/lawyer & judge assessment

1. Yale -------- 4.85 / 4.9 / 4.8

2. Harvard ----- 4.80 / 4.8 / 4.8

3. Stanford ---- 4.75 / 4.7 / 4.8

4. Columbia ---- 4.65 / 4.6 / 4.7

4. Chicago ----- 4.65 / 4.6 / 4.7

6. NYU --------- 4.60 / 4.6 / 4.6

7. Michigan ---- 4.55 / 4.5 / 4.6

8. UVA --------- 4.50 / 4.4 / 4.6

9. Boalt ------- 4.45 / 4.4 / 4.5

10. Penn -------- 4.40 / 4.3 / 4.5

11. Cornell ----- 4.25 / 4.1 / 4.4

11. Duke -------- 4.25 / 4.1 / 4.4

13. N'western --- 4.20 / 4.0 / 4.4

13. Georgetown -- 4.20 / 4.1 / 4.3

American University, Washington College of Law should be in the top 15.

8:15,

How about neither?

WCL should at least be top 16, if not top 15.

I'm bored.

I'd imagine that, at the margin, this type of assessment benefits good schools with large class populations more so than top-notch schools with small class sizes.

Hence, the large public schools oust the private ones.

8:19,

Not only that, but if there are 400 hiring partners surveyed, and we're talking about a full national survey, then WLRK had no more than 2 partners surveyed, and if they happen to be the 2 that went to non-top 5's, this "coincidence" could have been repeated at many firms producing an extremely skewed and inaccurate result, like the one we see in these rankings.

What I think everyone here can agree on is that you need to be more scientific than a handful of surveys.

Any ranking that contradicts my preconceived notions and assumptions is bogus!

8:32,

IU's enrolment would not classify it as a school with a "large class population." An atty who attended IU said his class sized were half mine, and I went to a private school.

Indiana at 12 and OSU not in the top 25? Not sure how Indiana plays on the coasts, but talk to anyone in the Midwest: OSU > IU.

HAHAHAHAH I love this. Well, anyone who even pays more than 5 minutes glancing at this list is a more-on. The only "list" that matters is the one that translates into jobs and opportunities (academia, business, law etc).

That would clearly be a mix of Harvard, Yale, Columbia, Chicago, Stanford and NYU and then "the rest" following after. I think I've spent 2 mins so far on this, plus the 1 minute it will take to post this comment, so I'm still below my own 5 minutes rule.

Thanks.

True IU is small but there entry stats are on par with Brooklyn Law School. Must be something in the water out there in the midwest that makes 'em good attorneys.

#
# It was reported that the Ohio Football Coach Jim Tressel will only be dressing 40 players for the Michigan game …the rest of the players will have to dress them selves.
# Did you hear that the Ohio State University library burned to the ground? All five books in the library were completely destroyed and the football team is really upset by the fire; they hadn’t colored in two of the books yet.
# Q: What does the average Ohio State University student get on his SAT? A: Drool.
# Q: How do you get an Ohio State Graduate off your front porch? A: Pay him for the pizza.
# Q: What did the OSU grad say to the Michigan grad? A: “Welcome to McDonald’s. May I take your order please?”
# Q: Why is ice no longer available at Ohio State football games? A: Because the senior who knew the recipe finally graduated.

I don't see the point of the people attacking the rankings above. Yes, Harvard has more prestige than Michigan or Virginia, that undebatable. And its fairly well settled that its easier to get a job from Harvard at vault firms that at Michigan and Virginia as well. However, that has nothing to do with what Vault is purporting to do. They are stating how well a first year associate does once they finish law school. Such a thing does not conflict on how much a law firm "values" a law school in hiring, nor does it seek to rank law schools by prestige.

Bottom line, it simply a ranking of what law firms partners think about their associates based on the law school once they are hired. It would seem to me that the comparison that is being drawn, given that it is easier to get a job from Harvard at random firm X, is that above average Michigan students do better than average Harvard students. Moreover, a corollary theory exists here. Perhaps Michigan and Virginia cannot get their graduates into elite firms, and thus because their school is undervalued initially by law firm recruiters, they tend to "wow" partners once they start working.

I'm not saying any of this is the case, I'm just saying that dismissing this ranking out of hand without considering all the factors is pre-mature.

8:32,

I live in the Midwest and work at a respected firm. I have never heard anyone, other than OSU grads, make such an argument. I guess that must be the word on the street in Columbus, maybe even Cinci, but not outside Ohio.

HLS has like 600 alumni with wikipedia pages....http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Harvard_Law_School_alumni

Michigan has like 35...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Michigan_Law_School

Lat must be depressed today to suggest YLS doesn't prepare people for firm jobs. Isn't that what roughly 75% of YLS grads go into? Wouldn't just getting into YLS, getting the name on the resume, be enough "preparation" to crack the top 3 on this list? I am pretty sure that any ranking of this sort would have to do three things: adjust for the percentage of grads going onto federal clerkships, adjust for class size, and then just look at firm placement (V10 placement perhaps). I could come up with my own rank without having some dumb vault workers do it for me. It would almost certainly have Yale ranked #1, Harvard #2, Stanford #3, Columbia #4, Chicago #5, NYU #6. Oh gee, look at that, it's what we all would EXPECT the ranking to show. Anyone care to put the numbers together for an ABOVETHELAW ranking of that nature?

8:32

You do realize that the schools that did well Michigan and Stanford are pretty small compared to NYU, Columbia and Harvard?

This list looks like a function of metropolises. What's the best school that LA firms recruit from? Stanford. What's the best school that DC firms recruit from? UVA. What's the best school that Chicago firms recruit from? Chicago. So all those firms are up there. Props to whoever pointed out that Yale and Harvard students aren't necessarily in it to be at firms, though that doesn't explain Chicago and Stanford. But everyone knows that Harvard is a meaningless credential nowadays. It's hard to get in but come on, the teachers suck.

Georgetown is ranked WAY too high on this list.

8:46

What's your point?

I call regionalism (i.e. ranking parties are more likely to rate a top-rate local-placing school over a top-rate national-placing school). This is due to associate exposure of the ranking parties (i.e. few associates/partners frequently see top national-placing schools at the rate they see local-placing schools).
Because of this, the scores are slanted to where:

1. the schools are more likely to dump into the local market
2. the local markets are largest, and
3. the school class sizes are the largest (this is less important)

So--

1. Stanford University Law School (2)
[top local-placing school -- California (LA/ SF/SD): local-placing? try to find an east coast SLS grad...)]

2. University of Michigan - Ann Arbor Law School (8)
[top local-placing school -- Chicago]

3. New York University School of Law (4)
[top local-placing school -- NYC]

4. University of Virginia School of Law (10)
[top local-placing school -- DC]

5. University of Chicago Law School (6)
[top local-placing school -- Chicago (but with enough national placement to put it under UM)]

6. Harvard Law School (2)
[top national placing school]

7. Columbia Law School (5)
[#2 top national placing school]

8. University of California, Berkeley - Boalt Hall School of Law (8)
[#2 top local-placing school -- Cali]

9. Northwestern University School of Law (12)
[#2 top local-placing school -- Chicago]

10. Yale Law School (1)
[top national-placing school, only low because class sizes are so small -- and fewer of these grads are at firms]

etc.

LMAO.

On Chicago's page:

Student Population:
Male: 95.9%
Female: 44.8%

Well, that was certainly how it felt sometimes, but I am doubting the accuracy of these numbers.

I really can't understand how the hell peopel are commenting that certain law schools are ranked too high or too low. How the hell would you know? Are you a Biglaw partner that reviews associate work?

8:48, my point is that for every notable UM Law grad there are 20 notable HLS grads.

"Vault surveyed only those people who directly assess the value of law school graduates in the real world once they enter the workforce- those individuals responsible for evaluating and hiring law school students. The respondents--who represent over 100 law firms-- were advised to consider the following factors in their rankings: research and writing skills; knowledge of legal doctrine; possession of other relevant knowledge (e.g., science for IP lawyers); and ability to manage a calendar and work with an assistant."

To claim that rankings need to be scientific is bs. What these rankings tell you is that these are the schools that churn out grads that perform well in a firm environment. Does that mean these schools are more "prestigious" than the USNews top 10? No, it just means their grads are more adapted to working at a big firm.

As much as "elite" law schools might not like these rankings, they are probably more accurate at predicting who will be good lawyers. Long & rigorous policy debates, as well as multidisciplinary academic theses, are not going to do much good for you in a firm. The question is: how good are you at working in a team, researching & writing, and managing workload? "Elite" law schools will always be in the top 10 or so, because their grads are so damn smart, but other law schools will outrank them because they churn out worldly, practical grads that are going to be better firm lawyers.

The End.

"my point is that for every notable UM Law grad there are 20 notable HLS grads."

But what does that have to do with the ranking?

I can gurantee you that there is no listings for "superstar first year associates"

This debate is predictable and funny. Those whose school's did well are defending the rankings. Those whose schools did not do well are attacking the rankings. These rankings don't comport strongly enough with my intuition to allow me to put much faith in them. If your school is ranked high in these, treat them like the bible. It doesn't really matter at all.

The same people who criticize Vault.com for this ranking are those who agree with the top 25 firm ranking. I guess Vault's criteria for this ranking aren't good enough because the ego stroke doesn't touch the right people, you know, those who think they're important.

It is always amusing to see people get so excited about a place or two in the most recent set of rankings from the most recent entity that decided to rank law schools. News flash: top national firms hire from all of the top schools.

Don't see a connection between GPA and LSAT on the one hand and firm performance on the other, when you're talking about a group of basically Tier 1 schools. The differences in average GPA between, say, Yale and Penn do not correlate strongly to actual differences in intelligence or whatever other characteristic you want to make a proxy for eventual performance in a firm. Same with LSAT.

Of course, I'm just speaking anecdotally - I had a 174, for example, but I was a crap-ass biglaw associate because I hated the job.

Let's not rope Columbia into the same class as Harvard and Yale. I know someone who had a 3.2 GPA undergrad who got into Columbia. This person was white, but did well on the LSAT. This person is lazy, which explains the low GPA. This person has had trouble working in law firms because of work ethic issues.

I wonder if this will affect next year's US News ranking?

We should all step back an realize that the difference between getting into Harvard versus Michigan or UVA is 3 to 5 more questions correct on the LSAT and a few more As instead of A- in undergrad. THAT SURELY CANNOT TELL YOU WHO WILL BE A BETTER ATTORNEY AT A FIRM.

8:58, I suspect that there are far more posters on here that don't go to HYSCC than go there.

As to another point, does anyone find it odd that the partners don't put their money where their mouth is? The biggest flaw in this survey is that we already know what partners think by the number of grads they hire from the various schools (given the chance). I am surprised Lat didn't point this out.

Or did all the top-tier firm partners REFUSE to respond to this survey?

Truth Teller,

"LSAT is an exclusionary poll tax that excludes poor/lower middle income and minority students from law school. The LSAT can be "gamed" through time consuming study of byzantine logic games and the purchase of high priced LSAT consultants."

This is not true. The LSAT is no different than any other standardized test. Guess what, most people will get nowhere near the top 99% no matter how hard they student, and no matter who tutors them. Guess what, I will never be able to dunk no matter who trains me. Get over it.

Worst rankings ever.

Darn it 5 minute rule guy, you just used up 30 of my seconds.

7:41 is right - no one will seriously pay attention to a list which excludes HLS, YLS and Columbia from the top 5, and frankly, it seems like Vault must have done so for the purpose of drawing attention to the list.

I did not pay 100k to graduate from number 6 when number 2 would have been free. I think Vault is talking about NCAA rankings, not law schools.

8:52

What happens when you control for class size and the century head start? HLS has been around forever and until fairly recently, just a few schools churned out most of the top lawyers. Not really true any more though.

Columbia and NYU grads have much lower GPA's and LSAT scores than Harvard grads.

Michigan was a top 3 school 25 years ago. People forget that. The older hiring partners may still have great respect for the institution.

9:06 Sadly, for the UM grads, these rankings do not even come close to the NCAA rankings.

Ranking whores are idiots. Why would anyone go to Chicago over UVA or Columbia. It is freezing in Chicago, and all three schools offer similar job opportunities. Those who seek to maximize incremental amounts of prestige have issues.

At 8:49: Hmmm.. Michigan sends more grads to NY than Chicago (77 versus 51), and sent 51 grads to California too... doesn't sound so local to me. I would hardly say that Michigan is where it is on these rankings due to a Chicago bias or something. I'm pretty sure Michigan actually places well nationally (maybe not in the absolute top elite firms, but as far as putting its grads across the nation). And then apparently its grads actually do good work and are well-liked. What a concept.

No one from Michigan suddenly thinks we're more prestigious. But I'd rather work with people from Michigan than Harvard, from my experiences with both.

5 Minute Rule-

A ranking that doesn't have HYS in the top 3 usually will be disregarded if that ranking is about "a general law school ranking" or "prestige" or maybe even "ability to get a job in biglaw." But as has been said multiple times, this ranking doesn't claim that.

Wow, I feel really sad for anyone who doesn't go to Yale, Harvard or Stanford. Inferiority complexes apparently last forever

Northwestern? Really?

I'm transferring to Michigan right away. I should have known that my school was actually a TTT.

Yale 1L,

No matter where you transfer, your wanker is still tiny. Sorry.

Social retards sometimes don't make the best attorneys.

People who went to schools ranked #4 through #10 at least had some fun in college.

This confirms that UCLA is TTT.

Columbia isn't that much more national that NYU.

Where is USC?

Midwest bias much? Michigan, Indiana, Iowa, Minnesota, and Wisconisn are all overrated on that list. Michigan is a top school, to be sure, but not #2, and the others are basically unheard of once you leave the central time zone. Even if the list is not meant to be a prestige list like USNWR, it's not representative of actual hiring either.

Apparently, they interviewed a couple dozen partners from the esteemed firm of Bratwurst Schlitz & Cheez LLP.

Is there some reasonably accessible means to determine which schools have the most "national" placement. I would think Michigan does well in that regard, along with many of the other usual suspects. But I suspect that some top schools are more "regional" than one might think.

VAULT SUCKS,

You chose Chicago over a free ride at Michigan? You are a miserable human being.

VAULT SUCKS,

You chose Chicago over a free ride at Michigan? You are a miserable human being.

Those who rank Columbia or, worse, NYU with HYS are blatant trolls.

9:29 - Anthony Ciolli of autoadmit fame made a pretty decent attempt a few years back. I think Chicago came out as the most national school for BigLaw placement. You can probably find paper with a web search.

Ciolli is a reputable guy.

Huh. Just, huh. These rankings don't make a whole lot of sense to me. I think numerical rankings are nonsense, but if I had to group the top schools into tiers I'd say

Tippy top:
Harvard Yale

Top: Columbia Stanford Chicago

Very good:
NYU Michigan UVA Duke Penn

I think that jives with the general perception of people in my firm. If we're just talking about biglaw cred, I think that Fordham probably belongs somewhere in the top 25 at least.

Now I really regret choosing the money at CLS over need-based aid at SLS - a 6 rankings place difference in Vault demonstrates a massive prestige gap whereas the 1 rankings place difference in US News was probably just a statistical fluctuation.

Texas is 22? Get real.

9:50 - if you think the perception of Duke is any different than that of Northwestern, Cornell or Gtown then you are sadly mistaken, friendo.

UVA is the best!!! The students have personality!! That is very important with employers. It is not enough to be a good lawyer, you have to be well liked, too.

Go Iowa! 19!! Woot.

Whatever.

Iowa ahead of Cornell, Georgetown and UCLA???

This list is a joke.

not sure why anyone is taking this list seriously. did the vault describe their survey methodology or give any information about who/where/what they surveyed?

Among UCLA, Cornell, Duke and GTown, I'd rather go to UCLA. Hot chicks, nice campus and in SoCal. GTown is a lawyer factory. Duke is the home of JJ Redick. Cornell is the equivalent of the NIT.

The average LSAT for UVA in 1995 was 162.

Frankly, I don't think any hiring partners should be judging recent graduates based on their outdated perceptions. They are probably the equivalent of a modern day Dozo grad.

I like 8:23's idea - it would be more interesting I think to know the different GPA cut-offs firms have for law schools.

9:28, ever heard of a Midwest work ethic? Apparently hiring partners have and the Vault rankings seem to indicate that they feel it holds water. Go Iowa!

Went to Michigan, and the 8 jillion dollars I will be paying back over the next 30 years wasn't worth the money. Never wanted a big firm job, but when student loan bills come calling, what else can you do?

I'm sure no one on this board will listen or care, but if your life doesn't revolve around how much money you make and what kind of car you're driving this week, stay away from taking out huge loans to pay for school. It's just not worth being a slave to debt.

10:19,

Does the same sage advice apply to those who want to afford decent educations and health care for their children? Those who see no shame in the desire for prestigious work?

Put it this way: You don't know shit about big firms. You only know that you aren't cut out for it.

10:19 --
I bet you're a Hawkeye.

Iowa is the most underrated school in the country. The students are amazing, the faculty is amazing, and the administration is wholly less than stellar.

Midwest work ethic = drink beer, eat cheese, marry a fat chick, and pick up a few OWI's while you're at it.

Just because Harvard and Yale are "tippy top" law schools (to steal language from 9:50), it does NOT mean their grads perform well at big law firms so there is some truth to these Vault rankings.

We automatically assume that the Harvardian on the deal will rock before we even start working with them.. but lo and behold, the Harvardian knows nothing more than the UofM grad or the Fordham grad in his or her class. To excel at a firm, you need ON THE JOB EXPERIENCE and as someone stated above, you gotta be WELL-LIKED.

Lat, we ought to rank schools based on ohw well their grads dress for the job.

Hey... 10:25 -- In Illinois we call them DUI, not OWI.

Sucka. Fool. Foolish sucka.

Hehehehe. According to Vault, the average entering student at Stanford has a "69" on the LSAT.

hehehehe. 69.

10:31,

What if you are operating a vehicle that is not technically driven, e.g., a plane or your mom?

Zing! --
My Mom is a very driven woman. She is also as pure as the driven snow.

lol, Indiana (!) in, Illinois out completely. So much for lolwereasgoodasgeorgetown.

most "comment posters" are likely HLS or Columbia students/alumni.

Lat, you should consider doing a small survey about posters on this blog. I guarantee you the findings would be eye-opening, and would give readers some perspective.

10:42 --
I agree, completely. Great idea.

10:39 --
Illinois is crap. (Not really, it's ok. It ain't as good as G'Town, though. Also, not as goo as a lot of the other Midwest schools).

For those wondering, the correct ranking of Midwest schools is:
1) Chicago.
2) Northwestern
3) Michigan
4) Iowa
5) Minn
6) Indiana
7) Wisconsin
8) Illinois
9) Southern Illinois

Midwest is most certainly not overrepresented. Absent ties all four of those schools are T25 in US News, and the firms that recruit there confirm it. Indiana suffers because less firms recruit there than at MN or WI, but its still a very good school.

No one respects Illinois other than US News, and for good reason. Most transparent attempt to boost ranking ever.

OSU is conspicuous by its absence, but I would guess that the ghoulish football factory mentality of the undergrad rubs off on OSU grads, either in perception or reality. Illinois (land of the frat) is probably the same.

Midwest is most certainly not overrepresented. Absent ties all four of those schools are T25 in US News, and the firms that recruit there confirm it. Indiana suffers because less firms recruit there than at MN or WI, but its still a very good school.

No one respects Illinois other than US News, and for good reason. Most transparent attempt to boost ranking ever.

OSU is conspicuous by its absence, but I would guess that the ghoulish football factory mentality of the undergrad rubs off on OSU grads, either in perception or reality. Illinois (land of the frat) is probably the same.

Hail, Hail to Michigan the leaders and the best!

General rule of thumb for MW schools other than Chicago/Michigan/NW:

Iowa is underrated.
Wisconsin is underrated.
Indiana is underrated.
Illinois is (very) overrated.
OSU is overrated.
Minnesota is about where it should be.
Iowa, Wisconsin and probably Indiana are as good as Minnesota.
Minnesota and Wisconsin have better job feeding due to location relative to work.

10:57 --
You're pretty much spot on, right there. I think Minnesota might be a little underrated, as well. Also, I'm not sure Wisconsin is that heavily underrated.

OSU/Illinois are pretty much teh sux.

harvard and yale = TTT

Hey Kudzu,

You don't know what the fuck you're talking about. Chicago places a much higher percentage of its little class in Chicago than does Michigan, and Michigan places about 25% of its class in NYC, with another 25% or so in California. So keep your moronic theories to yourself.

Hi 10:49, how's Northwestern treating you?

The reason why NU ranks so poorly may have something to do with the fact that 1/3 of its graduates who take the bar in California CONSISTENTLY fail. We're talking about 6 straight years of being the worst "top" school. It's embarrassing, and you think the hiring partners in CA don't notice that year in, year out they have to give some dumbass Northwestern grad a month off to study for the February bar?

11:04 - Minnesota is not underrated. At all.

Midwestern kids bust their ass. Why should it surprise anyone that their schools are well represented and University of Spoiled Californians, for example, is OUT?

They clearly sampled crappy firms.

The problem with the Vault rankings is that they assume a school sends the same students to a V5 firm as a V50 firm as a V100 firm. This isn't the case. The firms already take school prestige into account when they hire, so comparing Columbia to Fordham within one particular firm (for example) doesn't tell a whole lot about the schools, because the Columbia student might be a median at the median for her class, but the Fordham student might be significantly higher up compared to other Fordham students. If law firms were perfect judges of prospective candidates, one would expect to see absolutely no difference in the relative abilities of the graduates of different universities, because it would have already been internalized. Obviously that's not actually the case, but it's instructive as to why these rankings might not be particularly useful

JM, "not particularly useful"? I'm having a tough time seeing how this ranking is useful at all, other than providing entertainment.

Anyone that goes to Michigan or UVA over Harvard or Columbia is an idiot. Just because hiring partners think Stanford et al. might prepare students for firm life better doesn't necessarily mean that their firm would dip farther into their classes rank-wise. I challenge someone to submit confirmable empirical evidence that this is not the case (e.g., that cut-offs for Michigan are lower than cut-offs for Harvard).

11:30 - USC 1L watching OCI go up in smoke.

Stupid Kid,

If thinking that there's more to life than billing 2300 hours a year and not knowing your kids names, then I am proud to say I'm not cut out for it! I'm only hanging in there now at biglaw to pay off the excessive price I paid for my law degree.

I just don't get what's so attractive about prestige. It's just one big hamster wheel...it's a search for meaning that will never end or satisfy. At the end of the day, no one really cares where you went to school, how much money you make, or how many hours you bill. There's just more to life than that.

All I was doing cautioning people who aren't concerned with whether their clients are Fortune 500 companies or who don't want to spent their time shackled to a large debt to consider that before picking a school...no need for foul language. If you want big firm life and don't mind the debt load, go for it and good luck!

3L

That's exactly the point. This study didn't try and show any of that. The better performance by Michigan or Stanford could have been due to a number of factors like a better legal practice program or more clinics (or even them teaching more black letter law). Who the hell knows. One thing we know for certain are that people who are changing these vault rankings into "law school rankings" are completely missing the point.

If anything these rankings are of "how likely you are to be a good associate at the law firm you will end up at based on the law school you attend."

this is yet another confirmation that the vault rankings are untrustworthy. indeed, the vault firm rankings place skadden in the top 5, which all agree does not reflect skadden's actual prestige (quite low) among nyc firms. and here, putting michigan and uva ahead of harvard... it's just absurd on its face.

10:48 and 10:57, correction to midwest list: WUSTL >

4) Iowa
5) Minn
6) Indiana
7) Wisconsin
8) Illinois
9) Southern Illinois

First!!!!

Not a good sign when you have to remind people your law school exists.

Uh, wustl undergad :

The omission was correct. WUSTL is a toilet. Everyone knows that.

Any ranking system that does not have the king of law schools (Harvard) at or very near the top is absolutely bogus.

wustl Undergrad.... If there's one thing we can ALL agree that Vault got right on this list, it was the decision to not include Wash U.

You're lucky you're an undergrad... you have time to pick a real law school.

What do all top tier law grads have in common???

They all got into Michigan!

Ha. Zing!

Remember who is #11:
VANDY
The little law school that could!

I cannot believe it! I turn out a thousand JDs every year from my diploma mill and more people don't hold them in higher regard?!?

good to see vandy holding its own :)

Michigan = underrated, GO BLUE, NO.1!

People choose UVA and Berkeley over Columbia/NYU and Chicago all the time. In 2000, it only took a 3.3 GPA to get into Chicago. Guess what? Everyone who is normal still gets a good job.

Why the F!$% did we let Leiter go? We should have just caved on his demands for a gimp suit. Now we're really sliding in the rankings!

While some may quibble with these rankings, I hope we all agree that Cornell is the best law school in America!

Faculty: NYU > Columbia
Vault: NYU > Columbia
US News: NYU > Columbia
Location: NYU > Columbia
Dean's Cup: NYU > Columbia
Colors: Push; they're both pretty gay

Great to hear that I'm paying Georgetown over $40K a year and that most law firm lawyers don't think the school prepares us as well as Indiana @ Bloomington for firm life!

12:19 - Lol! Nobody was even talking about CLS/NYU.

Do these new vault rankings vindicate the pain of your CLS waitlist?

There are other schools in the MidWest than Chicago, Michigan and Northwestern? I wish someone would have told me. I showed them my LSAT score and they only provided me with those 3 options. Crap, maybe I got screwed.

The only attorney in my office who went to Cornell for law school is retarded. I think he runs the 110HH in the Special Olympics, as a side gig.

12:22- you could stitch your diploma mill JD's together to form a sail, and compete in the America's Cup!
It's a better chance for glory and wealth than actually practicing law after that TTToilet.

According to this thing, the top-ranked school, Stanford, has an average LSAT of "69."

Show up to your test, fill in your name, take a nap, and go to the Vault's top-ranked school in the country!

Nothing against Stanford (it's a phenomenal law school) but the Vault, like all these ranking systems, is completely and utterly useless. This proves how much we should not care about what this rag prints.

11:40--

I'm sorry Skadden didn't make you an offer (there are a finite number of spots you know). However, I'll bet if you bust your ass at CWT you might be able to lateral in a couple of years . . . assuming you don't get laid off first.

7:47 needs to learn to use the phrase "let alone" properly

The real question is how much do these rankings correspond with the number of hiring partners from these firms.

I don't know how these rankings were done or what criteria were used, but I know my firm (Vault 20) has over 20 Cornell grads and exactly ZERO IU grads and <10 Vandy grads.

That's a shocker, 1:52. You mean to tell me that IU grads tend not to go to New York (instead practicing in cities like Chicago)? And at the same time, you mean to tell me that New York has a lot of grads from an in-state university? You just blew my mind!

And on a related not, is it not somewhat inconsistent to hint at your firm's prestige by referencing Vault, while at the same time trying to discredit Vault?

1:59 (IU Troll) - I'm at a national firm, which is not based in NYC and has a Chicago office. And we still have ZERO IU grads.

"LSAT is an exclusionary poll tax that excludes poor/lower middle income and minority students from law school. The LSAT can be "gamed" through time consuming study of byzantine logic games and the purchase of high priced LSAT consultants. "

If it weren't for the LSAT I wouldn't have been admitted to Law School. Mostly because of economic hardship on my family that required me to always work and tough grading at an engineering school my UGPA was 2.78. With one Kaplan book and one shot at the LSAT I secured a spot at law school.

Standardized tests are the equalizer of classes. Keep them coming.

Seriously. Have you ever worked with a Yale law graduate? They're all nerds (so nerdy that lawyers can call them nerds). I've met only one Yale grade who made it big at a big law firm -- and even that guy was more Aspbergery than the typical lawyer.

Look at my school, Vandy, coming in at #11! And besides being great firm lawyers, we're also all happy!! It can be done!

Wow, the amount of Columbia and NYU trolling in this thread is incredibly disproportionate to the amount of posts by acknowledged Columbia/NYU students and grads normally around here.

What's the deal? Are they secretly the biggest list whores of them all?

2:38 - Typically, yes. CLS students are insecure that their school slipped to 5th in the last USNWR, and NYU students are insecure about being regarded as the 2nd choice school in NYC. It's all really meaningful...

I think anyone who looks at the schools objectively realize that cls and nyu are basically the same school, with the exceptions only of location and name recognition outside the profession.

As a stanford '05 grad.........interesting. But we are essentially tied with harvard, and anything that has one or the other significantly above/below is bs.

Just to point out one thing about Michigan - (disclaimer: I am a Michigan law grad).

Michigan's high ranking is not that anomalous considering that law partners are all old school.

When US News started ranking law schools in the late 1980's, Michigan was regularly in the top 3. The reason is that back then, the only criterion was a school's reputation among law professors.

Then, in the early 1990's, US News started to make the rankings more subjective by adding in quantitative criteria such as LSAT scores and acceptance rates.

The fact is, as a public university, Michigan will never be able to compete with private universities when it comes to acceptance rates, so when you apply such quantitative measures, Michigan necessarily dropped in the rankings.

That said, law partners who came of age in the old days still consider Michigan a top school.

This was the story sold to me when I was considering Michigan and I was skeptical so I actually looked at back issues to US News and confirmed that part of the story. Now the high rankings from law partners confirms the other part.

1:52 is clearly on the East Coast (national firm not based in Chicago), which is the same as being in NYC as far as the Midwestern schools are concerned.

Midwestern kids do not see the appeal of the East Coast, and a quick run of a COL calculator shows why. The only ones who, in my experience, have eagerly wanted to move further east than Ohio are the absolute gunner douches or the ones who are originally from the Coast. Very, very few of the comparatively pleasant superstars want to go anywhere other than Chicago or Minneapolis. Oh, and the Wisconsin kids who get treated like royalty at Foley Milwaukee and OSU people at Jones Day.

It's somewhat unfortunate. The schools have excellent clinicals and do not inflate grades for the most part. The top third could easily hack it in NYC and most of them wouldn't bitch nearly as much.

Yet somehow, the same hiring partners beg HY students to work for them. Except Cadwalader.

ATL chatter to V25 (school)!

US News to my bathroom!

I know this was a while back, but was 8:40 serious with "more-on?"

The only rankings that really matter are ATL's coolest law school rankings. Although these are pretty cool, too. Wahoowa!

Hail to the victors!

Michigan ahead of Harvard. Whatever.

Good grief, I hope I dislike my fellow lawyers less than my fellow law students.

Who cares about this stupid Vault and USNews crap! NEXT TOPIC

More on the "Milbank Promise"!!!!!!!!!

Posner makes a strong case for Chicago being the best school based on any rating criteria that matters... Leiter agrees. If you ain't Chicago, you ain't SHITTTT!

so sad about penn. i'm bummed. not sarcasm.

According to Vault, "The respondents--who represent over 100 law firms-- were advised to consider the following factors in their rankings: research and writing skills; knowledge of legal doctrine; possession of other relevant knowledge (e.g., science for IP lawyers); and ability to manage a calendar and work with an assistant."

What about analytical skills? Aren't those important skills for a lawyer!? I would have expected those to be a factor.

9:03am - link for Posner?

I think that this is not a valid list for transactional attorneys.

you prestige fuckers - it's finally my turn! word on the streets is that my school, the U of toledo, is #26 on the list. only 20 spots away from harvard - and I was a 142 LSAT/2.51 UGPA.

HAHAHAHA Prestige Here I Come!

HATER @ 8:47pm - what about New York City?

Over my eight years in biglaw I have interviewed dozens of Yale students and only one of them has not been strange. They don't make good firm lawyers.

HKlawyer at 5:43:

Well said.

Gawd.... this isn't a prestige ranking. It's a firm work capability ranking. Duh.

Yeah, I'd like to say, partly to talk about it, and partly to let the new guy in on the mood here a little bit. Uh.. the new Vault 25 is.. the light of my life. Um.. I know I speak for the others.. uh, when I say it is.. so amazing.. you know? And, uh.. it's just.. I wish.. you know.. I wish I could know the new Vault 25 more, you know? Because.. the new Vault 25.. it is one of a kind, you know?

Any ranking that contradicts my preconceived notions, intuitions, and assumptions is bogus! Any ranking that attacks the conventional wisdom is just wrong. I've invested a lot of myself into believing previous rankings, and Vault makes me feel uncomfortable.

Harvard is #1 -- cuz that's everyone tells me!

9:12 - Analysis is part of writing skills.

Leiter would have been pissed and issued an immediate statement (if he was staying at Texas).

9:54--

I agree. BU, Iowa, GW, Minn., Vandy & Indiana are ranked above Texas? Get real. The methodology of that test has to be

I agree with their "Harvard of the West" comment--that's seriously how people see the school in TX--but the whole 22 rank just doesn't make sense. That's especially true when it puts the school between BU and UNC. "Get real" is right.

Vault is in the tank for midwestern schools.

i have never met anyone -- in my life -- who would choose michigan or uva over harvard. likewise i never met anyone who got offers at both skadden and, say, cleary or simpson, and chose to go to skadden. fact is, uva is a shit school, just like skadden is a shit firm. the inability of vault to sort the wheat from the chaff -- in either law school or law firm rankings -- is telling. maybe they'll get it right next year.

# "The lawyers I've worked with from this school were sloppy and unprepared."

# "We've hired several lawyers from this school and they all have poor people skills and produce low-quality work."

Hahaahahhahahhahhahahahha

All of this is very amusing, indeed.

Glancing at sophomoric banter that animates the majority of these posts, it's clear to even the casual reader that most of you douchebags (that's one word, btw) are either law students or newbie law firm associates with no f-ing clue. Why else would someone care about a meaningless set of law school "rankings" that represent the umpteenth atttempt by some self-professed legal "authority" to sell more product? As a mid-level BigLaw associate, I can tell you this: no one who's established him/herself in the law firm environment gives a rat's ass about rankings like these, if for no other reason than that they have no reason to do so in the first place.

So carry on with your squabbling over GPAs and LSAT scores, children. Such is the abstract stuff of academia. Good luck in the real world of actual legal practice. With attitudes like yours, you'll need all of it.

Why haven't frat guy nor JT posted in this thread? More proof that fail vault is epic fail.

This thread:

-- Wisconsin and Minnesota people fighting over strength of schools.

-- Midwesterners mocking Illinois and OSU.

-- Angry Texans.

-- Arrogant Big Blue.

-- Butt-hurt Harvard.

i still remember when i interviewed at skadden and the first guy i saw was some adderall-addicted chump from the university of pittsburgh who bragged about having billed 3300 hours the year before. everyone at that place was so weird (except one very hot female associate in the IP "group"). it seems the only people skadden hires are kids that (a) went to shit schools or (b) went to good schools but got shit grades. those kids got no-offered everywhere else in ny, so they're perpetually insecure and falling all over themselves trying to prove who can bill the most hours.

does all that remind you of another firm in the news? another place that hires less qualified people with the understanding that they will work harder to make up for it? skadden is the bear stearns of law firms.

Michigan / UVA = TTT

Things White People Like --- Rankings! ;)

The emphasis on "employability" in these rankings indicates that they are designed to be more useful to hiring partners at firms, as opposed to to law school applicants. But, of course, since the hiring partners work in the field on a day to day basis, they shouldn't really need a simplistic ranking system to compare applicants. The main reason that USNWR is useful to applicants is that it boils a thousand different factors down into a nice, simplistic list.

So Vault's ranking system is pointless.

"Land of the Frat?"
Unresolved bully issues much?
Grow up.

Hey 9:52, here's one for you: I turned down that overpriced asshole haven called Harvard for a free ride at UVA, the school I wanted to go to anyway.

Currently a 4th year in NYC vault 3, and trust me, I have had a lot of without debt or the horrible memories of law school "hell" that most of my Harvard-educated colleagues have.

11:33(2) - stop being a drama queen d-bag. Hit the books instead of trolling this website. Your OCI is safe.

Fight on!

Penn State!!!! We made it into the top 20!!!!!!!!!!!!!! GO LIONS!!

Why does the incoming LSAT and GPA have anything to do with how good a school is? A good school should prepare you for the practice of law. Any school can take someone with a 4.0 and a 175 LSAT and teach them law in some form. Doesn't make you a great "school." "Schools" were designed to teach people.

9:51 AM - stop the whining. No seriously, take a tissue and wipe those tears off, you sound like the kid who was always picked last for a team in middle school gym class.

lol, Illini finally showed up.

So proud of the party atmosphere until you find out that hiring partners don't have any respect for your school despite the blatant rating jacking that is wholly inappropriate for a public charter/public funding school.

I don't know about you guys, but something seems a bit off about UChicago's "stats" on its page... I just can't seem to put my finger on it...

THE STATS

Bar Passage Rate (School) : 99%
Bar Passage Rate (IL) : 85%
Employment Rate (6 months after graduation): 95.9%
Student Population:
Male: 95.9%
Female: 44.8%
Average GPA of entering students: 3.66
Average LSAT of entering students: 170

You are all a bunch of self-important pricks.

New rankings. SMN > VCH > CBNY > TTT

Hmmm...wonder if the pollsters let the chips on their shoulders about where they went to law school interfere with their judgment on this one. "Well, I didn't get into Yale, but I hear the people who graduate from there are REALLY weird, even though I would've killed to go there...."

10:14: is that you aaron? dude, seriously, it amazes me that you haven't been let go yet. get back to work.

as one of the few praticing attorneys on this page (U Chicago grad) working in Texas, I will give you my two cents. I think that most practicing attorneys at big firms would generally agree with these rankings. HLS and YLS have very smart students, but on the whole, they are very awkward and thus will not make good future partners or even current associates. That said, they are smart so people give them extreme deference, which is why you don't see them further down this list. It is common for a HLS or YLS student to get no-offered, while all summers from UVA and UT get offers. They just tend to be more normal.

Co-sign 10:41, big-time.

Oh, and also 10:37.

Toledo 1L-

the most prestige you could ever hope for is a regional firm in a lower-third tier market.

There's no way these ranking are legit if Penn State isn't top 10. #13 is just an insult to all those in Happy Valley.

Yalies are weird!

The "buzz" for each of the top schools mentions students' lack of practical experience. Didn't the employers filling out the survey go to law school? Did law school provide practical experience then?

Isn't this ranking based on lawyering? It's well known that Yale produces great legal scholars... but that doesn't absolutely correlate with skill in practice.

The Michigan thing seems a bit out of place, but it's also well-known that Stanford and NYU produce some of the best practitioners anywhere.

Bull, but I do agree that Virginia belongs 9 spots ahead of Penn. Otherwise, this is silly.

I am currently enrolled at Michigan. It's so cold here that I haven't seen a girl in a skirt in at least 5 months. And that's enough to drive any man crazy.

That being said, if you think the students here have sparkling personalities, then you really need to put the bottle down.

On another note, I theorize we do so well in the rankings because no one ever goes out to do fun things during the winter, which leads to a higher rate of not having a life. I hear this is a good quality in biglaw.

I fail to see the correlation some people on this board want to make; having a high LSAT and going to a prestigious school doesn't make one good at managing document reviews, reviewing documents for white papers and depositions, reviewing documents for privilege, and taking orders from arrogant senior associates. I think it's the top students from schools like Fordham, BU, UMN, GW, etc., and yes many of you prestige-whores will think this is blasphemy, but I would also include the top at NYLS, that are best able to put up with the often mind-numbing work because they have a less a sense of entitlement, are more appreciative of their jobs even when the work is boring, and probably didn't clerk for an appellate judge and feel they deserve more substantive work then everyone else.

The right way to do this is to say, basically, USN has it right for HYS and maybe NCC, but ranking all law schools by the metric that ranks the top schools best is silly. Outside those 6, should factor "what biglaw wants" more heavily.

My rankings would be like this but with three to six "outliers" at the top not ranked.

10:52- I think you're onto something re: Michigan.

10:53- you hit the nail right on the head. strivers who keep their heads down, work like dogs and are in constant fear of being fired are worth more to a bigfirm than any naturally brilliant yalie with a 179 lsat.

10:45 - "It is common for a HLS or YLS student to get no-offered..." Really? Somehow, I think that's untrue. What do you consider "common?"

I'd be willing to bet it's more common for a HLS or YLS student to turn down a firm after a summer than the other way around.

emory pwns wustl!!!

For those who want facts and educated opinions instead of rankings, here's one Penn grad's synopsis of the school.

Pros:
- people are smart and relatively chill
- more gay-friendly than any school in the country
- everyone gets multiple offers with top nyc firms (three people in my class went to wachtell, several more went to cravath and s&c).

Cons:
- philadelphia sucks ass
- the student body is downright hostile to people who are politically conservative (be prepared to be labeled a "racist" if you disagree with affirmative action)
- you'll spend the rest of your life explaining the difference between upenn and penn state ("mom, just think of it as the wharton school of law, okay?")

Vandy????? Are you joking? I have worked with more retards from Vandy Law than all other schools combined. As an observation, Penn kids seem to be very bright (no I did not go to Penn...went to Michigan instead).

Harvard and Columbia students love talking about Vault when it comes to their firm choices.

Now all of a sudden Vault sucks.

LIST OF SHAME:

Yale: From 1 to 10.
Penn: Out of Top 10.
G'Town: Trashed in comments.
USC: REMOVED
Illinois: REMOVED, outranked by all neighbors.
Wash U in STL: REMOVED.

Almost 250 comments regarding law school rankings -- more evidence that this blog is primarily read by a bunch of wankers from HLS and Yale

The biglaw firm I work at did a survey of partners of what they wanted in associates. Surprisingly, writing and research skills were valued much much lower than judment, problem solving, and time management. The partners weren't necessarily looking for brilliance, but for practical skills and diligence and rainmaking abilities. Maybe at Cravath or in a supreme court practice that isn't true, but that's not where most of us work.

Indiana, BU, Minnesota, Wisconsin, but no Ohio State?

LOL!!!!! This is a joke. OSU is truly underrated.

Vandy topped Duke. Na na na na na!

10:53 -- Amen.

11:10,

The only joke here is that you suggest OSU deserves a spot on any "top" list.

I was once young enough to think that my self-worth derived mainly from the prestige of my law school or the fancy name on the door of the lawmill where I worked. But I got over it.

Michigan is not a regional school and is not just skating by on a higher ranking from 30 years ago. All the notable DC firms actively recruit at Michigan and have plenty of UM grads at all levels. In fact, I don't know about now, but in the mid-'90s, more grads went to DC firms than to Chicago. NYC was close behind, and I think it passed DC at some point after that. Most of the complaints about inadequate OCI opportunities involved firms west of the Rockies -- they came, but not in the same numbers.

I also don't see why people are so shocked by these rankings. If you click on the schools' names on the Vault page, it links to some of the representative quotes from people in firms. They say things like "Harvard people have a sense of entitlement" and "Yale grads would do better to worry about work and not about how to run the country." Anyone who's on these boards know statements like that to be true. And guess what, arrogance, entitlement and a refusal to work hard at often mundane projects are not positive qualities in a young lawyer. These numbers shouldn't come as a shock, and I don't think it's surprising that a number of midwestern schools faired very well, given their reputation for working hard. Don't worry Yalies, your reps as intellectual giants can remain safe even outside a V5 ranking. You just don't make good firm associates, and frankly, I don't think you should find that per se insulting.

"The biglaw firm I work at did a survey of partners of what they wanted in associates. Surprisingly, writing and research skills were valued much much lower than judment, problem solving, and time management."

I don't see any particular reason why writing and research skills would not go together with judgment and problem solving. Presumably, a good lawyer would have all of the above.

I am a COA clerk (for an active judge for those out there who were not COA clerks and don't realize that there is little "prestige" difference between active and senior circuit judges) and I went to UVA undergraduate and Michigan law. The best students at these institutions stack up very well against the best students from Harvard and Yale. All the comments about how one would be crazy to choose Michigan over Harvard are obviously coming from those who did not finish quite so well at their "tippy top" schools and are upset that they were denied COA clerkships that were given to someone with degrees from, gasp, public schools.

Was Cadwalader correct in their assessment of Yalies?

Go Blue!!!!11

10:53: I hope you're not confusing not complaining about being bored by BIGLAW drudge work with not actually bored with the work. Believe me, those of us from lower-tiered schools are just as bored as anybody else. We're just not idiotic enough to tell partners we are.

Michigan isn't tied to a coast the way Stanford, Yale, and Harvard are. While a bunch of Michigan grads end up in Chicago, it's not a majority. If you look at the NALP directory, you'll see that UMLS has the most employers show up to its OCI after Harvard.

So, it makes sense UMLS would be #2, because in sheer numbers, their kids are going to be spread out across a wider variety of firms.

COA Clerk: UVA to Michigan law to COA? Enjoy your AA clerkship.

What's the big deal? No matter where you go to law school, you're stuck being a lawyer the rest of your life. Then you die.

Following up a rank of emory as the #1 most underrated school by ranking it lower than us news seems somewhat contradictory.

11:53 is correct

11:02-
we might not be trying to run the country like the people at #10 / but we at #11 know how to run a law firm!

Say what you want about the anomalous results (and I'm sure there is room for improvement in their methodology), but the Vault rankings are based on what the Law FIRMS report, as opposed to U.S. News, which is based on what the Law SCHOOLS report.

When the law SCHOOLS lump contract and temp attorneys in their pie charts of graduates who work in "Large Firms" (see WSJ article last Fall), it makes the Vault rankings slightly more reliable for people who want to work in firms.

If not for the basketball program, dook would be wake.

If not for the basketball program, UNC would be UNCG.

UM's success can be attributable, at least in part, to their wide geographic network. UM does very well in third and fourth tier locales like SF, LA, Chi, TX, Philly, ATL and DC in addition to NY, whereas most Ivy kids never leave the east coast.

10:45 -- seconded.

Not only are the UVA and UT kids more "normal," I'd say they're usually very personable.

I didn't mean that students at other schools aren't bored with the drudge work, but they don't do lousy jobs on it because they're so busy whining that it isn't as prestigious as when they were writing appellate decisions. Sense of entitlement + lack of morale = lousy work product or work product that meets what was required but doesn't go above it.

1:22 -- does your tier rating look like this:
First Tier: New York City
Second Tier: New York City Suburbs
Third Tier: DC
Fourth Tier: Other

????

how is a mid-western land grant #2?
public school kids yield public school results...

and let the torrent of defensive UM grad responses commence. The worst insult you can hurl at a UM grad is the truth - UM is a state school.

ROFL at NYU inferiority complex!

http://www.biglawboard.com/blb/viewThread.jsp?threadId=13062&x=2

1:33: That makes sense. I had a person in my associate class ask how she could possibly be expected to do document review because she had just spent a year doing a clerkship. You know, because document review is so fascinating for the rest of us.

Looks like 2:01 got rejected from UM (and UVA, Boalt, and UP) -- is bitter with his worthless Fordham degree.

Ooh, going for the land grant slam. I only wish that it had COST like a public school. I was out-of-state, but even the in-staters didn't get much of a price break. (Good thing all those firms hired us so we could pay off our loans!)

1:53 - i was confused by that, too - i'm guessing 1:22 was a joke?

but let me be very clear about this: there are no new york city suburbs. there is manhattan and then a 3-state-wide portion of the map reading "here be dragons."

2:49 = has lived in NYC for less than four years, and watches a lot of Sex in the City.

2:15 is so very very right. UM rules, Fordham drools.

What makes 't-14' students so prone to inferiority complexes that they lose sleep when a few public schools get within sniffing distance of their ivory towers on a measly law school ranking? Does your entire self esteem really rely on a piece of paper you get after milling around one place for three year? If you want to see the validity of this ranking, just look at this comment thread.

It's threads like this that cause me to be overjoyed that I didn't attend one of these hoity toity law schools with the sort of clowns who are posting here. But I work with many who did and there's little difference between a lawyer from Harvard, Cornell, Yale, Boalt, Michigan, Columbia, Stanford or other "good" law school. Virtually all major firms hire from all of these places and it is virtually random which ones do well and which ones wash out.

And anyone still evaluating LSATs and GPAs years out of law school really really needs to get out more.

Illinois is taking quite the beating today - why so much hatred? Anyone care to fill me in on my the school is overrated or "sucks"?

Iowa is generally underrated (but back in 2002 it was #18 on US News rankings) because of its location in a small midwest town, which makes on-campus recruiting and placement at big firms on the coasts more difficult.

Iowa definitely belongs in the top 20!!!

I luv it says top law schools in the world! Wake up this is a list of top schools in America!

Based on the naive and completely out of touch comments that predominate this blog, I always figured that most of ATL's readers are law students and junior associates. But now that a post about some "new" law school ranking has drawn nearly 300 comments, I now know that for a fact.

Boy, I can't wait to start working. As if the entitled, rankings obsessed, attention whores at my law school weren't enough, I now see there is a whole world of insecure and self-important people out there.

Law school is law school and the only reason we have rankings is so that insecure, selfish, self-important type A brats can pat themselves on the back for being so clever and accomplished. Thinking you are better than other people is apparently the only thing that keeps most lawyers (and law students) from hurting themselves.

I like this ranking system a lot. Vault and USNWR are using VERY different criteria, and thus, they are complementary and both useful.

Anecdotally: I've spoken to a number of partners at NYC offices of Biglaw firms that tend to fall into the trap of only hiring super-gunner elite douchebags with top GPAs from the top schools. These partners have tended to complain about low-quality work from their elite douchbag associates. I hear them pine for more grounded, practical lawyers with qualities other than the ability to excel in a legal academic environment. Implication: the ability to excel in a legal academic environment does NOT necessarily translate into the ability to excel in a legal work environment. (Of course then their hiring committees go and apply the same silly hiring policies the next year.)

Disclosure: I am an elite douchbag from a top-tier school, but not a Biglaw associate; so while the partners were talking about people like me, they were not talking specifically about me. I think their assessments were candid and honest at the time.

Don't forget, law school rankings also give firms and other lawyers a way to make snap judgments about you without having to learn anything about your individual merits or personality.

Hahahahaha!

2:49: the correct answer is Manhattan & then a surrounding 3 state area entitled "Here live the MDs, CEOs, & GCs who employ us"

2:15:

UPenn is not a public school, douchebag.

3:35 re: Illinois beating

Illinois is a public law school and the only T1 in the state of Illinois that is really an option for Illinois public students (Northwestern and Chicago are private and very much national).

Illinois is decent as a university but is not world class. That is generally true of the law school as well. It is a solid T1 school. The law school has been around for over a hundred years, like the other land grants. It's not some new innovation.

Illinois figured out, as others have, that US News rankings are driven almost entirely by LSAT and GPA. These traditionally are what hammer public law schools because they can't be as selective as private schools. Thus, the bottom 25% of the class drags down LSAT/GPA and general perception of the institution.

Illinois basically chose to raise its "numbers" by reducing enrollment a lot compared to its neighbors. Minnesota and Wisconsin seat entering classes of ~260. Illinois seats 180. Illinois also interestingly has a median entering LSAT of 166, which is three points higher than MN and five points higher than WI, at least based on last year's US News rankings.

They aren't just "smaller." Pretty clear what's going on there.

This is as the public Big Ten school in a state that is as large as Minnesota and Wisconsin combined. It is transparent, and it is also a pretty rotten thing to do to the young people of the state of Illinois, as it effectively eliminates the T1 public option for a great deal of otherwise qualified people who wouldn't necessarily be worldbeaters, but who would be decent lawyers.

Illinois then proceeds to brag about its quality even though most people in the region don't buy into it and they certainly aren't recruited "nationally" in the same sense a Georgetown is. So it really doesn't help anyone other than egos of the people at the school.

Where's WCL? How many kids do we need to place at Weil before we get some respect?

Just an FYI, Illinois's 07 class had over 200 graduates. I don't know the numbers, but the class size was similar.

Regarding Wisconsin, Iowa, and Minnesota - all of them are respectable and solid law schools. However, Minnesota is a top law school solely because it has a strangehold on Minneapolis, a semi-major market. A UM degree in Minneapolis is as good or better than any school in the Top 5. Now, take that UM degree outside of Minnesota and see if it gets you any more leverage than the other comparable Big Ten law schools (Illinois, Wisconsin, Iowa, OSU) - it won't.

Regarding Iowa - I know a number of Iowa grads who loved their time at Iowa, and spoke nothing but the highest praise. However, try finding a job with a UIowa degree - unless you want to work in public interest, good luck. It has much less value (in finding a job) than the other comparable Big Ten law schools.

Wisconsin is much like Minnesota. You graduate from there, you write your ticket in Wisconsin, and can break into Chicago with good grades. There are only two law schools in Wisconsin though, and graduating from one of them means you are automatically admitted to the bar in the state. Much like Minnesota, it works against outsiders seeking to enter that market, and Milwaukee offers a semi-major biglaw presence.

OSU has much more of a national name based (sadly) on its sports recognition. The quality of the school is probably a bit less than MN, IL, IA and WI, but not far enough behind to make a meaningful difference.

Indiana - I have no idea where that came from. It's generally regarded as the red-headed stepchild of the Big Ten.

These law schools, Indiana excluded, are essentially the same. Probably all are top 10 public law schools (and in the case of Wisconsin and Illinois, top 10 public schools nationally in all academics). They all place great throughout the Midwest, and carry enough name recognition that the grads aren't solely limited to that region.

As for differences? Basically there are none between IL, IA, MN, and WI except that MN and WI dominate states without any other major law schools there (sort of like UT in Texas), IA students have limited job options, and IL has to compete with everyone its own biggest/best market. By the numbers, the students are basically the same, so any rankings difference is purely speculative.

6:09: I have a better question - who/what is WCL? Maybe you'll get some respect when people know who you are.

Oh, American. Nevermind. Wasn't familiar with the WCL acronym.

6:23,

I work in the Midwest and your analysis is decent. Although, I don't understand your OSU comment. I don't work with a single OSU grad and I am at a large firm. On the other hand, I work with several IU grads. Other than your IU and OSU comments, I would agree.

People who post here must all be law students. I think most of you will find that when you start working in real jobs, no one will care where you went to law school. It doesn't mean that you shouldn't be proud of your credentials or curious about different law school rankings. It just means that in most biglaw settings you will have one chance (namely, your first assignment) to prove that you are somewhat functional in a real-life law practice. Show some potential in that first assignment, regardless of where you went to law school, and you are on your way to success in biglaw if you want it. Cause grief for your firm's partners in any way--because you overthink everything and can't finish a project, because the project is not sufficiently "challenging" for your "intellect" and therefore you can't get motivated, whatever--and you will be written off from very early on.

7:02 - just curious, where do you work? If you won't say firm, at least city? I, too, work at a large firm in the Midwest - but I work with no IU grads, and several OSU grads.

I won't deny it - I'm an OSU Law alum and a big homer, so maybe I'm blinded by that, but I just can't understand any ranking system that places IU any more than a couple spots ahead of OSU, let alone at least 13 spots. That's just crazy.

Again, maybe it's just the homer in me, but check out OSU's faculty. I just don't see a Big Ten equal (Northwestern doesn't count).

I seriously don't get why people are so concerned with this ranking, unless you are about to apply to law school.
There are excellent attorneys from many different schools (yes even Yale) and not so good attorneys from top schools (yes even Harvard). I'm currently working with a 2004 grad from Harvard who takes so long to write a simple brief, it's like pulling her teeth to make her analyze deeper than what she's had to do in law school. I also work with a 2005 Illinois grad who is a brief writing machine and has a passion to succeed, someone I depend on to do all the work I assign her on time and well.
So go to sleep kids, just be thankful that you all have jobs.

Well thank god Fordham is out of the top25 in both USNWR and Vault.
when will they recognize that it's nothing more than a glorified Brooklyn?

If you do well at MN, you can crack in anywhere in Chicago. I did. They claim to have lots of alums in NY/LA.

The whole Univ. of Minnesota puts a lot of investment in the law school because they know its one of their few gems. It has a lot of clout in the university.

I think it deserves its ranking. The professors love the school and tend to stay there forever (even with more tempting offers). I think if it wanted it could put more emphasis on LSAT (good for me it didn't) and boost its median. It tends to focus more on GPA and qualitative factors. That's its personality.

Also, I think it gets highly ranked because of some of its previous faculty. E.g Irving Younger, Prosser (he wrote his Torts "masterpiece" there)

One thing that is odd: the local yocals tend to think William Mitchell Law School is the top law school in the city (there are 4). This couldn't be further from the truth.

This list has some merit because 8:04 is correct that some students at Yale, Harvard, etc., have a greater sense of entitlement and don't work as hard as associates as students from some other schools like Virginia and perhaps Stanford and Michigan.

NYU's placement is bogus because the students are not as smart as the Yalies and the students don't work hard. It shouldn't be in the top 10.

11:53 FTW

300th

301

comment about Michigan: Michigan is NOT a land grant school. Michigan State is a land grant school, but NOT the UofM.

Secondly, Ohio State's placement office should be better than it is. OSU places mostly in Ohio, but the faculty (especially those added within the last 10-15 years) is excellent. That school is totally underrated, and a good bargain. It's also smaller than many schools (in student population). In addition, they've really boosted their financial endowment in the last 10 years. But, I do think OSU ranks ABOVE places like Indiana (Bloomington), Wisconsin, and even Minnesota. Probably the same as going to Iowa or Illinois, and should be ranked like Illinois.
The average Big 10 or public law student is going to graduate with LESS debt than someone who has gone to a private law school (the exception to this rule is Michigan and Northwestern, the latter which is private). If you graduate in the top 1/3 of your class at one of these Big 10 schools, your employment prospects--even on the coasts--are pretty good. And yes, you can even get clerkships (state and federal). All I can say is that I'm glad I'm not in a shyt load of debt for private law school tuition like some of these folks who went to PRIVATE t-14s...

Flame away!!!!

Hey, what about the University of Utah? We should have cracked the top 25 but I guess we get no love.

Hey, what about the University of Utah? We should have cracked the top 25 but I guess we get no love.

I went to GMU for $7K/year and I make more money than you. Enjoy paying rent and student loans bizzattcchesss!

11
Vanderbilt University Law School
12
Duke University Law School
13
University of Pennsylvania Law School
14
Indiana University School of Law - Bloomington
15
Cornell University Law School
16
University of Minnesota - Twin Cities Law School
17
Georgetown University Law Center
18
University of California, Los Angeles School of Law
19
University of Iowa College of Law
20
George Washington University Law School
21
Boston University School of Law
22
University of Texas at Austin School of Law
23
University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill School of Law
24
Emory University School of Law
25
University of Wisconsin Law School

Kind of neat to see how well Minnesota did.

These old stodgy men at law firms need to realize that it's really hard to get into a good law school now. They most likely would not have been able to get into their respective law schools had they applied when I did in '03. Schools like Indiana Bloomington prepare their students well because of sheer numbers. There are 200 students per class. This is lots of face/argument time with professors who remember each student and are invested in their futures. Further, all the schools on the list are excellent and selective. I think it's short sided to say that high lsat and ugpa exclusively determine intelligence and legal ability. It's also short sided to think that all students are financially able to go to the best school to which they were admitted.

aasma (4:07),

For all intensive purposes it's a doggy dog world out there. Keep ur head up!

Note from SLS...

Though this conversation is so done by now, I think the sheer number of comments which completely missed (or simply chose to ignore) the critical difference between the Vault & USNWR ranking systems explains why some of the "super-elite" law school graduates (as well as some of the graduates of the "not so super-elite" schools) don't make good lawyers...attention to detail. Vault's not claiming to rank law schools per se; it's providing rankings based on firms' responses regarding associate performance based on the specified evaluation criteria.

I picked SLS over HLS for several reasons (and no, I did not apply to Yale - wasn't really my cup of tea, regardless of its rank), some of which were: class size; clinical programs; and, probably the most relevant to this conversation, the student body and the "culture"/philosophy of the program, as a whole. On average, Stanford students are a little older (not mostly straight-throughers) and many have worked before going to law school, so they bring something to the classroom/law school other than great grades and LSAT scores - namely, life & work experiences. Some of us worked at firms for several years before deciding to go to law school; some of us have completed other graduate degree programs; and some have just done really amazing things after college (e.g., PeaceCorps, TeachforAmerica, organized grassroots campaigns, set-up non-profit organizations, started companies, you get the idea). I found the students generally to be interesting people that get along with - and actually like - each other (which is rare among law school students and lawyers in general and is something I definitely did not experience with HLS students). Additionally, because the school is smaller (170 as opposed to HLS's almost 600), students can actually take advantage of the opportunities offered by the law school and they're not fighting each other for the chance to get ahead. The size of the class and the prestige of the school also make it possible for SLS students who want to work at firms to do so as 1Ls - giving them more time to develop the skills necessary to do well in that environment. There's also a pretty robust clinical program and opportunities to do pro-bono work starting your 1L year, where you have the chance to interact with clients and "real-life" attorneys. Students actually have the chance to see and DO some of the work that lawyers do in their practices - something which just cannot be grasped from only taking abstract, theory-driven doctrinal classes and reading/evaluating case law.

So, at the risk of sounding like I'm tooting SLS's horn, there are legitimate reasons why the Vault rankings don't (and shouldn't) map onto the USNWR rankings that have nothing to do with the aptitude of the students who attend the schools or whether the school is, in fact, "better" when evaluated on different criteria. But this point may be lost on this crowd, which seems shockingly preoccupied with bashing "good" & "not so good" schools and the students who picked or didn't pick them for myriad reasons, rather than taking the Vault ranking for what it really is - one that reports survey results. Appropriate comments would criticize the criteria/factors considered as not being relevant or sufficient indicators of associate performance instead of trying to conflate two completely different ranking systems to assuage preconceived notions of where certain schools should fall. Maybe it's just a minor detail, but it seems that failing to appreciate this subtle difference might explain why many graduates don't make good attorneys despite possessing "impressive" credentials.

US News 2008 has Columbia at 4 and NYU at 5. The post here is wrong.

In Los Angeles, after UCLA, we look to University of Chicago, Harvard, maybe Northwestern. Yalies are too good to work; Berkeley types smoke too much dope; NYU on the top ten? Please. Cornell, Indiana and Vanderbilt ahead of UCLA? Who made this list? Jeff Spicolli?

There are big national firms that only hire from 15 schools, and there are big national firms that hire from 60. The people who come from Indiana to biglaw are all top 15% of the class, all law review or moot court stars. My firm goes much deeper into the classes at harvard and stanford.

Indiana is a great school, has small class sizes, a collegial atmosphere, and focuses on preparing its students for life in the law. But all the students from IU that end up at the firms surveyed by Vault are stars. They are compared to average students from top schools and, no suprise, are more successful on the job.

You all need to get out of the mindset that the best student at a T40 school is somehow worse that the stupidest kid at harvard. If you do, things like this ranking become easier to understand.