The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
Why T14? Why not T15, T10?
Poast new message in this thread
Date: September 19th, 2004 3:48 PM Author: opaque plaza people who are hurt Why 14? Seems like a pretty random number to draw the cutoff at. Is the gap between #14 GULC and #15 Texas that huge or something? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=84744&forum_id=2#1358804) |
 |
Date: September 19th, 2004 3:49 PM Author: cerise cerebral box office depressive GULC = national, Texas = regional
|
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 3:49 PM Author: rose godawful rehab pistol same 14 schools have always been ranked 1-14. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=84744&forum_id=2#1358806) |
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 3:50 PM Author: cerise cerebral box office depressive well, then you can say that to T16 as well.
|
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 3:51 PM Author: rose godawful rehab pistol why, UT and (what, UCLA?) have always been in the top 16? I don't think that's correct... (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=84744&forum_id=2#1358816) |
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 5:18 PM Author: 180 painfully honest abode dopamine Neither UT nor UCLA have *always* been in the "Sweet 16". There were a few years in the early 90's where Vandy and USC took the #15 and #16 spots.
However, for the last 6 consecutive years, UT has been #15 and UCLA has been #16. This consistency, which will probably continue for years to come (barring any major changes in the T20 schools), suggests that the "Top 14" determination should be extended to include the likes of UT and UCLA. The problem is, "T14" is a prestigious proxy by which to gauge schools, and those who created it would rather see it contracted (read: T10, Trinity) than expand to include UT and UCLA, which many people on this board view as TTT's. |
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 7:52 PM Author: awkward field trump supporter UT and UCLA are fine schools.
But...
UT and UCLA aren't prestigious enough.
They aren't national enough.
And...
The Top 14 closely mirrors the colloquial Top 10 that has a few more than 10 schools. |
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 8:38 PM Author: 180 painfully honest abode dopamine "UT and UCLA aren't prestigious enough....They aren't national enough."
According to who? Not the nation's top law firms, obviously, as they all recruit there and interview students according to similar GPA-cut offs as their "Top 14" counterparts.
|
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 8:46 PM Author: awkward field trump supporter "According to who?"
Judges and practitioners.
People on this board.
The makers of the LSAT (take a look at their low LSAT numbers). |
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 8:51 PM Author: concupiscible idiot I actually think it is hard to argue that schools within the 4.0-4.2 range in the USNWR surveys are seen differently on some national basis (in fact, those results imply that most people are rating these schools the same way). (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=84744&forum_id=2#1360528) |
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 8:53 PM Author: 180 painfully honest abode dopamine "Judges and practitioners."
You know as well as I do that USNWR doesn't use a very representative sample. The response rate is too low. Furthermore, most judges and practicioners surveyed by USNWR are in the Northeast. Despite that, UT and UCLA consistently have 4.0+/4.0+ reputation scores in both categories year in and year out.
"People on this board."
As if that mattered. The opinions of the people of this board + $1.50 just might be able to buy you a sunday edition of the Times.
"The makers of the LSAT (take a look at their low LSAT numbers)."
Texas's median is the same as Cornell's (165). UCLA's median (166) is higher, and is one shy of Michigan's. Moreover, how are test results in any way related to determining the "national-ness" of a given school?
|
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 9:02 PM Author: awkward field trump supporter "Texas's median is the same as Cornell's (165)."
But how 'bout that distribution?!
Woo-ee!
"Moreover, how are test results in any way related to determining the "national-ness" of a given school?"
I'm answering the prestige question. Try to keep up. |
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 9:17 PM Author: 180 painfully honest abode dopamine "I'm answering the prestige question."
Ok, so how do test results answer the prestige question?
Is it something like:
Only smart people score high on LSAT. Thus schools with high LSAT distributions must have smart people. Smart people make more money than dumb people in the long run. People with lots of money often work in prestigious jobs. Having a prestigious job reflects the prestigiousness of the school you attended. Thus, having a high LSAT means you attended a prestigious school.
There seem to be a lot of gaps in that logic.
Also keep in mind that LSAC themselves give you a score band of +/- 3 points. If you take a look at UCLA's band then 163-168, it's not that far off from several of the lower T14s. |
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 9:47 PM Author: awkward field trump supporter "Only smart people score high on LSAT. Thus schools..."
No. It's an inductive and probabalistic process, not a deductive one.
"There seem to be a lot of gaps in that logic."
Yeah, because you assume the reasoning is deductive.
|
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 7:50 PM Author: awkward field trump supporter But you can't also say something "GULC = national, Texas = regional" about that group. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=84744&forum_id=2#1360197) |
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 4:56 PM Author: Submissive provocative location this applies to top 16 as well.
and texas and ucla have both been top 14. |
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 8:32 PM Author: magenta boyish chapel They may have been top 14 at one time, but only 14 are actually thought of as national. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=84744&forum_id=2#1360410) |
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 8:33 PM Author: concupiscible idiot The USNWR surveys imply this is wrong. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=84744&forum_id=2#1360421) |
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 8:42 PM Author: magenta boyish chapel Imply what is wrong?
There could be two lists: the best schools and the schools that are best thought of nationally. Texas very well could make the first list, but will never make the second. |
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 8:46 PM Author: concupiscible idiot The survey results imply that most respondents gave UT the same ranking as some of the top 14 schools.
This would not be possible if people outside of Texas thought less of UT than these other schools.
In short, if the vast majority of the respondents to the surveys think UT is as good as schools like NU or Cornell, then it makes no sense to say NU and Cornell are "better thought of" nationally. |
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 5:11 PM Author: 180 painfully honest abode dopamine "same 14 schools have always been ranked 1-14."
Not true. UCLA and UT have made the Top 14 (in place of Cornell and NU) in previous rankings.
|
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 5:50 PM Author: Beady-eyed Nibblets What year? I have ranking all the way back to 1989 and dey ain't in dare. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=84744&forum_id=2#1359440) |
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 5:52 PM Author: 180 painfully honest abode dopamine 1987 (first USNews ranking)
Texas was #11, UCLA was #14
|
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 4:05 PM Author: concupiscible idiot The top 14 has been relatively stable, and there is a notable step down between the top 14 and most of the next few schools in the rep surveys, which are the most important USNWR categories.
The one exception is Texas, which is actually pretty close to several top 14 schools in the rep surveys. But Texas has a notably lower LSAT band.
Personally, I think it is fair to say that Texas is a school that has the institutional resources and reputation of a top 14 school, and "hidden" in Texas are a decent number of students with very good numbers who could have attended a top 14. But, Texas also has a much larger number of students with numbers below the typical top 14 range, and that has consistently kept Texas out of the top 14. |
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 4:19 PM Author: appetizing chartreuse whorehouse I imagine it's the in-state students at UT that bring their medians down.
Anyone have any data on this? |
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 4:29 PM Author: concupiscible idiot On whether it is instate students bringing down their median? Not exactly, but I think UT is required to be 80% Texan, so that pretty much guarantees they set the medians.
On the flipside, however, UT presumably can also offer Texans a better deal than the top 14 schools. Accordingly, it would not surprise me if the group of students above the medians who could have attended a top 14 were also mostly Texans.
|
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 4:40 PM Author: appetizing chartreuse whorehouse Well, if your 80% figure is correct, there are obviously going to be mostly Texans on either side of the medians. And while I'm sure that there are plenty of TX residents with high numbers at UT, the numbers for TX residents are going to drop off a lot more quickly than those of national applicants, since they're a much smaller group. So I'm willing to bet that the medians for the small population of out-of-staters are considerably higher than those of the in-staters. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=84744&forum_id=2#1359027) |
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 4:53 PM Author: Lemon irate useless brakes wtf are you talking about? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=84744&forum_id=2#1359084) |
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 4:55 PM Author: concupiscible idiot At a guess (and this is pure speculation) the percentage of outstate students will peak somewhere in the 50-75 range (meaning between the medians and the top 25%). In other words, those are the students UT did not have to admit just to fill its Texas quota, but it is also possible that UT was the best school these people got into.
Once you are into the top 25% range, however, you are increasingly getting people who probably could have gotten into a higher ranked school, so I would think they are increasingly Texans looking for a good deal.
Anyway, assuming that is about right, it should be true that the medians are higher for outstate students, but those significantly above the medians may be predominantly Texans again. |
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 5:48 PM Author: Beady-eyed Nibblets why not top 14? how is it anymore random than top 10 or top 20?
you fucking multiple of 5 biased mother fucker
Why does every list have to be a multiple of 5?
Huh? Huh? Huh?
Is it because we have 5 fingers on each hand?
Why? Why? Why?
fuck you. |
Date: September 19th, 2004 4:11 PM Author: red spectacular brunch just to piss off leiter. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=84744&forum_id=2#1358899) |
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 4:31 PM Author: Submissive provocative location T14 is a board creation (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=84744&forum_id=2#1358984) |
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 7:53 PM Author: awkward field trump supporter No, it isn't. The Top 14 is really the Top 10 or sometimes the Top 15 that is colloquially used.
We just happen to know that it's really 14 schools and not 10 or 15. |
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 5:13 PM Author: grizzly bonkers internal respiration factory reset button All 14 schools have at one point been in the Top 10. You can't say that for UT or UCLA.
EDIT: 1987 Harvard Yale Michigan Columbia Stanford Chicago Berkeley UVA NYU Penn
1990 Yale Chicago Stanford Columbia Harvard NYU Michigan Duke Penn UVA
1991 Yale Harvard Chicago Stanford Columbia Michigan NYU UVA Duke Penn
1992 Yale Harvard Stanford Chicago Columbia Michigan NYU UVA Duke Penn
1993 Yale Harvard Stanford Chicago Columbia NYU Michigan UVA Duke Georgetown
1994 Yale Harvard Stanford Chicago Columbia NYU Duke Michigan Penn Berkeley
1995 Yale Harvard Stanford Chicago Columbia NYU UVA Duke Berkeley Michigan
1996 Yale Harvard Stanford Chicago Columbia NYU Michigan Penn UVA Duke
1997 Yale Harvard Stanford Chicago Columbia NYU Michigan UVA Berkeley Duke
1998 Yale Harvard Stanford Columbia Chicago NYU Berkeley Duke Michigan Penn UVA
1999 Yale Harvard Stanford NYU Columbia Chicago UVA Duke Michigan Cornell Berkeley
2000 Yale Stanford Harvard NYU Columbia Chicago Michigan Berkeley UVA Cornell Duke
2001 Yale Stanford Harvard Columbia NYU Chicago Michigan UVA Berkeley Duke Penn
2002 Yale Stanford Harvard Columbia NYU Chicago Berkeley Michigan Penn UVA
2003 Yale Stanford Harvard Columbia NYU Chicago Michigan Penn UVA Cornell Berkeley
MORE EDIT: NU was the only one that hasn't cracked the Top 10 prior to this year. If there are more than 10 school for a year, there were ties at #10.
|
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 5:19 PM Author: Submissive provocative location Being in the top 10 once in a flawed rankings survey is not a very compelling rationale for the existence of a top 14. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=84744&forum_id=2#1359251) |
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 5:23 PM Author: grizzly bonkers internal respiration factory reset button I'm not really trying to defend the rankings. I was just giving my reason why I thought there was a cut off at 14. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=84744&forum_id=2#1359281) |
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 5:24 PM Author: Submissive provocative location ok fair enough (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=84744&forum_id=2#1359288) |
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 5:20 PM Author: 180 painfully honest abode dopamine This statistic actually provides a more logical reason for the T14 distinction. However, I don't think the majority of xoxo/PR posters subscribe to this belief. They usually just claim it's the dividing line between national/regional schools. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=84744&forum_id=2#1359257) |
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 5:22 PM Author: Submissive provocative location and they base this declaration, as usual, on nothing. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=84744&forum_id=2#1359268) |
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 5:24 PM Author: ruby titillating step-uncle's house doctorate It may not be that there is a line between national/regional.
But for many firms the top 14 (or expanded top 10) is a dividing line between cutoffs for firms |
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 5:31 PM Author: 180 painfully honest abode dopamine I'm not so sure how true that is. Which the exception of Wachtell, pretty much every major firm in the Vault 100 interviews at both UT and UCLA. And as an older thread once proved, the GPA cut-offs for interviews at these firms at UT, UCLA and Georgetown are almost always identical. In some cases, the cutoff was actually *lower* at UT and UCLA than for Georgetown. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=84744&forum_id=2#1359327) |
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 5:57 PM Author: Beady-eyed Nibblets If we said Top 15 no one would be asking "why top 15, why not top 16 or top 18?"
The question is not why top 14?
The question is why not top 14? |
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 5:58 PM Author: Submissive provocative location If the board collectively asserts that a top 14 exists, the onus should be on those who make such an assertion to provide compelling evidenc that it makes sense to do. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=84744&forum_id=2#1359506) |
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 5:58 PM Author: 180 painfully honest abode dopamine Time to get back to your social studies homework. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=84744&forum_id=2#1359508) |
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 6:35 PM Author: concupiscible idiot Humans prefer to break things into groups that are multiples of five and ten. The reason why, of course, is right in front of you.
So, asking "why top 14 instead of top 10 or top 15?" is actually perfectly sensible. |
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 8:21 PM Author: awkward field trump supporter Sensible but arbitrary.
There are multiple justifications for using Top 14. There's only the stupid fact that hands exist for using Top 15.
Multiple justifications beat a silly fact about preferences. |
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 8:32 PM Author: concupiscible idiot I just meant it makes sense to ask why it is top 14 in this case, not that there may not be a valid answer.
Similarly, if people were talking about the Vault Top 11 firms, it would be natural to ask "why 11, and not 10?"
In short, if you are talking about a top X, where X is a multiple of 5, you don't need an explanation for why you chose that number in particular (that is just standard practice).
But if you choose an X that is not a multiple of 5, then it requires explanation (although you may well have one). |
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 6:51 PM Author: Cobalt angry hominid I think UT is probably as good a school as Gtown and it does have a strong national rep. Yes more UT students end up in texas, but more NU students end up in IL, and lots of national firms come to UT. As I mentioned before, OMM comes to UT, but doesn't feel like going on campus for Penn (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=84744&forum_id=2#1359823) |
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 6:54 PM Author: Submissive provocative location why is it worse than penn/michigan? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=84744&forum_id=2#1359848) |
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 8:30 PM Author: magenta boyish chapel Quality of students, and national rep. HTH (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=84744&forum_id=2#1360405) |
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 8:47 PM Author: awkward field trump supporter Check out those LSAT scores. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=84744&forum_id=2#1360494) |
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 8:51 PM Author: magenta boyish chapel Exactly, look lower than the top 14. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=84744&forum_id=2#1360525) |
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 8:49 PM Author: Cobalt angry hominid UT's national rep gets it the same OCI from top firms as georgetown and Penn. I wouldn't go to UT, but I wouldn't go to fucking georgetown either. HTH (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=84744&forum_id=2#1360510) |
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 8:56 PM Author: ruby titillating step-uncle's house doctorate Who cares what top firm comes to campus, esp when they're only going to make offers to the top person they see in OCI?
The difference is that most 125k firms recruit much, much deeper into the class at Penn and other top 14's than they do at UT. |
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 9:05 PM Author: Cobalt angry hominid Ok, but they go much deeper into Penn than at Cornell, Georgetown, NU, etc. Shoule we call it the top seven then? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=84744&forum_id=2#1360601) |
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 9:11 PM Author: 180 painfully honest abode dopamine "The difference is that most 125k firms recruit much, much deeper into the class at Penn and other top 14's than they do at UT."
This is simply not true. I can't speak for UT, but at UCLA, the GPA cut-offs for interviews at most major Vault firms are IDENTICAL to the cut-offs at Cornell and Georgetown. In some cases, the cut-offs are even *lower* at UCLA than at Georgetown.
For instance:
Latham: UCLA (3.2 required); Gtown (3.3 required)
Gibson Dunn: UCLA (3.4 required); Gtown (3.6 required)
LeBouef, Lamb: UCLA (3.0 required); Gtown (3.3 required)
Greenberg Traurig: UCLA (3.0 required); Gtown (Top 15% required)
Bryan Cave: UCLA (3.2 required); Gtown (3.3 required)
Littler Mendelsen: UCLA (3.0 required); Gtown (Top 15% required)
And this is just a small sample. I'm sure the same goes for UT.
|
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 9:17 PM Author: magenta boyish chapel You do realize the inherent flaw in your logic, don't you?
Because GPA's are equal from school to school, a 3.0 might capture the top 80% at one school vs only 20% at another. You can only compare percentages if you want a comparison you can actually use for your argument. |
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 9:22 PM Author: 180 painfully honest abode dopamine You moron, UCLA and Georgetown have EXACTLY the same Grade Distribution. They both use B/B+ curves. I know for a fact that a 3.3GPA is relatively identical at both schools in terms of a student's class rank.
That's precisely why I used these two schools in my side-by-side comparison. Pitting UCLA against Penn, for instance, where there is a more generous B+ curve awarded at the latter, would skew the numbers dramatically. |
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 9:23 PM Author: magenta boyish chapel Perhaps, but you can't make the arg with all of the schools you cited. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=84744&forum_id=2#1360706) |
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 9:18 PM Author: ruby titillating step-uncle's house doctorate Well Vandy has the same cutoffs then as GULC (and even lower on some).
Still, the placement is much better throughout the class than at UCLA, Texas, or Vandy.
OCI is not the only thing that matters. |
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 9:14 PM Author: Cobalt angry hominid If anyone was willing to pony up and say we drop Georgetown and talk about the lucky top 13 I could go for that. At least that would make a little more sense (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=84744&forum_id=2#1360660) |
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 9:18 PM Author: magenta boyish chapel Georgetown belongs in the group, I don't know why you would drop it. The full-time class has far better numbers than a number of other schools that are higher ranked. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=84744&forum_id=2#1360685) |
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 9:24 PM Author: deranged floppy water buffalo alpha Because when people talk about the "top 10" law schools, there are generally fourteen names that come to mind. Using T14 just saves people the hassle of having to explain that Duke didn't suddenly become a better school this year than last year. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=84744&forum_id=2#1360708) |
|
Date: September 19th, 2004 9:43 PM Author: awkward field trump supporter "Because when people talk about the "top 10" law schools, there are generally fourteen names that come to mind."
And sometimes when they say Top 15.
Anyone who has been around lawyers long enough knows that even they joke about things like the "15 schools in the top 10."
We've merely identified what they're talking about.
That's a small accomplishment, not a small failure. |
|
Date: October 23rd, 2006 2:26 PM Author: vivacious school mood Rise and give knowledge! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=84744&forum_id=2#6841365) |