lawfirmaddict presents the first wave of SA stats
| Sienna Impressive Shrine Coffee Pot | 05/20/06 | | amethyst public bath | 05/20/06 | | Yapping death wish love of her life | 05/20/06 | | Sienna Impressive Shrine Coffee Pot | 05/20/06 | | anal bawdyhouse | 05/20/06 | | Sienna Impressive Shrine Coffee Pot | 05/20/06 | | Swashbuckling hissy fit | 05/20/06 | | Sienna Impressive Shrine Coffee Pot | 05/20/06 | | Swashbuckling hissy fit | 05/20/06 | | arousing godawful hairy legs | 05/20/06 | | curious brunch pervert | 05/20/06 | | Sienna Impressive Shrine Coffee Pot | 05/20/06 | | curious brunch pervert | 05/20/06 | | Sienna Impressive Shrine Coffee Pot | 05/20/06 | | Smoky Lascivious Set | 05/20/06 | | Sienna Impressive Shrine Coffee Pot | 05/20/06 | | bull headed olive office boistinker | 05/20/06 | | Smoky Lascivious Set | 05/20/06 | | bull headed olive office boistinker | 05/20/06 | | Smoky Lascivious Set | 05/20/06 | | Sienna Impressive Shrine Coffee Pot | 05/20/06 | | Smoky Lascivious Set | 05/20/06 | | bull headed olive office boistinker | 05/20/06 | | Smoky Lascivious Set | 05/20/06 | | bull headed olive office boistinker | 05/20/06 | | bull headed olive office boistinker | 05/20/06 | | Smoky Lascivious Set | 05/20/06 | | bull headed olive office boistinker | 05/20/06 | | Smoky Lascivious Set | 05/20/06 | | Sienna Impressive Shrine Coffee Pot | 05/20/06 | | Galvanic kitchen | 05/20/06 | | exhilarant regret haunted graveyard | 05/20/06 | | amethyst public bath | 05/20/06 | | exhilarant regret haunted graveyard | 05/20/06 | | Big Coiffed Locale Azn | 05/20/06 | | Slippery resort | 05/20/06 | | Sienna Impressive Shrine Coffee Pot | 05/22/06 |
Poast new message in this thread
Date: May 20th, 2006 6:15 PM Author: Sienna Impressive Shrine Coffee Pot
Without more numbers on 1L associates or the unknowns, it's impossible to be entirely accurate. But those should theoretically be diffuse enough to cancel each other out and affect real numbers only at the margins.
With a real shortage of some geographic regions, especially in California, the California schools are probably under-represented.
***
The raw numbers, which include 1167 2L summer associates at Vault 25 firms.
***
Harvard 285
Columbia 205
NYU 181
Yale 129
Georgetown 104
Chicago 92
Michigan 79
Penn 79
Northwestern 77
Stanford 65
Virginia 58
Cornell 57
Duke 52
Unknown 46
Boalt 45
Fordham 42
UCLA 34
GWU 31
Boston College 22
Boston U 22
Texas 22
Vanderbilt 18
Notre Dame 15
Illinois 14
Brooklyn 13
USC 13
WUSTL 13
Toronto 11
Cardozo 10
Howard 10
NY Law 10
American 8
BYU 8
Hastings 8
Indiana 8
St. Johns 8
Ohio State 7
Wisconsin 7
Albany 6
Loyola 6
McGill 6
Rutgers 6
Hofstra 5
Pepperdine 5
Tulane 5
Arizona 4
Davis 4
DePaul 4
Emory 4
Iowa 4
North Carolina 4
Pace 4
Seton Hall 4
Suffolk 4
Syracuse 4
UConn 4
W&M 4
Buffalo 3
Case Western 3
Missouri 3
Washington 3
York 3
Cleveland State 2
Houston 2
Kent 2
Northeastern 2
Villanova 2
Wake Forest 2
Akron 1
Alabama 1
Amsterdam 1
Denver 1
Dickinson 1
Florida 1
George Mason 1
Kansas 1
Kentucky 1
Kingston 1
Loyola LA 1
Maryland 1
Minnesota 1
New Mexico 1
Pittsburgh 1
San Diego 1
SMU 1
Southwestern 1
Temple 1
Touro 1
Utah 1
W&L 1
Weidner 1
Western Ontario 1
***
The percentages of American schools, based on FT+PT first years as the estimate of the class size, with USNWR rank in front of the school
***
1 Yale 64.8%
4 Columbia 54.2%
3 Harvard 51.2%
6 Chicago 47.9%
4 NYU 40.4%
2 Stanford 37.6%
7 Penn 32.5%
12 Northwestern 31.7%
13 Cornell 29.5%
11 Duke 26.1%
8 Michigan 21.6%
14 Georgetown 17.8%
8 Boalt 17.0%
8 Virginia 15.5%
15 UCLA 10.7%
19 WUSTL 9.6%
17 Vanderbilt 9.0%
32 Fordham 8.7%
22 Notre Dame 8.6%
27 Boston College 8.0%
22 Boston U 7.5%
27 Illinois 7.4%
TTT Howard 6.3%
17 USC 6.3%
19 GWU 5.8%
34 BYU 5.2%
16 Texas 5.0%
37 Indiana 3.5%
39 Ohio State 3.2%
53 Cardozo 2.7%
43 Arizona 2.6%
58 Brooklyn 2.6%
32 Wisconsin 2.6%
80 St. Johns 2.5%
TTT Albany 2.4%
65 Rutgers 2.4%
70 Loyola 2.3%
34 Davis 2.1%
87 Pepperdine 2.1%
50 UConn 2.0%
60 Missouri 2.0%
27 W&M 2.0%
43 Hastings 1.9%
TTT NY Law 1.9%
22 Iowa 1.8%
27 North Carolina 1.7%
43 American 1.7%
26 Emory 1.7%
43 Tulane 1.7%
27 Washington 1.7%
TTT Pace 1.5%
TTT Syracuse 1.5%
51 Case Western 1.3%
39 Wake Forest 1.3%
TTT Hofstra 1.3%
80 Buffalo 1.2%
80 DePaul 1.2%
70 Seton Hall 1.1%
87 Northeastern 0.9%
TTT Cleveland State 0.8%
77 New Mexico 0.8%
60 Villanova 0.8%
57 Utah 0.8%
22 W&L 0.7%
FTT Suffolk 0.7%
43 Alabama 0.6%
70 Kansas 0.6%
70 Houston 0.6%
60 Kent 0.6%
65 Kentucky 0.6%
TTT Akron 0.5%
87 Dickinson 0.5%
37 George Mason 0.5%
60 Pittsburgh 0.4%
42 Maryland 0.4%
19 Minnesota 0.4%
43 SMU 0.3%
FTT Touro 0.3%
58 Temple 0.3%
TTT Southwestern 0.3%
70 Denver 0.3%
65 San Diego 0.3%
65 Loyola CA 0.2%
41 Florida 0.2%
FTT Weidner 0.2%
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419935&forum_id=2#5822922)
|
 |
Date: May 20th, 2006 6:44 PM Author: anal bawdyhouse
"But those should theoretically be diffuse enough to cancel each other out and affect real numbers only at the margins."
This information, especially the percentages, is almost entirely useless. Looking at your site, you are missing many, many offices and firms. Do you really think that only 50% of Harvard students or 30% of Stanford students go to these firms? It probably exceeds 90%. You really need to include all offices before posting this stuff.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419935&forum_id=2#5823073) |
 |
Date: May 20th, 2006 7:11 PM Author: Swashbuckling hissy fit
i disagree with the notion that these stats are useless. incomplete, yes, but useless, no. instead, they might be more valuable broken up by region. i know because i did this for the chicago market and sent them to lawfirmaddict. you should host it on your site and link to it. even without winston strawn, which still isnt out anywhere that i see, thats very useful for people considering schools. its not useful for people looking to take pride in their school because of the large self-selection bias, but its useful to see where most lawyers in the chicago market are coming from for people on the margins.
maybe nick could provide insight into the california market and then you can gather data similarly on those regions. in the aggregate though without taking regions into account, its hardly good to look at the nyc biased V25. For example, take the V26 instead and because Mayer Brown is 26, UChicago, Northwestern and UMichigan all improve.
My 2 cents...
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419935&forum_id=2#5823180) |
Date: May 20th, 2006 6:57 PM Author: curious brunch pervert
These stats are useless, grossly inaccurate, and a waste of time for you to compile and for us to read.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419935&forum_id=2#5823126) |
 |
Date: May 20th, 2006 7:34 PM Author: bull headed olive office boistinker
"Plus there are some firms left out, no? So the percentages aren't terribly useful except as a metric to compare schools."
Wow.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419935&forum_id=2#5823265)
|
 |
Date: May 20th, 2006 7:29 PM Author: bull headed olive office boistinker
You're being entirely speculative. If 30 of those 46 were from one school it certainly would.
I'm not sure exactly how you can argue that this is an accurate representation of anything other than the lists posted on xoxo. What relevance that has to anything is entirely unclear to me.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419935&forum_id=2#5823246) |
 |
Date: May 20th, 2006 7:33 PM Author: bull headed olive office boistinker
What do you think a likely cause for a person not giving his school address? Random chance, or perhaps advice from a particular career services officer?
What do think is more likely, that a firm like OMM will be like the 96% of the NYC firms, or skewed toward CA schools?
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419935&forum_id=2#5823262) |
 |
Date: May 20th, 2006 7:39 PM Author: Smoky Lascivious Set
1) I have no idea.
2) He's already conceded that this is biased against CA schools. So yes, Stanford and Boalt would move up if more CA were included, but it's a good overall picture.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419935&forum_id=2#5823277) |
Date: May 20th, 2006 8:05 PM Author: Sienna Impressive Shrine Coffee Pot
well this was a failure. All the discussion's about the methodology and not the results
I updated the blog http://lawfirmaddict.blogspot.com Take a look and post new info if you have it.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419935&forum_id=2#5823363) |
 |
Date: May 20th, 2006 9:10 PM Author: Galvanic kitchen
The thread is a failure and the discussion is about the methodology because the methodology is horrible. The results are worthless, so there's not much to discuss.
Obviously Harvard is better for biglaw than Texas. You don't need some "study" by a guy on a message board named "lawfirmaddict" to tell you that. The interesting problem is comparing the schools that are similarly-ranked. And the flaws in your methodology (which both you and others have identified) do little to solve the problem.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419935&forum_id=2#5823576) |
Date: May 20th, 2006 8:33 PM Author: exhilarant regret haunted graveyard
northwestern pwnage
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419935&forum_id=2#5823461) |
 |
Date: May 20th, 2006 9:42 PM Author: Big Coiffed Locale Azn
"nu . . . filters out the douchey tools"
180 (unless you're being serious)
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419935&forum_id=2#5823694) |
Date: May 20th, 2006 9:44 PM Author: Slippery resort
SUFFOLK!!!!!!!!!!
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419935&forum_id=2#5823698) |
Date: May 22nd, 2006 9:05 PM Author: Sienna Impressive Shrine Coffee Pot
anyone?
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=419935&forum_id=2#5834377) |
|
|