Big thanks to Jigsaw_earth, posting in the comments, who brought this to our attention (and who continues to break down the rankings within the comments to this post, amongst others). CU Law improved to 36th in the U.S. News and World Report law school rankings.
Of note, the gap between DU and CU has grown to 41 places. (DU is 77th in the Rankings).
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
14 comments:
Thanks for making the post, notjustlaw. This is significant news for CU Law, having gone from the outer cusp of the 1st tier (50th in 2004) to CU's highest ranking ever (38 in '01 and 39 in '96 were previous highs).
I haven't seen all the stats yet, but from what I have seen, our peer assessment / lawyers/judges scores didn't improve, so it must mean better employment rates, better comparative GPA/LSAT scores, or lower acceptance rates.
So if I had to guess as to any effect the new building had on people, it would be that it potentially attracted more highly qualified students, over bumping up the school's perception in the mind of practitioners. Will have to see all the data first though.
Yadda yadda, "we shouldn't be concerned with rankings / it's about finding the right fit," yadda yadda... but when it goes your way, it's sure nice to see.
Agreed Jig. The steep increase in rank is what surprises me. I was expecting the rank to rise with the new building (I think we were unfairly hit a few years ago), but at much slower pace.
14 spots in two years? It really tells me that the drop in rank had everything to do with the building delays/ABA accreditation issues.
More data:
Rank: 36
Overall Score: 55
Peer Assessment: 3.0
Lawyers/Judges: 3.2
25%/75% GPA: 3.37-3.75 (high end up)
25%/75% LSAT: 159-165 (high end up)
Acceptance: 26.3% (down... as in, higher % accepted)
Student/Faculty: 13.7
Employed @ grad: 84.5% (this seems to be the biggest jump)
Employed @ 9mo: 99.5% (this jumped too)
Bar Pass Rate: 89.4%
CO state bar pass rate: 76%
downloadable pdf of all rankings data
(scroll down to the flashing arrow)
I can't get over these employment stats. That's been the biggest knock against CU these last couple of years and has to be the reason for the significance of the jump. 99.5% employed at 9 months? That's higher than Stanford, NYU, Columbia, Chicago, Penn, Berkeley, UVA, Cornell, Georgetown, etc...
I wonder if there was some change in the way employment stats were reported by the school this time around? If someone found a way to be creative in reporting while staying factually accurate... well, thank goodness that person's working at the school.
I'm still a little skeptical about the 99.5% after 9 months. With how thin the Denver-Greater Denver job market seems to be, this seems a little high. Also, it must include non-law jobs since our bar passage rate isn't high enough to match the employment rate.
Let's hope they weren't being too creative! The "employed at 9 months" figure has been sliced and diced in the past few weeks by a prof at Chapman and he's pointing the finger of possible foul play at schools like UCLA and Georgetown. At the very least, we don't want the finger pointed our way, too. Worse, it might mean an "adjustment" in next year's figures and rank.
Those are interesting posts about the employment figures. I'm glad to see CU didn't show up in Prof. Bell's list of schools who may potentially be skewing data.
That said, schools should report their data in the light most favorable to the school -- I never understood the "we're taking the high road on reporting info for rankings" party line. Either it's acceptable for US News purposes or it's not.
Prof. Bell distinguishes between employment questionnaire language from the ABA and USNWR. What may not be an acceptable answer to the ABA may be acceptable for USNWR purposes. "The high road" of reporting ABA data to USNWR when they ask for different info is just plain stupid. If there's an inevitable correction looming down the road, it's something a number of schools will likely have to deal with.
The conclusion I'm left with now is *gasp*: We actually have someone at CU now who understands how to report factually correct data to USNWR in the light most favorable to the school. Whoever this person is deserves recognition and a pat on the back for a job well done.
After reading the posts, I still find it interesting that the ABA doesn't ask specific questions as to what filed the graduates are employed in. Working full-time at, say, Best Buy (because he can't find a law related job) would seem to count the same as a graduate toiling away at a big firm.
If that is the case, then those employment statistics are not a strong indicator of the strength of job prospects. The slicing and dicing mentioned seems to be more directed at coding students as "unemployed and not seeking work," a code that would allow the school to discount them from their employment stats. There doesn't seem to be a concern for the actual work being performed.
I'm pretty skeptical as well. I personally know two 2006 grads that didn't get a job until just recently. There's another that is still looking since he failed the Bar in July. Is the employment data from the 2005 or 2006 graduating class?
This is great news and there are some great points being made on the blawg, I agree with almost all of them.
The one thing I want to add...I think this DOES matter. Publicly, I tell people considering law school "listen, it's much more important to have a good fit" just like jigsaw said. But, truth be told...this is important, and the higher the school goes, the better our degree is, the more jobs we get nationwide.
I'm thrilled.
Anon, You are right this is a great thing for the school. Two things are important to remember. The school needs to stay consistent (if you look at the historical data provided by jigsaw, the school has back slid every year after entering the top 40). Second, the word needs to get out to employers that CU is by-far the class of the region (now with statistical data to back up the claim) and hopefully we will see the benefits in better job opportunities down the line.
Like it or not, 36th leaves plenty of room for improvement, particularly when you consider our company at that rung of the ladder.
Hs is right, so that is why it is important to get off this rung and move forward, not backslide like in the past.
It is also worth noting that we have improved to 4th in environmental law.
Post a Comment