Ranking Law Reviews in Terms of General Social Science Impact

Mikhail Koulikov recently wrote an article examining the academic impact of legal scholarship in disciplines other than law. Specifically, he explores the level of coverage that selected law reviews received in eight general academic databases. His methodology is explained:

Because nonlegal academics do not generally use legal databases, I developed a study to see whether nonlegal scholars have access to legal journal articles, and thus legal scholarship, through databases they might commonly use. Any in-depth analysis of the coverage of law reviews by major nonlegal academic databases necessarily must be limited to a sample of law reviews, and a selected number of databases. I decided to use the three major general databases that Blessinger and Olle evaluated as a starting point. Expanding on their work, and taking the generally accepted view that law is a social science, my study also examined coverage of law reviews in several other databases that are key to study of the social sciences: JSTOR, PAIS International, Periodicals Archive Online, Worldwide Political Science Abstracts, and the International Bibliography of the Social Sciences. All of these are commonly available databases that should be familiar to most academic researchers, and all five claim to include coverage of law as a discipline.

He limited the scope of his study to the top 20 law reviews in terms of impact factor (per the Journal Citation Reports) and included--for good measure--the general law reviews of the top twenty schools according the U.S. News and World Report Rankings. The following are the first ten law reviews in his ranking in terms of general academic scholarship impact (with impact factor as the number in brackets):

(1) Harvard Law Review
(2) Columbia Law Review
(3) UCLA Law Review
(4) Texas Law Review
(5) Yale Law Journal
(6) University of Pennsylvania Law Review
(7) California Law Review
(8) Cornell Law Review
(9) Stanford Law Review
(10) Virginia Law Review

This study provides a good illustration of how legal scholarship is used to inform development of other social sciences. I recommend reading Mr. Koulikov's full article.

Law School Transparency

We urge all of our readers to check out Lawschooltransparency.com. Their goal?

Law School Transparency’s goal is to provide open access to ABA-approved law school employment data and information. Many journalists, legal scholars, law school professors, graduates, and current students have discussed the need for a more comprehensive look at job prospects for recent law school graduates. When schools do go above the minimum standards set by the ABA or prominent third parties like U.S. News, they present the additional employment information in ways that often make it impossible to compare job prospects across law schools and determine the actual range of opportunities available at each school. Accordingly, our mission is to establish a new standard for employment reporting and to assist ABA-approved law schools in improving their reporting methods.

This website aims to become a clearinghouse for employment data from ABA-approved law schools. Additionally, we provide a closer look at how career services and admissions offices work together at ABA-approved law schools to develop relationships with employers and assist students in finding work. We believe that publishing employment lists will supplement, rather than replace, the many job placement summaries already provided by schools, publications, and legal scholars.

Hopefully law schools will embrace this idea. Many already hope for fundamental changes to the system as it is now constituted.

Visualizing the U.S. News Rankings

Visualize Law provides a pretty cool graphical representation of the overall scores of the 2011 U.S. News Rankings. Click the small image above to see it.

Because Who Wants to Wait? USN Rankings Leaked @ TLS

Every year, as the tax man comes to take his share from his loyal citizens, law students from around the country eagerly anticipate the release of the latest U.S. News rankings. And every year, someone always claims to have the elusive list before it is officially released.

We may just have it, thanks to the diligent law students on the Top-law-schools message board.

Click the picture to the right and enjoy.

Disclaimer: This may not be the real deal - but it's always fun to speculate!

Informational Asymmetries, the Emperor's New Clothes and More Cries For Value

Early in 2009, we noted that the recession has exposed numerous deficiencies in the current legal education system. Accordingly, we argued for a systematic change in curriculum and focus. It appears that law students elsewhere are yearning for the same at their institutions. From The Daily Texan:

[C]riticisms [of the University of Texas Law School] are well-founded. In a survey of accredited law schools, Texas was the only school without a mandatory brief-writing course. In fact, only about half of first-year students surveyed reported being able to get into a brief-writing course. As a result, they will not be trained how to present arguments to a court — one of the most basic legal skills.

Instead of rectifying the problem by meeting national practical skills standards, UT Law instead chooses to steer law students away from taking practical courses by offering grossly grade-inflated first-year electives on such totally impractical topics as Race and Gender in the Constitution.

The first-year curve in all courses is set at 3.3; the average in these “electives” is a 3.8. A student in Race and Gender in the Constitution commented, “The class is a complete joke and a waste of time, but the professor gives almost everyone A’s.” Since law students’ employment is determined by their first-year GPA, creating such an exception to the curve is unfair to other students and misleading to employers relying on the veracity of student transcripts. . . .

So law students can game the system and come out Order of the Coif, while not knowing a single thing about the basic exceptions to the hearsay rule? I can vouch for the fact that this is an absolutely accurate characterization of the system as it is constituted both at my institution, and as the authors noted, at others.

But more pertinently, law school seems (oddly enough) to present a sort of transparent information asymmetry cogently illustrated by the student in this article: in many respects, law schools fail to meet the demands and expectations students have upon entering and that employers have when hiring. Yet, it seems like we all know a little bit of what we are getting at the outset; the sales pitch is just all too compelling. In this sense, law school is more like an experience good that shouldn't demand any sort of warranty. But the problems are still exceedingly pervasive. As the authors noted with respect to their institution:

[There is a] deeper problem at UT Law that has drawn criticism from all corners of the legal industry: Lax institutional standards have marginalized the law school’s role in society of preparing its students to be competent, ethical lawyers.

I hate to say it, but this problem is not confined to UT Law. We need major reforms soon, because permitting students to become engulfed in massive amounts of debt with little to no guidance on how to be competent lawyers will (inevitably, I think) continue to dilute the profession's quality, and worse yet, harm students' lives. Law students ought to be more vocal in their cries for change like the authors in the noted article.

Bad Year in Legal Employment

The National Law Journal issued its annual Go-To Law School List, and the results reek of the recession. Even the top schools placed little more than half of their respective graduating classes into NLJ 250 firms. The top 10 law schools this year in terms of total percentage of the class placed:

1. Northwestern -- 55.9%

2. Columbia -- 54.4%

3. Stanford -- 54.1%

4. Chicago -- 53.1%

5. Virginia -- 52.8%

6. Michigan -- 51%

7. Penn -- 50.8%

8. NYU -- 50.1%

9. Berkeley -- 50%

10. Duke -- 49.8%

Obviously, schools like Harvard (47.6%) and Yale (35.3%) had smaller numbers because graduates of those schools tend to pursue the clerkship and academia routes more heavily. Check out the full rankings.

U.S. News Looks Into Brooklyn Law School's Survey Responses

Robert Morse, of U.S. News and World Report, confirms that the magazine is looking into "reports [that] Brooklyn Law School in New York appears to have given U.S. News only its 2008 full-time entering class admission data for the LSAT, undergraduate grade-point average, and applications and acceptances instead of the requested data combining full-time and part-time students for those same variables."

There is certainly much debate over the U.S. News law school rankings methodology, and--in accordance with the common critiques advanced along these lines--the school has responded to the said allegations in an official statement. Specifically, the school claims that some of the alleged inaccurately reported data was simply provided "consistent with [the school's] prior practice . . . [which was to decline] to provide U.S. News with LSAT/GPA information about [its] part-time students," despite the recent (direct) request.

U.S. News is waiting for the ABA to publish its law school data on May 22, in order to "cross check Brooklyn Law School's and other law schools' statistics with the association's official data."

We will keep you updated on any developments in this story.

Random Musing #2: USNWR Rankings and The Case of The Ineffective Administration and Broken Wings...

And we're back: Today's Random Musing involves my bewilderment at the steep plunge in my school's ranking. When I signed up for this gig, Ol' LUC was sitting at 70. There was some talk at admitted students day that we were primed for climbing, if not nationally, then at least regionally. Two years later, and we're down 21 spots. Three letters, two commas and one question mark sum up my dismay: W, T, F?

BBLers, I look to you for advice-- what's a 2L who's on the verge of attending a TTT to do? What advice should I/We give my administration? What can be done?

[Ed. Note: I realize that some of the snobbier people in the world consider anything outside the T14 or T25 as "TTT." Notwithstanding that ATL commenters-esque definition, my concern is more with falling off the second page...]

U.S. News Rankings Leaked (UPDATE)

We have received some e-mails notifying us of a new lead regarding the controversial copy of the supposedly leaked 2010 U.S. News Law School Rankings, providing color photographs of the allegedly new rankings.

Although U.S. News declined to comment when contacted by Above The Law, the rankings appear to be legitimate dispelling our prior belief that the leaked rankings were a hoax.

This interesting development is sure to prompt tons of controversy. We hope, however, that prospective students will heed Craig's sage advice that all rankings--whether "real" or "fake"--be taken with a grain of salt.

------

UPDATE (Apr. 20, 12:35 PM): Here are links to scans from the magazine: 1-55; 56-100.

U.S. News Rankings Leaked?

Due to an overwhelming amount of e-mails, we want to clarify to the Blackbook Legal faithful that we are aware that the 2010 U.S. News Law School Rankings have purportedly been leaked--both on the Critical Badger and the Top Law Schools Message Board. There is a reason, however, that we have not posted them. After much investigation, it is our initial (preliminary) opinion that they are not accurate.

Every year at about this time someone always seems to leak an "official-looking" copy of the rankings. These copies are easy to fake even if it does take some effort to make them. Forgive us for being skeptical, but before we post anything, we want to be 100% sure that what we post is legitimate.

------

UPDATE (Apr. 19, 8:56 PM): Apparently it is easier than we thought to manufacture "fake" scanned copies of the rankings. A reader sent this copy to us, which paints a different picture than the original leaked rankings, and further supports our point that we should take all of these leaks with a grain of salt.

------

UPDATE (Apr. 20, 12:00 PM): An update to this developing story has been posted here

UC - Irvine is the Most Selective Law School in the Country

Or, so they say. The school reported yesterday that it "accepted 110 of 2,741 applicants to fill its 68 first-year positions, for an acceptance rate of 4%. By comparison, Yale Law School at 7%, and Stanford Law School at 9%, are the only other law schools with single-digit acceptance rates." Wait, what is UC - Irvine Law again? Oh yeah. It is the law school started last year by (now Dean) Erwin Chemerinsky, the same guy who wrote the comprehensive treatise I used for Constitutional Law during 1L.

While still patiently waiting for its ABA accreditation, the school is off to a fantastic start with respect to its numerical student performance data as well: "The incoming class will have a median grade point average of 3.65 and a median LSAT score of 167."

"We are extremely pleased to have fielded such a high-caliber inaugural class," noted Dean Chemerinsky. High-caliber it is indeed. But how did they accomplish such a miraculous feat? Dean Chemerinsky attributes the success:

to the strength and support of the University of California, Irvine, to the high quality of the founding faculty, and to the three-year, full-tuition scholarship offered to each member of the first-year class. (emphasis added)

The scholarships were ostensibly the driving factor for these impressive numbers--particularly given the current economic climate. But the other factors cannot be ignored, and what Dean Chemerinsky and his staff have done is remarkable. This is fantastic news for UC-I Law, its students and its top faculty. Look out UCLA, UC-B (Boalt?), UC-D, and UC-H--there's a new (UC) law school on the block.

Ohhhh LSAT

Times are tough, and going to law school is not as easy a choice as it was in prior years. But there are those who are not phased by the harsh economic conditions and truly do want to be lawyers. These prospective students still must face the obstacle all law students have faced: the LSAT. A 2L at a top 5 law school agreed to speak with me about her encounters with the test and her desire for a change in how law schools evaluate applicants.

The typical argument in favor of the LSAT is that it is the most useful predictive measurement of how well a student will perform in her first year of law school. As I understand, this rationale is not full-proof, but given the stark differences in quality and rigor between undergraduate institutions across the country, there simply must be some means to "level" the applicant playing field so to speak. The interviewee said:

I scored a 156 on the LSAT, and was accepted into a local, state school. I was pretty distraught because I worked hard for roughly 6 months before I took the exam. Unfortunately, I waited until the last possible date to take the test for the first time, so I gambled on the possibility of transferring to a top 14 school after my first year.

Well, it worked. She did extremely well her first year and transferred to a Top 5 school, where she has since excelled. She offered the following suggestion for a change in the format of the LSAT:

I think the LSAT should focus more on writing ability and the ability to rationally apply principles to fact patterns rather than forcing the applicants to merely parse through difficult logical questions under ridiculous time constraints. There should be flexibility, and the test should illustrate an applicant's reasoning ability in "real time."

Her suggestion is fair. After speaking with her, I did some solo research and found that Professors Sheldon Zedeck and Marjorie M. Shultz have instituted a study assessing the effects of a "test that they say is better at predicting success in the field than the widely used [LSAT]." The professors conducted a preliminary survey asking judges, law firm clients, and law professors what traits are vital for future lawyers:

The survey produced a list of 26 characteristics, or “effectiveness factors,” like the ability to write, manage stress, listen, research the law and solve problems. The professors then collected examples from . . . Berkeley alumni of specific behavior by lawyers that were considered more or less effective.

In response to these results, the professors created and administered an exam to a study group of roughly 1,100 lawyers.  The exam had interesting features:

Instead of focusing on analytic ability, the new test includes questions about how to respond to hypothetical situations. For example, it might describe a company with a policy requiring immediate firing of any employee who lied on an application, then ask what a test taker would do upon discovering that a top-performing employee had omitted something on an application.

The proposed exam tests the qualities the interviewee thought would better predict her future success in law school.  It appears that many deans have been receptive to the idea of another factor that would assist them in making admissions decisions when an applicant with an otherwise impressive file has a sub-par LSAT score.  "David E. Van Zandt, dean of the law school at Northwestern, said he would welcome a supplement to the LSAT to evaluate applicants, a sentiment echoed by other law school deans." 

Because it focuses on an applicant's ability to be a successful lawyer rather than his ability to merely do well in law school, this exam seems desirable.  Hopefully, the research sparks some change.

(Image Credit: http://sabegalli.blogspot.com/)

The Fixation on Prestige

“Are you not ashamed of caring so much for the making of money and for fame and prestige, when you neither think nor care about wisdom and truth and the improvement of your soul?” Socrates

Why do you want to be a lawyer? This was the (predictably obvious) question posed to me at a pre-law seminar as a freshman in college. One student raised her hand and proclaimed that she wished to enter the legal profession because she wanted to change the world. How idealistic! I raised my hand and stood to attention. Confidently, and without thinking twice, I stated that I planned on becoming an attorney because I desired the prestige and the money. From the looks of others in the audience, it was the answer they had in mind too, but were ashamed to admit.

I’d like to think my answer was that of an immature eighteen year old, and, to an extent, it was. I ultimately chose to attend law school because I believed I’d be challenged intellectually and have the opportunity to study interesting issues and concepts. I am no longer eighteen and clearly there’s more to life than prestige.

If I keep telling myself that, maybe I can will myself into believing it?

But while I wish the prestige fixation was a lost vestige of the past, I've come to learn that law student’s prestige-focus is second-to-none (ok, maybe Anne Coulter gives us competition, but still…). As I have addressed earlier, (most) prospective law students desire to attend the most prestigious institution possible. For many, acceptance to the illusive “T14” consumes their existence. Undoubtedly, these students are eagerly anticipating the newest edition of U.S. News and World Report’s graduate school rankings. I can picture it now: incoming first years having panic attacks because the law school at which they deposited drops in the rankings.

It doesn’t end there. The next goal for law students is to place on the most prestigious law journal possible. Following that, of course, is fall recruitment. Law students nationwide compare their offers. For all too many, the most important indicator of a prospective employer’s worthiness is their vault ranking or “selectivity.”

Surely, a law student can relax after he or she has locked up a position at a prominent high-paying law firm. Right? You’ve done it! You’re (finally) a success! Think again. The question turns to what position you have on your respective journal’s editorial staff, and, then, (perhaps) to whether you have a prestigious clerkship lined up for post-graduation. Even those who don’t really want to clerk—who aren’t even interested in clerking at all—may choose to clerk. I guess I can’t blame them: it’s “prestigious” (although, in today's economy, risky). But when does this obsession with prestige end? And what’s the source of the law student’s infatuation with prestige?

I don’t have the answers to these central questions, but I do think that I have finally overcome my own prestige-obsession. This isn’t to say that I won’t continue to slosh through the morass of prestige with my peers. I almost certainly will—but, hopefully, for the right reasons: I’ll do what I do because I believe it will make me the best attorney rather than for its own, intrinsically “prestigious” sake.

Here they come (with some controversy)

It's nearing that time of year again when U.S. News and World Report release their annual graduate school rankings. According to Robert Morse, the rankings will be published online on April 23, 2009--roughly a month later than last year's. The law school rankings "will be getting an upgrade" as U.S. News will publish its "first-ever ranking of part-time J.D. law programs."

I also came across an interesting article from last year providing a comprehensive summary of a debate among various legal blogs on the other changes implemented by U.S. News in the ranking methodology employed for this year's edition.

-----

Check out some other blogs on these issues: TaxProf Blog, The Shark