Could Hastings accomplish what NYU did.

Graduate School Law School
1

<p>Quote from Leiter: </p>

<p>Nell Jessup Newton, currently Dean of the law school at the University of Connecticut, will be the new Dean of the University of California, Hastings, from which she graduated nearly twenty years ago. The Hastings press release is here. </p>

<p>Like many large, state law schools, Hastings has been treated badly by U.S. News; probably only Wisconsin has fared as badly at the hands of the U.S. News criteria that reward a school for being small and private. U.S. News to the side, I've often heard folks remark that Hastings is an underperforming law school; when you consider that it's part of the prestigious University of California system, and located in one of the three great American cities (the other two being, of course, New York and Chicago), surely it should be unambiguously top 20 or better? </p>

<p>Could Hastings accomplish what NYU did in the 1990s, i.e., exploit its location to recruit a first-rate interdisciplinary faculty? That must surely be one of the challenges facing Dean Newton as she takes the helm. As Dean Newton remarked: "I am excited about the opportunity to lead Hastings as it secures its place as one of the best law schools in the country." Many in the legal academy will watch with interest.</p>

2

<p>Hastings has a great regional rep, but lacks a national rep. Hastings is in the shadow of Stanford Law, but then again NYU was in the shadow of Columbia.</p>

3

<p>Not to be overly combative, but I would dispute certain parts of that press release. </p>

<p>Specifically, I don't think that USNews necessarily rewards schools for being small. Consider this. What's the most populous full-time law school in the country? Some scrub school? No, it's Harvard Law. Yep - HLS is absolutely gigantic in terms of student population. Literally triple the size of peer schools like Yale law or Stanford Law. Yet there Harvard sits at #2, lower than Yale, but higher than Stanford.</p>

<p>In fact, of the top 5 in the USNews rankings, 3 of them are large. Harvard, Columbia, and NYU are not small law school by any stretch. Hence, I don't know how you can say that USNews discriminates against large schools. </p>

<p>Nor do I buy the contention that USNews discriminates against public law schools. Of the top 10, two - Michigan and Virginia - are public. Not only that, but both are quite large. Another, Berkeley, is parked right outside the top 10 at #11. Seems that the public law schools are quite well represented. </p>

<p>I also don't believe in the notion that being located in a great American city necessarily means all that much. It certainly doesn't mean that you will be unambiguously part of the top 20, no matter what sort of greater university systsem you are a member of. After all, most of the top law schools are not located in big cities. They may be CLOSE to a big city, but not actually in it. Yale is in New Haven. Harvard is in Cambridge. Stanford is in Palo Alto. Virginia - Charlottesville. Michigan - Ann Arbor. Northwestern - Evanston. </p>

<p>The truth is, the bulk of the top lawyers in San Francisco came from Berkeley or Stanford. Just like the top lawyers in Boston tend to come from Harvard. Cities don't need to have law schools actually located inside it. </p>

<p>Look, can Hastings become a top-ranked law school? Of course. My issue with the press release is that it seems as if Hastings thinks it deserves a top ranking just because it is located in San Francisco and by being part of a strong university system. It doesn't work that way. If you want a top ranking, you have to earn it. USNews isn't just going to hand it to you. If Hastings wants a better ranking, then it will need to bring in better students and develop its academic offerings. If it doesn't do that, then it won't get a higher ranking. Hastings can't just say "Well, we're in a great city and we're part of UC, so we should automatically get a top ranking". I don't think so.</p>

4

<p>actually isn't northwestern's law school in chicago? (everything else is in evanston though). not that it really matters, but i know sakky is usually very detailed-oriented. </p>

<p>anyway, i think hastings can move up in the rankings. seems to be that most in the bay area consider hastings to be the next best law school after stanford and boalt, although hastings is ranked lower than UC davis i believe. but i can't imagine hastings accomplishing as much as NYU did. in the UC hierarchy, it theoretically would still remain under boalt and UCLA.</p>

5

<p>theoretically, haha.</p>

6

<p>
[quote]
theoretically, haha.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Hahahahaha.</p>

7

<p>KFC4u, yes, I forgot, Northwestern's Law school is actually located in Chicago. Just like Harvard Business School and Harvard Medical School are located in Boston, even though the rest of Harvard is in Cambridge.</p>

<p>But anyway, I think y'all get my point. Hastings can't just expect to have a top ranking handed to it.</p>

8

<p>Lawschool.com posted the following:
"California July 2005 Bar Exam Pass Rates
For only first-time candidates, ABA-Accredited Schools: </p>

<p>1 UCLA 88.7% (235/265)
2 Stanford 88.0% (73/83)
3 Boalt 87.0% (201/231)
4 Hastings 84.3% (305/362)
5 USC 81.7% (152/186)
6 USan Diego 80.0% (187/234)
7 Loyola 75.0% (251/335)
8 USF 74.4% (131/176)
9 UC Davis 73.8% (118/160)
10 Pepperdine 72.6% (114/157)
11 Southwestern 66.4% (162/244)
12 McGeorge 63.9% (168/263)
13 Santa Clara 62.5% (163/261)
14 Chapman 59.5% (66/111) </p>

<p>Quote:</p>

<p>Hastings just had one of its investments appreciate in value. Carol Corrigan, a UC Hastings (JD) Alumni, was sworn into the California Supreme Court this past Wednesday</p>

9

<p>FM UC Hastings
Excerpt</p>

<p>Probably of greatest interest to you is the announcement that in Governor Schwarznegger's proposed 2006-07 budget there are funds to buy out the proposed 2006-07 General Enrollment and Nonresident Fee increases that were approved in September. </p>

<p>Second, as I announced just before the holidays, Dean Nell Newton has been selected to succeed me as Chancellor and Dean. She will be the first Hastings alum to serve in this position .</p>

<p>Third, in December we received the July 2006 Bar Pass results and Hastings really did well. Our first-time pass rate was 84.%, up from 81% the year before. That made us fourth in the state, following UCLA (89%), Stanford (88%), and Boalt (87%). Our other comparison schools USC and Davis, had rates of 82% and 74%.</p>

10

<p>...because they are a very mediocre indicator of the type of education you will receive.</p>

<p>Mostly, it indicates two things (which are somewhat opposite from each other):
1. The types of students who go to that school - are they diligent enough and smart enough to learn the material for the bar?
2. The way the law school will teach. Some schools, instead of teaching legal theory and making you a better thinker, will teach you how to pass the bar. Instead of teaching federal law, or common law, or whatever, they'll teach you things that are particular only to that state. It's like being in high school and having your classes geared towards the SAT.</p>

<p>I think that you will waste three years (and a ton of tuition money) if you go to a law school that focuses too much on bar passage. Instead of learning a lot of federal law, you'll probably learn law that is specific to your state. Instead of learning the "whys" of our legal system, you'll learn very basic facts about it - the depth of which is akin to reading commercial outlines a few times. Yes, the bar pass rate will be high, but that comes at quite a cost.</p>

<p>Some schools (even "lesser" schools) will focus on the fun part of law - the theory, the rationale, the history - all the stuff that can make you a great lawyer, once you put it together with the black-letter law. That, to me, is what makes law school great. I'm not talking about policy arguments such as the theory of different legal systems (why contract law operates a certain way; why criminal law punishes certain actions but not others). </p>

<p>This is just my opinion... others can chime in... but I don't look at a high bar pass rate and think, "That's an incredible school." I think that it either has very diligent students, has some sort of bar prep course, or focuses its legal education on the bar instead of on, well, a legal education.</p>

11

<p>Well, to a degree I would agree with you that "teaching to the bar" as my profs at my law school called it is frowned upon at most law schools. But, that should not be confused with offering courses that geared to a particular state's bar exam, such as community property in California, or gas & oil in Texas. Making sure the content is covered is not the same as "teaching to the bar," IMHO.</p>

12

<p>I concur. </p>

<p>Some states have their own quirks - and many law schools will offer a course on its own state's particular issues. </p>

<p>I do think it's different from gearing the entire curriculum towards a particular state, or from teaching more black-letter law than anything else so your kids will do well on the bar.</p>

13

<p>Agreed, Ariess</p>

14

<br>


<br>

<p>So CA Bar passing Top 3 ( UCLA, Stanford, Boalt) are not incredible schools. </p>

<p>I agree.</p>

15

<p>Yeah, who would want to go to those three schools, anyway? Student quality, student life, reputation, and everything else aside, who would?</p>

16

<p>While NYU put incredible resources into its law school as part of its effort to bring the entire university into another tier, I don't see that happening at Hastings, since Boalt, UCLA, and Davis already have well-respected law schools. If anything, I believe that Boalt is where the resources will go, to increase the size of the faculty under the new dean.</p>

<p>Hastings will remain a good school that serves a slightly different student body. At least in the past, they attracted more students interested in public interest law, and more older students, as well as students who didn't get into the other UCs. As has been pointed out, as opposed to USNWR rankings, law school alumni networks also work on a regional level. Santa Clara University, for example, traditonally produced more than its share of By Area judges.</p>

17

<p>Keep in mind as well that NYU was in the top ten long before the 1990s, though the recruitment of high-profile faculty members may have made more people aware of its quality and propelled it a couple of spots up the ladder.</p>

18

<p>Excerpt from Leiter Report</p>

<p>Data from the National Association for Law Placement on the number of firms interviewing on campus</p>

<p>Over 800 firms: Georgetown, Harvard [note, of course, that Georgetown and Harvard are the two largest top law schools in the country in terms of student population]</p>

<p>Over 700 firms: Virginia</p>

<p>Over 600 firms: Duke, Michigan, NYU</p>

<p>Over 500 firms: Berkeley, Chicago, Columbia, Penn, Stanford</p>

<p>Over 400 firms: George Washington, Howard, Northwestern, Texas, Yale</p>

<p>Over 300 firms: Cornell, UCLA, Vanderbilt</p>

<p>Over 200 firms: Boston College, Boston Univ., Emory, Fordham, North Carolina, Notre Dame, Southern California, UC Hastings, William & Mary (and Washington & Lee is very close, with 197)</p>

<p>Over 150 firms: UC Davis</p>

<p>Over 100 firms: American, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Houston, Illinois, Iowa, Loyola/Los Angeles, Minnesota, SMU, Tulane, Wake Forest, Wash U/St. Louis, Wisconsin</p>

<p>72-94 firms: Baylor, Brigham Young, Brooklyn, Cardozo, Case Western, Catholic, George Mason, Indiana, Miami, Ohio State, Rutgers-Camden, Rutgers-Newark, San Diego, Santa Clara, Temple, Villanova, Washington/Seattle</p>

<p>49-66 firms: Chicago-Kent, Cincinnati, Connecticut, Denver, Florida State, Kansas, LSU, Maryland, Oregon, Penn State, Pittsburgh, San Francisco, Seton Hall, South Carolina, South Texas, St. John's, Tennessee. (And on the cusp: Arizona [47], Loyola-Chicago [47], Mississippi [47], Utah [46], Georgia State [45], Missouri-Columbia [45].)</p>

19

<p>
[quote]
Specifically, I don't think that USNews necessarily rewards schools for being small. Consider this. What's the most populous full-time law school in the country? Some scrub school? No, it's Harvard Law. Yep - HLS is absolutely gigantic in terms of student population. Literally triple the size of peer schools like Yale law or Stanford Law. Yet there Harvard sits at #2, lower than Yale, but higher than Stanford.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>This is a really poor argument. I don't really know specifically what the critics allege that USNews does to favor small, private schools, but this does nothing to disprove any of it. </p>

<p>
[quote]
In fact, of the top 5 in the USNews rankings, 3 of them are large. Harvard, Columbia, and NYU are not small law school by any stretch. Hence, I don't know how you can say that USNews discriminates against large schools.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>And three of the top six are small. What's your point? This is like a middle schooler trying to make some kind of argument. Hey, if Bill Gates is the wealthiest person alive, you can't say that having a college degree has any impact on your net worth!</p>

<p>
[quote]
My issue with the press release is that it seems as if Hastings thinks it deserves a top ranking just because it is located in San Francisco and by being part of a strong university system.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>That isn't the point. The idea is that they have the potential to exploit these resources and become a top school.</p>

20

<p>man where is sakky to respond with the 3 page rebuttal?</p>