<p>Hey I like 2pac too but why mock Kurt? They're both great artists. Plus, injecting half a kilo of heroin would make it HARDER. So maybe one should say, Kurt did it even when...</p>
<p>"Then going by that rationale, almost every school in the top 15 should be in a sort of similitude with each other in terms of this."</p>
<p>No, did you read the part that said "their interests"?</p>
<p>"Why does Stanford place better into top law schools than Penn?"</p>
<p>1) Stanford has a higher SAT average, indicated a slightly stronger average student - and since the difference between being admitted to a top law/medicine program is so slight, this slight difference can be magnified when someone is applied to heavily numbers-driven top law schools for instance, and 2) I wouldn't be surprised if there are more Penn UGs at Penn law than Stanford UGs at Stanford law simply because Stanford is so much harder to get into, meaning more Stanford students went to other top law schools. Stanford, along with Yale, is considered to be one of the two only law schools to be as much EC driven as numbers driven (because it can be). To a lesser extent, the same is true of Penn Med vs Stanford Med (the latter of which is the most selective %wise in the nation), almost admissions to top med schools are more competitive anyway. </p>
<p>"Why does Dartmouth place much better than Cornell?"</p>
<p>Uh, more Cornell students go into engineering? Also, again, Dartmouth has a higher SAT average than Cornell, indicating a slightly stronger average student. Additionally, I doubt that many students in Cornell's "state schools" other than ILR are considering top law programs. </p>
<p>"Besides, going by the sentiments on CC, Duke should have abysmal grad placement considering as how the students are supposedly aggregately inferior to most of the top 10 schools"</p>
<p>It's SAT averages are comparable to the schools right below HYPSMC (the last two of which are tech schools, so a comparison isn't completely valid). Duke has a VERY pre-professional student body, and Duke law isn't ranked as high as, say, Penn law, so it makes sense that the smarter Duke students go somewhere else instead of being enticed to stay in Durham (whereas many people would choose Penn law over, say, Michigan). Note that this isn't the same reason Stanford UGs might choose a different law school, as that is simply because Stanford Law is so insanely competitive. </p>
<p>"Some schools have significantly better success with putting students into top programs. It is splitting hairs that we compare students here. The student quality is almost the same at all top 15 schools."</p>
<p>Yes it's "almost the same", but that subtle difference makes a large difference in grad admissions, where you are splitting hairs AMONG THE TOP STUDENTS. And as I said, different schools have students with different motivations. Do you REALLY think that Caltech deserves a 28 ranking?</p>
<p>I agree that it's unfair to really compare many of the schools that top the USNWR ranking list. </p>
<p>Brown and Dartmouth are more like LACs, but are still technically universities.</p>
<p>Schools like Penn and MIT have undergraduate business programs which other schools do not.</p>
<p>Schools like CIT are essentially tech schools, with not much distinction in fields outside of Math/Science/Engineering.</p>
<p>Schools like Brown and Northwestern have 7/8 year undergrad+medical programs which other schools do not.</p>
<p>Schools like Columbia and Chicago have core curriculums which other schools do not.</p>
<p>Schools like Columbia, Penn, and Cornell have special honors programs which other schools do not, namely HYPS.</p>
<p>Schools like Rice and Duke offer full ride merit scholarships which other schools do not, namely ivy league ones.</p>
<p>And yet, all these institutions are lumped together on the same list. Really goes to show that in comparing apples to oranges, no one will be completely happy with any ranking.</p>
<p>OHnoes, you put far too much emphasis on a flawed standardized test.</p>
<p>It's that kind of thinking, perhaps, that education needs to be rid of, not continuing with and heralding.</p>
<p>Kurt had some good lyrics, and then many others that were too strung out to make sense. I feel his pain, he's a great performer, but he's not one of the best musicians of all time, whether enjoyable or not. Brilliant, in a sense, perhaps, but his uniqueness is something I already concede ;).</p>
<p>Yes, I play guitar, and I am a music whore.</p>
<p>Marshal Crenshaw:</p>
<p>"I've suffered for my art...now it's your turn"</p>
<p>"Yes it's "almost the same", but that subtle difference makes a large difference in grad admissions, where you are splitting hairs AMONG THE TOP STUDENTS"</p>
<p>Does it? </p>
<p>"Do you REALLY think that Caltech deserves a 28 ranking?"</p>
<p>I could care less.</p>
<p>"Duke has a VERY pre-professional student body, and Duke law isn't ranked as high as, say, Penn law, so it makes sense that the smarter Duke students go somewhere else instead of being enticed to stay in Durham"</p>
<p>Actually Duke law has been ranked higher than Penn law on quite a number of different occasions. Law school rankings are very capricious as well. I will indulge conjecture just this once and answer to your next point. Penn has a very pre professional milieu as well. Being enticed to stay in Durham? Uhm...let me correct you:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Sometimes Big Law is put off by recent law graduates' inability to accept a different environment. Many lawyers have told me this and Duke students are encouraged to apply and spread out to other places by pre law advising. Durham has nothing to do with it.</p></li>
<li><p>Most students I know passed on Cornell, Penn, Columbia to live in Durham. So, I'm sure an extra three years there wouldn't be so awful...now would do it?</p></li>
</ol>
<p>"Stanford has a higher SAT average, indicated a slightly stronger average student"</p>
<p>I hope this is a joke.</p>
<p>"Stanford, along with Yale, is considered to be one of the two only law schools to be as much EC driven as numbers driven (because it can be)"</p>
<p>Uhm..it can be? Look at that facts. University of Chicago are known for having better faculty than just about any other school. Moreover, Berkeley law can be more selective than Stanford law. They look particularly at the GPA...."because they can." Even 175+ LSAT scorers are given their pink slips at places like UCB. Morevoer, almost any T14 can be more liberal with admissions. They are all THAT good. Look at Columbia Law. They need a class for around 360 out of 8000 applicants. So much for restriction, eh?</p>
<p>"To a lesser extent, the same is true of Penn Med vs Stanford Med (the latter of which is the most selective %wise in the nation), almost admissions to top med schools are more competitive anyway."</p>
<p>This is not relevant at all. Duke Med has a 3.9% acceptance rate. Stanford's is 3.1%. Yeah I see what you mean about "subtle differences" making big impacts. Especially considering as how Duke has ranked higher than Stanford in medicine for a number of years. How much more selective do you need? :confused: Even Penn in all its inferiority (wow) has ranked higher than Stanford in med.</p>
<p>"Note that this isn't the same reason Stanford UGs might choose a different law school, as that is simply because Stanford Law is so insanely competitive. "</p>
<p>I laughed out loud when I read this. You realize that ANY T14 is extremely competitive, don't you? In fact, I would say that Columbia, University of Chicago, Harvard, Yale and Berkeley can be even MORE competitive. Stanford alums are not turned off by Stanford being more competitive. What time of rationalization is that? This way of thinking is not in line with your previous masochism.</p>
<p>'OHnoes, you put far too much emphasis on a flawed standardized test.</p>
<p>It's that kind of thinking, perhaps, that education needs to be rid of, not continuing with and heralding."</p>
<p>The SAT is the only measure which can paint a decent picture of the strength of the student body. While it may not be completely accurate on an individual basis, when you have several thousand people combined it becomes a somewhat useful tool for comparing colleges.</p>
<p>By the way...here are the law school rankings from over the years:</p>
<p>1994 1994
1 Yale
2 Harvard
3 Stanford
4 Chicago
5 Columbia
6 NYU
7 Duke
8 Michigan
9 Penn
10 Berkeley
11 Cornell
12 Northwestern
13 Georgetown
14 UVA
15 Vanderbilt
16 UCLA
17 Minnesota
18 USC
19 Iowa
20 UC Hastings
21 UT
22 Emory
22 Washington & Lee
24 Boston College
25 Univ. of Washington</p>
<p>1993 1993
1 Yale
2 Harvard
3 Stanford
4 Chicago
5 Columbia
6 NYU
7 Michigan
8 UVA
9 Duke
10 Georgetown
11 Penn
12 Berkeley
13 Northwestern
14 Cornell
15 UT
16 Vanderbilt
17 UCLA
18 USC
19 Boston College
20 Notre Dame
21 George Washington
22 Wisconsin
23 UC Hastings
23 Iowa
25 Minnesota</p>
<p>1992 1992
1 Yale
2 Harvard
3 Stanford
4 Chicago
5 Columbia
6 Michigan
7 NYU
8 UVA
9 Duke
10 Penn
11 Georgetown
12 Berkeley
13 Northwestern
14 Cornell
15 UT
16 Vanderbilt
17 UCLA
18 USC
19 UC Hastings
20 Notre Dame
21 Minnesota
22 Boston College
22 Univ. of Washington
24 George Washington
25 Iowa</p>
<p>1991 1991
1 Yale
2 Harvard
3 Chicago
4 Stanford
5 Columbia
6 Michigan
7 NYU
8 UVA
9 Duke
10 Penn
11 Georgetown
12 Berkeley
13 Cornell
14 Northwestern
15 UT Austin
16 USC
17 Vanderbilt
18 UCLA
19 Univ. of Iowa
20 UC Hastings
21 Wisconsin
22 George Washington
22 Minnesota
24 Notre Dame
24 UNC Chapel Hill</p>
<p>1990 1990
1 Yale
2 Chicago
3 Stanford
4 Columbia
5 Harvard
6 NYU
7 Michigan
8 Duke
9 Penn
10 UVA
11 Northwestern
12 Georgetown
13 Berkeley
14 Cornell
15 Vanderbilt
16 UT
17 USC
18 UCLA
19 Notre Dame
20 Boston College
21 UNC Chapel Hill
22 UC Davis
23 George Washington
23 Emory
25 Washington & Lee
25 UIUC</p>
<p>1987 1987
1 Harvard
1 Yale
3 Michigan
4 Columbia
4 Stanford
6 Chicago
7 Berkeley
8 UVA
9 NYU
10 Penn
11 UT
12 Duke
13 Georgetown
14 UCLA
15 Cornell
16 Northwestern
17 UIUC
17 USC
19 Minnesota
20 Wisconsin</p>
<p>2003 2003
1 Yale
2 Stanford
3 Harvard
4 Columbia
5 NYU
6 Chicago
7 Michigan
7 Penn
9 UVA
10 Cornell
10 Berkeley
12 Duke
12 Northwestern
14 Georgetown
15 UT
16 UCLA
17 Vanderbilt
18 USC
19 Minnesota
19 Washington & Lee
21 Iowa
22 Boston College
22 George Washington
22 Notre Dame
25 UIUC
25 Wash. U. (St. Louis)</p>
<p>2002 2002
1 Yale
2 Stanford
3 Harvard
4 Columbia
5 NYU
6 Chicago
7 Berkeley
7 Michigan
7 Penn
7 UVA
11 Northwestern
12 Duke
13 Cornell
14 Georgetown
15 UT
16 UCLA
17 Vanderbilt
18 Iowa
18 Minnesota
18 USC
18 Washington & Lee
22 Boston College
22 Emory
24 Notre Dame
25 Boston University
25 George Washington
25 UIUC
25 Univ. of Washington
25 Wisconsin
25 Wash. U. (St. Louis)</p>
<p>2001 2001
1 Yale
2 Stanford
3 Harvard
4 Columbia
5 NYU
6 Chicago
7 Michigan
7 UVA
9 Berkeley
10 Duke
10 Penn
12 Cornell
13 Northwestern
14 Georgetown
15 UT
16 UCLA
17 Vanderbilt
18 USC
19 Minnesota
20 Iowa
20 Washington & Lee
22 Boston College
23 George Washington
23 UIUC
23 UNC Chapel Hill
23 Univ. of Washington</p>
<p>2000 2000
1 Yale
2 Stanford
3 Harvard
4 NYU
5 Columbia
6 Chicago
7 Michigan
8 Berkeley
8 UVA
10 Cornell
10 Duke
12 Northwestern
12 Penn
14 Georgetown
15 UT
16 UCLA
17 USC
18 Vanderbilt
19 Minnesota
20 Washington & Lee
21 Iowa
22 UNC Chapel Hill
23 Boston Collge
23 George Washington
23 UIUC</p>
<p>1999 1999
1 Yale
2 Harvard
2 Stanford
4 NYU
5 Columbia
6 Chicago
7 UVA
8 Duke
8 Michigan
10 Cornell
10 Berkeley
12 Northwestern
12 Penn
14 Georgetown
15 UT
16 UCLA
16 Vanderbilt
18 Minnesota
18 USC
20 Washington & Lee
21 UNC Chapel Hill
21 Notre Dame
23 UIUC
23 Iowa
25 George Washington
25 Univ. of Washington</p>
<p>1998 1998
1 Yale
2 Harvard
2 Stanford
4 Columbia
4 Chicago
6 NYU
7 Berkeley
8 Duke
8 Michigan
8 Penn
8 UVA
12 Cornell
12 Georgetown
12 Northwestern
15 USC
16 Vanderbilt
17 UCLA
18 Minnesota
19 Washington & Lee
20 George Washington
20 UIUC
22 Boston College
23 Univ. of Washington
24 Iowa
25 Emory
25 Fordham
25 UNC Chapel Hill
25 Notre Dame</p>
<p>1997 1997
1 Yale
2 Harvard
3 Stanford
4 Chicago
5 Columbia
6 NYU
7 Michigan
8 UVA
9 Berkeley
10 Duke
11 Penn
12 Cornell
13 Georgetown
14 Northwestern
15 USC
16 Vanderbilt
17 UCLA
18 UT
19 UIUC
20 Minnesota
21 Notre Dame
22 Boston College
23 George Washington
24 Iowa
25 Washington & Lee</p>
<p>1996 1996
1 Yale
2 Harvard
3 Stanford
4 Chicago
5 Columbia
6 NYU
7 Michigan
8 Penn
9 UVA
10 Duke
11 Cornell
12 Georgetown
12 Berkeley
14 Northwestern
15 USC
16 Vanderbilt
17 UCLA
18 UT
19 UIUC
20 Washington & Lee
21 Minnesota
22 George Washington
23 Emory
23 Univ. of Washington
25 Notre Dame</p>
<p>1995 1995
1 Yale
2 Harvard
2 Stanford
4 Chicago
5 Columbia
6 NYU
7 UVA
8 Duke
8 Berkeley
8 Michigan
11 Northwestern
11 Penn
13 Georgetown
14 Cornell
15 USC
16 Vanderbilt
17 UT
18 Minnesota
19 Iowa
20 UIUC
21 Washington & Lee
22 George Washington
23 Wisconsin
24 UCLA </p>
<p>You were saying.....</p>
<p>"Actually Duke law has been ranked higher than Penn law on quite a number of different occasions. Law school rankings are very capricious as well. I will indulge conjecture just this once and answer to your next point. Penn has a very pre professional milieu as well. Being enticed to stay in Durham? Uhm...let me correct you:..."</p>
<p>1) I wasn't talking about how much people like the city, but while you bring it up having lived in NC all my life I can say that plenty of people who liked Duke are still ready to get out of Durham, 2) like it or not, the only law school ranking that matters is USNews. And while I think it's dumb, there is an overwhelming trend among law school applicants to pick the highest ranked school they get in to regardless of other factors (personally I think people should put more weight on peer assessment of law schools than the actual ranking, but unfortunately they don't). </p>
<p>"Uhm..it can be? Look at that facts. University of Chicago are known for having better faculty than just about any other school. Moreover, Berkeley law can be more selective than Stanford law. They look particularly at the GPA...."because they can." Even 175+ LSAT scorers are given their pink slips at places like UCB. Morevoer, almost any T14 can be more liberal with admissions. They are all THAT good. Look at Columbia Law. They need a class for around 360 out of 8000 applicants. So much for restriction, eh?"</p>
<p>No, the truth is that Yale and Stanford and the most <em>unpredictable</em> out of all T14 law schools, there is no denying this (see lawschoolnumbers.com). For any other school, even Berkeley (which relies more heavily on GPA), a formula can give you a decent idea as to which schools you'll be accepted and which you won't. This isn't the case with Y & S, as you not only need the numbers but also good ECs/outside experience. </p>
<p>"This is not relevant at all. Duke Med has a 3.9% acceptance rate. Stanford's is 3.1%. Yeah I see what you mean about "subtle differences" making big impacts. Especially considering as how Duke has ranked higher than Stanford in medicine for a number of years. How much more selective do you need? Even Penn in all its inferiority (wow) has ranked higher than Stanford in med."</p>
<p>I was talking about how you were discussing Penn's lower ranking, and the Penn Med was an extension of the Penn Law arguement. Duke, like Stanford, has one of the most selective med schools in the country (although Penn is of course still highly selective), and as a result not as many of its UGs end up at the med school compared to Penn. This in turn means that more Duke and Stanford students are probably going elsewhere than Penn students. But as I said it is "to a lesser extent", because med school classes are typically smaller than law school classes, and admissions are much more random. </p>
<p>"I laughed out loud when I read this. You realize that ANY T14 is extremely competitive, don't you? In fact, I would say that Columbia, University of Chicago, Harvard, Yale and Berkeley can be even MORE competitive. Stanford alums are not turned off by Stanford being more competitive. What time of rationalization is that? This way of thinking is not in line with your previous masochism."</p>
<p>You completely missed the point, which was that strong Stanford UGs are more likely to be <em>declined</em> by their home LS than any of those other schools (save for Yale of course, and posssibly Berkeley for someone with a low GPA/high LSAT), and thus obviously don't stay there. Again, see lawschoolnumbers.com - Yale and Stanford are the two schools which cannot be predicted using numbers as the primary indicator. Even for Harvard, with a certain LSAT/GPA admission is very likely. Columbia and Chicago may have similar LSAT ranges to Stanford, but admission to these schools is much more predictable, and there is a higher raw acceptance rate simply because of the larger classes. Yale and Stanford have smaller classes than most T14 law schools, which is simply why they are so selective.</p>
<p>kurt cobain is like JFK- if he had lived, he'd probably be a whole lot less popular today.</p>
<p>My argument stands as is. But you were utterly wrong when you said Penn Law ranks higher than Duke law. </p>
<p>"like it or not, the only law school ranking that matters is USNews. And while I think it's dumb, there is an overwhelming trend among law school applicants to pick the highest ranked school they get in to regardless of other factors (personally I think people should put more weight on peer assessment of law schools than the actual ranking, but unfortunately they don't)."</p>
<p>EXACTLY. By the way, lawschoolnumbers.com is a very meek way of gauging mercurial tendencies. I agree that Yale is the most arbitrary. But I most certainly DISAGREE that Stanford be put in that category in terms of its unpredictability. IMO Uchic is better than Stanford in Law...but not by much. Look at faculty ratings...</p>
<p>University of Chicago's faculty are more distinguished than ANY in this country.</p>
<p>I wouldn't even say Stanford was top 5 in elite firm hiring. I would put Harvard, Chicago, Yale, Columbia, and Michigan in front of it anyday. The most selective firm in this country, Cravath, Swaine & Moore, has only 2 Stanford Law alums going there. This is in New York, so you may counter me by saying Stanford alums typically would work more along the confines of Calli, right? Well....</p>
<p>at OMelveny & Myers....there are more Harvard University, Loyola Law School, Los Angeles, Univ. of California, Los Angeles, Univ. of California, Berkeley, University of Southern California, Yale University alums. </p>
<p>The most ELITE law firm in San Francisco, Morrison & Foerster, ironically invites more Berkeley and Hastings alums.</p>
<p>By the way, if class size equals selectivity, then Uchicago is probably the most selective law school in the country. Around 5000 apply....only around 150 are in a class.</p>
<p>While I would still say that SLS > CLS (unless you want to go into academia, which is where faculty quality truly comes into play), I'm not talking about the actual quality of the schools and don't care about that - just how hard it is to get accepted because that's all that pertains to the arguement. Stanford and Chicago do have similar class sizes which are quite a bit smaller than most other T14s (Stanford's 514 to Chicago's 590), but Stanford's acceptance rate is <em>half</em> of what Chicago's is due to yield. Chicago is certainly underrated, but Stanford is easily more selective. </p>
<p>But I digress from the original point, which is that the WSJ rankings are next to useless. A student of similar quality at Duke/Brown/Penn/Cornell/Dartmouth/Columbia/Northwestern/etc will probably end up at similar graduate schools.</p>
<p>One more thing....</p>
<p>Since test scores seem to gauge student quality to you...</p>
<p>Harvard LSAT 169-175</p>
<p>Yale LSAT 168-175</p>
<p>Columbia LSAT 167-173 </p>
<p>Uchic LSAT 167-171 </p>
<p>NYU LSAT 167-172 </p>
<p>Stanford LSAT 166-172 </p>
<p>As you can see, a number of schools have Stanford slightly beat. Since "subtle differences make a big impact," I will not leave any room for vindication.</p>
<p>Back on topic...</p>
<p>I completely agree with you. Columbia/Duke/Penn/Brown/Dartmouth/JHU/Uchic are all going to the same place. Moreover, I don't see why a Columbia or a Duke/Penn alum would not receive work just as fast as a Stanford alum. People really don't care once you get to that echelon and have the grades.</p>
<p>Right, but again I don't care about the quality of the <em>law</em> schools for sake of the arguement, just how hard they are to get into. And Stanford has the second lowest acceptance rate of all T14s, second only to Yale (6.5% to 7.7%). The next closest is Boalt at 10%, Harvard at 11.3%, and the rest are 14%+.</p>
<p>Hey, knightmare, didn't you post this on the U/Penn board:</p>
<p>"USnews is ********! There should only be ONE school in Tier 1, and that is the Jewniversity of Pennsylasia"</p>
<p>lawyerdad- we on the penn board, much like your typical penn student, have a very sarcastic and cynical sense of humor.</p>
<p>Muppy: Actually, it works quite well in the hearings we conduct at the State Division on Human Rights where we zealously advance the right of all people to live and work in an environment free of hatred represented by the sort of bigoted utterences you so shameleslly embraced and then defended. Your insensitivity and ignorance is shocking by itself, but from a female who only a brief time ago was the object of the exact same bigotry is unimaginable. Style and nuance? Perhaps you're joking. Unfortunately, I doubt it.<br>
You wouldn't last a minute at Brown, if you could get admitted.</p>
<p>Hatred? Oh really? Lemme see...would openly calling people bigoted, shameless, insensitive, and ignorant constitute as hatred? I'm asking because I obviously wouldn't know, since I don't go to Brown. Do educate us young 'uns, oh zealous one.</p>
<p>Are you kidding? Seriously, get a grip on yourself. It's a time-honored, self-deprecating nickname. Penn has a history of accepting Jews since a time when most of the Ivies were a bunch of racist WASPish country clubs. Don't make me go on a tangent rant about how being one of the most hated, perennially persecuted races on Earth has led the Jewish people to develop an amazingly level-headed, cynical & self-deprecating sense of humor (see: Jon Stewart)</p>
<p>There is a line where being PC becomes offensive. I would say you've crossed it, but since your goal is clearly to do nothing but pick a fight for no reason (see: troll) it's not worth it. </p>
<p>So instead, let's talk about US NEWS. God, isn't the US NEWS ranking stupid and pointless?? Who would put Penn over Brown? Honestly.</p>
<p>Hahahaha... I think it's really funny that someone attacked someone for being "bigoted" by calling them "retarded."</p>