Monday, June 11, 2007
The USN& WR rankings take a fair amount of criticism from Moneylaw contributors and for good reason. No one knows exactly what the rankings mean. The most devastating criticism from my point of view is Nancy Rapaport’s study showing that, once you pass the first few law schools, the next 50 or more are separated by a couple of eye lashes. This means that being 35th or 49th means little except to the same types of people who vote for the political candidate with the catchiest slogan and to those who then have to contend with those people.
3 Comments:
Why does a public school have to be judged exclusively by contribution to public services? Couldn't the public good be keeping really smart lawyers in the state where they can help the economy (perhaps as transaction cost engineers or perhaps as entrepreneurs with legal training) or serve as political and intellectual leaders after getting private sector training? Private start-up schools can't manufacture the prestige associated with even an average state's flagship school and therefore can't adequately fill this gap in attracting students over the short-term. It's true that a state can use lawyers from other states or attract native lawyers to return home after going to other state's law schools, but these may be more costly or unsuccessful than keeping them at the local school in the first place. Moreover, the school itself may be a net plus to the economy by providing jobs, attracting students as temporary and potential long-term residents, helping vendors, assisting real estate markets etc. It may be that there are more efficient industries to subsidize, but the measure of the law school's success would still be the ultimate economic and social return (which is much broader than just the starting salary of the or the number of public interest jobs assumed by students). Even on a narrow public interest model, private sector lawyers help with legislation or do pro bono and non-profit work years after they graduate. It would be difficult to capture that return in a one year measure.
>>My sense is that the only thing good about USN&WR report is that it takes the rankings out of the hands of complacent faculties and administrators who serve them. <<
I'm not so sure that this isn't a good enough aim in and of itself.
I think that perfect is the enemy of the good in law school rankings. Which is to say that any criticisim lobbed at USN&WR ought first be fired at law school administration.
Dear Mr. Anon. I think we actually agree. Most of the factors you list would be counted a forms of public service.
Post a Comment
<< Home