Like sands through the hour glass....
...so slips the ranking of Texas.The new US News and World Report ranking of law schools came out this week, and Texas has slipped on down two spots to #18. This also resulted in Vandy and USC hurdling Texas.
Guess the upping of out of state admissions basically didn't help them at all.
Labels: rankings
posted by The Lioness @ 11:04 AM
13 Comments:
i'll bet heads are gonna roll for that, but its so arbitrary and capricious a system...
apparently they told the prospective students that the dip in the ranks had to do with the post-graduation employment metric?
I'm sure the TTTexas haters at xoxo and lsd are loving this...
texas
This is the official law school spin:
This year, a reporting anomaly in one of the categories has placed the University of Texas at a one-year disadvantage, and embroiled the U.S. News methodology in controversy. Most of the law schools in the top twenty reported recent graduates who were studying for the winter bar exam as “not seeking” employment. UT reported the same group as “studying for the bar,” and U.S. News—despite contrary practices of the National Association for Law Placement (NALP) and the American Bar Association (ABA)—chose to classify these alumni as “seeking” employment. This single glitch caused UT Law’s overall ranking to be eighteen, notwithstanding its significantly higher reputational scores. Dean Sager observes, “This is, of course, annoying. But it is a one time reporting hiccup, and we will fare far better in the future.”
http://www.utexas.edu/law/news/2007/033007_rankings.html
However you spin it, it hurts...is it me or was Sager been a mistake as Dean?
He's had a number of screw-ups now. We had quite a few good choices for Dean. I was quite disappointed when he was selected last year.
Dropping in the rankings does blow, but I don't think you should get carried away with things. The overall number is virtually irrelevant. Practicing lawyers and judges have better things to do than sit around reading US News to find out exactly where a school falls. They just know if a school is generally good or not, and UT has good reputation scores.
Additionally, there's something bogus about the idea that a school with virtually identical numbers as UT can be ranked at 15 while we're at 18. It just doesn't make sense, and there's a good reason for that: US News rankings are highly visible but pretty crappy.
As for Sager, I don't know...I'm happy that he approved starting the Supreme Court clinic, but I don't really know what else he's done.
What are the mistakes that he's made? If you're talking about Ghetto Fabulous, please get over it. The email he sent was perfectly reasonable, and IMHO, it was also about the right response. Arguments to the contrary come from obviously biased factions within the law school.
sager is and will be a huge force for UT. reputation is tied to the hip of faculty. and sager was the pivot behind the hiring moves that took NYU from a ranking down about where we are now, to up where NYU is now. and let's not forget, at the end of the day, it aint always easy to get profs who live on the coasts (undoubtedly where most of the top lateral hires and newbies are) to come live in texas. so expect UT's rise to be slower even if sager is doing more here than he was able to at NYU. one dean can only have so much gravitational pull.
and yeah, if you think Sager's response to the Ghetto Party was a blameworthy mistake - you're likely part of the reason it's hard to get people to come to Texas. did you not take intro con law? do you know anything about the history of UT law school?
- coleslaw
Also, check this out for an interesting take on the real force by the rankings:
http://notthebene.blogspot.com/2007/03/bin-laden-claims-responsibility-for-gw.html
and yeah, if you think Sager's response to the Ghetto Party was a blameworthy mistake - you're likely part of the reason it's hard to get people to come to Texas. did you not take intro con law? do you know anything about the history of UT law school?
Yes: UT temporarily admitted candidates solely by merit instead of giving brownie points for the right skin color.
EEEEEEEEVIL!
Not quite.
Try Sweatt v. Painter.
Yes: UT temporarily admitted candidates solely by merit instead of giving brownie points for the right skin color. EEEEEEEEVIL!
First, anon, I disagree.
However, whether I disagree doesn't have anything to do with the point, much like your comment doesn't have anything to do with the point. That's because I'm not making any normative claims about UT's "history" ... I'm saying that there exists a fact of historical controversy surrounding UT. The normative claim (if there is one), is that UT admin (Dean Sager) thus "ought" to address the ghetto party issue head-on. That's because there are enough people out there who disagree with you, anon, including, as was my point, many profs on the coasts. And as the admin is a political body, I can't imagine how Sager's particular response was any sort of a blameworthy mistake given the circumstances. I mean, would the suggestion be Sager come out to support the party goers? Or should the admin have tried to ignore it happened?
Besides, anon, sounds like maybe you're bitter about your own admissions history - or is it just that you were at the ghetto party and can't get over the sting of the hand slap? (zing! threw that in just for controversial blog spice!)
- coleslaw
I hate to revisit the so-called ghetto party controversy, but I feel I need to respond to the comments that have already been posted. First of all, there is no evidence that the negative publicity affected the law school’s ranking, at least none that I’m aware of. Any negative effects would be seen in the reputation score, which was consistent with where it has been in the past few years. Second, the party theme was “ghetto-fabulous,” in essence, hip-hop culture and the exaggerated emphasis on material wealth we see on MTV. This was clearly reflected on the invitations that were distributed through e-mail. It only became a “ghetto” party when TMLS decided to re-characterize the party’s theme in order to help them make the case that the party’s intent was to mock people (primarily African-Americans) of a lower socioeconomic background. They were the ones that began calling it a ghetto party, and that label has stuck. Now, please drop the issue. It has nothing to do with the drop in the US News rankings.
no- the party doesn't have anything to do with the drop in USNews rankings... and that you read the convo as such suggests your world is still revolving around the sting of the handslapping.
the party only came up because of the suggestion that Sager was a mistake as dean, and then a further note suggesting that one mistake he has made, as dean, was his response to the party.
Post a Comment
<< Home