Measuring Outcomes: Post-Graduation Measures of Success in the U.S. News &amp; World Report Law School Rankings

Morriss, Andrew P.; Henderson, W.

doi:10.2139/ssrn.954604

Cited by 7 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…49 We reasoned that our detailed categorical variables for parental education and occupation (used in Models 1 through 5 in Table 12) might be dissipating a real SES effect regarded but far-flung state law schools, while many schools in the 51-75 range are private schools in large metropolitan markets. An analysis by Morriss and Henderson (2008) finds that the 51-75 schools draw a larger number of on-campus-interview slots from law firms than the 35-50 range schools. 46 The AJD data also collected self-reported class rank information, but these data were even less reliable than self-reported grades.…”

Section: Status Eliteness School Performance and Legal Careersmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Other factors, in particular the location of the law school, play important roles in postgraduation outcomes. See Morriss and Henderson (). An earlier, less systematic study came to similar conclusions about the salience of geography.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It appears that many schools in the 35–50 range are well‐regarded but far‐flung state law schools, while many schools in the 51–75 range are private schools in large metropolitan markets. An analysis by Morriss and Henderson () finds that the 51–75 schools draw a larger number of on‐campus‐interview slots from law firms than the 35–50 range schools.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Secret of My Success: How Status, Eliteness, and School Performance Shape Legal Careers

Sander¹,

Bambauer²

2012

J Empirical Legal Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

If we study the 40,000 law graduates who join the legal profession each year, how well can we predict their future careers? How much of their future is predicted by their social class? The law school they attend? Their law school grades? This article undertakes the first in‐depth examination of these questions. Drawing on several large and recently released data sets, we examine the role of class, school prestige, and law school grades on the career earnings of lawyers and the success of big firm associates in becoming partners. We find that social class strongly conditions who goes to law school, but no longer predicts much about postgraduate outcomes. Law school prestige is important, but it is generally trumped by law school performance (as measured by law school grades). Law school grades reflect both personal characteristics not well captured by prelaw credentials, and one's relative position in a law school class as measured by prelaw credentials. Our findings suggest that there is little empirical basis for the overwhelming importance students assign to “eliteness” in choosing a law school.

show abstract

Section: Status Eliteness School Performance and Legal Careersmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Secret of My Success: How Status, Eliteness, and School Performance Shape Legal Careers

Sander¹,

Bambauer²

2012

J Empirical Legal Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…But schools have not protected their practices from the influence of this new environmental pressure. Rankings have changed the fundamental activities of schools, transforming, for instance, how actors make decisions, do their jobs, and think about their schools (Elsbach and Kramer 1996;Espeland and Sauder 2007;Johnson 2006;Morriss and Henderson 2007).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Discipline of Rankings: Tight Coupling and Organizational Change

Sauder

Espeland²

2009

Am Sociol Rev

773

552

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article demonstrates the value of Foucault's conception of discipline for understanding organizational responses to rankings. Using a case study of law schools, we explain why rankings have permeated law schools so extensively and why these organizations have been unable to buffer these institutional pressures. Foucault's depiction of two important processes, surveillance and normalization, show how rankings change perceptions of legal education through both coercive and seductive means. This approach advances organizational theory by highlighting conditions that affect the prevalence and effectiveness of buffering. Decoupling is not determined solely by the external enforcement of institutional pressures or the capacity of organizational actors to buffer or hide some activities. Members' tendency to internalize these pressures, to become self-disciplining, is also salient. Internalization is fostered by the anxiety that rankings produce, by their allure for the administrators who try to manipulate them, and by the resistance they provoke. Rankings are just one example of the public measures of performance that are becoming increasingly influential in many institutional environments, and understanding how organizations respond to these measures is a crucial task for scholars.

show abstract

“…By representing the quality of law schools, students with high LSAT scores apply to schools with higher rankings, and those with lower scores apply to lower‐ranked schools. This extends to postgraduate measures of success, where law firm recruiters use law school rankings to seek top graduates (Morriss and Henderson ; Korobkin ). From 1993 to 2003, the rankings consisted of the top fifty schools and the division of the remaining 130+ schools into tiers (2, 3, 4).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Is the Expert Admissibility Game Fixed?: Judicial Gatekeeping of Fire and Arson Evidence

Dioso-Villa

2015

Law & Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Anecdotal evidence claims that in criminal cases, trial judges admit the prosecution's expert witnesses more readily than the defendants', and in civil cases the reverse is true; judges exclude plaintiffs' experts more often than civil defendants' experts. This occurs despite the fact that, with few exceptions, the same rules of admissibility apply to all parties and, in most jurisdictions, across criminal and civil cases. This article empirically tests this differential by reviewing judicial decisions to admit or exclude evidence holding the type of expert testimony constant, fire and arson evidence, across criminal and civil cases in the United States. The study examines the admissibility of fire and arson investigation experts in criminal and civil cases across all legal parties in fifty‐seven federal and state opinions in the United States. The findings offer empirical support of a bias in criminal cases and in civil cases which present expert witnesses at trial, and is less pronounced, but still evident, on appeal. Specifically, the role of the party that offers the evidence has a profound effect on whether arson evidence is admitted, even when factors around the judge's political affiliation, attorney experience, expert qualifications, and rules of evidence are taken into account.

show abstract

Measuring Outcomes: Post-Graduation Measures of Success in the U.S. News & World Report Law School Rankings

Cited by 7 publications

References 0 publications

The Secret of My Success: How Status, Eliteness, and School Performance Shape Legal Careers

The Secret of My Success: How Status, Eliteness, and School Performance Shape Legal Careers

The Discipline of Rankings: Tight Coupling and Organizational Change

Is the Expert Admissibility Game Fixed?: Judicial Gatekeeping of Fire and Arson Evidence

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About