Harvard and Yale drop out of US News LAW Rankings

Question

Harvard and Yale Law Schools drop out of US News Law School Rankings

Reason - seems like too much emphasis on Test Scores.

Just saw this article in NY Times.
I know someone will say this is law school and what does it have to do with MBA? These are Harvard and Yale law schools, which were ranked number one and they are dropping from the US news rankings. I believe Yale was ranked number one for the last 30 years in a row, and apparently they’re not happy with the rankings. One thing is for your number five a number 10 schools to drop out. It’s very different when number one and two drop out.

I suspect that other departments/schools may follow suit within Harvard and Yale, and so business school and undergraduate institutions may also withdraw from US News rankings, which would basically mean who cares about the rankings if the top programs are not there?

Do you think it will spread to MBA Rankings?

Meanwhile, Yale and Harvard, just in one blow put US news, rankings into question, at least for law schools, but if there’s a problem with the US News Rankings methodology, I assume it applies to all other methodologies as well…

Interesting enough, we pointed out flaws and problems with the US news rankings in our review a year ago, https://gmatclub.com/forum/what-us-news ... 55274.html and came up with our own rankings to accommodate for inefficiencies and problems that US News rankings had… of course the problem is that as an accurate and troubled US news rankings are, they are the most reliable In this space…. So it is like a rug getting pulled from under your feet 🥴😱

Quote:

It has become impossible to reconcile our principles and commitments with the methodology and incentives the U.S. News rankings reflect,” John F. Manning, the dean of Harvard Law, said in his statement

Full Article:

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/16/us/y ... ticleShare

nightblade354 and Regenerate - what do you think?

Posted from my mobile device

Attachments

25E202C5-8898-4B7B-889E-C95CECF03FC5.png [ 5.77 MiB | Viewed 3223 times ]

bb · Answer

Some interesting quotes:

I was not sure how US News was making money off the rankings… or how things relate….

Posted from my mobile device

nightblade354 · Answer

I was just talking about rankings the other day, and how flawed they are in general. While I may have a bias towards certain schools, I have never understood the reasoning behind US News' methodology -- specifically why GPA and GMAT/GRE/GMAT/LSAT mean so much when statistically there is little to no difference after a certain point.

As for schools deciding to back out, I think this can either create a lot of good or a lot bad. As discussed, the methodology is flawed. Yale points that out and says that they are forced to play by US News' game to maintain rankings, which is in contradiction to the idea that quality education = higher ranking. This is where the good comes from. Once you prove yourself and your abilities, you don't need a 175 (750 on the GMAT) to get into a good business or law school. You would need the benchmark of, say, 700 or 170 (LSAT) and then have good experience. The bad will be that rankings do play an important role. Without them, there is no uniform way to measure schools. So new versions will crop up, one way or another. Do they focus on the right things? Maybe. Or maybe it devolves into something worse and students are forced to guess and/or go with brand-names.

And to your point  bb , Yale is the best law school in the country, bar none. They are the top. Harvard Law and Stanford almost always take the second and third spots. Will this benefit some of the T-10 or T15? Hard to say. But it will be interesting to see how it plays out. Power vacuums create a lot of chaos in the interim.

MyMBAPath · Answer

"I know someone will say this is law school and what does it have to do with MBA? These are Harvard and Yale law schools, which were ranked number one and they are dropping from the US news rankings."

It has A LOT to do with MBA. When the news came out, a number of b-school dean friends started chatting about it. Especially after the news about Kellogg offering test waivers to people who got caught up in the tech industry lay offs.

The only remaining major thing that is still propping the use of tests in MBA admissions are the rankings. As trust in the rankings continues to wane, so will the usefulness of the tests. Ten years from now, assessment of academic readiness for a top MBA program will not look the way it does today.

bb · Answer

So far Harvard and Yale business schools supposedly said they were not dropping out of the MBA rankings.

But this is dropping fast for law schools. I think LSAT may only survive in GMAT Ninja’s videos and as a tool for overzealous GMAT test takers looking to get V 50. 😱

OK, perhaps not so dramatic since LSAT was required by the bar association and unlike, BSxhools, law schools could not make it optional. So this is more of a parity with GMAT.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/law-school ... 1668778730

Posted from my mobile device

Attachments

6739276D-485A-4B77-A3FD-1D090C515D1A.png [ 3.39 MiB | Viewed 2853 times ]

nightblade354 · Answer

bb , these schools can vote to make things 'optional'. We've seen how waivers panned out on the B. school side: few were accepted without a score. Moreover, while tests have their issues, they are the single best way to measure a student's ability to succeed in the classroom. While the LSAT may very well serve as more of an IQ test than a law school aptitude test, no one can ace it without studying. You have to commit, and those hours are a prerequisite for the countless hours students will need to study their first year. I think schools will always favor the test, and those who go to eliminate will, in my opinion, need to go back to it.

MyMBAPath · Answer

In my experience, the b-schools waivers worked exactly as intended - they removed an obstacle from the path of MBA candidates who could offer enough alternative evidence they can succeed academically.

And I am curious why you think the test is he single best way to measure a student's ability to succeed? The research Darden has done the last several years points to very solid alternatives to determine success in the classroom without a test.

Business schools will continue to diminish their reliance on the test.

A few years ago I asked a professional friend and mentor who is heavily involved with each incoming class at one of the very top MBA programs (let's just say top 3) what is the biggest difference they've seen in MBA students over the last decade. Without any hesitation, the person responded "The vast disparity in quant readiness as they enter the program.”

Let's think about this for a second. The average GMAT at the top schools has continued to rise but the quant readiness is more varied than ever? What does this tell us? That standardized tests no longer provide as valuable a data point when the MBA applicants over the years have become much more diverse in every possible sense of the word.

nightblade354 · Answer

Let's break down each of these comments. I respect the opinion, but I think there are flaws. Either way, I welcome any further comments. I enjoy hearing differing view points. Should I be wrong, I will welcome the change as I think the GMAT, LSAT, GRE, MCAT, ect. are all back-breaking exams that aren't fun.

MyMBAPath · Answer

What good is that proof if it didn't help them be ready for quant in the classroom? They would have been much better off taking HBS CORe or even MBA Math. In the end, only time will tell us which one of us is right. Our polemics won't be the deciding factor.

Harvard and Yale drop out of US News LAW Rankings

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards