US News "Americas Best Graduate Schools" 2023-2024 to be released 4/25/23.

[Sir ScarletKnight]

The only law schools in New Jersey are Rutgers and Seton Hall. There are other Big Ten universities with law schools in satellite locations -- like here, it doesn't work well.

I don't know anything about what Holloway thinks. It would cost well over $100 million-- maybe $200 million or more -- to build a law school building. I don't know where the money would come from. There is now a single dean for both Camden and Newark, but I know of nothing that indicates that she would want a New Brunswick law school instead. Nor do I know if political considerations would let Holloway, in effect, kill the Newark and Camden law schools. Holloway is not a lawyer and his background makes me think he considered law school and rejected it,and so legal education may not be something he cares about. But at least he is not a medical doctor like Barchi, and we know what doctors think of lawyers -- and vice versa!

Three things.

One, I don't know why it has to be a question of if-or. There are multiple schools at Rutgers that are cross-campus. There is no reason that a New Brunswick addition to the school couldn't be opened with enough investment and *without* killing off the Newark\Camden. It would just be similar to the Business School, and could theoretically increase the school's profile without harming the other two.

Two, there's already a perfect space on campus for it, behind the livi apartments next to the yellow lot. Giant, undeveloped plot next to an underutilized parking lot.

Three, the bar exam is a test of minimum competency. Seems reasonable.

 

[RU Husky]

After getting my BA from RU I pursued a PhD at Wisconsin-Madison. I couldn't believe the main law school building was integrated with the rest of the campus and was centrally located on Bascom Hill. I even had a few history classes in the law building.

I think housing the law school on the Rutgers -NB campus would be a fine idea, but it's present location in Newark and easy connection to NYC should present more of an advantage than it seems to.

 

[RUnTeX]

Embarrassing. Hard to believe that a law school so well situated in the media- finance- corporate heartland that is the metro area is still struggling to increase its profile.. Like everything else- poor management. Perhaps RU and the state governance actually like it that way.

I graduated RU- Newark Law back in 1981 having completed four years in the evening program thanks to the GI Bill. That did not prevent me from becoming a partner in one of the biggest and most successful law firms in the state.

My guess is highlighting outcomes (which Rutgers and others can similarly boast) is more difficult than hyping incoming "stats" when marketing to prospective students so on a relative basis Rutgers Law struggles to win the perception battle on that front? Do top law schools even offer part-time/evening programs (some top business/MBA schools do but not all)? Rutgers serves its mission for the state and there are no other public law programs in NJ so it likely has limits on selectivity, which then impacts rankings or creates a ceiling on how far up it could climb, assuming it was managed better to begin with.

I think housing the law school on the Rutgers -NB campus would be a fine idea, but it's present location in Newark and easy connection to NYC should present more of an advantage than it seems to.

If a more selective program was started in NB, could it realistically be geared toward raising its profile with top NYC law firms and feeding them with its top grads, while competing with top 10/20 type law schools already entrenched with those firms? Seems like a tough proposition. Meanwhile, would the Newark law school focus on NJ?

 

[retired711]

My guess is highlighting outcomes (which Rutgers and others can similarly boast) is more difficult than hyping incoming "stats" when marketing to prospective students so on a relative basis Rutgers Law struggles to win the perception battle on that front? Do top law schools even offer part-time/evening programs (some top business/MBA schools do but not all)? Rutgers serves its mission for the state and there are no other public law programs in NJ so it likely has limits on selectivity, which then impacts rankings or creates a ceiling on how far up it could climb, assuming it was managed better to begin with.


If a more selective program was started in NB, could it realistically be geared toward raising its profile with top NYC law firms and feeding them with its top grads, while competing with top 10/20 type law schools already entrenched with those firms? Seems like a tough proposition. Meanwhile, would the Newark law school focus on NJ?

Let me go point-by-point:

Rutgers Law has an outcome problem: its bar passage rate has been going down at last report, and is lower than Seton Hall's. That's probably a leading reason why Rutgers slipped so much in the rankings.

Few law schools offer part-time programs. Rutgers Camden adopted one in the mid-1970s under pressure from the state legislature (I don't know when Newark adopted its part-time program.) The part-time program now has many fewer students than it used to. It's not clear why this is; perhaps employers are more reluctant to subsidize law school tuition for their employees. In addition, having a part-time program probably makes it a little harder to attract good faculty because of the obligation to teach in the evening every four semesters or so. (The ABA, which accredits law schools, comes down hard on trying to rely on part-timers for basic courses.) On the other hand, the part-time program attracts some truly exceptional students with unconventional backgrounds who have the maturity that full-time students generally do not. (Working for a living, as virtually all part-times do, makes one an adult in a hurry!) Aside from the hours, it is a pleasure to teach evening classes.

The state legislature has never given any evidence that it wants to restrict the admissions selectivity of the law school, or indeed cares about the issue at all.

If New Brunswick had a quality law school, firms would flock to interview there. Firms care about the quality of graduates; they aren't attached to particular law schools. Even now, Newark and Camden attract fine firms to interview. When the University of California established a new law school in Irvine (Orange County: that is, the Los Angeles metro area.) that school's graduates had no problem competing with grads from UCLA, USC, and other prominent LA schools.

Newark doesn't have to focus on New York; it's close enough to New York that its students can seek jobs there. If Newark were a better school, its graduates would do better in competing with grads from other NYC-area schools. The same is true of Camden and Philadelphia. (Camden is the next subway stop from Philadelphia.)

Hope I didn't go on too long.

 

[NotInRHouse]

Let me go point-by-point:

Rutgers Law has an outcome problem: its bar passage rate has been going down at last report, and is lower than Seton Hall's. That's probably a leading reason why Rutgers slipped so much in the rankings.

Few law schools offer part-time programs. Rutgers Camden adopted one in the mid-1970s under pressure from the state legislature (I don't know when Newark adopted its part-time program.) The part-time program now has many fewer students than it used to. It's not clear why this is; perhaps employers are more reluctant to subsidize law school tuition for their employees. In addition, having a part-time program probably makes it a little harder to attract good faculty because of the obligation to teach in the evening every four semesters or so. (The ABA, which accredits law schools, comes down hard on trying to rely on part-timers for basic courses.) On the other hand, the part-time program attracts some truly exceptional students with unconventional backgrounds who have the maturity that full-time students generally do not. (Working for a living, as virtually all part-times do, makes one an adult in a hurry!) Aside from the hours, it is a pleasure to teach evening classes.

The state legislature has never given any evidence that it wants to restrict the admissions selectivity of the law school, or indeed cares about the issue at all.

If New Brunswick had a quality law school, firms would flock to interview there. Firms care about the quality of graduates; they aren't attached to particular law schools. Even now, Newark and Camden attract fine firms to interview. When the University of California established a new law school in Irvine (Orange County: that is, the Los Angeles metro area.) that school's graduates had no problem competing with grads from UCLA, USC, and other prominent LA schools.

Newark doesn't have to focus on New York; it's close enough to New York that its students can seek jobs there. If Newark were a better school, its graduates would do better in competing with grads from other NYC-area schools. The same is true of Camden and Philadelphia. (Camden is the next subway stop from Philadelphia.)

Hope I didn't go on too long.

Irvine is a pretty salient example. Orange County is kind of like a West Coast NJ. And getting from NYC to NB is 10x as pleasant as going from DTLA/Century City to Irvine.

 

[RU Husky]

Irvine is a pretty salient example. Orange County is kind of like a West Coast NJ. And getting from NYC to NB is 10x as pleasant as going from DTLA/Century City to Irvine.

But the eye candy at UCI/Newport Beach is a lot nicer than NB/ Piscataway. I lived for lengthy periods in both places and will take NJ for food and ability to get from place to place and Orange County for weather.

 

[sct1111]

Rutgers Law is very much into DEI, moreso than Seton Hall. Their bar passage rate is lower because they accept students with lower LSATs who wouldn't get into other tier 2 law schools in the name of diversity.

 

[retired711]

Rutgers Law is very much into DEI, moreso than Seton Hall. Their bar passage rate is lower because they accept students with lower LSATs who wouldn't get into other tier 2 law schools in the name of diversity.

This may have been true at Newark when it was on its own. It wasn’t true of Camden. I don’t think it’s true of the merged institution, which cares much more than Newark did about its LSAT profile. I think the biggest problem is that grades in the C and lower range are rare, and so students aren’t getting adequate notice that they need to improve.

 

[Proud NJ Sports Fan]

Lawyers, lol 😂

 

[NotInRHouse]

But the eye candy at UCI/Newport Beach is a lot nicer than NB/ Piscataway. I lived for lengthy periods in both places and will take NJ for food and ability to get from place to place and Orange County for weather.

Close call in my opinion but generally I would say SoCal or tri state holds the title nationally lol.

 

[knight_ru]

As a Rutgers law graduate, I think a good chunk of the inconsistent rankings over the years since the merger has to do with the turnover in leadership.

Under the codean model, there have been THREE in each location since the merger (merger was only ~7 years ago). That is way too much turnover. They also have had 3 admissions directors during this time span. Tough to build any sort of forward momentum when that happens.

I am thrilled that they are going with the one dean model.

 

[retired711]

As a Rutgers law graduate, I think a good chunk of the inconsistent rankings over the years since the merger has to do with the turnover in leadership.

Under the codean model, there have been THREE in each location since the merger (merger was only ~7 years ago). That is way too much turnover. They also have had 3 admissions directors during this time span. Tough to build any sort of forward momentum when that happens.

I am thrilled that they are going with the one dean model.

I am thrilled as well although I have not met the new dean.

Turnover was inevitable under the co-dean model. Anyone who would be excellent at running a law school would much be a dean than a co-dean; constantly negotiating with a coequal is difficult. So a good co-dean inevitably wants to jump to a deanship elsewhere. And a bad co-dean is not going to have the skill to survive.

It is also extremely difficult to be an effective subordinate given the changes in leadership and given the inevitable difficulties of coordinating two campuses whose interests are not always aligned and whose faculties have different philosophies.

 

[knight_ru]

Turnover? Sure. But when you have codeans who do not last 2 years, that is a problem, especially considering regular law dean terms can be 5-8 years.

From what I have heard, the new dean will be a good one.

 

[retired711]

Turnover? Sure. But when you have codeans who do not last 2 years, that is a problem, especially considering regular law dean terms can be 5-8 years.

From what I have heard, the new dean will be a good one.

I have heard the same thing about Johanna Bond, the new Dean. I like her resume -- she didn't go to a fancy undergraduate or law school, but instead worked her way up as a professor.

 

[pmvon]

Have folks heard about the US News changing the criteria in the university ranking to focus more on diversity and less on things like alumni giving? I can’t think of two changes in the criteria that would help RU more.

 

[RU Husky]

Alumni giving and Rutgers are antonyms.

 

[knight_ru]

Have folks heard about the US News changing the criteria in the university ranking to focus more on diversity and less on things like alumni giving? I can’t think of two changes in the criteria that would help RU more.

This is not accurate.

Big shifts in U.S. News & World Report law school rankings. Here's why.

This year’s U.S. News & World Report law school rankings released on Wednesday brought an unprecedented number of dramatics shifts—the result of a revamped methodology that placed greater emphasis on graduate employment and bar pass rates.

www.reuters.com

 

[pmvon]

This is not accurate.

Big shifts in U.S. News & World Report law school rankings. Here's why.

This year’s U.S. News & World Report law school rankings released on Wednesday brought an unprecedented number of dramatics shifts—the result of a revamped methodology that placed greater emphasis on graduate employment and bar pass rates.

www.reuters.com

What is not accurate? Disregard my post as I see a separate thread on the topic.

 

[NotInRHouse]

What is not accurate? Disregard my post as I see a separate thread on the topic.

I think one is law school one is undergrad

And yeah, I can say having gone to a private law school, the diversity- and lack of economic diversity- were a big jump- and I went to a law school that would still be diverse by national standards, just not vis-a-vis RU.

 

[retired711]

This is not accurate.

Big shifts in U.S. News & World Report law school rankings. Here's why.

This year’s U.S. News & World Report law school rankings released on Wednesday brought an unprecedented number of dramatics shifts—the result of a revamped methodology that placed greater emphasis on graduate employment and bar pass rates.

www.reuters.com

I note the greater reliance on objective measures like bar passage rate and employment after graduation. I wonder how the latter is being measured. Law schools have in the past counted just about any position, legal or not, as employment. Some schools have actually resorted to giving grads temporary jobs as a way to pad the numbers. I hope something is being done about this.