Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

jschubart t1_iwlbz1k wrote

Their methodology is whoever pays them more gets higher ranked.

505

LoungingLlama312 t1_iwlfx4f wrote

Yea everything is becoming pay for play now. Forbes does their "council" where they pump it as emergent leaders in a field. Really it's whomever wants to pay the 1k+ yearly fee to be able to put it on their work bio.

152

AugustHenceforth t1_iwlh5jv wrote

As recipient of the 2006 Time Magazine Person of the Year award I take issue with that.

113

probsnot605 t1_iwmb1lf wrote

You was the recipient of the 2006 Time Magazine Person of the Year

21

Rancarable t1_iwmku8h wrote

Woosh. Try taking a look at the "cover" for 2006.

−10

[deleted] t1_iwmsai5 wrote

Bro said woosh like we were all suppose to be able to recall the 2006 time magazine cover on the spot at anytime in case anyone made an obscure joke about it on Reddit.

Edit:spelling

16

SurrealWino t1_iwnlryh wrote

Jokes on you I use old magazine covers as wallpaper because I have been waiting for this very moment

9

probsnot605 t1_iwoe4cx wrote

Everyone show the woosh guy some respect, he too was Time Magazines Person of the Year in 2006, very distinguished

5

Alwayssunnyinarizona t1_iwlmlbc wrote

In my field, rankings are based on a survey sent out to graduates: which university do you think is the best for your degree?

Lost the feeling of prestige I had graduating from a top 5 when I learned that.

59

abattleofone t1_iwna1g8 wrote

I’ve worked in higher ed in a department that controlled application, admission, and enrollment data. It’s a lot more than just surveys; a lot of it is also based on enrollment numbers, admission rates, acceptance rates, average GRE/GMAT/etc.

2

Relevant_Link_ t1_iwmby2f wrote

>For 30 years, US News & World Report has been using a secret formula to rank the best colleges and universities in the United States. As a public service to our listeners, we hack the algorithm and discover the dirty little secret of the rankings game.

Malcolm Gladwell

Revisionist History

Lord of the Rankings

44

All_the_dinohorses t1_iwmo8z7 wrote

This is how Military Friendly schools are determined. About a decade ago schools paid to get included on a list to attract veterans with GI Bill. So they created tiers of how friendly you are (at opening your check book)

7

A_Gent_4Tseven t1_iwmrvrv wrote

It’s the same with Yale though technically… I still think regardless of people caught(and in some cases never really punished) paying or accepting payments and yet still… even some of their purchased degrees still stand. But Ivy League schools all around did that shit, and I doubt they’ll ever actually stop. I don’t get it all around. Greedy.

5

mbmba t1_iwlxspw wrote

Yale can truly say it’s progressive when it eliminates legacy admissions and pay-to-play admissions for kids of rich donors.

267

thatoneguy889 t1_iwm2o8l wrote

There's a friend of a family friend of mine that's one of those disgustingly wealthy people you've never heard of. His son applied to a very prominent and prestigious university, but didn't get in because he fucked around in high school and his grades sucked. The guy basically donated a new wing to the university's library or something like that and a few weeks later the son got a letter in the mail saying his admission was reconsidered and he got in.

76

KingfisherDays t1_iwmdynd wrote

Ever heard of the z list? That's what happens when you're the kid of a rich donor who can't get into Harvard normally. They admit you and make you defer a year in between. So if you seen the child of a rich or influential person going to Harvard after a gap year, it's possibly because of that cough Malia Obama cough

20

Redpandaling t1_iwmrkpd wrote

Eh, rich people are also better situated to take a gap year in general. Gap years are like entrepreneurship - a thing you can do when you're rich because you're not worried about having enough money for your basic living needs.

For your specific example, I'm not aware of any evidence suggesting Malia wasn't a good student / made bad decisions. Obviously giant leg up from being a first daughter. Given that she would have been going to college in 2016, taking a gap year seems like a smart idea for her just to let the furor die down a bit.

46

Recent_Record t1_iwuc77b wrote

It probably helped that both Barack and Michelle went to Harvard too.

1

wheniswhy t1_iwngx08 wrote

I went to a prestigious Ivy League university. One summer, I took an internship working with a bunch of Harvard kids in NYC. I remember thinking it was kind of odd that they were all Harvard kids except for me, but it was a good opportunity with a good company and great potential networking, so didn’t think too much of it.

About a week in, I found out that the kid who was really running the operation was the son of the guy who owned the company. Who owned the floor. Who owned the building. And he had absolutely no clue what he was doing.

We had a saying at my school: “The hardest part about Harvard is getting in.”

16

themoneybadger t1_iwmpj54 wrote

This isn't news to anybody. Legacy admissions are a way to secure easy funding.

5

Marthaver1 t1_iwnaine wrote

Legacy admission and pay to play admissions is broad day life corruption, plain and simple.

Imagine being a poor student, working your ass off to get excellent grades, entrance exams scores (another corrupt shit btw), active in 5+ extracurricular activities per semester, and just to be rejected over little Baron with mediocre grades because daddy is an alumni and or is a generous donor of that school. These schools have no shame. Ethics my ass. With what moral grounds can they even enforce plagiarism when they are doing shit this?

5

Ok-Tap-4824 t1_iwotd8k wrote

>Legacy admission and pay to play admissions is broad day life corruption

Pretty sure you're just describing capitalism.

No one is surprised when the Ferrari dealership doesn't care about your grades. They'll take a check, thanks.

3

_Happy_Sisyphus_ t1_iwoyb8l wrote

But universities claim to be not for profits

1

Ok-Tap-4824 t1_iwoyjv2 wrote

Yeah, and they don't make any profit. They reinvest all that money back into the university.

That doesn't mean they don't care about money.

If you want to test this, here's a nifty experiment -- go swing by a non-profit hospital, whichever is closest to you, and ask them to give you all their money. See what they say.

2

Aazadan t1_iwnlp65 wrote

How about they just get rid of their water polo team? Maybe give the space to an international airport.

0

Chippopotanuse t1_iwll0ed wrote

Is Yale going to abandon pumping out Federalist society judges as well?

Because the Fed Soc does far more harm than to these low-income students who want public-interest careers than the US News ranking ever did.

152

paperclip_nazi t1_iwlmhip wrote

How do you think Yale could even do anything about what students choose to do after law school?

42

Chippopotanuse t1_iwlns4v wrote

They can’t.

But they could stop hiring professors who don’t want to teach the law. Yale is where the Fed Soc started in 1982…and now Fed Soc members are destroying the judiciary.

And they are also shitty people. For instance, look at Amy Chua (tiger mom) and her husband Jed Rubenfeld.

They were grooming female clerks on how to dress and how to get clerkship jobs for Kavanaugh. (Including Chua’s own daughter). Rubenfeld was sexually harassing folks to the point he was suspended for two years.

83

Ozark--Howler t1_iwm9s1p wrote

There’s a bit of a difference between a judicial philosophy that you don't like and sexual harassment.

1

Chippopotanuse t1_iwmaxc6 wrote

From watching the Kavanaugh, or Thomas SCOTUS hearings…I’d beg to differ with you on that. I prefer judges who don’t sexually assault women, who don’t leave pubic hairs on soda cans, and who don’t brag how big their cock and balls are to female subordinates. But that seems to follow one party around.

And the reason why is that a huge part of conservatism is basically saying “fuck you” to women’s rights. As well as showing little to no respecting regarding the boundaries of consent. (Grab em by the pussy!).

10

d36williams t1_iwlnp0z wrote

Yale's close door culture poisons the larger world, with its secret societies. Federalist is an outgrowth of that.

32

JettisonedJetsam t1_iwmwj5t wrote

I don’t really understand why you think the Federalist society is some secret society cabal. I signed up in law school. It cost 5 bucks and they gave us pizza and brought in professors to have debates. Maybe my experience is different than others, but it’s literally just a law school club.

−7

Throwawayhelp111521 t1_iwn75y1 wrote

> Maybe my experience is different than others, but it’s literally just a law school club.

It's a law school organization with an agenda, especially at prestigious schools like Yale Law School and Harvard Law School, but there's nothing illegal or improper about its objectives.

5

JettisonedJetsam t1_iwn7mvq wrote

You’re right. But every law school club has a certain agenda. Obviously fed Soc will have a less popular agenda, and rightly so, but it is literally just a law school club. It’s not a secret society.

2

Throwawayhelp111521 t1_iwpmeyg wrote

No, from what I've read, for years, Federal Society graduates have worked hard to get their members in key positions, much more than the ordinary law school organization. I didn't say it was a secret society, but in terms of exercising influence to help its members, it does remind me of societies like Skull and Bones.

2

paperclip_nazi t1_iwlnwi6 wrote

The federalist society and conservatism isn’t the fault of Yale law school.

−8

Chippopotanuse t1_iwmadjs wrote

Not Yale’s fault? Hmmm….let’s walk down memory lane with the Fed Soc to 1982.

  • the Fed Soc was founded in 1982 by students at Yale Law School, Harvard Law School, and the University of Chicago Law School.

But these weren’t regular students. They were wholesale propped up by the soon-to-be Yale Dean who was the uncle of one of them.

  • The group's first activity was a three-day symposium titled "A Symposium on Federalism: Legal and Political Ramifications" held at Yale in April 1982.

  • The symposium, which was attended by 200 people, was organized by Steven G. Calabresi, Lee Liberman Otis, and David M. McIntosh. (Speakers included Antonin Scalia, Robert Bork, and Theodore Olson.)

How does a random law student like Calabresi organize all that and get such prominent folks on campus??

Well, for the uninitiated, he wasn’t some random student. He is the nephew of Guido Calabresi, (who would become Dean of the Yale Law School shortly thereafter…those family connections help).

And Steven Calebresi would go on to clerk for Judge Bork and Justice Scalia on SCOTUS. (Isn’t it weird how he kinda waltzes in to such competitive clerkships…clerking for the same folks who he somehow convinced to come to Yale for the Fed Sox’s first event…)

From where I sit, the Fed Soc never gets off the ground if prominent folks at Yale and (Yale itself) didn’t wholesale embrace the bullshit theories that it stands for.

I’m sure you are of the mind that it was an innocent student group that just coincidentally had its genesis at Yale.

To each his own I suppose.

24

Throwawayhelp111521 t1_iwn6upy wrote

Steven Calabresi is very well-connected, but his uncle, Guido, the former dean of Yale Law School and current federal appellate judge, is not a Federalist Society type.

When Robert Bork was nominated for SCOTUS in 1987, virtually everyone at YLS was against it. There was a very well-attended panel discussion at which his former colleagues spoke. Even the professors who had a friendly relationship with Bork criticized his legal philosophy.

4

paperclip_nazi t1_iwmlqsn wrote

But what is Yale supposed to do about that? You can’t just ban fed soc

−3

Chippopotanuse t1_iwnuvy0 wrote

Yes…yes you can.

As a private college, Yale can most certainly place a particular set of moral, philosophical, or religious teachings above a commitment to free expression. It has EVERY right to do so.

The freedom to associate voluntarily with others around “common goals or beliefs” is an integral part of a pluralistic and free society.

AND ITS WHAT CONSERVATIVE JUDGES AND THE FED SOC USE TO JUSTIFY EXCLUDING GAYS FROM PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS LIKE THE BOY SCOUTS AND FROM RELIGIOUS COLLEGES.

So, students who want to be a part of the shitty federalist society can fuck right off with their complaints about “free speech” if they get banned from private elite colleges.

Yale ain’t the government. It don’t need to accommodate.

Why is that?

Well…back in 2000, Rehnquist, joined by O'Connor, Scalia, Kennedy, and Thomas, authored a 5-4 decision in Boy Scouts of America et al. v. Dale.

And that case held that the constitutional right to freedom of association allowed the Boy Scouts of America (BSA) to exclude a homosexual person from membership IN SPITE of a state law requiring equal treatment of homosexuals in public accommodations.

More generally, the court ruled that a private organization such as the BSA may exclude a person from membership when "the presence of that person affects in a significant way the group's ability to advocate public or private viewpoints".

1

surfpenguinz t1_iwoxf03 wrote

This is the most insane, terrifying, and anti-intellectual comment I’ve ever seen on Reddit, and I’ve been here a while.

0

JimiSlew3 t1_iwm2pqq wrote

Oh, this criticism goes way way back:

At a press conference of law school deans in 1998 decrying the annual US News Law School Rankings, then New York University School of Law Dean John Sexton quipped, "If they were asked about Princeton Law School, it would appear on the top 20 -- but it doesn't exist" [1] (Sexton was denouncing the US News usage of reputation survey results from judges, lawyers and law school deans in its ranking formula, expressing doubt over the expertise of some surveyed). -wiki.

64

mrfoof82 t1_iwn3otw wrote

Harvard University too, at least for their law school.

(“The Harvard Crimson” is Harvard University’s largest student newspaper).

7

Marthaver1 t1_iwn90aq wrote

The majority of college rankings are a big scam and I’m surprise other more prominent schools haven’t excluded themselves from this corrupt scheme. If anyone has the time, I strongly recommend watching a video by PolyMatter briefly exposing the flaws of school rankings. I linked it below if anyone is interested:

https://youtu.be/cQWlnTyOSig

3

texansfan t1_iwnz7sn wrote

Malcolm Gladwell is dancing somewhere

2

Vista36 t1_iwn2qbg wrote

They didn’t say anything in the decades when they were ranked No 1?

−1

fragbot2 t1_iwn6m84 wrote

What people still want to go to law school? For anyone not attending a T14 school, it's generally money poorly spent as law school graduate salaries are bi-modal (https://www.nalp.org/salarydistrib) with the "big law" firms hiring mostly from the same 14 schools. For people outside that rarefied air, it's a financial loser.

Yale's argument about public interest law is goofy anyway. If you want to do non-profit shit, you might as well spend less at Temple or Rutgers and reserve the T14 spots for people who need the pedigree to justify their hire at a white shoe firm.

−4

Microwavegerbil t1_iwn8pec wrote

Even a modest scholarship makes it worthwhile faster, and those statistics even identify that their small firms numbers are unreliable and they're getting less than half and they even admit it's understated in the graph.

If you're capable and motivated, law school is incredibly profitable, even outside the "big law" arena.

4

bihari_baller t1_iwnoxtn wrote

>What people still want to go to law school? For anyone not attending a T14 school, it's generally money poorly spent as law school graduate salaries are bi-modal (
>
>https://www.nalp.org/salarydistrib
>
>) with the "big law" firms hiring mostly from the same 14 schools. For people outside that rarefied air, it's a financial loser.

I reckon not everybody wants to work for "big law." There's more to law than corporate law. There's family law, estate law, immigration law, etc.

2

MrJenzie t1_iwmnukb wrote

WAAH WAAH we're not high enough on their stupid list WAAH WAAH

etc

−7

Throwawayhelp111521 t1_iwn53dj wrote

Yale Law School has been number one on the list since 1990. That's why it's significant that it and Harvard are leaving the ranking process. They don't think it's fair to schools that promote public interest or provide significant scholarship aid and they have never needed U.S. News & World Report and never will.

1

11fingerfreak t1_iwm1h1z wrote

Not sure if I care what Yale thinks about anything. They’ll always be third rate compared to Stanford and Harvard. Haven’t met a Yale grad yet that was more impressive in person than they are on paper.

−17

WhatDoesItMatter21 t1_iwm85ew wrote

Yale is the top law school in the country

9

CloggedBathtub t1_iwmeom9 wrote

The law school definitely stands alone.

4

Throwawayhelp111521 t1_iwn5syi wrote

Yale College and Yale University are excellent. Yale Law School is extremely prestigious among law schools because it is the most difficult law school to get into in the United States and has many successful graduates despite its size. Harvard Law School is also excellent, but it is much larger than Yale. HLS has 1,900 students (law students and advanced degree students). YLS has a little over 600.

2

11fingerfreak t1_iwmokld wrote

I’ve met Yale educated lawyers. Not really impressed.

−5

[deleted] t1_iwmql3c wrote

[removed]

7

11fingerfreak t1_iwmrnc2 wrote

All that snark for one person’s opinion? Somebody has a boner for Yale grads, I guess 🤷🏾‍♂️😂😂

−1

milkboxshow t1_iwm4ooy wrote

Interesting way to apply generalized bigotry to school attendance.

2