just as an FYI, also a Columbia LLM got hired by Wacthell; no teaching experience, couple of years of working experience, but surely very smart

Hi guys! I´m currently doing the LLM in USA and I can tell you that the rankings are almost pure crap, even if you are looking for a job.

If you are looking for a job (in the US and not for a foreign offce), I can't see how you wouldn't be concerned about the rankings. Firms hire JDs for US jobs, which makes sense. If they still have slots left over, then they look at LLMs (excepting people with extraordinary work experience or connections, of course). This is also why the strongest chances for getting a job come when firms know who are acccepting and declining offers for permanent positions.

Yes, even the "top" Wall Street firms have partners who are not from Harvard, Yale, Stanford, etc., etc. However, this has nothing to do with LLM hiring, because they look at a lot less LLM candidates. Guess which LLMs they inevitably look at first, considering they don't want to look at a lot? Also, whether or not the JD rankings are accurate, it's the only set of rankings at the back of firms' minds.

I don't want to be elitist or condescending, but I think this is a reality, and anyone choosing, for example, between a lower-ranked school offering a scholarship and a higher-ranked school offering no financial aid should consider the ranking factor. Or, a student hell bent on getting a job in the US (with an AmLaw Top 100 firm) accepted only to a lower-ranked school.

To give a concrete example, I'm in Boston and I get to talk to Boston U Banking and Finance LLMs looking for New York jobs. I think it's an excellent program and the only one of its kind. However, I also tell them to be realistic about their expectations. For example, if one of them applied to Sullivan & Cromwell, they would have to compete against every Harvard, Yale, Stanford, etc., LLM AND JD student, which is a tough (but not impossible) proposition.

I hate to say it, but I've seen an LLM from another Boston school trying to talk to a partner from that tier of law firm at a function, but with a Harvard JD and a Harvard LLM beside him. I hate to say that I think there was an unconscious difference in his manner when speaking to each of the three, and I think it's something you realistically have to hurdle.

To give another concrete example, Wachtell accepted an NYU LLM student last year for a permanent position. However, it was a combination of a rare set of simultaneous departures that meant they needed to fill a couple of entry level positions after the normal JD hiring process, that particular LLM's EIGHT years of corporate law experience plus law teaching experience, that particular LLM's being a native English speaker, and Wachtell liking that particular LLM's personality. The emphasis is on rare.

Of course, the boost your school's brand name lends is just one factor in addition to your grades, specific credentials, and networking effort.

On the other hand, consider that the Columbia LLM Job Fair has one day set aside from Harvard, Yale, Stanford, Columbia, NYU, etc., and another day for everyone else.

Note this is all in the context of looking for a job. I personally wouldn't want to be in a school where LLMs are segregated from JDs, but I doubt this has any impact on the rankings employers have in mind when looking at LLMs.

Thanks for that bit of information. I forgot to ask about the second slot that opened up that year at the same time.

What matters is where employers hire students and the following article from The National Law Journal ranks the schools the most popular for hiring :

http://www.law.columbia.edu/null/NLJ_Ranking?exclusive=filemgr.download&file_id=133&showthumb=0

Columbia and Penn Law Grads Are Top Pick Among Nation's Largest Law Firms - both Columbia and Penn have the highest percentage of graduates hired by NLJ top 250 firms.

Granted, this is a ranking about JD hiring, but it is still indicative of the hiring trends of employers.

I'd point out that the statistic cited (percentage of JDs who went to work at a law firm, as opposed to business, the academe, public interest work, etc.) is completely irrelevant to this discussion. It's about STUDENT (not employer) preference.

Even if someone compiled a statistic about percentage of law firm hires, that would likewise be irrelevant, being skewed in favor of larger law schools.

The statistic used is also inaccurate for your desired purpose becuase it intentionally excludes students who are working in firms but doing one or two years of clerkships first, and these are usually the best students.

Finally, I noted there were firms presented with specific breakdowns, but this was done by size and not based on student preference. I imagine people might be curious about the breakdown for smaller but very prestigious firms such as Wachtell and Cravath, and not Baker and DLA Piper.

This post has become the most ridiculous debate in the LL.M Guide website history. You are actually acting foolishly quoting from reviews and stuff...I mean please!!! the most important is to feel comfortable in the school and get the knowledge you were actually looking for. It can be in school ranked N°1, 10 or whatever !!
I wish everybody the best and not according to us.news.com but according to what YOU want for your professional life...

In Yueping's defense, the original author's particular concern was finding (good) (firm) employment, and I think it's naive to think rankings don't influence this.

In fairness, students pay attention to rankings of firms (mainly Vault) as well. I was just speaking to a firm partner who explained what he felt were the inaccuracies in his firm's Vault review, even though the firm was ranked very highly.

Yes rankings do count, but my point was just that it was too much of a debate ... ;-)