Lawstudents.ca

Greetings all,


I have decided to finally put to bed all the arguments over tiers in Canadian schools with some statistical evidence. As we all know, Bay street firms are the only real indicator of success after law school, so I have taken the index of Torys article hires from this year, as seen here and sorted all schools according to their level of representation.




This gives an easy to understand tier system even some of the mouth breathers from Cooley can understand. I present to you, the definitive rankings for 2009;


Tier 1: Osgoode, Toronto, Ottawa, Western, UNB
Tier 2: Windsor, Queens, McGill, Dal
TTT: Victoria, UBC, Sask, Manitoba, Calgary, Alberta

statistically significant sample sizes ftw!

LOL. Why would Torys be the definitive choice for your rankings?

when you make statements like this, you should say something that at least implies you're joking so people know this is an attempt at humour and not a display of legitimate stupidity.

:)

time to feed the troll? or should i just stay away from this one?

Let's not try to turn a serious discussion into ad hominem attacks. Contribute or get out.

Aren't you still writing the LSAT?

And a beer for you, sir.

Thanks Uriel, I had a nice laugh there :)

Perhaps more people from "tier 1" schools end up on Bay Street simply because more people who wish to work on Bay Street (not everyone does) attend these schools. And because more of those people end up on Bay Street, it seems like you're more likely to end up there if you atttend one of these schools... etc etc. So perhaps it's just a chicken/egg question...

i think it should be based on what university has the most 1L summer jobs at the top 30 largest firms in Canada...not sure but would take a guess that it may be Calgary, so Calgary it is, best Can. law school

Wow. I did not realize that UBC so was terrible.

Thanks for the info!!!!

Lol.

The only real tiers (having not bothered to read your post), would be:

Tier 1: Toronto, McGill, Osgoode (in this order)

Tier 2: Everyone else.

You could say that schools like UBC, Dalhousie, UVic are stronger than schools like Calgary, Sask and UManitoba... and wouldn't be wrong per se, but the difference is minimal relative to each other.

Also, all of this talk of "tiers" is based on the assumption that you want to work either in a firm on bay street... you might get diff results if you start looking at other walks of life that a law degree opens up, or even other markets.

I entirely agree that rankings tend to be too heavily weighted towards Bay St, but to make that statement and then declare Toronto, McGill and Osgoode to be in the "top tier" is simply inaccurate since Osgoode's placement rates on Bay have been worse than Queen's for the past few years and most McGill students don't even bother in the first place.

Reminds me of the quote, "You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be misquoted and used against you in a court of law."

1) I am not saying rankings are too heavily weighted towards Bay Street.

2) I am saying it is, largely, an underlying assumption of the rankings that you wish to BE on Bay Street. It is not the ONLY assumption. There are others. One of them is that you wish to enter academia. Another, is the school's lay prestige. There's multiple considerations.

3) McGill consistently out places many Canadian schools in international positions. I've been doing research for OCIs - the U.S. firms who have tables of their hires always have some McGill students, and some U of T students, and that's pretty much it. There might be one or two random Canadian schools, but at least anecdotally, it seems like McGill students are doing fairly well. This is in line with Macleans ranking, if you put any faith in that, as well as Brian Leiter (a renowned U.S. ranking individual)'s opinion on the Canadian schools.

4) I can't really get involved in the whole Osgoode discussion, because as a U of T student, I look biased. I can say I have heard some negative comments about the school from attorneys, but I imagine Osgoode students would say the same thing about U of T from some individuals.

5) If you compare the faculty at Queens v. Osgoode, there is a substantial difference in their caliber... Not to take away from Queens, which is an excellent institution in its own right, but, I'd rather have Peter Hogg or Patrick Monahan teaching me constitutional law. Also, Alan Hutchinson, who taught at Bridge Week at U of T this year and is a renowned scholar, at Osgoode.

Just my $0.02.

Well I don't think I misquoted you. You spoke of "rankings" in a very dismissive way, not bothering to read other people's opinions, but then authoritatively stated the 3 schools you feel belong in a "top tier", and then concluded by saying that "tiers" is a concept based on the assumption that you want to work on Bay st. Yes there are and should be other considerations, but you didn't mention any of those; that's not my misquote at work.

All I did was point out that you can't reconcile a "tier" system that is based on Bay St placement with the fact that Osgoode doesn't do as well on Bay St as a school such as Queen's. But if your "tier" system does in fact include all sorts of other considerations, then the inconsistency disappears and your 3 schools can be in the top tier as you see fit. And all I said about McGill was that many of their students don't bother with Bay St, so I'm not sure how your point about McGill's strong placement at US firms (largely a thing of the past, much like Osgoode's reputation...zing!) is in any way related to that.


I'm not here to disparage Osgoode, it has a well earned and very high reputation in many fields, constitutional law being one of them because of some of the faculty members you just mentioned. But naming 3 profs from Osgoode and then concluding that the breadth of faculty at Osgoode is of a significantly higher calibre than Queen's...well as before, that's just inaccurate. I'd rather have Don Stuart teach me criminal law. And Bill Flanagan teach me international trade. And Nick Bala teach me family. Does this make Queen's faculty superior in all these areas? I don't think so.

I'm dismissive of rankings in Canada because they tend to be more misleading than beneficial in the way the majority of them are constructed.

When based on logical standards and for clearly measured objectives, I think rankings do serve a legitimate purpose. I can think back to undergrad where my school wrote a letter to Macleans (or rather, more precisely, signed a letter), refusing to provide more information for their rankings. Their reasoning, in this open letter, was that the methodology was misleading. To tell patients of a hospital that it was the 5th best, when it was ranked 1st in OB/GYN and 10th in Cancer was at best misleading and at worst, harmful. The same applies to schools.

With respect to the schools, they aren't "my opinion", so much as the general consensus that I've heard from lawyers, seen on Macleans (for all their flaws), and from other sources. Personally, I think Osgoode is overrated, but, my opinion matters little. I was simply trying to provide an accurate portrayal.

As to the claim that I didn't mention other considerations, I never held myself out to be providing an exhaustive list, my apologies if you interpreted my post as being such. It was not the intent. The reality is that at, what is now 4:30 in the morning, I can think of more important things to do than articulate every possible thing that enters into consideration. I decided to answer a few threads before bed, because it's a nice change of pace from working on OCI related material.

If my answers are not as complete as they could otherwise be if I was not tired, my apologies.



Queens has its own problems. It does poorly at Supreme Court Clerkships for students and does not produce much in the way of legal scholarship (among its Faculty). Despite this, it does seem to place well on Bay Street (and elsewhere around the country), though one could ask the legitimate question if this is related to the education one receives or the reputation it has achieved... Which, if anything, is as long and distinguished (as a University) as Osgoode is (as a Law School).

One could also ask if it matters, one way or the other, or is the plum job all we care about? That said, at least where the caliber of Professors are concerned, I believe you will receive a better education, all things being equal, at Osgoode, than at Queens. I could be wrong. I have not attended either school.

With respect to McGill & Bay Street, the point I was trying to make, was the placement of graduates at top firms. Frankly I'm not sure I can bother to argue if you wish to say ending up in downtown New York or Boston is somehow "worse" because it's not Bay Street? The anecdotal evidence, which, while not conclusive is still interesting, suggests that McGill is still placing well outside of its market with good to great firms. That seems like a reasonable point to bring up when discussing why some might consider McGill a superior school to Queens.

On the issue of, Osgoode's reputation, I agree, by the by, that its reputation has a substantial role in how it is perceived. However, I think that same statement is true of Queens and McGill (at least in the program I was enrolled in before law school; one in which historically, both of those schools were renowned as powerhouses in), at least in my own experience with their students at competitions involving them and other schools. However, if you were to go to Harvard or Oxford, for example, I think you'd find the same sort of thing. The reality is that the modern generations of these schools are, while still incredible, not nearly as separated from their peers as they perhaps once were. It's naive to pretend otherwise. That doesn't mean there isn't a difference though, it just means its not what it once was.



I wouldn't care if you were disparaging Osgoode. I'm not a student at Osgoode, I have no real stake in the debate.

However, none of the faculty you mentioned rival those at Osgoode. Sorry. Here's why:

1) Almost all Canadian law students take Criminal Law, Property Law, Tort Law, Constitutional Law and Contract Law during their first year of study. No Canadian law school that I can think of requires International Trade or Family Law to graduate (although, I know Dalhousie and Toronto *recommend* Family Law among your courses to varying degrees of fortitude in the recommendation, neither requires it).

2) Peter Hogg, and his book on Constitutional Law, is if memory serves the most cited book by the Supreme Court of Canada. It is a resource for law students across the country. The same cannot be said of any of the professors at Queens you mention.

3) I currently have sitting on my desk Constitutional Law, by Patrick J. Monahan. I do not have (and I did take) a criminal law book by Don Stuart. Why not? If he is such an expert professor, why do other schools not read what he has to say?

4) With respect to Professor Hutchinson, I admittedly can only defer to his teaching ability as being superb. His publications, you (nor I, if I hadn't looked them up), would not be familiar with. On the other hand, there is a reason he was elected to the Royal Society of Canada in 2004 and recently a Visiting Professor at Harvard.

Believe what you would like, but, the caliber is not the same. The professors you mention might be very, very good.. and by all means, Professor Bala (from what his bio says... it's too late in the morning to read up on all three) seems like a great guy... but Osgoode's are still, better still.

Oh dear me. Certainly didn't intend for this to get so big. I'm not disagreeing with 95% of what you say. I simply interpreted you original statement to mean that Osgoode, UofT and McGill belonged in a top tier of Canadian law schools, a tier system which you claimed was based on Bay Street placement. That's it. That's all that was in your original statement. If I misinterpreted, then I sincerely do apologize. When I took exception with it, you alleged that I had misquoted you, so I tried to correct that impression.



I really don't wish to say any such thing, that NY or Boston is "worse" than Bay. I hate to say it, but you might the one who is misquoting now. My entire point about McGill, again, is that many of their students don't even bother with Bay street. Why? A million different reasons perhaps, one of which is that they have a lot more international opportunities because of the nature of their program and McGill's reputation, as you said. Because many McGill students don't bother with Bay, I took exception, again with your original statement, that it belongs in a top tier on the basis of Bay Street placement. That's it. Nothing else.


Finally, as for the Queens/Osgoode faculty, I'm not sure we'll get very far on this. At the risk of getting catty, you have a very selective way of determining the calibre of a faculty. Only subject areas that are taught in 1st year count? Only those professors whose books you own? I didn't use Hogg's book in 1L, does that mean he's no authority at all? There are probably 100 different arguments to be made why Osgoode's faculty is generally superior to Queen's, but these arent them. As it were, Don Stuart DID write the book on Canadian Criminal law and he's the most cited criminal authority at the SCC. I'm not making any claim that Queen's faculty is superior to Osgoode. But you ARE claiming the opposite, and I'm trying to convey that your own personal experience as a 1st year law student and the professor names with which you are (un)familiar do not exactly make the basis for an authoritative argument.

pyke, let me suggest that you not work on your OCI materials at 4:30 a.m. ;)

p.s. How many are you submitting?

I wasn't :P, stopped working on them before that. Went and watched TV for an hour then was making some posts before bed. That said, I'm a night person anyway so, rather be at 4:30am then 7:00am.

As to #, a fair few. It's slightly more than some students because I am applying to 2 markets.

bahbehbah has done an excellent job with replies for the most part, so there's only a couple of things I wanted to address:


How do you know and why do you think they do poorly at SCC clerkships? Have you personally looked into this or are you going by last year's Maclean's rankings, which takes into account SCC clerkships? Our performance varies year by year. Last year, Queen's had 0 clerks at the Supreme Court. This year, we have 2. Two years ago, I know there was at least 1. Aside from the superior numbers UofT and McGill put up (Ottawa too?), I wouldn't imagine this is any different from any of the other law schools. Just how much better does Osgoode place in clerkships, considering their class is double the size of other schools?


Bah. Nothing takes away from the fact that professors like Stuart, Manson and Bala are among the best at what they do. Criminal and family law are both core subjects, just as important as constitutional law.

How is it even possible to say that "the professors you mention might be very good but Osgoode's are better"? Is there a way to judge that Hogg is better in constitutional law than Stuart is in criminal law? Books? So what if you don't use Stuart's book? I don't use Hogg's book. Stuart's book is used in both Queen's and Ottawa. Apparently, other school do care about what he has to say.

Reputation is probably the only way you can judge a faculty, since it's virtually impossible to compare how well professors actually teach. I think the general consensus is that Osgoode gets the point here. As an example, Brian Leiter (who is very well known in the law school rankings world) had this to say (from http://www.top-law-schools.com/brian-leiter-interview.html):

His opinion is not everything, obviously, but I'd say that he does have some authority on this since he's an academic who follows such matters. And I know it sounds cheesy, but citations are a fairly objective way of measuring productivity and respect of a faculty as well. According to MacLean's Osgoode and U of T are ranked 1, and Queen's is ranked 8.

Also, a major factor people seem to be forgetting about is adjunct faculty. I'd even say that this is more important that the full-time academics, since adjunct profs bring in actual work experience to the classroom. Schools in big cities like Toronto, Vancouver and Montreal tend to have more access to practitioners from a variety of different fields, and the bigger names tend to be located in the bigger cities. Kingston just can't compare to Toronto, so Queen's just can't compare to Osgoode in this respect.

Regarding Bay Street numbers, I thought that Osgoode and Queen's were pretty much on par, with Osgoode doing slightly better.

A vote for my new school, UBC...

I know this may be news to some people who think that Toronto is the capitol of Canada, but actually there are biglaw firms out on the west coast too! And unlike the biglaw firms in the maritimes, after the big articling salary gap, salaries are very close for associates. (And they may work a little less on the west coast too) Some UBC graduates might - gasp - prefer to enjoy the better climate and work at an $85K job in Vancouver than a $95K job on Bay street. I know, shocking right?

Seriously, all biglaw jobs outside Bay street are not the same. And all Bay Street jobs are not vastly superior to biglaw jobs in other Canadian markets.

To be fair most of the biglaw firms out west have their offices in Calgary not Vancouver.

Hi. I'm David Miller, and I lol at your pathetic, condo-infested, and totally uninspiring Chinese city.

Bay Street for Life!

Uhm, given the cost of living in Vancouver, I'd love to see how far your big salaries go.

Just throwing that out there.

Oh I wasn't making the mirror argument that "Vancouver is the best legal market." (I just mentioned Vancouver because I know more about its market) The fact that Calgary's market is strong actually helps my argument that while Bay Street may have the highest concentration of lucrative biglaw jobs in the country, it doesn't have a monopoly on those jobs.

BTW, I've heard that UVIC and UBC grads have better prospects in Calgary and Calgary grads have better prospects in Vancouver, compared to grads from eastern schools.



I could write pages on a comparative analysis of the Vancouver and Toronto housing markets! Short version: it's complicated. Buying is generally more expensive in Vancouver, renting at the lower end of the market is significantly more expensive, and renting at the higher end of the market is generally cheaper.

But I'm not seeing a lot of evidence $85K would go significantly less far in Vancouver than Toronto. Plus a lot of people just like Vancouver more; wouldn't you rather have a slightly less comfortable lifestyle in Paris than a slightly more comfortable lifestyle in Buffalo? Not that I'm comparing Vancouver/Toronto to Paris/Buffalo! But according to some people it might be Paris/Brussels... (I'm not speaking for myself here, BTW. I would have preferred to stay in Toronto and I expect I'll come back here after I graduate. I'm a proud Torontonian. That said, it's been years since I've been to Vancouver and the better weather and that relaxed West Coast attitude may convert me. If I'm making good money I'd be happy to spend a few thousand dollars to have a few months less of ice.)

at least part of this (if true) is probably because a lot of the eastern grads who can land big law jobs probably don't bother looking for big law jobs 4000 km away. also, if i remember correctly, doesn't the western hiring process overlap with the eastern hiring process? if grads who can get OCIs have to choose one or the other, wouldn't eastern grads usually choose eastern OCIs since a majority would be from the east? how do you expect lower quality students/grads (pardon the term) from eastern schools to compete with higher quality students/grads from the good western schools like ubc, uvic, and ualb? your point says more about the individuals than the schools. i'm sure the same point could be made about western grads competing in ON [they have stats classes in pre-med programs don't they??? (joke)]

All true. (Except premed students usually have to take calculus, not statistics. Which was unfortunate for my GPA!) That's also why some schools, like UBC and Calgary, risk lower rankings because their graduates like their locations. There is a whole chicken/egg aspect to this.

I think it's also just more convenient to job hunt in the same region you live. Plus I've heard there's more networking opportunities at western schools for western firms and vice versa of course, which makes sense.

Basically I think any ranking of schools on the basis of how many biglaw jobs their graduates get - which is of course a very problematic ranking system for all of us who have little interest in biglaw - is kind of ridiculous unless it factors in all the lucrative biglaw jobs outside Toronto.

i hope you don't mind my edits

Not at all.