Better Late Than Never – 2021 1L Recruit Results

[BlockedQuebecois]

Ultra Vires has posted the 1L recruit stats.

The key takeaway is undeniably that Ryerson (4 students hired) matched Windsor and Ottawa for 1L jobs, and beat out Queens (3). Western (6) narrowly edges out Ryerson, but it comes at the cost of making three students work at Dentons. 

Once you factor in the two Ryerson hires at McCarthy’s, which didn’t respond to Ultra Vires, Ryerson ties Western in total jobs and beats out Western vis-a-vis big law jobs. 

Edited October 13, 2021 by BlockedQuebecois

[Jaggers]

If Ryerson existed when I went to school I would have gone there for sure. It's nice to finally have a law school in downtown Toronto.

[mistertubby]

2 minutes ago, Jaggers said:

It's nice to finally have a law school in downtown Toronto.

🤔

[penguin]

There was definitely more than 3 MAG positions. I've seen more than 3 1Ls post about receiving a MAG offer on LinkedIn last year and it was through the official 1L recruit. 

[BlockedQuebecois]

4 minutes ago, penguin said:

There was definitely more than 3 MAG positions. I've seen more than 3 1Ls post about receiving a MAG offer on LinkedIn last year and it was through the official 1L recruit. 

The words after the comma are doing work on that row. 

[MapleLeafs]

Why is MAG even counted in the results? 

[ZineZ]

48 minutes ago, MapleLeafs said:

Why is MAG even counted in the results? 

Why shouldn't it be? OCIs have always included both government and corporate positions. It's valuable information for anyone trying to land a position after 1L. 

[Turtles]

It turns out proximity to Bay Street was a more relevant predictor to success in the 1L recruit than a law school's "prestige" or the size of a school's alumni network.  

[QueensGrad]

Goes to show how irrelevant school prestige is. What really matters is the quality of the candidate. Evidently Ryerson is a better filter for good 1L candidates than  established schools like Windsor and is about the same as Queens and Western. 

That is not to say you are getting the same quality education at a Ryerson or Windsor compared to an Oz, McGill, UBC or U of T. Go look at the different course lists, and compare instructors, and it is obvious which schools give you the best quality in that regard.

Edited October 14, 2021 by QueensGrad

[LMP]

6 hours ago, QueensGrad said:

Goes to show how irrelevant school prestige is. What really matters is the quality of the candidate. Evidently Ryerson is a better filter for good 1L candidates than  established schools like Windsor and is about the same as Queens and Western. 

 

I don't put too much stock in the 1L recruit though I admit this is a promising sign for Ryerson.

But at the same time I wonder if we can really say that "prestige" is totally irrelevant. The 2L summer numbers seems to demonstrate long-term patterns in which certain schools place significantly more students. If prestige was truly irrelevant than there should be a very different distribution. 

Though I'll close by admitting that prestige is certainly a nebulous and overused term, especially amongs 0Ls.

[BlockedQuebecois]

5 minutes ago, LMP said:

The 2L summer numbers seems to demonstrate long-term patterns in which certain schools place significantly more students. If prestige was truly irrelevant than there should be a very different distribution. 

The 2L recruit historical numbers are also completely consistent with other theories, including the one mentioned by QueensGrad (specifically, quality of candidate). 

I think school prestige does matter for some jobs (clerkships, elite boutiques, and academia, mainly), and its definitely a proxy for student quality. But I don't see how QueensGrad's statement is inconsistent with the 2L numbers. 

[LMP]

16 minutes ago, BlockedQuebecois said:

The 2L recruit historical numbers are also completely consistent with other theories, including the one mentioned by QueensGrad (specifically, quality of candidate). 

I think school prestige does matter for some jobs (clerkships, elite boutiques, and academia, mainly), and its definitely a proxy for student quality. But I don't see how QueensGrad's statement is inconsistent with the 2L numbers. 

I could well be wrong here and I see the point you're making. But I suppose what I was trying to convey was this: 

If prestige didn't matter and firms were solely concerned with the quality of student, wouldn't they simply interview an equal number of students from each school (something they certainly don't do now)?

Or

If we are saying prestige doesn't matter and firms simply interview/select more students from certain schools based on those students inherent quality, then it would seem like the main criteria used to identify quality is which school you go to. Which to me is more or less what the word prestige means in conversations like these. 

Sorry if these aren't the most coherent thoughts, I'm just trying to reconcile what some folks here (who are certainly more knowledgeable about stuff like this than I) are saying with what I see when I view these recruit numbers. 

[BlockedQuebecois]

22 minutes ago, LMP said:

If prestige didn't matter and firms were solely concerned with the quality of student, wouldn't they simply interview an equal number of students from each school (something they certainly don't do now)?

No, because we know quality students are concentrated in some schools and not others.

23 minutes ago, LMP said:

If we are saying prestige doesn't matter and firms simply interview/select more students from certain schools based on those students inherent quality, then it would seem like the main criteria used to identify quality is which school you go to. Which to me is more or less what the word prestige means in conversations like these. 

This is what I mean when I say that prestige is a proxy for student quality. The firms interview (and hire) more students from U of T because U of T has more quality students. They don't interview (and hire) more students from U of T because U of T is a more prestigious school. 

You'll note they're self reinforcing cycles, though. U of T has better outcomes because it has better students, and so better students go to U of T because it has better outcomes. 

[Jaggers]

It's hard to draw any conclusions from first year hiring. Purely anecdotal, but my view is that students with interesting resumés seem to have at least some advantage in first year hiring, as first year law students tend to be a pretty homogenous bunch and interesting work or other experience can help you stand out a bit. Ryerson may attract slightly more of those people, due to its newness, admissions policies, or whatever. And it may just be a one-year fluke, which is always possible with small numbers.

[pepesilvia]

Might not have anything to do with location solely, considering recruits are virtual.

Maybe the quality of students is just better adapted to what these firms look for. I have to imagine that the type of students that are willing to take risks and go to a 2-year old law school over a well established one are probably a certain breed that law firms may find attractive. Another thing is grading might be different to these more established schools. 

[epeeist]

While interesting, without more data it's not entirely meaningful. In particular, what's the size of the potential recruit pool - how many applicants from each school participated?

Or, am I so out of touch (quite possibly due to passage of time!) and it can be assumed that almost 100% of 1Ls at each and every school, including outside Toronto, would all be seeking Toronto summer jobs?

[BlockedQuebecois]

@pepesilvia, Ryerson's grading policy is pretty standard, it just requires the average grade to be a B: 

Quote

In first year lecture courses, B is the average grade for all evaluated assignments and exams. It is recommended that no more than 20% of students are awarded grades A- or higher, and no more than 20% of students are awarded grades of C+ or lower.

In the first year seminar course and upper year seminar courses, B or B+ is the average grade for all evaluated assignments and exams.

Also, this was Ryerson's first class ever. 

@epeeist, people often bring up the same objection to the 2L recruit. At the end of the day, I'm inclined to think the application rates are more or less the same across schools, with the exception of out-of-province schools and (possibly) Lakehead (because it's practically an out of province school) and Ottawa (because of the presence of government jobs in Ottawa). 

Schools know how many of their students apply for the 2L recruit, and they know how many students land jobs through it. If Windsor (say) had a much lower application rate that make their school's success rate in OCIs look great, they would almost certainly use it to promote their school. They already have to compile it and submit it to NALP. But they don't, likely because their students don't apply to OCIs at a significantly reduced rate.

Additionally, reports from schools like Western (>75%) and Queens (63%) show relatively similar placement rates in Toronto to U of T (>75%). And schools that don't public where their grads end up (coughWindsorcough) often have a lot of students from the GTA who are likely to try to go back (80%, in Windsor's case). Even with a school like Queens, that has a lower rate, you have to ask whether that's because Queens grads are opting out of the GTA or simply striking out in the Toronto recruit. The only people that know the true answer to that are the administrators at Queens, and they're choosing not to share that info. In the absence of them sharing it, I'm comfortable drawing a negative inference. 

If (once) you think the 2L recruit has relatively standard application rates between schools, there would be no reason for it to change between the 1L and 2L recruit. 

[epeeist]

@BlockedQuebecois As you know my own experience was long ago, but also from somewhat more recent discussions, and thinking of Queen's I thought there were a number of people interested in working in Ottawa and wanting to be close by not there? And contrariwise some U of T people not interested in Toronto biglaw.

Oh, I mean as a first iteration assumption sure, assume similar % from each school try, but a well-designed anonymous or pseudonymous survey of students might garsner better info if a decent response rate (always a problem avoiding or specifically are the successful much more likely to reply to a survey skewing results...). But also, presumably students including student amateur journalists aren't interested in pursuing a story with no upside (it either confirms what originally reported, their school is great, which is no bonus, or finds it's not as good at placements if it turns out % applicants from each school means another school is per capita better, which is a downer).

[WhoKnows]

1 hour ago, epeeist said:

@BlockedQuebecois As you know my own experience was long ago, but also from somewhat more recent discussions, and thinking of Queen's I thought there were a number of people interested in working in Ottawa and wanting to be close by not there? And contrariwise some U of T people not interested in Toronto biglaw.

I can't believe this is my first post on the new forum. Lots of Ottawa, lots of people just not interested in biglaw at all at Queen's. I know a lot of folks that just opted out of the process or applied to a very narrow band of firms because they weren't interested in biglaw. 

[epeeist]

47 minutes ago, WhoKnows said:

I can't believe this is my first post on the new forum. Lots of Ottawa, lots of people just not interested in biglaw at all at Queen's. I know a lot of folks that just opted out of the process or applied to a very narrow band of firms because they weren't interested in biglaw. 

Of course that makes sense to me, it's just because I went years ago I didn't want to be putting too much weight on my assumptions, given my criticism of assumptions...

[BlockedQuebecois]

The problem is that I similarly know a lot of people at Osgoode who just opted out of the process or applied to a very narrow band of firms, so until there's data showing otherwise, I'm not particularly swayed by anecdotes about it. 

At the end of the day, Queens has this information. There's no need for student journalists to do surveys and release it. In my opinion, if Queens actually had far fewer of its students apply to the 2L recruit, and thus actually had a much better 2L recruit placement rate than is reflected in the Ultra Vires reporting, it would advertise that. The fact that it doesn't is telling. 

Until there's data showing the opposite, the reasonable assumption is that most Ontario law schools have relatively similar application rates for most jobs. 

As an aside, and not to pick on anyone, this conversation has reminded me of @Rashabon's post on the old forum about why U of T students are better than everyone else, and how its because they don't spend their time worrying about whether or not their school is the third or fourth best for placement rates. This type of discussion happened all the time at Osgoode, too, with students saying Osgoode was just as good as U of T, just fewer Osgoode students wanted 2L recruit jobs than U of T and that's why Osgoode does so much worse. We also see that all the time with the McGill folks who suggest they have top secret numbers showing they kill it across Canada, but then refuse to share them (and the published numbers aren't glowing). 

I view the blind assertion—which is what these types of assertions are, since nobody has actually looked at the data—as indicative of the type of insecurity Rashabon was talking about in that post. There's nothing wrong with going to a school with a lower placement rate than some other school, and the desire to try to explain away evidence-based conclusions with anecdotes is a bit bizarre to me. 

[epeeist]

@BlockedQuebecois At least for Toronto schools, my assumption is the same as yours. And thus I have a level of skepticism, not because I disagree with you, but because I'm skeptical about any unverified data even (or especially!) if it conforms to my assumptions.

And, why would schools share data, if there's no perceived benefit to them or their students? That is, even if numbers were favourable one year they might be unfavourable another, so better just to say nothing all the time. Does the U of T share data about exactly how many students participated? If so great, but if not, then there's a school which by your (and my) assumption does the best in Toronto, still declining to share data. Which suggests that the assumption that favourable data would always be shared should be taken skeptically.

In the US ABA approval mandates some level of information sharing I believe about employment outcomes (as well as bar pass rates). But not summer employment I think.

[goodisgood]

On 10/13/2021 at 2:54 PM, BlockedQuebecois said:

Ultra Vires has posted the 1L recruit stats.

The key takeaway is undeniably that Ryerson (4 students hired) matched Windsor and Ottawa for 1L jobs, and beat out Queens (3). Western (6) narrowly edges out Ryerson, but it comes at the cost of making three students work at Dentons. 

Once you factor in the two Ryerson hires at McCarthy’s, which didn’t respond to Ultra Vires, Ryerson ties Western in total jobs and beats out Western vis-a-vis big law jobs. 

Wait, not sure if you're joking but is there something wrong with Dentons? From what I've read they're a pretty great firm. 

[Queens23]

5 hours ago, goodisgood said:

Wait, not sure if you're joking but is there something wrong with Dentons? From what I've read they're a pretty great firm. 

Definitely a chirp. There's nothing wrong with Dentons.

[BlockedQuebecois]

Queens is right, I routinely express my disdain for that firm in real life and on this forum because there’s nothing wrong with it. 

Putting aside the problems I have with Dentons—which are numerous—it’s fair to say that for the 1L recruit the problem is students who land 1L gigs at Dentons would almost invariably land at better firms if they waited until the 2L recruit.

There’s a reason Dentons has abandoned the 2L recruit all together. They know they can’t compete for top students once enough firms get in the mix, so they try to siphon up talent in the 1L recruit. 
 

Edited November 4, 2021 by BlockedQuebecois