Bad News on the Rankings Front
A lot of people already know that, in the new US News rankings, Boalt has remained in the sixth spot.
But the bigger news is this: for the first time in seventeen years, Berkeley is no longer the top-ranking school for intellectual property. For 2010, that spot is held by Stanford.
I'm sad to say that I'm not terribly surprised. All the staff and faculty at BCLT and the Samuelson Clinic do great work. But I don't see any evidence that the administration has considered it a top priority to build on that reputation. Instead, there's been a kind of benign neglect, predicated on the assumption that Berkeley will always lead in this field. That's not enough.
I hope this serves as an opportunity for Berkeley to consider making a stronger commitment to one of its core strengths.
But the bigger news is this: for the first time in seventeen years, Berkeley is no longer the top-ranking school for intellectual property. For 2010, that spot is held by Stanford.
I'm sad to say that I'm not terribly surprised. All the staff and faculty at BCLT and the Samuelson Clinic do great work. But I don't see any evidence that the administration has considered it a top priority to build on that reputation. Instead, there's been a kind of benign neglect, predicated on the assumption that Berkeley will always lead in this field. That's not enough.
I hope this serves as an opportunity for Berkeley to consider making a stronger commitment to one of its core strengths.
Labels: Rankings And Associated Bullshit
posted by Carbolic at 2:51 PM
31 Comments:
Meh.
Something I noticed about the rankings--isn't it wacky that out-of-state students pay more to attend Boalt than students pay at Stanford and Harvard? I thought the price difference for out-of-state students is because the state's not subsidizing the cost of their education (as they theoretically are for in-state students). So that assumes that the REAL price of a Boalt education is actually higher than Harvard and Stanford. I don't get it. I think the out-of-state students must just be footing the bill for the little TVs that are being installed outside every classroom for no apparent reason.
Don't forget that after one year, most students at Boalt will get in-state tuition, assuming they follow all the rules and fill out all the forms. So, without doing the math, I'd wager that the total cost is still far less than Stanford or Harvard.
It's a good thing the administration has been hiking tuition at every opportunity so that we can move up in US News Rankings. Looks like we're off to a great start too. Thanks!
"Meh"?
I disagree 3:03. IP is Boalt's golden goose. It pays the bills and massively subsidizes the rest of the operation. It may not be glamorous, but if the IP program were to wither away, Boalt would too.
I hope the administration recognizes the gravity of the threat. I think two things should be addressed. One way to fix it would be to keep and recruit more faculty. Letting Shelanski slip away was foolish. Failing to offer/hire Kerr (I don't know any details) was a mistake.
A second thing to note is the bottom of the iceberg. One of the strengths of Boalt's IP program is the breadth brought by practitioners who teach at the school. They all drive up from the Valley, perhaps because of the allure or prestige of teaching at the best school for IP (many are not alums). Would they jump ship for Stanford for the (a) shorter commute and (b) prestige and resources. I don't know, but I hope someone asks them.
It's a sad day for Boalt. And a sad for recruiting. I wonder how many students who could pay the full price and increasing tuition will now go to Stanford...
This is pretty surprising. One of Stanford's IP bigwigs (Larry Lessig) is actually leaving for Harvard. I'm not sure how this will affect Stanford's ranking next year, but if it's close now, this may put us back on top.
In any event, I agree that Berkeley's IP program is it's prize (though it is ranked 5th in environmental law, and 10th in international law). Hopefully this is just temporary.
I always thought our "golden goose" was social justice.
I never thought anybody cared about these specialty rankings. Take a look at the schools in them, they really don't mean anything.
Definition of elitism.
For 3:14 -
Actually, the amounts listed for tuition in US News are misleading. Boalt's $ amount INCLUDES student fees and student health insurance. Stanford's does NOT - and not sure about Harvard - but I doubt that they included health insurance fees as well.
Given that IP is already strong, I would much rather Boalt invest resources in other areas. For example, our transactional offerings are embarassingly weak. We're a public school, and I think we should be solid across the board rather than focus on a few specialties.
Realistically, how many students turned down Stanford to go to Boalt because we were historically a slot above them in the IP rankings (and multiple slots behind them in overall rankings)? I'm sure such students exist, but I bet it's not a lot.
Yes, we should try to improve our IP program, but I think this is hardly a big deal.
4:42, couldn't agree more. For a school where a large number of students end up at large law firms our business law curriculum is pretty crummy.
What type of specialty is "legal writing"?
Answer (from one of the funniest blogs that's no longer active).
I think a couple of the more recent commenters miss Tom's valuable point about the need for the IP program as a cash cow to fund other programs. Sorry, social justice program expansion has to be funded somehow FIRST.
How is IP a cash cow?
I've often thought that there are sort of three "Boalts." There's the old school Boalt, with its progressive grading system and focus on social justice and public interest. There's the Dean Edley Boalt, an overlay of top-notch professors recruited directly from HLS. Then there's the IP Boalt, with Merges, Menell, Samuelson and all the contacts they bring.
I don't think Boalt should overreact to this US News IP ranking. The IP program at Boalt is amazing -- we have amazing professors who make amazing things happen (like getting the judge who wrote the dissent in In Re Bilski to speak a few days after the decision), and through the BCLT luncheon program, we get to meet amazing IP practitioners twice a week. We have a top-notch technology law journal, and extremely practical courses (patent lit, for example).
If Boalt needs to do anything, it's throwing a few extra PR dollars into promoting the program to the Bob Morses of the world.
more than anything, this proves (once again) that the us news rankings are broken.
mark lemley alone does not an ip program make. stanford lost lessig and has no ip/cyberlaw clinic.
boalt is still hands down the strongest ip program in the country. the fact that it is ranked 2 says more about the rankings than it does about the quality of the program at boalt.
Yes, it sucks that our most prestigious program dropped a notch, but I'm relieved that we hung in there at #6. I think that when we made the jump last year, a lot of people were very skeptical. The longer we hang there, the easier it will be for us to be accepted alongside UofC and NYU.
"Relieved" we stayed at 6? Serious? Certainly the rankings matter to some degree, but does #6 versus #8 or #10 really matter?
And no one has explained how exactly IP is a cash cow.
Evidence to support my "cash cow" statement:
1. The students. They take high-paying jobs after graduation. They don't cost the school through LRAP. They then donate money from their law firm salaries after they have graduated.
2. The law firms. They pay for the privilege of putting on lunch presentations and coming to job fairs to recruit students at the #1 (oops, #2) law school for their niche. (link to the list below)
3. Other donors. For example, consider these excerpts from Boalt's website:
- "Microsoft Corporation donated $1 million to Boalt's renowned Berkeley Center for Law & Technology (BCLT) to support frontier research by BCLT's brain trust of scholars in high-technology law and policy. " (link)
- "Professors Pamela Samuelson and Robert Glushko pledged an additional $1 million to Boalt's Samuelson Law, Technology & Public Policy Clinic, the groundbreaking training and advocacy program that they established in 2001 with a $2 million gift." (link)
- Donations from Google, IBM, Yahoo, as described here. See another list of donors here.
- "Three former co-workers of Barr, executive director of the Berkeley Center for Law and Technology (BCLT), have raised nearly $300,000 from 34 donors—29 of whom did not attend Berkeley Law." (emphasis added) (link)
This is by no means comprehensive. But it's a small sample that shows the prominence of Boalt's IP program and the effect that prominence has. To me, it's persuasive. If you don't think so, I'd love to hear why.
I'm sorry, Tom, but free lunches for students and donations *to the IP program itself* do not equate to "massively subsidizing" the rest of the school. Subsidizing itself? Maybe.
Gotta agree with 3:03. Meh. Self-important asses like Menell could use a little bump-down.
ya exactly, i don't see how people donating to the IP program itself helps the rest of the school out any.
i guess you could argue that if its being funded by outside donors then it doesn't need school funding and thus more funds can go to other programs, but then seems a bit attenuated and im sure the IP program will get the same funds regardless.
so, echoing a previous comment, and probably summing up the thoughts of all non-IP boalt students:
"meh"
As an IP student, I'm not that worried about this. Assuming there is some validity to these rankings and there really is a difference between first and second, I think it was just a matter of time. We were the first with a real IP program, and hence were the best, a decade in a row. Other schools invested and built up their programs, as have we, but you can't be top forever. Even Cal Rugby loses. I feel the program is as strong as it was two years ago when I started. Maybe this will light a fire and get some big hires. Can't get too worked up about this "rankings and other BULLSHIT".
IP is undeniably a cash cow for the rest of the school. 6:44 and 8:23 - you ever tried raising money for the Crim Law Journal at Boalt? it's not pretty/easy/doable, so far as I can tell.
Tom,
(3) probably has some validity. But isn't it just a result of Boalt historically focusing on IP? If we had focused on transactional practice historically, I imagine it would be paying similar dividends.
(1) and (2) - I disagree. If Boalt had any corporate law program to speak of, those students would take the same high-paying jobs IP grads take, and conceivably donate at the same rate. We have a huge advantage in being one of few top schools on the west coast, and there is no reason why big firms wouldn't come to put on corporate events if we invested any energy in that area.
And I don't really think that the reasons you mention make the IP program a "cash cow" for the entire school. While Boalt's strong IP program certainly strengthens the school as a whole, there is no reason why other areas - if we made the investment - wouldn't have the same effect.
10:17,
I agree re: business law. I wish we had a better program. I was disappointed I couldn't take Securities Regs. II because it wasn't offered. I was sad I couldn't take Corps. II because it was offered only at awkward times. The classes I did take though -- Sec. Reg. I, Corps. I, Income Tax I and Sec. Lit. -- were all excellent.
My basic point was that having the best IP program in the country helps the school across the board, the same way that having a strong program in any field would be good. Think about how much NYU reaps from being the best in tax. In my opinion, the school should reinforce its positions of strength. From there, it can increase the strength of other areas like business law.
It seems to me that there is an obvious niche for developing a business program focusing on innovation, entrepreneurship, and the founder--> IPO pipeline. It could draw strength from the IP program and the expertise of local practitioners. I think Boalt tries with some of its course offerings, but I can't think of any faculty that devote their attention to this area. Oh well.
5:23 - what's this:
http://www.law.stanford.edu/program/clinics/cyberlaw/
a webpage that refers to a clinic that used to be active but currently has no faculty director and hasn't for quite a while.
The clinic doesn't even operate anymore? That's dishonest to keep it posted on their website. Wow! How in the heck did Stanford's TTTechnology Law program rank #1 without even having a clinic--and losing Lessig?
I'm actually surprised that Harvard's Berkman Center doesn't rank higher on the IP rankings. They don't even rank top 10 (puh-lease, Franklin Pierce over Harvard?), even though they have a top technology journal, a cyberlaw clinic (unless they're lying on their website too), and well, they're Harvard.
Post a Comment
<< Home