Rankings of law school in Australia (2 Viewers)

[freejk]

how would u rank them?

 

[doink]

1. ANU
2. Uni of Melb
3. USYD
dont remember them from now on, search the forums there was link somewhere to ranking.

 

[Frigid]

a wanky UMelb research paper once ranked it something like: ANU, UMelb, USyd, UNSW, etcetera...

but employers don't really give a damn about national rankings (unlike the US).

in NSW, prestige-wise, it's really USyd, UNSW and the rest...

 

[melsc]

I don't think the whole prestige thing is a bad as it used to be. I managed to land a job with a SC and another barrister who were aware I went to UWS and go to Mac. Didn't bother them at all, all they asked was which seemed to be better. I suppose it still effects some of the large firms and some of those who still have the 'Sydney is the only decent law school' attitude. But otherwise I have found persistence to be much stronger than prestige. If they miss out on decent law students/grads because they are blinded by prestige then its their loss.

 

[Frigid]

oxford, cambridge, yale and harvard. the only decent law schools. the end. :wave:

 

[Krieg]

you'll be able to get a good job with a law degree from most aus unis

 

[jackmurray1989]

Except the university of gay. As far as I'm aware it's not even a real university.

 

[freejk]

Is Bond law school that good?

I heard they've got very outstanding law school

but i dont see them in rankings

like they are far below
...

 

[hfis]

As far as I can tell, Bond is awesome according to Bond. To everyone else, they seem to be perceived as money hungry elitists, and probably refuse to take part in rankings because they know they'll get smashed by UWS and be forced to justify why they charge so much for a law degree.

 

[subdued123]

The summary so far:

1 - USyd, Melb and ANU are the premier law schools
2 - But Law schools do not really make a difference if you try, and the prestige thing only gets you so far
3 - University of gay does not seem to exist
4 - Bond is a rubbish uni. It is a private uni that marks on a bell curve (fact), so certain people will always get HD, even if they are not that good.

In conclusion - don't get so hung up on it. Justice Kiefel is now a HCA judge and she didn't even go to uni.

 

[freejk]

well the only reason i am so concered about rankings

is that i am hoping to be working in an international field where there is linkage between australian businesses and other international corporations.

So. if i graduate from some of the known prestige unis, i thought it could be an advantage for me to find a job. Because my employment could be overseas corporation. im not reallie aiming to work in australia but internationally

 

[Bobness]

If you are indeed "[not] aiming to work in australia but internationally" then the rankings of law school(s) in Australia will be irrelevant to your cause.

47.46.45 posted in another thread that his future aim of working in America would be unaffected (or at least, less affected) by his uni of choice. In his own words, graduating from UWS law would not impact upon him, as much as within the domestic environment.

However, this article disagrees with the view i have offered http://www.lawyersweekly.com.au/art...aw-firms-turn-off-Sydney-grad-fair_z66677.htm. So if you are looking for intangible 'prestige' then seek out USYD, UNSW, UMELB and MONASH.

 

[Frigid]

a person from bond uni and another from uws work at mallesons

statistically, you are trying to infer that, because a meteorite once fell down the sky and landed on some poor bloke's house, therefore, meteorites kill people, often.

 

[Bobness]

statistically, you are trying to infer that, because a meteorite once fell down the sky and landed on some poor bloke's house, therefore, meteorites kill people, often.

You're far too involved in dissecting circumstantial evidence, which denotes how prestige is not as much of a factor in the legal profession, as it previously was.

Be egalitarian (moonlight was)

Manlychief was great too (old threads).

 

[RogueAcademic]

However, this article disagrees with the view i have offered http://www.lawyersweekly.com.au/articles/International-law-firms-turn-off-Sydney-grad-fair_z66677.htm.

Thanks for that article, it does offer a real world perspective (as opposed to academic stats and rankings).

 

[RogueAcademic]

You're far too involved in dissecting circumstantial evidence, which denotes how prestige is not as much of a factor in the legal profession, as it previously was.

I agree with the point that Frigid is making though, even if I also partially agree with fOxYcLeOpTrA89's point.

Anyway I've posted this article before which should shed 'some' light:

http://www.lawyersweekly.com.au/articles/A-matter-of-degree_z74278.htm

 

[Bobness]

Yeah i was hoping noone would post your link

I'm far too equitable as a person to claim any particular 'prestige' an institution may or may not hold.

However i do understand that material reality does supersede Utopian notions of equality in many (law) cases. It comes down to the binaries of legal positivism and natural law.

In the words of Orwell: "all animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others". If we are to associate graduates of cut-throat universities as mere beasts

 

[RogueAcademic]

A quick post to note that I edited my post above just as you were posting yours.

 

[Frigid]

You're far too involved in dissecting circumstantial evidence, which denotes how prestige is not as much of a factor in the legal profession, as it previously was.

Be egalitarian (moonlight was)

bobness, you should know well by now i'm a bit of a meanie.

et tu, Brute? apparently you harassed one of my friends off these forums.

 

[Bobness]

bobness, you should know well by now i'm a bit of a meanie.

et tu, Brute? apparently you harassed one of my friends off these forums.

I would highly doubt the veracity of this statement, unless your 'friend' was my opposite number in a moot Even then, 'harass' would mean i am attacking the actual arguments of him/her.

Also i do not recall using the epithet of or drawing attention to your status as a "meanie". I was merely commenting on your particular philosophy.* In this sense, you have used ad hominem to great effect.

If your friend has an issue, please give me the full details via PM and i shall stand corrected.

*Btw, you are entitled to your views, such is the strength of our fundamental right to free speech, however i was desiring a constructive discussion around this point.