I think there are several ideas interacting with each other here, but what seems to stand out is that ultimately, how many people feel about their experiences at admitted students day is animated by comparing Columbia with other schools. I agree with Lauren, from the refactored version of this conversation, that people's impressions should not be dictated by "where it is [they]'re choosing from," but for many of us, I think it is an unavoidable--and admittedly very faulty--starting point, subconsciously set or not, in translating our admitted-students-day experiences.

In Khalil's conversation with Professor Moglen and the rest of the class today, Khalil said that there really is no difference between School A and School B--that they're all the same. I wonder how many of us really, deep down, think that. In me, the party line behind which my multiple personalities (try to) rally seems to be "That's right--I think there is absolutely no difference." But I'm sure this is an indulgence in my self-righteousness, as it is difficult for me to ignore the creeping suspicion that I am flat out lying to myself. But maybe there's more to discuss about my disingenuousness. If we all ask ourselves whether or not we agree with Khalil's statement, and find that most of our answers (sincerity assumed) are in the negative; then maybe there really is a difference between School A and School B. In other words, our misconceived biases create and perpetuate the difference. Then eventually future applicants, employers, and donors buy into the con, and it all gets "formalized" into a ranking.

I remember when I attended the admitted students day as a prospective student, every hour or so I would find myself in a pocket of other prospective students discussing whether NYU or Columbia was more highly ranked. And yesterday for April Fool's, the Student Senate sent out a prank e-mail to the student body about Columbia's drop to number nine in the U.S. News ranking of law schools--tied with Duke and UPenn. The e-mail's subject line read, "We're fine with 9!"

What else explains this hierarchy creation other than law students' competitive nature, as Lauren mentioned, and BigLaw's fiction that, out there, there are "elite" law students among "ordinary" law students--and that these "elite" students "deserve" to work for BigLaw's "cream of the crop" firms?

-- JosephLu - 02 Apr 2009