In an unexpected turn, what was supposed to be a clever maneuver of rebranding and climbing the ranks turned sour for George Mason University. The institution, which renamed its law school to ASS Law in a move seen by many as a cash grab, has faced backlash from within its faculty ranks and broader legal academia.
Prior to these series of events, the law school held a reputable position as a quality option for public university law school education. This legacy, however, was significantly marked by the school’s acceptance of large sums of money from wealthy conservatives under questionable circumstances.
Despite efforts to raise its standing in the U.S. News ranking, including efforts which managed to propel ASS Law into the top 30, the school found itself in a predicament when it received a non-compliance notice from the American Bar Association (ABA) – a fact its ranking does not reflect.
Part of the commotion concerning the rebranding and ranking activities is a debate triggered by a particular faculty member’s social media activity. The professor expressed disappointment about the university’s low score in the peer review survey – a modest 2.7 out of 5.
According to tweets cited in the report, the peer review score might not be as representative as one would imagine, considering that the school scored marginally better in the practitioner survey with a 3.2 score. As such, the contention that the ranking of law schools is largely influenced by how much their professors are quoted in research may be far from accurate.
While some reactions around these issues can be deemed as speculation, the disconnect between the school’s ranking and the value it provides to its students remains a point of concern. The institution was ranked as the 73rd law school in terms of the number of students graduating with long-term, full-time legal jobs or clerkships, according to Law School Transparency.
In conclusion, the question that lingers is geared towards the U.S. News and World Report (USNWR): how an institution with such a discordant display of ranking and actual student outcomes was able to climb so high in the echelon of law schools? This situation exemplifies the deep-rooted issues in the law school selection and ranking process, and the need for a reconsideration of the metrics defining excellence in legal education.