Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=2140944
 


 



The Cite Stuff: Inventing a Better Law Faculty Relevance Measure


James Cleith Phillips


University of California, Berkeley - School of Law Dept. of Jurisprudence & Social Policy; Brigham Young University, Dept. of Political Science

John Yoo


University of California at Berkeley School of Law; American Enterprise Institute

September 3, 2012

UC Berkeley Public Law Research Paper No. 2140944

Abstract:     
Citation rankings as a measure of scholarly quality are both controversial and popular. They provide a quantitative, albeit imperfect, measure of intellectual impact and productivity. But the number of times a scholar has been cited by his peers confers more than just bragging rights. They arguably help form the reputation of American legal scholars to the point that they have allegedly influenced faculty hiring decisions, and their collective impact may well shape the ranking of law schools themselves.

Arguably, the most well-known such metric for legal scholarship is the method used by Brian Leiter of the University of Chicago Law School and posted on his website. Despite the methodological rigorousness of the Leiter system, it suffers from some well-recognized limitations. It is biased in favor of schools with older, smaller faculties, for example, and against schools that do not produce as much peer-reviewed scholarship.

This study seeks to improve on earlier efforts by producing a more relevant and accurate citation-based ranking system. It produces a measure that explains 81 percent of the variation in the U.S. News academic peer rankings, implicitly revealing how schools could boost those rankings, and lists the most cited professors based on this new ranking methodology, both overall, amongst younger scholars, and in 20 areas of legal. This allows for the top school in each area of law to be calculated, which could be useful to aspiring JD students who desire to know the best school in the area(s) of law they are most interested in. Finally, this study proposes an alternative faculty ranking system focusing on the percentage of a law school faculty that are “All-Stars” (ranked in the top 10 in citations per year in an area of law). This alternative ranking system improves upon some of the weaknesses of previous faculty quality ranking methodologies and argues that citation-based studies do measure something important - relevance of scholarship.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 39

working papers series


Download This Paper

Date posted: September 6, 2012 ; Last revised: July 19, 2013

Suggested Citation

Phillips, James Cleith and Yoo, John, The Cite Stuff: Inventing a Better Law Faculty Relevance Measure (September 3, 2012). UC Berkeley Public Law Research Paper No. 2140944. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2140944 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2140944

Contact Information

James Cleith Phillips (Contact Author)
University of California, Berkeley - School of Law Dept. of Jurisprudence & Social Policy ( email )
2240 Piedmont Avenue
Berkeley, CA 94720-7200
United States
Brigham Young University, Dept. of Political Science ( email )
Provo, UT 84602
United States
John Choon Yoo
University of California at Berkeley School of Law ( email )
Boalt Hall
890 Simon
Berkeley, CA 94720-7200
United States
510-643-5089 (Phone)
510-643-2673 (Fax)
American Enterprise Institute ( email )
1150 17th Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20036
United States
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 5,977
Downloads: 2,045
Download Rank: 3,321

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo8 in 0.266 seconds