Johns Hopkins Takes Top Spot in U.S. News’ Best Research Medical Schools Ranking Preview

In the U.S. News’ preview of its 2024 Best Medical Schools (Research), Johns Hopkins University overtook perennial leader, Harvard, for the top rank. The full rankings will be released April 18th.  

In addition to the noteworthy change at the top, significant movement occurred elsewhere within the top-ranked schools when compared to the 2023 rankings. 

• University of Michigan and Northwestern University entered the elite tier of medical schools, climbing to 9th and 12th, respectively, from a tie at 17th last year. 

• Three schools dropped out of the top 15: University of Washington (ranked 8th in 2023), Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai (ranked 11th in 2023), and Vanderbilt University (ranked 13th in 2023). 

• NYU Grossman saw a sharp decline, although it still remained in the top 15, falling from 2nd in 2023 to 13th in 2024. 

• Washington University in St. Louis climbed seven spots from last year, moving from the 11th rank in 2023, to tie for 4th in 2024. 

Rank School

1 Johns Hopkins University, +2 from 2023

2 University of Pennsylvania (Perelman), +4

3 Harvard University, -2

4 University of California—San Francisco (tie), -1

4 Washington University in St. Louis (tie), +7

6 Columbia University, -3

7 Stanford University (tie), +1

7 Yale University (tie), +3

9 Duke University (tie), -3

9 University of Michigan—Ann Arbor (tie), +8

11 University of Pittsburgh, +3

12 Northwestern University (Feinberg), +5

13 New York University (Grossman), -11

14 Cornell University (Weill) (tie), no change

14 Mayo Clinic School of Medicine (Alix) (tie), no change

U.S. News has also made changes to their ranking methodology, which includes the addition of a research quality metric, increased weight given to faculty-student ratios, and a reduced weight for reputation surveys, MCAT, and GPA scores.

Briefly addressing the departure of many medical schools from the rankings—including those at Harvard, Columbia, Stanford, University of Pennsylvania, Cornell, Duke and University of Chicago—U.S. News explained that it ranked all schools using publicly available data from the National Institutes of Health, as well as data submitted through surveys in 2023 (or 2022 if 2023 was not available).  

Following Months of Controversy, U.S. News Unveils Preview of 2024 Best Law School Rankings

The U.S. News just published a preview of its 2024 Best Law School Rankings. And there weren’t many surprises. Stanford Law moved up from the second rank to tie Yale University for the top spot. Columbia Law dropped from the fourth rank to the eighth, Georgetown Law fell out of the top-14, and UCLA moved up from the 15th rank to take Georgetown’s place. 

There were some notable updates to U.S. News’ methodology, however, which the news organization said were based upon the input of over 100 law deans and legal experts. Some of the named changes include: an increase in the weight given to the bar pass rate and the addition of the “ultimate bar pass pass rate” (the bar pass rate of a graduating class two years post-grad); an increase in the weight given to employment ten months post-graduation; changes to the credit assigned for students entering into fellowships or graduate school post-graduation; and a significant reduction in the weight given to reputation surveys, LSAT/GRE scores, and median GPA scores. 

Briefly addressing the controversy, U.S. News explained that it ranked all schools using publicly available data, and removed some of the metrics that were not available (e.g. expenditures, at-graduation employment rate, and JD graduate indebtedness). 

The U.S. News plans to publish the full methodology, including measures and weights, alongside the complete rankings, on April 18. 

Rank School Name

1 Stanford University (tie)

1 Yale University (tie)

3 University of Chicago

4 Harvard University (tie)

4 University of Pennsylvania (Carey) (tie)

6 Duke University (tie)

6 New York University (tie)

8 Columbia University (tie)

8 University of Virginia (tie)

10 Northwestern University (Pritzker) (tie)

10 University of California, Berkeley (tie)

10 University of Michigan—Ann Arbor (tie)

13 Cornell University

14 University of California—Los Angeles

AMCAS 2024: “Disadvantaged Applicant” Question Revised to Broader Adversity Question

The AMCAS “disadvantaged applicant” question is no more. This year’s AMCAS application has introduced a new question in its place that asks more broadly about an applicant’s “impactful experiences.” 

The 2024 AMCAS application will now include the following question and guidance: 

Other Impactful Experiences 

To provide some additional context around each individual’s application, admissions committees are interested in learning more about the challenges applicants may have overcome in life. The following question is designed to give you the opportunity to provide additional information about yourself that is not easily captured in the rest of the application. 

Please consider whether this question applies to you. Medical schools do not expect all applicants to answer “yes” to this question. This question is intended for applicants who have overcome major challenges or obstacles. Some applicants may not have experiences that are relevant to this question.  Other applicants may not feel comfortable sharing personal information in their application.  

o Yes o No 

Please use the space below to describe why you selected “yes.” [This text and the textbox only appear if “yes” is selected for this question.] 

In a pop-up box, AMCAS provides some helpful examples. It reads:

The following examples can help you decide whether you should respond “yes” to the question, and if so, what kinds of experiences you could share. Please keep in mind that this is not a fully inclusive list and any experiences you choose to write about should be ones that directly impacted your life opportunities. 

Example Experiences 

• Family background: serving as a caretaker of a family member (e.g., siblings, parent/guardian), first generation to college 

• Community setting: rural area, food scarcity, high poverty or crime rate, lack of access to regular health care (e.g., primarily used urgent care clinics or emergency room, no primary care physician) 

• Financial background: low-income family, worked to support family growing up, work-study to pay for college, federal or state financial support 

• Educational experience: limited educational opportunities, limited access to advisors or counselors who were knowledgeable/supportive of higher education requirements 

• Other general life circumstances that were beyond your control and impacted your life and/or presented barriers (e.g., religion) 

Why the change?

The AAMC made the revision in response to “limitations” identified with the previous question, which asked a candidate if they wished to identify themself as a “disadvantaged applicant.” Research into the text found that applicants found the question ambiguous, and that many had a negative reaction to the use of the term “disadvantaged applicant.” 

However, AAMC’s research also found that both applicants and admissions officers found value in the intent of the question, which was “to provide rich contextual information about an applicant’s journey and how their lived experiences align with schools’ missions and/or the communities they serve.” 

The revised question and associated guidance was piloted using the Summer Health Professions Education Program and the supplemental Electronic Residency Application Service. And both the question and guidance received “generally positive feedback” from administrators and applicants. 

Should I respond to this question?

As with the question that preceded it, this question text states that not all candidates are expected to respond. Rather, it is intended for those who have had “major challenges or obstacles.” 

That being said, this updated question provides applicants with a broader scope for responses. So, we urge you to consider any significant challenges that you have faced, using the following questions:

1. Did this experience impact my life in such a way that it provides meaningful context to my application? 

Examples of such adversity include: Facing a significant health challenge such as cancer or a disability; serving as the guardian to your younger siblings, while also attending classes (likely, negatively impacting your resume); living in an underserved medical community that made it difficult to gain shadowing or clinical experiences, but also inspired your interest in rural medicine. 

Alternatively, more typical experiences that likely do not represent significant adversity (but potentially belong in your personal statement or secondary essays) include: Breaking a bone during high school athletics and going through a difficult recuperation process; facing a life-impacting food allergy, the dissolution of a romantic relationship, a domestic move, and/or your parents’ divorce. While these experiences likely impacted you greatly, they may not belong in this response. 

2. What did I learn from the experience? 

Your essay response should detail the adversity, but should center on what you learned from going through the experience. Did this experience provide you with an “ah-ha!” moment that changed your perspective and impacted your life? If the take-aways from the adversity do not feel relevant to your application (i.e., your learnings do not clearly make you a stronger candidate for a medical school), you should reconsider the take-aways or including the experience.

3. Have I already spoken to this experience in my personal statement? 

You will want to avoid redundancy by sharing different stories and anecdotes in this essay and your personal statement. If you fully explored the experience in your personal statement, do not feel compelled to re-write about the experience here. Not all applicants are expected to have responses to this question. 

Your writing approach:

Overcoming adversity makes for a stronger medical school candidate and this is what you will want to emphasize in your response: Provide the reader background on the situation in the first 20 percent of the response. But the remaining 80 percent should be devoted to what you learned from the adversity.

How will your future classmates and patients benefit from the lessons you gained from the adversity? Keep in mind the qualities that medical schools are looking for in prospective students and show the reader how your experience improved your dedication to medicine and resilience and/or your abilities in leadership, teamwork, empathy, and critical and creative thinking.

Most Popular Courses at Stanford GSB in Interpersonal and Organizational Dynamics

To gain insight into the “future of management,” The Economist recently published a profile of Stanford GSB’s most oversubscribed courses. The findings are fascinating. In a world where ChatGPT and AI are gaining traction, the most popular courses for Stanford GSB students are also the most humane. Students are seeking instruction on how to thrive within the murky and complex world of interpersonal dynamics and organizational politics. 

Interpersonal Dynamics, often referenced as “Touchy Feely,” has received the “most popular” accolade annually at GSB for the last 45 years. The class recognizes the role that self-awareness and introspection play in creating strong relationships, which in turn are necessary for success in global and interconnected organizations. The course is typically facilitated in a conversational style within small group sections, and culminates with students sorting themselves into a line based on their influence. The Economist noted their struggle as they seek to balance their perception of their own personal influence with the, occasionally conflicting, views of their classmates.  

Another exceedingly popular course asks students to look outward to understand the power dynamics at play around them. The course, The Paths to Power, provides students with a view of inter-organizational power struggles and strategies to thrive within that dynamic. Topics such as likeability, aggression, pushiness, and audaciousness dominate the conversation. According to the instructor, the course is designed to ensure that students have the tools to “never have to leave a position involuntarily.” According to The Economist, students joke that the course is, “designed for the budding Machiavellian.” 

Finally, Managing Growing Enterprises is geared towards students who plan to own a business. But, rather than the logistics of scaling a business, the course gears predominantly towards navigating sensitive interpersonal or public relations situations, such as poor employee performance or lay-offs, challenging board interactions, crisis management, journalist interactions, missed revenue forecasts, etc. Students engage with these situations through role-playing exercises followed by feedback, offered by professors and fellow students, which can be highly critical. 

New Jersey Bar Association Advocates to Remove Mental Health Questions from Bar Applicant Questionnaire

New Jersey is the latest state to seek to abolish the mental health questions asked on the “character and fitness questionnaire” required of all Bar applicants. Late last month, the New Jersey State Bar officially requested that the NJ Supreme Court remove item 12B from the bar applicant questionnaire: Do you currently have any condition or impairment (including but not limited to substance abuse, alcohol abuse, or a mental, emotional, or nervous disorder or condition) that in any way affects your ability to practice law in a competent, ethical, and professional manner and in compliance with the Rules of Professional Conduct, the Rules of Court, and applicable case law? 

Jeralyn Lawrence, New Jersey State Bar Association President, speaking to the New Jersey Law Journal, explained the reasoning behind her advocacy for the change. “We are a profession in crisis. The pace of our practice is not sustainable. We need to remove barriers in place for people to get help, and 12b, we believe, is a barrier to the bar. We’re advocating strongly that the court remove that question so that it’s not a detriment to people getting help,” she said. 

Virginia and New York removed its mental health questions from the bar admission application in 2019 and 2020 following similar advocacy efforts by law students and interested groups. And, in January, Ohio abandoned questions related to diagnosis and only asks about mental health as it relates to disciplinary actions or guardianship/conservatorship. 

According to the ABA: 

• Fourteen states do not request a candidate’s mental health status in evaluating their fitness for the Bar: Arizona, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, New York, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Washington, and Wisconsin. 

• Four states—Indiana, Idaho, New Hampshire, and Texas—ask about mental health only in the context of disciplinary action. 

• One state—Ohio—asks about mental health only in the context of disciplinary action and court appointed guardianship/conservatorship. 

• Two states—California and Connecticut—ask about mental health only in the context of court appointed guardianship/conservatorship. 

• Ten states—Louisiana, Montana, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Vermont, West Virginia, and Wyoming), and Washington D.C.—have adopted the three mental health questions drafted by the National Conference of Bar Examiners (NCBE) that are shown below: 

1. Diagnosis:  Do you currently have any condition or impairment (including, but not limited to, substance abuse, alcohol abuse, or a mental, emotional, or nervous disorder or condition) that in any way affects your ability to practice law in a competent, ethical, and professional manner? Note: “Currently” means recent enough that the condition or impairment could reasonably affect your ability to function as a lawyer. 

2. Treatment: Are the limitations caused by your condition or impairment reduced or ameliorated because you receive ongoing treatment or because you participate in a monitoring or support program? 

3. Defense/Disciplinary Action: Within the past five years, have you asserted any condition or impairment as a defense, in mitigation, or as an explanation for your conduct in the course of any inquiry, any investigation, or any administrative or judicial proceeding by an educational institution, government agency, professional organization, or licensing authority; or in 10 years, connection with an employment disciplinary or termination procedure?

• Eleven states that do not follow the NCBE test—Alabama, Arkansas (disciplinary action only), Colorado, Delaware, Indiana (disciplinary action only), Kentucky, Nevada, New Hampshire (disciplinary action only), Oregon, Rhode Island, and Texas (disciplinary action only)—ask at least one of the NCBE questions. 

• Fifteen other states ask questions of their own drafting.

Some Students Don’t Match on Residency Match Day. Do they Need More Support?

Match rates improved across all applicant types in the 2023 National Match. U.S. MD seniors garnered a 93.7 percent match rate (+0.8 percentage points from 2022) and U.S. DOs achieved an all-time high with a match rate of 91.6 percent (+0.3 percentage points from 2022). Among international medical graduates, who historically match at lower rates, U.S. citizens achieved a record high match rate of 67.6 percent (+6.2 percentage points from 2022) and non-U.S. citizens matched at a rate of 59.4 percent (+1.3 from 2022).

The Match generally brought positive feedback for the improving rates, but what about those who don’t match? “After the match, of course, there's an uptick [in calls] every year," said Pamela Wible, MD and Founder/Operator of a mental health helpline for doctors and medical students. "Matchless medical students reach out to me who don't know what to do with their lives, sitting on $300,000 of student loans, sobbing on their couch" continued Dr. Wible, in a MedPage article published after the 2021 Match.

A recent MedScape op-ed considers the challenges for matchless medical students and urges the medical community to provide more proactive and structured advice and guidance on how to navigate not matching to a position. The authors suggest the following ways that medical schools or national medical organizations can offer more meaningful support: 

• Prior to Match Day, organizations can facilitate webinars/meetings that both normalize not matching to a position and also provide guidance on useful actions. The meeting might include topics such as how to adjust career plans, approach loan repayment, enter the SOAP process, explore alternative positions in research or other fields, and reapply to a future Match process. 

• Medical schools should focus on providing mental health support services and ensuring that students know how to access these resources both prior to, on, and after Match Day. In addition to providing access to emergency counseling services, the authors suggest that schools offer stress reduction workshops/tips and opt-out mental health services prior to the Match.

• Finally, schools and the medical community must work together to destigmatize not matching. Students should feel comfortable and safe pursuing next steps knowing that their school and the wider medical community will support them as they determine how they will continue to pursue their dream of practicing medicine. 

“Stay in touch with your dean and others at your medical school and ask them for help…Also, get involved in a research project. Look for mentors at your medical school who are working in the field of medicine you want to work in and volunteer to help,” said Margarita Loeza, MD, MPH and Assistant Dean of Student Affairs and Admissions at the Charles R. Drew University of Medicine and Science in AMA article published last month. 

Elite MBA Programs Incorporate Online Learning

Even the most elite MBA programs continue to embrace online learning. A recent Business Because article highlighted a few of the recently added options.  

• The University of Pennsylvania (Wharton) Global Executive MBA will launch in May and provide a predominantly online experience for participants. Just 25 percent of the program will take place in-person, while the remainder of the content will be provided online. The program intends to cater to a global cohort of participants and will confer the same Executive MBA degree, at the same cost, as the in-person Executive MBA.

• The NYU (Stern) Part-Time MBA will provide online modules (asynchronous online learning combined with an in-person component) and course options for those in the part-time MBA program. The online offerings are intended to provide additional flexibility, however, the program will still require students to take at least nine classes in-person. The tuition and degree conferred are the same for part-time students taking courses in-person or using the hybrid learning model.

• The University of California Berkeley (Haas) Part-Time Flex MBA will allow students to complete the majority of their coursework online, but do require participation in at least three in-person immersion events. The tuition and degree conferred are the same for the in-person and online part-time programs.

• The Georgetown (McDonough) Flex MBA Online will offer students the option to complete the majority of their coursework online. In addition to the virtual classes, the program requires students to participate in a two-week on-campus residency as well as a one-week study abroad program. The tuition and degree conferred are the same for the Flex MBA and Flex MBA Online.

Learn How to Accept Critical Feedback Before Starting Medical School

This blog is the first in a new series that we are publishing on the soft skills that all premedical students should develop prior to starting medical school. While your academic preparation has been underway for many years, we don’t want you to forget about those skills we believe will be vital to your success in medical school (and beyond).

Many pre-medical students have spent the majority of their lives receiving praise and playing starring roles both inside and outside of the classroom. Your commitment to success is part of why you made it into medical school, but it can also make the transition particularly tough. Medical school is not only a challenging academic environment, it is a time filled with new experiences and, accordingly, a lot of mistakes. You will get critical feedback in large doses. 

“My first piece of written feedback during my clinical year was ripe with criticism. I regrettably reacted to it by reading and re-reading it, allowing discouragement and imposter’s syndrome to slowly infiltrate my psyche. My voice began quivering during my presentations on rounds. My thoughts quickly became consumed with what every attending might be thinking of me at any given moment. It became harder to concentrate and learn. I stood in my own way, allowing my dependence on external validation to hamper my professional growth,” said Nabeel Salka, a third-year medical student at the University of Michigan, in a personal essay.  

In preparation for medical school, we want you to gain some comfort with the discomfort. We urge you to practice requesting and receiving negative feedback because feedback plays a critical role in performance and leadership effectiveness. Dr. Sheila Heen, a lecturer at Harvard Law School and author of Thanks for the Feedback: The Science and Art of Receiving Feedback Well, regularly references research that says those who regularly seek critical feedback report higher job satisfaction, adapt better into new roles, and receive higher performance reviews than those who do not seek out feedback. 

But it’s not always easy. Dr. Heen points out that feedback can cause various “trigger” responses, such as truth triggers, relationship triggers, and identity triggers that make it difficult to productively receive the provider’s message. 

--Truth triggers: When we question the veracity of the feedback. We may feel misunderstood, wronged, or indignant, and we are more likely to reject the feedback or go on the defensive.

--Relationship triggers: When the person providing the feedback colors how we receive it. We may feel targeted or bullied. 

--Identity triggers: When feedback hits at how we see ourselves. We may feel shaken, confused, and particularly sensitive. 

So, once you identify your triggers, what’s the next step? Tasha Eurich, organizational psychologist and executive coach, provides guidelines for overcoming the initial emotional reaction, and accepting critical feedback for the useful tool that it is. 

--Don’t rush it. Negative feedback is inherently uncomfortable and emotional. Sit with the discomfort, feel the emotions, and don’t feel compelled to respond to feedback immediately. While researching for her book, Insight, Eurich interviewed a group of people who dramatically improved in self-awareness. Within this group, two clear patterns emerged: First, she found that they made a habit of seeking out critical feedback (although many agreed it was “unpleasant”). Second, after receiving feedback, they took their time, days or even weeks, to respond. During this reflection period, some worked to transform their view of the feedback from an emotional reaction (e.g, “upsetting”) to a rational one (e.g, “helpful and productive data”). Others used “self-affirmation” techniques such as considering their many good qualities (“I am a committed medical student.'') to contextualize the feedback into a broader picture, thus making it feel less threatening.  

--Gather more data. Request additional data points via feedback from others to understand the situation more completely. Is this feedback relevant to many interactions or is it an outlier? Find out if others agree and what additional context they can provide. In addition to providing a more complete picture and reducing personal blind spots, the additional data can help inform an improvement strategy. 

--Don’t choose isolation. There is a real tendency for people to cut off relationships with those who provide negative feedback, to their own detriment. Eurich references research by Marshall Goldsmith and Howard Morgan, who tracked 11,000 leaders within a leadership development program; the contingent who received critical feedback and continued to engage with their coworkers made dramatic behavioral improvements, while those who didn’t were much less likely to see improvement. Maintaining relationships with those who provide difficult feedback drives better progression over time. 

Within medicine, particularly in the clinical setting, there are additional barriers to feedback beyond our own emotional responses. An article in the NEJM Resident 360 identifies the following: not enough time, conflicting priorities, lack of physical/private space to provide feedback, power differentials (particularly for upward feedback), lack of (enough) observations, and a lack of a growth mindset (receiver). Understanding these barriers can help you to create structures to overcome them, such as seeking out feedback on a routine basis, learning to identify feedback in whatever form it may come, gaining comfort in hearing feedback publicly, and accepting that some feedback may not be valid due to a lack of observations. 

Nabeel Salka ended his personal essay by describing the power he felt when he learned to accept negative feedback for what it is, a growth opportunity rather than an indictment of his abilities as a physician. He wrote, “Nearly a year after receiving my first piece of written feedback, I read it again. This time I didn’t feel hurt or ashamed. In fact, I felt like I understood the actual content of the criticism for the first time. Rather than concerning myself with the grade and how much the resident disapproved of my performance, I learned that I could be more organized when presenting.” 

Starting medical school with an ability to see criticism as a learning moment, and nothing more, will allow you to enjoy and take advantage of challenging opportunities in this unique period of your life.

The GMAT Gets a Refresh

An updated version of the GMAT called the GMAT Focus will be released this year. Developed by GMAC in partnership with business schools, it is designed to offer test takers more flexibility because it is close to an hour shorter in length and won’t require an essay.  

According to a leaked graphic published by Poets & Quants, specific updates to the test are expected to include:

• A shorter Quantitative Reasoning section. The GMAT Focus will ask 21 questions, which will reduce the section by 10 questions and 17 minutes from the current GMAT. 

• A shorter Verbal Reasoning section. The GMAT Focus will ask 23 questions instead of the current 36, and the time allotted will decrease by 20 minutes. This section will include questions on reading comprehension and critical reasoning. 

• A new Data Insights section. The new section will increase the current GMAT’s Integrative Reasoning section from 12 questions to 20, with an additional 15 minutes of time. The section will include questions on data sufficiency, multi-source reasoning, table analysis, graphics interpretation, and two-part analysis.

In addition to shortening the overall test experience, test-takers will have the ability to flag questions that they wish to return to prior to the end of the section time. 

The current version of the GMAT will also be available for test-takers through early 2024. 

555 Vacant Emergency Medicine Resident Positions Remain Following National Match Day

According to social media reports, this year's National Resident Matching Program left 555 unfilled positions in emergency medicine. While the positions will likely be filled in the Supplemental Offer and Acceptance Program, it is noteworthy because, as recently as three to four years ago, the specialty was among the most competitive. This year’s number of vacancies more than doubled last year’s 219 unfilled positions, but in 2021 just 14 vacancies remained post-match. 

Several emergency medicine groups published a joint statement reacting to the open positions on the American College of Emergency Physicians website. In the statement, they noted that a combination of many factors likely influenced this year’s outcome. “Many have speculated about factors such as workforce projections, increased clinical demands, emergency department (ED) boarding, economic challenges, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, and the corporatization of medicine, among many others.”  

An interview between Medscape and Robert McNamara, MD, Chair of Emergency Medicine at Temple University and Chief Medical Officer of the American Academy of Emergency Medicine, provided additional insight into two of the factors: workforce projections and the corporatization of emergency medicine. In December 2021, the Annals of Emergency Medicine published a study projecting an oversupply of emergency physicians by 2030. In McNamara’s view, the suggestion of an oversupply may have deterred prospective entrants into the field who worry about finding a job and repaying loans. 

"Emergency medicine residents always have among the highest debt of any specialty," McNamara said. "They have a strong sense of social justice and often don't come from privileged backgrounds ... so they're likely to accumulate debt."

He also added that emergency medicine positions tend to fall under corporate entities more often than physician-run groups. The corporate focus on profit can lead to burnout and a lack of “physician autonomy.” 

Moving forward, the joint statement announced the creation of a Match Task Force with heavy emergency medicine representation to further understand the reasoning behind the unfilled positions and create mitigation strategies for the future.

The Chairman and CEO of U.S. News & World Report Accuses Elite Law and Medical Schools of Evading Accountability

The U.S. News & World Report has publicly defended its rankings, hitting back at the elite law and medical schools that have staged public boycotts. Eric Gertler, Executive Chairman and CEO of U.S. News & World Report, penned a Wall Street Journal op-ed, which was ffollowed a day later by a full-page ad in the Boston Globe timed to coincide with a conference hosted by Harvard and Yale Law Schools on “best practices in data.” 

While US News & World Report’s previous response to the boycott focused on responding to criticisms of the methodology and seeking collaboration, more recently, they have taken a defensive stance. Gertler’s op-ed not only defended the rankings, but also leveled sharp accusations towards the withdrawing schools. He accused them of evading accountability and not wanting to rely on an independent third party that they cannot control. Gertler then went on to tie the schools’ decision to withdraw from the rankings to the Supreme Court’s current review of the use of affirmative action in school admissions decisions. He proposes that elite schools are currently de-emphasizing GPA and standardized test scores in admissions, in advance of the decision, to provide themselves more leeway in the future. 

“There is added urgency as the Supreme Court considers a pair of cases on affirmative action that could change admission norms. Some law deans are already exploring ways to sidestep any restrictive ruling by reducing their emphasis on test scores and grades—criteria used in our rankings,” Gertler wrote.

In defending the rankings, which Gertler admits cannot accommodate every nuance in educational excellence, he points to the ranking’s ability to provide “accurate, comprehensive information that empowers students to compare institutions and identify the factors that matter most to them.” And, he concludes, the elite schools that have withdrawn have ended their participation in a critical national discourse about what constitutes excellence in education. 

Salary Increases Outpace Inflation for Most MBAs

Are post-MBA salaries living up to the degree’s promise? In most cases, the answer is yes. 

Using their rankings data, Bloomberg Businessweek analyzed MBA starting salaries from 2018 to 2022 compared to the inflation rate during the same period (17.6 percent). And they found growth that outpaced inflation in seven industries, including two of the most prominent for newly minted MBAs. These include Consulting (salary increased by 19.5 percent between 2018 and 2022), Technology (+18.8 percent), Defense and Aerospace (+20.9 percent), Government/Politics/Lobbying (+19.4 percent), Telecommunications (+27.3 percent), Education (+43.8 percent) and Construction (+20.8 percent). 

The median salary growth for MBA alumni also outpaced inflation. The reported median earnings for MBAs six years post-graduation grew 28.1 percent between 2018 and 2022. The growth rate compares favorably to both the inflation rate (17.6 percent), and the national median earnings for all full-time workers (18.7 percent). 

Poets & Quants created a similar analysis using their data to determine how the growth in median earnings between 2018 and 2022 compared to the inflation rate amongst top-ranked MBA programs. They found that at the top 27-ranked schools, the growth in starting base salary between 2018 and 2022 averaged 24 percent, well above the inflation rate, and at the top seven schools it averaged 26.7 percent. NYU Stern garnered the highest growth rate (36 percent), followed by Columbia, Chicago Booth, and Dartmouth Tuck. In fact, just three of the top-ranked schools posted median starting salary growth rates below the inflation rate: UCLA Anderson (16.8 percent), UNC Kenan-Flagler (8.3 percent), and Washington University in St. Louis (9.1 percent). 

Amidst US News Rankings Boycott, Law School Representatives Work to Provide Data Transparency

Last week, Harvard Law School and Yale Law School co-hosted a conference to discuss “best practices for law school data.” This is in response to the current U.S. News rankings boycott, which has prompted law schools to consider alternative ways to provide data transparency to prospective students and the public. The event included representatives from more than 100 law schools, 30 graduate-level educational institutions, and the Department of Education. 

U.S. Secretary of Education Miguel Cardona, in a keynote address, expressed support for the boycott, noting that rankings systems can create perverse incentives for institutions. “Rankings discourage institutions with the largest endowments and greatest capacity to enroll and graduate more underserved students from doing so because it may hurt their selectivity,” he said. “Instead, the most life-changing higher education opportunities go to young people who already have every socioeconomic advantage.”

Secretary Cardona encouraged those in higher education to “set the agenda” rather than allowing U.S. News to do it for them. However, the intricacies of making data available to prospective students wishing to evaluate graduate options, proves complicated. Currently the ABA site does not allow for easy comparison between schools and other existing data sources, including Law School Transparency, XploreJD, and the Law School Admission Council, lack a desirable user experience for reviewing and comparing data. 

Christopher Avery, a Harvard Kennedy School Professor with experience studying college ranking systems, noted that while transparency is critical, it is important to give careful consideration to what will be used as a replacement for the U.S. News ranking. He recommended against jumping from “one bad system” to “another system that may be bad in a wide variety of other ways.” 

U.S. Under Secretary of Education James Kvaal also expressed a need to move with thoughtful consideration. He encouraged conference attendees to “not lose sight of why the rankings are important.” And, in an interview afterwards, Kvaal expressed an interest in working with the U.S. News to make the ratings more equitable. He noted that the Education Department has reached out to the organization with suggestions for improvement.

Make the Most of Your Relationship with Your Pre-Health Advisor

A pre-med/pre-health advisor can be an invaluable resource. In addition to providing academic support, they can tell you about the school’s internal processes (such as requesting letters of evaluation), as well as available shadowing, clinical, and/or research opportunities. But, to make the most of your advisor relationship—you must invest in it. Below, we’ve compiled our top tips for making the most of your relationship with your pre-health advisor. 

1. Find a good fit. Meet with your assigned advisor early, and determine if you have a good rapport. Ensure they have extensive experience guiding students into medical school, and that they are accessible and responsive. You may have the option to find an alternative advisor if it isn’t a good fit, so that’s why starting early is key.  

2. Early in your undergraduate career, you should plan to meet with your advisor at least one or two times per semester. In your junior and senior years, particularly before and during the time you are actively working on your application, you will want to meet more frequently. We recommend setting up time to meet at least once a month. Many advisors work with a large number of students so, instead of trying to squeeze into their calendars last minute, plan ahead. 

3. Take advantage of other resources that your school provides to help you stay informed and up-to-date on the medical school application process. Sign up for pre-health newsletters, digital resources, and/or clubs. You can then use your meetings with your advisor for more personalized guidance.

4. Make the most of your time together. Create an agenda for each meeting so that you can address all of your open items and use your time efficiently. In advance of the meeting, update your application timeline and resume, share any key goals or questions that you’d like to discuss during the meeting, and follow-up after meetings with any outstanding actions or questions. 

Bar Pass Rates Dip for First-time Takers in 2022

Over three-quarters, 78 percent, of law graduates who took the bar exam for the first time in 2022 received a passing score according to new data released by the American Bar Association. This is a slight decline in the first-time pass rate recorded in 2021 (80 percent) and 2020 (84 percent), although covid-necessitated modifications to the exam in those years make direct comparison difficult. 

The “ultimate bar pass rate,” or the percentage of law school graduates who pass the bar within two years, has increased this year. For the class of 2020, 91.9 percent passed the licensing exam within two years, up slightly from 91.3 percent in 2019 and 90.1 percent in 2018. 

While many of the most prestigious law programs boasted their highest pass rates, the percentage who passed did decrease for most schools when compared to 2021. 

NYU Professor Urges MBA Students to Think Beyond Consulting, Finance, and Tech

A recent WSJ op-ed by Suzy Welch, CNBC Contributor, Author, and Professor at NYU Stern provides career advice for MBAs: Although consulting, finance, and tech are the most commonly sought careers post-MBA, they are not the only routes to success. Welch advises MBAs to seek work, “at the intersection of their authentic values, their strongest skills and aptitudes, and the kind of work that interests and excites them intellectually and emotionally.” But, she points out, despite most students entering MBA programs feeling awash with career possibilities, most leave with jobs in just three industries. 

Finding purpose is an idea that she’s put a lot of thought into. After the loss of her husband, the legendary Jack Welch, she realized her need to find an “organizing principle” in her life. Welch then developed, pitched, and is now teaching a course at NYU Stern on the topic. Designed to guide MBAs on an introspective journey towards a fulfilling career path, the course is titled “Becoming You: Crafting the Authentic Career You Want and Need.” She describes it, according to Poets & Quants, as the class she wishes that she’d been able to take before graduating from Harvard Business School and entering into consulting. 

In her WSJ article, Welch identifies two key patterns emerging within MBA programs that are reducing opportunities for graduates. The first is internal: groupthink. She described this phenomenon In an interview with Poets & Quants. “You go to business school and you think about strategy and the digital economy, but what about thinking about what you want to do with your life? Most people go to business school to pivot into a new career... So you get there and you are looking around and the choices get narrower and narrower because of groupthink. You arrive big-eyed and you end up squinting. Investment banking and consulting are the two big funnels, or maybe tech,” she says. 

While she notes that some MBAs may also be seeking financial security and a way to repay loans, she purports that it runs deeper. That, for many, taking a job in one of the big three—consulting, finance, or tech—is fulfilling a “group instinct” and is good for “optics.” And as is so often the case with groupthink, MBA students who opt not to apply for these lucrative positions, or those who turn down such offers, can feel foolish or like risk-takers. But she warns that many who do follow that path as a means for safety and security often end up regretful. “A lot of very smart, very capable people, usually in their late 30s and early 40s, wake up miserable one day. Over my years as a journalist specializing in the workplace, I saw this phenomenon so often I came to dub it “The Velvet Coffin”—a state of cushy creature comfort encased in emotional or intellectual dissatisfaction” she writes.

Welch also observes a second pattern and it is external. Industry, she calls out, does a poor job showing up to recruit and sell itself among MBAs. Whereas, consulting, finance, and tech recruiters not only show up but have excelled in creating touchpoints and programming, and defining a consistent and compelling “narrative.” 

“I heard it repeatedly, because my students parroted it back to me: Even if you don’t stay long-term, with our credential on your résumé and professional development programs, we’ll set you up for your career! The big three are so persuasive and make it so convenient to get a job that it ends up feeling inevitable,” she writes. 

Welch concludes that MBA students, like never before, are seeking meaning and purpose from their careers and their lives. And she advises them to think carefully about their goals, listen, and dare to consider opportunities beyond the big three industries.

Five Qualities Medical School Admissions Committees are Looking for in Applicants

Throughout your medical school primary and secondary applications, you will want to highlight the following skills and qualities. 

Leadership. This is a key quality that separates physicians from other members of a healthcare provider team. Throughout your application, you will want to showcase your ability to lead a team in order to accomplish a common goal. Consider the role you play within a group and how you help bring out the best in other team members. You don’t need to be the captain of a sports team or a club president to be a highly-effective and persuasive leader. Rather, you need to be able to articulate how your influence and openness promote the best outcome(s) in a collaborative environment. 

In what meaningful experiences did you show your leadership abilities? Did leadership come naturally to you, or did you work to get to this place? (Both things are great!) How did you support your team? Did you encourage collaboration or independence? Did you feel supported by your team? Did you experience any pushback, and how did you handle that if you did? What did you think about these things at the time? How did you feel? What did you learn that you will incorporate into your leadership style in the future?

Teamwork:  Medical school and the practice of medicine are often team endeavors. While we’ve encouraged you to showcase your ability to lead a team, you will also want to show your ability to work collaboratively and productively with others. Highlight instances where you have shown humility and elevated the voices of others. Think about your most effective team experiences and what you learned about yourself from working with those teammates. 

During what meaningful experiences did you work with a team or collaborate with others successfully? Were you working with people unlike yourself? Was there a struggle for balance in the beginning? Any confusion? What did you appreciate about your team members? How did they influence and impact you and your actions? Did one or two team members step up in a way you admired? What did you think about these things at the time? How did you feel? Have you had experiences with teams that were unsuccessful? What did you learn (remember: failures can provide great insight too!)?

Critical and creative thinking. The practice of medicine requires constant engagement with problem solving, from interacting with patients to coming to a diagnosis and treatment plan to driving research and innovation agendas. You will need to ask good questions and consider the interplay of multiple variables. Showcase the critical thinking skills you’ve already developed, as well as your ability to stay calm when faced with complicated issues.

In what meaningful experiences did you utilize critical thinking and problem-solving skills? How did you determine the best course of action? Did you approach something one way at first and then correct yourself? What did you think about these things at the time? What did you learn? How did you feel?

Intellectual curiosity. Medical school is academically rigorous, and schools want students who can not only handle the workload, but will elevate the classroom discourse by engaging deeply with the material. And, beyond school, medicine is an ever-evolving field. Throughout your career, you will be asked to take on new challenges and employ innovative thinking. Just demonstrating a record of academic success is not enough. Rather, you will want to show the admissions committee examples of situations where you went beyond what was required to better comprehend a topic. Keep in mind that you can demonstrate intellectual curiosity in an academic environment but also beyond it—at work or in your participation with a charity or hobby. 

In what meaningful experiences did you demonstrate intellectual curiosity? How have you gone above and beyond the expected to better understand a topic? In what ways have you pursued additional knowledge or sought out learning opportunities? How have you taken your interest to the next level? How did it make you feel? 

Empathy and the ability to connect with others: Medical schools are highly-attuned to the interpersonal capabilities of applicants. Share experiences where you demonstrate empathy, listening skills, and the ability to form connections. Showcase situations in your life where you overcame obvious differences with others to form a respectful relationship. Make it clear that you always treat others with humility and respect and that you will see your patients as full people, rather than as a set of symptoms or a puzzle to be solved. 

In what meaningful experiences did you empathize and connect with others? What effect did you have on others? What effect did they have on you? What did you think about these things at the time? How did you feel? What have you learned about how to find common ground with those who are different from you? Do you have any examples of times that forming a good relationship with someone else led you both to a better outcome?

Opportunities Expand for Students Seeking In-House Roles Immediately Post-Graduation

In the not-so-distant past, advisors encouraged law students interested in pursuing a career in an in-house legal department to gain at least five years of law firm experience first. But, as of late, this trend has started to shift; law schools are now proactively preparing students for in-house roles directly out of school and companies are demonstrating a greater willingness to hire less experienced lawyers. While working at a firm is still the most typical leadoff to an in-house career path—a 2022 survey of in-house professionals found that just 17 percent of the 2,000 plus respondents went directly in-house, while 78 percent had outside firm experience —for students who know that they’re seeking an in-house role, the possibilities are expanding.

A recent LegalDive article highlighted a few of the experiential learning programs currently being facilitated at law schools. We’ve provided a brief summary below: 

• Baylor University School of Law’s In-House Counsel Externship Program: Includes both a classroom component, which covers legal issues faced by in-house counsel and practical skills, as well as an externship with a supervising lawyer in a local corporate legal department. 

• Santa Clara University School of Law’s Tech Edge J.D.: Provides legal externships at tech companies or law firms, along with classroom instruction. Alumni who work in-house speak to students about their career paths, and answer questions about their roles.

• Columbia Law School’s Reuben Mark Initiative for Organizational Character and Leadership (a joint initiative between the law school and Columbia Business School): Includes a set of courses designed to teach law students leadership and collaboration skills, and features guest speakers who will discuss the large influence corporate lawyers have over the organization’s operations.

• Duke University School of Law’s Law & Entrepreneurship Program: Provides students with legal and business knowledge needed to support the business, institutional, and strategic role that entrepreneurial advisors must play, and also gives perspective on how to start and grow a company. The program also supports a Start-up Ventures Clinic where students can represent founders and entrepreneurial companies. 

• UC Hastings College of Law’s Paragon Legal DEI Career Connect Program: Still in the early stages, but places recent UC Hastings law school graduates at participating companies to gain experience in the in-house legal role.  

Jack Terschluse, a 2019 law graduate of Washington University in St. Louis, quit his job at a law firm after just two years to work for Balto, a tech start-up. “I think in a startup, the opportunities for promotions and different leadership experiences are greater earlier on than they might be at a bigger company because there’s not this big bench of people who’ve been waiting their turn to ascend to that leadership position,” Terschluse said in an interview with LegalDive. Similarly, Phelan Simpkins, intellectual property counsel at State Farm, and 2021 law graduate of the University of Missouri, was able to achieve his goal of an in-house position directly out of law school. He pointed out, also to LegalDive, that recent law graduates shouldn’t underestimate their ability to have an immediate impact in an in-house role. “Having somebody who is coming out of law school who’s had the theoretical training, but not necessarily the practical aspect of it, you’re getting a fresh perspective on an issue of law or how the company manages certain issues, which can be refreshing,” he said.

Consultants with MBAs Report Higher Job Satisfaction

Considering a career in consulting? An MBA may do more than just improving your chances of landing a job. According to a recent Poets & Quants article, consultants who have MBAs report a better employee experience within consulting firms than those who have obtained an undergraduate degree alone. In fact, MBAs report higher satisfaction than their bachelor’s degree holding counterparts across all Quality of Work and Life dimensions that were measured in a consulting ranking by Vault and analyzed by Firsthand, an industry intelligence platform. 

MBAs noted significantly higher satisfaction with international opportunities, compensation, client interaction, level of challenge and benefits, while the two groups aligned more closely in satisfaction on “big picture items” such as business outlook, innovation in industry, firm leadership, and supervisor relationships. 

Below, we’ve included a chart showing the various Quality of Work and Life dimensions, along with the average satisfaction scores (with ten as the highest score) for MBAs and those with undergraduate degrees alone.

Source: Poets & Quants

Law Schools Incorporate Student Development Programs to Drive Student Wellbeing and Career Readiness

Earlier this month Bloomberg Law released the results from its second annual Law Student Preparedness Survey. And the results on student wellbeing were… not great. The survey, administered in December 2022, showed that over half of the 1,000 students reported that their wellbeing worsened slightly (32 percent) or significantly (26 percent) during the fall 2022 semester. Additionally, most of the law students, over three-quarters, reported experiencing mental or physical health problems due to law school related issues: 77 percent experienced anxiety, 71 percent experienced disrupted sleep, and 51 percent experienced depression. Just 11 percent said they did not experience a mental or physical health issue due to law school. 

Luckily, more law programs, recognized by Bloomberg Law’s Innovation Program, are creating programs to offer better support to students in terms of their law school experience and career readiness. Each of the schools named as a finalist also track the student outcomes related to their programs via qualitative and quantitative data, ensuring that the programs are actually bolstering student development and not just paying lip service to the idea. 

We’ve highlighted a few of the programs recognized for innovation in student development below, and the full list is available on Bloomberg Law. You can also find Bloomberg Law’s lists for law school innovation in other categories (technology, business, pedagogy, etc.). 

Elon University School of Law: Elon offers a redesigned curriculum with an emphasis on experiential learning, an academic period of seven (rather than eight) semesters, and lower tuition. The shortened law school year allows graduating students to take the bar in February and commence professional life earlier. Elon Law’s Interim Dean Alan Woodlief, in an interview with Bloomberg Law, described the school’s improved admissions, bar passage, and career placement rates since adopting the new curriculum. “These data points demonstrate a strong demand for law schools that place student needs and development at the center of their approach to educating future attorneys, and we’re proud of the strides we have made together as a community in our noble mission,” he said.

Fordham University School of Law: Fordham offers the Peer Mentoring and Leadership Program, which pairs third-year law students interested in being mentors with second-year students. The school identified the second-year period as a critical time for students, who are often under intense academic and career pressure. The benefits of the program include increased support of students in a high pressure period, cross-cultural understanding, growth in friendships and professional networks, and improved leadership skills for the mentors. The program’s founder, professor Linda Sugin, described the aims of the program to Bloomberg Law, “All the mentoring and leadership skills developed in the program are essential for lawyers—regardless of the type of work they do. All lawyers need to develop self-awareness, work cross-culturally, handle challenges and setbacks with resilience and equanimity, and care for their own well-being,” she said. 

The University of Tennessee College of Law: The University of Tennessee developed the Institute for Professional Leadership (IPL) to offer students a curriculum curated to develop legal and professional leaders. Specific leadership courses are combined with pro bono, public service, and career advancement opportunities, and events to develop students’ leadership skills and prepare them for careers in law, government, nonprofit, and for-profit organizations. The Interim Director for the IPL and law professor, Joan MacLeod Heminway described the reasoning behind the Institute’s creation to Bloomberg Law. "Leadership education in the law school setting fills a gap in the traditional program of legal education. Robust leadership education in law schools focuses students on intentional introspection and the identification and development of skills, values, professional identity, and career paths through interdisciplinary programming beyond a strictly legal context,” she said.