Now that the fourth Ranking Season has been locked, we turn our collective attention
to Ranking Season 2011, and possible changes to the ranking methodology.
Has the Ranker hatched some new ranking scheme? That’s now the wrong question to ask.
From here on out, rule changes will be the province of the LSA Rules Committee – a
committee consisting of law schools (initially 8).
By way of explanation, the Ranker is an alum of Chicago-Kent College of Law, which is
among the programs ranked. Understandably then, LSA has always kept an eye out for
the appropriate moment to transfer the rule-making power to the programs themselves.
When to convene a Ranker-less Rules Committee turned on the question: Which programs
will entertain only those rule changes that will, in effect, preserve the “good will”
LSA has diligently accrued over these four years. (Since the Ranker never hesitates
to engage moot court stakeholders in rhetorical battle, the term “good will” is being
used loosely here.)
We have our answer. In which programs do we vest rule-making authority? The programs
deeming moot court worthy of investment: The Top 20 programs. In other words, a vote
is earned - but not yet claimed - for each Top 20 finish. When a sufficient cross-
section of Top 20 programs claimed the votes they earned, the inaugural LSA Rules
Committee was born.
Thus, and in stark contrast with a methodology conceived/controlled by anindividual founder who graduated from Chicago-Kent, any rule changes will now pass through a
committee consisting initially of eight law schools. (That number should grow
significantly with each passing Ranking Season.)
[Wanna be part of the next Rules Committee? Have you finished Top 20 in one or more
Ranking Seasons? Then email the Ranker, and request/sign/return LSA’s vote-claiming
New/amended/abolished rules will be clearly marked as suchhere, with the remaining
rules on that screen reflecting the methodology that existed prior to transfer.
We here at LSA look forward to many years of ranking your moot court programs -
hopefully, with your additional involvement at the committee level. Regardless, and
as always, please feel free to forward me your program's top finishes, including the
following information: number of non-international/non-sponsor teams that paid and
submitted briefs; school names of winner, finalist and non-advancing semifinalists;
along with any links/official emails reflecting same.
[Please also email me if you're interested in free promotion of your law school's
interscholastic moot court competition. It will be the standard Q&A linked from the
main/landing page of LawSchoolAdvocacy.com.]
Brian Koppen, ostensibly still the “Ranker” of LawSchoolAdvocacy.com (but now just the
adder-upper), [email protected]