TaxProf Blog

Gender, Race, and Age in SSRN Download Rankings

In our article, Ranking Law Schools: Using SSRN to Measure Scholarly Performance, 81 Ind. L.J. 83 (2006), Bernie Black and I noted that one of the advantages of SSRN download counts over the other faculty rankings measures (citation counts, publication counts, and reputation surveys) is that SSRN downloads favor younger scholars at improving law schools while the other measures favor more established scholars and schools.  We also noted that women and minorities are under-represented in SSRN download counts as they are in citation counts, publication counts, and reputation surveys, but speculated that the representation of women and minorities would improve in the future as they posted more papers on SSRN, particularly in the recent downloads measure.  We closed the article with case studies of the SSRN download rankings in our respective fields -- corporate and tax law (pp. 120-22).  The SSRN download data were from August 2005.  The chart below compares that data with the most recent tax download data (September 2009) on gender, race, and age:

	Top 25 All-Time Downloads		Top 25 Recent Downloads
	2005	2009	2005	2009
% Women	16%	20%	20%	39%
% Men	84%	80%	80%	61%
% Minority	8%	4%	0%	0%
% White	92%	96%	100%	100%
Mean Age	47.0	47.6	45.4	46.3
Median Age	47.0	48.0	44.5	47.0

Earlier this year, I asked Why Do Female Tax Profs Do Better in the SSRN Rankings Than Their Nontax Counterparts?.  The representation of women in the Top 25 has increased from 2005 to 2009 in both all-time (4 percentage points) and recent (19) downloads.  However, the representation of minorities has decreased in all-time downloads (4) downloads and has stayed at 0 in recent downloads (based on self reporting in the AALS listing of minority law teachers).

On the age front, Tax Profs in the Top 25 of the SSRN download rankings in both 2005 (all time: 47.0 mean, 47.0 median; recent: 45.4 mean, 44.5 median) and 2009 (all time: 47.6 mean, 48.0 median; recent: 46.3 mean, 47.0 median) are much younger than Tax Profs (55 mean, 54 median) and law professors (53 mean, 52 median) generally.  Eric A. Lustig, Who We Are: An Empirical Study of the Tax Law Professoriate, 1 Pitt. Tax Rev. 85 (2003) (2001 AALS data).  However, the mean and median ages have increased from 2005 to 2009 in both download categories -- all-time (0.6 mean, 1.0 median) and recent (0.9 mean, 2.5 median) downloads.

SSRN Tax Faculty Rankings

Theodore P. Seto (Loyola-L.A.) has updated his ranking of the Top 25 U.S. Law School Tax Faculties, as measured by the number of SSRN downloads (through 8/19/09):

		All-Time Downloads		Recent Downloads
1	Michigan	26,128	Michigan	6777
2	Harvard	23,955	Illinois	4366
3	Illinois	15,724	UC-Davis	3976
4	Pennsylvania	14,560	Harvard	3285
5	Colorado	13,418	Chicago	2708
6	Chicago	11,882	Loyola-L.A.	2669
7	USC	10,970	Pennsylvania	2381
8	Loyola-L.A.	10,839	Colorado	2377
9	UCLA	10,817	Washburn	2322
10	UC-Davis	9474	Baltimore	2266
11	Columbia	8653	Florida State	2126
12	Boston University	8516	UCLA	1997
13	Florida State	8501	USC	1939
14	Cincinnati	7711	Connecticut	1800
15	Chapman	6341	San Diego	1792
16	Stanford	6247	Chapman	1746
17	NYU	6000	Florida	1644
18	Florida	5518	Pace	1637
19	Washburn	5392	Columbia	1468
20	Baltimore	5164	Boston University	1467
21	Indiana-Bloomington	5012	Case Western	1372
22	Boston College	4638	Notre Dame	1346
23	Notre Dame	4608	Northwestern	1297
24	UC-Berkeley	4463	Texas Tech	1249
25	George Mason	4455	UC-Berkeley	1190

For purpose of Ted’s analysis, a tax professor is initially defined as any full-time law professor at a U.S. law school (1) self-identifying with one of the tax categories in the AALS faculty listing, (2) who has posted at least one tax or tax-related article in abstract or full text on SSRN. Paul Caron’s listing of new hires and lateral transfers is also reflected. Further corrections are made as requested. As is true of Paul Caron’s ranking of individual tax professors, downloads of all SSRN postings of any tax professor, so defined, are then tallied. Articles co-authored by members of a single faculty are counted only once towards that faculty’s tally.

For more on the use of SSRN downloads in law school rankings, see Bernard S. Black & Paul L. Caron, Ranking Law Schools: Using SSRN to Measure Scholarly Performance, 81 Ind. L.J. 83 (2006).

New 2010 U.S. News Tax Rankings

The new 2010 U.S. News Law School Tax Rankings were released today:

• 1. NYU (#1 last year)
• 2. Florida (#2)
• 2. Georgetown (#3)
• 4. Northwestern (#4)
• 5. Harvard (#6)
• 6. Boston University (#8)
• 6. Miami (#6)
• 6. UCLA (#5)
• 9. Michigan (#10)
• 10. Stanford (#13)
• 11. San Diego (#16)
• 11. Virginia (#9)
• 13. Columbia (#19)
• 13. Texas (#10)
• 15. Chicago (#17)
• 16. Loyola-L.A. (#13)
• 17. Chapman (unranked)
• 17. Penn (#19)
• 19. Denver (#19)
• 19. SMU (#22)
• 19. U. Washington (#15)
• 19. Yale (#10)
• 23. Boston College (unranked)
• 23. George Washington (unranked)

The upward moves from last year in the overall tax rankings are:

• +6 Columbia (#13)
• +5 San Diego (#11)
• +3 Stanford (#10)
• +3 SMU (#19)
• +2 Boston University (#6)
• +2 Chicago (#15)
• +2 Penn (#17)
• +1 Georgetown (#2)
• +1 Harvard (#5)
• +1 Michigan (#9)
• Chapman, Boston College, and George Washington were unranked last year and rank #17, #23, and #23, respectively, this year

The downward moves from last year in the overall tax rankings are:

• -9 Yale (#19)
• -4 U. Washington (#19)
• -3 Texas (#13)
• -3 Loyola-L.A. (#16)
• -2 Virginia (#11)
• -1 UCLA (#6)
• Duke, USC, and Villanova ranked #18, #22, and #22, respectively, last year and are unranked this year

Here are the rankings of the graduate tax programs:

• 1. NYU (#1 last year)
• 2. Florida (#2)
• 2. Georgetown (#3)
• 4. Northwestern (#4)
• 5. Boston University (#6)
• 5. Miami (#5)
• 7. San Diego (#9)
• 8. Loyola-L.A. (#7)
• 9. Chapman (unranked)
• 10. Denver (#10)
• 10. SMU (#11)
• 10. U. Washington (#8)

The upward moves from last year in the graduate tax program rankings are:

• +2 San Diego (#7)
• +1 Georgetown (#2)
• +1 Boston University (#5)
• +1 SMU (#10)
• Chapman was unranked last year and ranks #9 this year

The downward moves from last year in the graduate tax program rankings are:

• - 2 U. Washington (#10)
• - 1 Loyola-L.A. (#8)
• Villanova was ranked #11 last year and is unranked this year

For the 2009 U.S. News Tax Rankings, see here.

Early Release of 2010 U.S. News Tax Rankings

Although the 2010 U.S. News Law School Tax Rankings will not be released until Thursday, April 23, the Top 10 list appearing in the magazine has been published on the Internet.  Perhaps the biggest development is Georgetown moving up to #2 (tied with Florida): 

• 1.  NYU (#1 last year)
• 2.  Florida (#2)
• 2.  Georgetown (#3)
• 4.  Northwestern (#4)
• 5.  Harvard (#6)
• 6.  Boston University (#8)
• 6.  UCLA (#5)
• 6.  Miami (#6)
• 9.  Michigan (#10)
• 10. Stanford (#13)

I will publish the complete Top 25 Tax Rankings when they become available on Thursday (if not earlier).  For the 2009 tax rankings, see here.

Update:  For the release of the full 2010 U.S. News Tax Rankings of the Top 24 schools, see here.

SSRN Tax Faculty Rankings

Theodore P. Seto (Loyola-L.A.) has updated his rankings of the Top 25 U.S. Law School Tax Faculties, as measured by the number of SSRN downloads (through 9/12/08) [click on chart to enlarge]:

   

For purpose of Ted’s analysis, a tax professor is initially defined as any law professor at a U.S. law school (1) self-identifying with one of the tax categories in the AALS faculty listing, (2) who has posted at least one tax or tax-related article in abstract or full text on SSRN. Paul Caron’s listing of new hires and lateral transfers is also reflected. Further corrections are also made as requested. As is true of Paul Caron’s ranking of individual tax professors, downloads of all SSRN postings of any tax professor, so defined, are then tallied. Articles co-authored by members of a single faculty are counted only once towards that faculty’s tally.

For more on the use of SSRN downloads in law school rankings, see Bernard S. Black & Paul L. Caron, Ranking Law Schools: Using SSRN to Measure Scholarly Performance, 81 Ind. L.J. 83 (2006).

SSRN Tax Faculty Rankings

Theodore P. Seto (Loyola-L.A.) has updated his monthly rankings of the Top 25 U.S. Law School Tax Faculties, as measured by the number of SSRN downloads (through 12/6/07) [click on chart to enlarge]:

For purpose of Ted’s analysis, a tax professor is initially defined as any law professor at a U.S. law school (1) self-identifying with one of the tax categories in the AALS faculty listing, (2) who has posted at least one tax or tax-related article in abstract or full text on SSRN. Paul Caron’s listing of new hires and lateral transfers is also reflected. Further corrections are also made as requested. As is true of Paul Caron’s ranking of individual tax professors, downloads of all SSRN postings of any tax professor, so defined, are then tallied.

For more on the use of SSRN downloads in law school rankings, see Bernard S. Black & Paul L. Caron, Ranking Law Schools: Using SSRN to Measure Scholarly Performance, 81 Ind. L.J. 83 (2006).

SSRN Tax Faculty Rankings

Theodore P. Seto (Loyola-L.A.) has updated his monthly rankings of the Top 25 U.S. Law School Tax Faculties, as measured by the number of SSRN downloads (through 8/1/07):

   

For purpose of Ted’s analysis, a tax professor is initially defined as any law professor at a U.S. law school (1) self-identifying with one of the tax categories in the AALS faculty listing, (2) who has posted at least one tax or tax-related article in abstract or full text on SSRN. Paul Caron’s listing of new hires and lateral transfers is also reflected. Further corrections are also made as requested. As is true of Paul Caron’s ranking of individual tax professors, downloads of all SSRN postings of any tax professor, so defined, are then tallied.

For more on the use of SSRN downloads in law school rankings, see Bernard S. Black & Paul L. Caron, Ranking Law Schools: Using SSRN to Measure Scholarly Performance, 81 Ind. L.J. 83 (2006).

SSRN Tax Faculty Rankings

Theodore P. Seto (Loyola-L.A.) has updated his monthly rankings of the Top 25 U.S. Law School Tax Faculties, as measured by the number of SSRN downloads (through 6/1/07):

 

For purpose of Ted’s analysis, a tax professor is initially defined as any law professor at a U.S. law school (1) self-identifying with one of the tax categories in the AALS faculty listing, (2) who has posted at least one tax or tax-related article in abstract or full text on SSRN. Paul Caron’s listing of new hires and lateral transfers is also reflected. (Lateral transfers due to take effect July 2007 are not yet incorporated.) Further corrections are also made as requested. As is true of Paul Caron’s ranking of individual tax professors, downloads of all SSRN postings of any tax professor, so defined, are then tallied. This month’s tally for Michigan is boosted by the addition of Jim Hines.

For more on the use of SSRN downloads in law school rankings, see Bernard S. Black & Paul L. Caron, Ranking Law Schools: Using SSRN to Measure Scholarly Performance, 81 Ind. L.J. 83 (2006).

SSRN Tax Faculty Rankings

Theodore P. Seto (Loyola-L.A.) has updated his monthly rankings of the Top 25 U.S. Law School Tax Faculties, as measured by the number of SSRN downloads (through 5/1/07):

 

For purpose of Ted’s analysis, a tax professor is initially defined as any law professor at a U.S. law school (1) self-identifying with one of the tax categories in the AALS faculty listing, (2) who has posted at least one tax or tax-related article in abstract or full text on SSRN. Paul Caron’s listing of new hires and lateral transfers is also reflected. (Lateral transfers due to take effect July 2007 are not yet incorporated.) Further corrections are also made as requested. As is true of Paul Caron’s ranking of individual tax professors, downloads of all SSRN postings of any tax professor, so defined, are then tallied. This month’s tally for Michigan is boosted by the addition of Jim Hines.

For more on the use of SSRN downloads in law school rankings, see Bernard S. Black & Paul L. Caron, Ranking Law Schools: Using SSRN to Measure Scholarly Performance, 81 Ind. L.J. 83 (2006).

Overall Law Faculty Rankings v. Tax Faculty Rankings

Brian Leiter (Texas) has posted The Top 15 Most Downloaded Law Faculties, 2006 on our Leiter's Law School Rankings site.  The following chart compares how the overall faculty rankings compare to the tax faculty rankings compiled by Ted Seto (Loyola-L.A.):

[Click on chart to enlarge.]  Note that 7 of the schools comprising the Top 15 Faculties also are among the Top 15 Tax Faculties.

SSRN Tax Faculty Rankings

Theodore P. Seto (Loyola-L.A.) has updated his monthly rankings of the Top 25 U.S. Law School Tax Faculties, as measured by the number of SSRN downloads (through 3/1/07):   

For purpose of Ted’s analysis, a tax professor is initially defined as any law professor at a U.S. law school (1) self-identifying with one of the tax categories in the 2005-2006 AALS faculty listing, (2) who has posted at least one tax or tax-related article in abstract or full text on SSRN. Paul Caron’s listing of 2006-2007 new hires and lateral transfers is also reflected. Further corrections are also made as requested. As is true of Paul Caron’s ranking of individual tax professors, downloads of all SSRN postings of any tax professor, so defined, are then tallied. This month’s rankings include several requested additions to the NYU tally, among others.

For more on the use of SSRN downloads in law school rankings, see Bernard S. Black & Paul L. Caron, Ranking Law Schools: Using SSRN to Measure Scholarly Performance, 81 Ind. L.J. 83 (2006).

SSRN Tax Faculty Rankings

Theodore P. Seto (Loyola-L.A.) has updated his monthly rankings of the Top 25 U.S. Law School Tax Faculties, as measured by the number of SSRN downloads (through 2/1/07): 

   

For purpose of Ted’s analysis, a tax professor is initially defined as any law professor at a U.S. law school (1) self-identifying with one of the tax categories in the 2005-2006 AALS faculty listing, (2) who has posted at least one tax or tax-related article in abstract or full text on SSRN. Paul Caron’s listing of 2006-2007 new hires and lateral transfers is also reflected. Further corrections are also made as requested. As is true of Paul Caron’s ranking of individual tax professors, downloads of all SSRN postings of any tax professor, so defined, are then tallied. This month’s rankings include several requested additions to the NYU tally, among others.

For more on the use of SSRN downloads in law school rankings, see Bernard S. Black & Paul L. Caron, Ranking Law Schools: Using SSRN to Measure Scholarly Performance, 81 Ind. L.J. 83 (2006).

SSRN Tax Faculty Rankings

Theodore P. Seto (Loyola-L.A.) has updated his monthly rankings of the Top 25 U.S. Law School Tax Faculties, as measured by the number of SSRN downloads (through 1/1/07):      

For purpose of Ted’s analysis, a tax professor is initially defined as any law professor at a U.S. law school (1) self-identifying with one of the tax categories in the 2005-2006 AALS faculty listing, (2) who has posted at least one tax or tax-related article in abstract or full text on SSRN. Paul Caron’s listing of 2006-2007 new hires and lateral transfers is also reflected. Further corrections are also made as requested. As is true of Paul Caron’s ranking of individual tax professors, downloads of all SSRN postings of any tax professor, so defined, are then tallied. This month’s rankings include several requested additions to the NYU tally, among others.

For more on the use of SSRN downloads in law school rankings, see Bernard S. Black & Paul L. Caron, Ranking Law Schools: Using SSRN to Measure Scholarly Performance, 81 Ind. L.J. 83 (2006).

SSRN Tax Faculty Rankings

Theodore P. Seto (Loyola-L.A.) has updated his monthly rankings of the Top 25 U.S. Law School Tax Faculties, as measured by the number of SSRN downloads (through 12/1/06): 

For purpose of Ted’s analysis, a tax professor is initially defined as any law professor at a U.S. law school (1) self-identifying with one of the tax categories in the 2005-2006 AALS faculty listing, (2) who has posted at least one tax or tax-related article in abstract or full text on SSRN. Paul Caron’s listing of 2006-2007 new hires and lateral transfers is also reflected. Further corrections are also made as requested. As is true of Paul Caron’s ranking of individual tax professors, downloads of all SSRN postings of any tax professor, so defined, are then tallied. This month’s rankings include several requested additions to the NYU tally, among others.

For more on the use of SSRN downloads in law school rankings, see Bernard S. Black & Paul L. Caron, Ranking Law Schools: Using SSRN to Measure Scholarly Performance, 81 Ind. L.J. 83 (2006).

SSRN Tax Faculty Rankings

Theodore P. Seto (Loyola-L.A.) has updated his monthly rankings of the Top 25 U.S. Law School Tax Faculties, as measured by the number of SSRN downloads (through 11/1/06):

For purpose of Ted’s analysis, a tax professor is initially defined as any law professor at a U.S. law school (1) self-identifying with one of the tax categories in the 2005-2006 AALS faculty listing, (2) who has posted at least one tax or tax-related article in abstract or full text on SSRN. Paul Caron’s listing of 2006-2007 new hires and lateral transfers is also reflected. Further corrections are also made as requested. As is true of Paul Caron’s ranking of individual tax professors, downloads of all SSRN postings of any tax professor, so defined, are then tallied. This month’s rankings include several requested additions to the NYU tally, among others.

For more on the use of SSRN downloads in law school rankings, see Bernard S. Black & Paul L. Caron, Ranking Law Schools: Using SSRN to Measure Scholarly Performance, 81 Ind. L.J. 83 (2006).

Updated SSRN Tax Faculty Rankings

Theodore P. Seto (Loyola-L.A.) has updated his monthly rankings of the Top 25 U.S. Law School Tax Faculties, as measured by the number of SSRN downloads (through 10/1/06):   

For purpose of Ted’s analysis, a tax professor is initially defined as any law professor at a U.S. law school (1) self-identifying with one of the tax categories in the 2005-2006 AALS faculty listing, (2) who has posted at least one tax or tax-related article in abstract or full text on SSRN. Paul Caron’s listing of 2006-2007 new hires and lateral transfers is also reflected. Further corrections are also made as requested. As is true of Paul Caron’s ranking of individual tax professors, downloads of all SSRN postings of any tax professor, so defined, are then tallied.

For more on the use of SSRN downloads in law school rankings, see Bernard S. Black & Paul L. Caron, Ranking Law Schools: Using SSRN to Measure Scholarly Performance, 81 Ind. L.J. 83 (2006).

Updated SSRN Tax Faculty Rankings

Theodore P. Seto (Loyola-L.A.) has updated his monthly rankings of the Top 25 U.S. Law School Tax Faculties, as measured by the number of SSRN downloads (through 9/1/06):   

I’m still working the bugs out of the system. I now have Yariv Brauner back at Florida, not Arizona State. In addition, I’ve added Donald Weidner to Florida State’s tally. These faculty changes account for all of the changes in “all-time downloads.” Otherwise, the “all-time download” rankings are unchanged from last month. “Recent downloads,” of course, are much more of a “What have you done for me lately?” phenomenon.

For more details about Ted's study, see below the fold:

SSRN tax faculty ranking changes since August 2006:

For purpose of Ted Seto’s analysis, a tax professor is initially defined as any law professor at a U.S. law school (1) self-identifying with one of the tax categories in the 2005-2006 AALS faculty listing, (2) who has posted at least one tax or tax-related article in abstract or full text on SSRN. Paul Caron’s listing of 2006-2007 new hires and lateral transfers is also reflected. Further corrections are also made as requested. As is true of Paul Caron’s ranking of individual tax professors, downloads of all SSRN postings of any tax professor, so defined, are then tallied.

For more on the use of SSRN downloads in law school rankings, see Bernard S. Black & Paul L. Caron, Ranking Law Schools: Using SSRN to Measure Scholarly Performance, 81 Ind. L.J. 83 (2006).

More on Tax Faculty Rankings

Jim Maule responds to our publication of Ted Seto's second monthly tax faculty rankings (here and here), questioning the usefulness of SSRN downloads as a rankings measure and proposing an alternative ranking based on the number of BNA tax portfolios published by a school's tax faculty.  Here are the top schools under Jim's measure:

• 1.  Villanova
• 2.  Iowa State
• 3.  SMU
•      Suffolk
• 5.  Emory
•     Georgia
•     Houston
•     Michigan
•     Washington & Lee

Although Jim claims that this ranking is "no more or less meaningful than any other tax faculty ranking," I suspect most people would find SSRN's tax faculty ranking more persuasive:

• 1.  Harvard
• 2.  UCLA
• 3.  Penn
• 4.  USC
• 5.  Michigan
• 6.  Columbia

Indeed, SSRN's ranking of law faculties as a whole also seems to identify the right top schools:

• 1.  Chicago
• 2.  Harvard
• 3.  Columbia
• 4.  Stanford
• 5.  Texas
• 6.  UCLA
• 7.  Yale
• 8.  Georgetown

Jim is certainly right that SSRN is an incomplete measure, as it includes only a subset of faculty scholarship.  But as I argue in a forthcoming essay in a Yale Law Journal Pocket Part symposium on The Future of Legal Scholarship, the enormous data available on SSRN (3,500 law faculty have posted 11,500 papers on SSRN, which have been downloaded 2.4 million times) provide important insights into the market for legal scholarship.

The answer to SSRN's shortcomings is not to go in the other direction and focus on the offerings of a single publisher.  In our article, What Law Schools Can Learn from Billy Beane and the Oakland Athletics, 82 Tex. L. Rev. 1483, 1533-37 (2004), Rafael Gely and I propose comprehensive and qualitative measurements of faculty scholarly performance:

Given the increasing market demand for more detailed and refined measurements of performance, future studies should provide a comprehensive list of all faculty publications, with the weighting disclosed by the authors and thus capable of further refinement by others. Indeed, we envision a custom-ranking process that allows users to assign their own rankings to the comprehensive data, as is developing now with law school rankings....

The next step in the development of citation count methodologies should extend measurements to include citations to faculty work in books and other forms of scholarship, as well as in judicial opinions, executive branch determinations, and congressional sources....[M]easurements of scholarly impact by citation counts to date consistently have foreshorn any qualitative measures and instead have embraced a strictly numerical approach. But assuming a reliable measure of law review quality can be developed, it may be proper to “count” an article in the #1-ranked journal more than an article of equivalent length in the #180-ranked journal. It also may be appropriate for an extensive discussion of a faculty member’s work in the text of an article to “count” more than a single mention in a string cite in a footnote of an article.

In addition to productivity and citation counts, a more rigorous and systematic use of peer evaluation could provide an alternative measure of individual faculty productivity. The Internet provides a venue for faculty to evaluate each other’s work, not unlike the “book reviews” common on Internet bookstores such as Amazon.com.

I subscribe to Philip Postlewaite's view in Life After Tenure: Where Have All the Articles Gone?, 48 J. Legal Educ. 558, 567 (1998):

[T]he consummate legal academic publishes for the academy (academic articles and university press books), for the profession (professional articles and treatises), and for students (casebooks and student guides). Each constituency is worth addressing, and the vehicles appropriate to the different constituencies are equally legitimate. No constituency and no vehicle of expression should be preferable to the others. All have value.

Updated SSRN Tax Faculty Rankings

Theodore P. Seto (Loyola-L.A.) has updated his monthly rankings of the Top 25 U.S. Law School Tax Faculties, as measured by the number of SSRN downloads (through 8/15/06): 

 

Due to a misallocation of faculty members, Florida was overcounted last month and Illinois and Arizona State were undercounted. In this month’s rankings, these errors have been corrected. As a result, Florida has dropped and Illinois and Arizona State have risen in the rankings.

For more on the use of SSRN downloads in law school rankings, see Bernard S. Black & Paul L. Caron, Ranking Law Schools: Using SSRN to Measure Scholarly Performance, 81 Ind. L.J. 83 (2006). For more details about Ted's study, see below the fold:

SSRN tax faculty ranking changes since July 2006:

For purpose of Ted Seto’s analysis, a tax professor is defined as any law professor at a U.S. law school (1) self-identifying with one of the tax categories in the 2005-2006 AALS faculty listing, (2) who has posted at least one tax or tax-related article in abstract or full text on SSRN. Paul Caron’s listing of 2006-2007 new hires and lateral transfers is also reflected. As is true of Paul Caron’s ranking of individual tax professors, downloads of all SSRN postings of any tax professor, so defined, are then tallied.

Seto on The Top 25 Tax Faculties

As regular readers of this blog know, I prepare a weekly ranking of the Top 5 New Tax Papers, as well as a monthly ranking of the Top 25 Tax Professors, as measured by the number of SSRN downloads.  Theodore P. Seto (Loyola-L.A.) has gone a step further and prepared a study for publication here, SSRN Tax Faculty Downloads by Law School and City.  I will share the results of this study over the next three days.

In today's installment, Ted ranks the Top 25 U.S. Law School Tax Faculties, as measured by the number of SSRN downloads (through 7/1/06):

Note: Because of his recent move, Victor Fleischer's downloads are credited to Colorado rather than to UCLA.  Ted's conclusion:

SSRN downloads are, of course, only one measure of scholarly productivity and impact, and scholarship is certainly not the only relevant measure of the quality of a law faculty. With these qualifications, however, it’s pretty clear who comes out on top: UCLA’s tax faculty rocks. (If Louis Kaplow’s non-tax works are excluded, UCLA heads both lists.)

Ted Seto's 3-Part Study of Tax Faculties:

• Today:  The Top 25 Tax Faculties
• Thursday:  The Top Graduate Tax Faculties
• Friday:  The Top 10 Tax Faculties By Metropolitan Region

For more on the use of SSRN downloads in law school rankings, see Bernard S. Black & Paul L. Caron, Ranking Law Schools: Using SSRN to Measure Scholarly Performance, 81 Ind. L.J. 83 (2006). For more details about Ted's study, see below the fold:

For purpose of this analysis, a tax professor is defined as any law professor at a U.S. law school (1) self-identifying with one of the tax categories in the 2005-2006 AALS faculty listing, (2) who has posted at least one tax or tax-related article in abstract or full text on SSRN. Paul Caron’s listing of 2006-2007 new hires and lateral transfers is also reflected. As is true of Paul Caron’s ranking of individual tax professors, downloads of all SSRN postings of any tax professor, so defined, are then tallied.