The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
Temple 3L at bottom of class attacks grading in lengthy screed
Poast new message in this thread
Date: February 15th, 2007 12:12 AM Author: big hyperventilating doctorate http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2007/02/reviewing_gradi.html#comments
Comment #2 |
 |
Date: February 15th, 2007 12:13 AM Author: pearl motley school I too will comment anonymously, as I'm a student at Hoffman's school, though not one of Hoffman. I take issue with two points in his post:
1. I am heartened to see you agree that GPA is not a meaningful scale. understanding that current grading policies leave students in the middle is admirable, but the lack of a better solution is troubling. I have noticed a sharp discrepancy in my grades between the massive lecture courses and the smaller writing seminars. Perhaps I'm a student who responds better to smaller groups, and learning material in that forum, but it has left me believing that the basic way you teach and test the law in school is unrelated to real life. It does not encourage creative thinking. It does not encourage understanding the nuances of the material.
Had I known about this discrepancy earlier, I would have taken as many writing courses as possible after first year, and seen a significant spike in my GPA as a result.
I should note two things here, before I get written off as just another disgruntled student. First, my work product both summers was exemplary, got a lot of praise and notice, and was used verbatim. This indicated to me that at least in terms of research and writing, that I could function at least as well as currently practicing lawyers. This was heartening. It has been less heartening to be struck out of the running for certain jobs because my overall GPA did not fit a certain number. One other thing I should note. Up until this point I went to very very selective institutions, and thrived at them. I went to Temple because of the cost. I was used to working my ass off and doing well. I am not saying this to be snotty. The current discrepancy between real life lawyering and my law school experience has me very disillusioned.
My disillusionment is amplified because I am facing graduating with a significant debt burden. Also because for the first time in my educational career, I know how students who are not doing so well in a class are treated by professors. Some professors, who are geniune teachers, take time and patience with these students. With other professors, it becomes very apparent, once your end of term grade comes out and you go to them, that they are less interested in you now that you are, in their eyes, no longer the student who contributes consistently in class and has a good grasp of the material, but now are reduced to the student who got a B minus on their exam. It is a form of intellectual snobbery that is new to me, and more infuriating because I have been able to produce good work in a real setting.
2. The stories about grading mishaps are not "fun stories". The stories about students getting their grades bumped up due to errors make other students wonder if they should have gone in and asked the professor to go over the exam closely with an eye to changing the grade. I have gone over my exams with professors, and never has the question of regrading the exam come up. Perhaps because I was not as pushy as some of my compatriots. I didn't realise you were allowed to question grades. At my prior schools, it was seen as extremely poor form to whinge about grades. Reviewing exams was fine, but pressuring a professor to change the grade was not.
Posted by: anon2 at February 14, 2007 04:58 PM |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 12:16 AM Author: idiotic nighttime quadroon if i was bottom of the class at temple i'd kill self (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=580690&forum_id=2#7606701) |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 12:18 AM Author: adventurous aquamarine orchestra pit I like how he went there because of the cost, but then complains about how much debt he will have. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=580690&forum_id=2#7606715) |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 12:19 AM Author: idiotic nighttime quadroon maybe that logic got him where he is today? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=580690&forum_id=2#7606725) |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 12:23 AM Author: charismatic love of her life mexican He also seems surprised that a professor thinks that someone who got a B- on his exam doesn't actually have a good grasp of the material.
|
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 12:21 AM Author: charismatic love of her life mexican Yeah. I guess he didn't realize that it's easier to pay off $150k in debt when you're making $160k + $30k bonus than it is to pay off $70k in debt when you're unemployed. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=580690&forum_id=2#7606734) |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 12:19 AM Author: charismatic love of her life mexican "Had I known about this discrepancy earlier, I would have taken as many writing courses as possible after first year, and seen a significant spike in my GPA as a result."
Are there really a lot of 2Ls and 3Ls out there who don't realize that small seminars are almost always graded on a much nicer curve than big lectures? I thought this was common knowledge.
"Up until this point I went to very very selective institutions, and thrived at them. I went to Temple because of the cost. I was used to working my ass off and doing well."
Now this, my friends, is why you don't turn down a T14 for a lower ranked school offering money. |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 12:21 AM Author: adventurous aquamarine orchestra pit Dude didn't get into T14 schools. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=580690&forum_id=2#7606738) |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 12:23 AM Author: idiotic nighttime quadroon clearly, and by very very selective institutions i bet he means wustl (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=580690&forum_id=2#7606749) |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 12:25 AM Author: charismatic love of her life mexican Probably true, but the implication is that he had gotten into higher ranked schools than Temple.
Then again, his other option might have been a fourth tier private school like like Widener. |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 12:31 AM Author: adventurous aquamarine orchestra pit He would be retarded to turn down a T14 for Temple w/ money. He would not be retarded turning down Tulane for Temple w/ money. See the difference? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=580690&forum_id=2#7606789) |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 12:34 AM Author: idiotic nighttime quadroon the tulane example is probably much closer to what happened. if he could get into any t14 he got scholarships from schools better than temple (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=580690&forum_id=2#7606815) |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 12:37 AM Author: adventurous aquamarine orchestra pit Exactly. I don't fault him for taking the money, but he clearly didn't get into top schools. Also, while he probably still has a ton of debt, it is weird to complain about his debtload since he claims he only went to the school because it is cheap. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=580690&forum_id=2#7606840) |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 12:35 AM Author: charismatic love of her life mexican Not so sure about that. Depends on a whole host of factors.
Also chances are he didn't get a scholarship at Temple, but is just referring to instate tuition. |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 12:38 AM Author: adventurous aquamarine orchestra pit If he didn't get a scholarship the schools he turned down were even less likely to be significantly better. I don't see the benefit in paying much more to go to another school if your career prospects are going to be shitty coming out of either. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=580690&forum_id=2#7606851) |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 12:28 AM Author: Appetizing walnut pervert boltzmann "It does not encourage understanding the nuances of the material"
O RLY? Fortunately for the world, we have people like this self-deluded prick to pick out the "nuances of the material" that A students are just unable to do... |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 12:32 AM Author: charismatic love of her life mexican I wonder if he's actually seen what an A exam looks like. Also curious what he means by "nuances of the material." Sounds like he might just be going off on wild tangents on the exam instead of sticking to relevant issues. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=580690&forum_id=2#7606794) |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 12:41 AM Author: electric locale have you actually seen what an A exam looks like? It looks like a B exam but the guy who got the A spotted a few more issues, you can usually count on one hand the number of real differences.
Granted the people who got C's and shit probably have no clue. |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 12:44 AM Author: charismatic love of her life mexican I've written both A and B exams, and yeah there is a difference. Might not be that much of a difference at the margins (A/A-, A-/B+, etc.) but the difference between an A and a B is probably going to be very significant -- at Penn we're talking the difference between top 15% and bottom 40%, but at a place like Temple where far fewer As are given out it's going to be even more significant. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=580690&forum_id=2#7606879) |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 12:50 AM Author: electric locale I should have said B+ for all of you who are lucky enough to go to schools on B+ or 3.2 curves, my shithole is on B curve so a B is not bottom 40, but right at the median. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=580690&forum_id=2#7606910) |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 12:53 AM Author: charismatic love of her life mexican The difference is still significant though... if it's a lower curve and the median is a B, chances are As will only be given to 1-5% of the students. Are you really saying there usually isn't much difference between the top 1-5% exams in the class and the "average" exam? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=580690&forum_id=2#7606935) |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 1:20 AM Author: electric locale these tests are really not heavily g-loaded nor are they sufficiently objective to be good measures of anything. If you had the same professor regrade his very own exams 6 months down the line how many of the B+'s would become A's and how many of the A's would become B+'s? Way more than any professor would ever admit. Since there is still a curve most people are going to get B's no matter how many regrades you do, the uncertainy will alway come at the extremes which makes the extremes far less informative. All the people in your law school are basically of the same level of intelligence, thats what the LSAT does. To take this narrow range of IQ's and to say you can split it further using an exam regime that is not even as g-loaded as the lsat is flawed thinking.
I also dont think all the B's are really B's. Some of the B's are closer to B+'s and some are more like B-'s and C+'s. Letter grading of essay exams is TTT, they should use percentiles. That way grades will tell us more. That "B" tells us very little.
Also, we really need to know just how extensive the regression to the mean is to see if grades measure much of anything. If by the end of 3L year the gap between everyone narrows a lot even the class rank stops meaning much.
When a quarter of the class is seperated by less than .25 points what does being ranked 10% lower than someone else really tell you? That your GPA is .1 lower! Lets strictly enforce those top 25% cutoffs at OCI! That .1 difference is SOOO HUGE!
|
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 1:27 AM Author: electric locale If law exams are a good measure of anything its your ability to write law exams to your professors liking, by no stretch of the imagination can you conclude that they are a good measure G. Those of you who have a hardon for the lsat's utility as a metric should understand this. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=580690&forum_id=2#7607119) |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 8:07 AM Author: Misunderstood trailer park weed whacker Subject: Loser Talk You sound like a loser. Are you a loser? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=580690&forum_id=2#7607753) |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 12:41 AM Author: Appetizing walnut pervert boltzmann a successful exam very much takes into account the nuances - that is what makes it a successful exam. His problem might be that he doesn't see the nuances - i.e.: he writes "A will definitely prevail against B in his suit for battery" rather than "A may prevail against B; however, B has some compelling defenses..." (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=580690&forum_id=2#7606869) |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 12:48 AM Author: charismatic love of her life mexican I don't think I'd call mentioning potential defenses nuances. However you're right that nuances (well, true nuances) matter.
It wouldn't surprise me if this guy, when faced with that question about battery, would go off on completely irrelevant tangent, like writing several paragraphs about the history of battery law, and then wonders why he didn't get an A. |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 12:15 AM Author: Maize station becky lawl you go to temple (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=580690&forum_id=2#7606696) |
Date: February 15th, 2007 12:19 AM Author: Razzle free-loading stain Thanks. I let myself get down sometimes, but then I read something like this... (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=580690&forum_id=2#7606720) |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 12:28 AM Author: pearl motley school Whenever you feel down just read some of the posts from insurance defense firm associates at jdjive.com (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=580690&forum_id=2#7606772) |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 12:25 AM Author: vigorous property temple has a ls? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=580690&forum_id=2#7606756) |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 12:26 AM Author: adventurous aquamarine orchestra pit More of a certificare program for future paralegals and contract attorneys. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=580690&forum_id=2#7606766) |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 12:32 AM Author: idiotic nighttime quadroon top 10% does just fine in philly (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=580690&forum_id=2#7606800) |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 12:34 AM Author: adventurous aquamarine orchestra pit Interesting. I never bothered looking up information on schools outside of the top 10 or so. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=580690&forum_id=2#7606812) |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 12:35 AM Author: charismatic love of her life mexican Yeah, but 90% of the class won't be in the top 10%, and if you want to work outside of Philly you're going to run into problems even if you're in the top 10%. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=580690&forum_id=2#7606829) |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 12:37 AM Author: idiotic nighttime quadroon that would be why i refused my scholarship offer. otherwise i'd probably be as sad as this loser (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=580690&forum_id=2#7606843) |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 12:44 AM Author: Zippy offensive dilemma boiling water hey man, what do you think about an upper t14 full price vs. GW full ride? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=580690&forum_id=2#7606881) |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 12:49 AM Author: charismatic love of her life mexican T14 unless you're gunning for unprestigious or uncompetitive public interest jobs. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=580690&forum_id=2#7606906) |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 12:51 AM Author: Zippy offensive dilemma boiling water I want to do an appellate clerkship. They have a pretty decent record, plus its free, plus Orin Kerr will be my Professor mentor b/c of a presidential merit scholarship. Oh, and 1l housing is covered. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=580690&forum_id=2#7606919) |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 12:55 AM Author: charismatic love of her life mexican You're assuming Orin Kerr will even be there. He did a "look-see" visit at Chicago last quarter, and if they give him an offer I'd be surprised if he would turn it down.
If you want to clerk (and presumably do biglaw after you clerk) I can't imagine turning down HYSCCN for GW for any reason. And that goes double if you want a prestigious appellate clerkship, and to infinity if you want academia. |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 1:02 AM Author: Zippy offensive dilemma boiling water I meant upper in terms of numbers. I.e. culc, nw, duke, cornell (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=580690&forum_id=2#7606992) |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 1:07 AM Author: Zippy offensive dilemma boiling water bump?
yeah HYSCCNMVP i would take without hesitation |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 1:11 AM Author: vigorous property lol, i think dunces like you - i.e., clowns who don't seem to "get it," no matter how obvious the answer is - are better off going to TTTs like GW. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=580690&forum_id=2#7607049) |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 1:12 AM Author: Zippy offensive dilemma boiling water dood, im sorry if 150k is a lot of fucking money for me. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=580690&forum_id=2#7607054) |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 1:19 AM Author: charismatic love of her life mexican And if you do NY biglaw after you graduate you'll be making $190k+ a year.
Not to mention that $150k is nothing when spread out over a 30 year repayment period, especially at these interest rates.
$190k+ a year and far greater appellate clerkship placement is much better than a full ride (which isn't really a full ride since apparently they're only covering your tuition and 1L housing) and the very real possibility that you'll be unemployed or underemployed at graduation.
At least that's my take on it. You have to remember that law school is one of the biggest investments you'll ever make in your entire life, and law school prestige matters a whole lot. If you're okay with not doing a federal appellate clerkship or taking a job that pays $80k (but would probably still require biglaw-like hours), then maybe a full ride at GW is a better option. But if you want to clerk and you want biglaw, I can't imagine turning down any T14 for it. |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 1:30 AM Author: Zippy offensive dilemma boiling water huh. well that makes sense. its just hard to swallow. thanks.
GULC too huh? thats so crazy to me. What if ucla passes gulc this year? then i will have paid 150k to not even go to a t14 lol. |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 1:39 AM Author: charismatic love of her life mexican T14 was not caused by U.S. News -- it's just that U.S. News, despite all its flaws, is correctly identifying the most elite law schools. If U.S. News changed its methodology and UCLA passed GULC this year, the result wouldn't be the T14 changing, but U.S. News being wrong. GULC would still retain all its advantages over UCLA, and I'd still recommend that people take GULC over UCLA -- Firms and judges aren't going to magically change their hiring patterns because of U.S. News. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=580690&forum_id=2#7607177) |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 1:45 AM Author: Zippy offensive dilemma boiling water So whats the difference between GULC and UCLA?
I get your point but its kinda hardcore to say that the top schools arent made by the rankings. I mean look at NYU. Its a relative newcomer to the top and it rose rapidly in the rankings.
I know GULC has a great history and all but its also a factory and the tide might turn against it soon. Mind you I dont know much about LS or the schools themselves but this site makes some of the lesser t14s seem WAY less safe bets than say, virginia even. |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 1:56 AM Author: charismatic love of her life mexican NYU is not a "newcomer" in any meaningful sense of the word since it's been a top school for literally decades. As for GULC, you need to realize that school reputations are among the most static things out there -- even if GULC is in decline, the decline won't have any actual effects for literally *decades.* Just look at Michigan -- pretty much everyone who doesn't go there or work there admits that it's no longer as good as it once was (over the course of several decades going from a solid top 3 law school to where it is now), but there are still many judges and employers who treat it as a much better school than it is, and will continue to treat it that way until they all die off, once again several decades from now long after you graduate. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=580690&forum_id=2#7607262) |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 2:00 AM Author: Zippy offensive dilemma boiling water Huh. I guess I just have the wrong perception school reputations. I could give a fuck about rankings. I just want to, at best, get a sweet fed clerkship, at middle, work at Latham OC, at worst, work at some v100 in SoCal. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=580690&forum_id=2#7607290) |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 2:03 AM Author: Coiffed Gaping go to harvard or nyu for latham. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=580690&forum_id=2#7607305) |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 2:05 AM Author: Zippy offensive dilemma boiling water OC office? really?
Also, I aint getting in to those two. |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 3:31 AM Author: Bateful public bath black woman are you joking? Michigan was ranked a top 3 during a very small span of years, when us news used a very differnt methodology. It's not in decline. It's where it's always been- 6-9. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=580690&forum_id=2#7607617) |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 12:29 PM Author: Coiffed Gaping hard as this may be to believe, michigan existed for years before us news even dreamt of rating the top schools. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=580690&forum_id=2#7608418) |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 1:13 AM Author: charismatic love of her life mexican If I was in this position, I'd take the T14, especially if I knew I wanted an appellate clerkship. The $ from GW just wouldn't be worth the lost opportunities and the extremely stressful 1L year (I can't imagine going to a law school where I knew I had to be in the top 25-33% to have the same opportunities as someone at the bottom of a T14's class). (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=580690&forum_id=2#7607062) |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 1:17 AM Author: Zippy offensive dilemma boiling water so you're saying that the bottonm of the shittier t14 schools is better than all but the top of GW. in terms of jobs/clerk/whatever? what about for California. according to your study GW does pretty well there. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=580690&forum_id=2#7607077) |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 1:29 AM Author: charismatic love of her life mexican There's no such thing as a shittier T14 school. All the T14 have excellent placement -- some are obviously better than others (sometimes by a lot), but you can't go wrong with any of them. If for some reason you just *loved* Northwestern I don't think people would think you're screwed for taking it over NYU.
But turning down any T14 for GW is a different story. I'm not saying GW is a TTT or that going there will ruin your life or anything like that. However, I think you really need to think long and hard about the downsides of taking GW over a T14. Yeah, GW with a full ride is fabulous if you end up top of the class... but what do you think your career options will be if you finish only in the top third? Or middle of the class? Or bottom quarter?
Bottom line is that taking the T14 is the safe bet -- you know you'll get market biglaw salary if you want it if you go to any school from Yale to GULC, and you know your chances of getting a federal appellate clerkship are a lot higher (though obviously that'll involve more work than just getting biglaw). But GW is not a safe bet -- yes, you get money, but you have to work your ass off to finish in the top half of the class just to *maybe* have the same opportunities as people at the bottom of the class at a T14. Remember, no employer is going to give a shit about your full ride if you end up in the bottom of the class. |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 1:37 AM Author: Zippy offensive dilemma boiling water so basically the worst-case scenario is the way i should approach this. I.e. go to the school that will leave me the best if i do the worst. I mean, I've subscribed to the xoxo philosophy since ive been here for so long, but fuck man, its a hard pill to swallow when you actually have the options in front of you. Mind you I dont literally have them yet.
I guess what makes me feel better is that every single student in a top ten school could have had my scholarship and turned it down, most without even bothering to aply to the school. |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 1:50 AM Author: charismatic love of her life mexican One thing that's very important to understand is that there is no way to predict beforehand where you'll end up in your class. No one goes into law school thinking they'll be in the bottom half of the class (let alone the bottom 10%) -- if anything, virtually everyone shows up convinced they'll be in the top 10%. But 90% of the class won't be in the top 10%, and half the class will be in the bottom half of the class.
Yes, you likely did very well on the LSAT to get a full ride from GW, but the LSAT, while the best single predictor of 1L grades, is still a very weak predictor (something like 30% correlation, maybe less). Multiple xo posters have taken scholarships at low ranked schools only to end up finishing in the bottom of the class -- jose marquez for instance had a 170something LSAT and took a big scholarship at Cardozo, only to finish in the bottom of the class and eventually lose his scholarship (same thing happened to ponky, though she dropped out after losing her scholarship). Of course it doesn't sound like GW's money is grade contingent, however being bottom of the class at GW is pretty damn bad for your employment prospects, especially if you have high ambitions.
You also have to remember that law school is nothing like undergrad. It's a completely different system -- not only is it a forced curve, but almost no one is fucking around. It's not like undergrad, where it's pretty certain that 25-50% of every class, especially intro classes, is going to be full of people who don't give a shit (because they're just there to party, or because they're taking the class as some distribution requirement, or whatever). When everyone is smart (and at a school like GW, everyone still is smart) and there is a forced curve and you have absolutely no feedback until after the exam (and when you perhaps feel a bit overconfident due to your higher GPA/LSAT), the result will be lots of very smart people finishing in the bottom of the class, none of whom actually expected to be there.
It's not an easy decision by any means. However I think you seriously need to consider these possibilities, especially if you have high ambitions. You can still do pretty damn well coming from the bottom of GULC or Northwestern's class -- the same just can't be said for the bottom of GW's class (and of course the upside of going to a T14 is also much greater if you do very well -- the opportunities the top of the class at GULC and NU have are far greater than the opportunities available to the top of the class at GW). |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 1:56 AM Author: Zippy offensive dilemma boiling water Good stuff man, Ill take it into consideration. Thanks.
I have no visions of finishing in the top 10% of my class, especially b/c i have a pretty shitty history as a student. So no matter my intentions, or my plans to be a great student, all I can really count on is my history of shittiness. Therefore, I definitely want to plan for the future and to close as few doors as possible. |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 2:07 AM Author: Coiffed Gaping this happened to a guy I met who didn't apply till the deadlines of his cycle. he was waitlisted at bc and bu, but got some monster scholarship at st. john's. being an engineer, he didn't realize the importance of school on your legal career, so he took it. all he had to do to keep the st. john's scholarship was score in the top half after 1L. he missed it of course, and had to pay full fare to go to a school he never wanted to attend in the first place. |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 3:33 AM Author: Bateful public bath black woman again, are you joking? There isn't much difference between NU and NYU. Well besides the Y. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=580690&forum_id=2#7607623) |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 1:29 AM Author: coral arrogant garrison bbw Opportunities at differently-ranked law schools converge at the top of the class, but diverge rapidly as you down the class rank. I wouldn't say that the bottom of the lower T14s is better than all of everything but the top of GW, especially not when it comes to clerking.
However, a T14 gives you a significantly larger comfort zone for firms when you're not at the top of the class. The real question to ask: what's the outcome of the worst-case scenario? For a T14 like Penn, the worst outcome is being at the absolute bottom of the class and working at Philly BIGLAW. At GW, I'm not sure what the outcome is, but it's probably not as rosy. |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 1:36 AM Author: charismatic love of her life mexican Yeah, for a federal appellate clerkship people in the middle of the class at Penn are likely screwed. However, people outside the top 10% at GW are also going to be screwed for that, especially without law review, since federal appellate clerkship jobs are much scarcer than biglaw jobs and on average federal judges are rather big prestige whores.
Honestly it's the federal appellate clerkship thing that seems like the dealbreaker against taking the GW full ride -- while he'd have a shot (not a guarantee, but a shot), at biglaw if he's top 25-33% of the class at GW, he really does have to be top of his class to be competitive for a federal appellate clerkship from GW, and while getting that sort of clerkship won't be easy from a T14, it will be easier. |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 1:39 AM Author: Zippy offensive dilemma boiling water Obviously Im just dreaming at this point. since i have yet to set foot in a law classroom i have no idea how well ill do, and i know that id need to do quite well even if at harvard. point is that a federal clerkship is my goal. At least im starting with high aspirations. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=580690&forum_id=2#7607176) |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 2:00 AM Author: charismatic love of her life mexican Yeah, it's good to have high aspirations. However if you do take GW you have to realize that it's going to be a lot harder to achieve those aspirations even if you end up at the top of the class (just look at the number of Supreme Court clerks GW has had in the past five years to the numbers at T14s). (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=580690&forum_id=2#7607288) |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 2:03 AM Author: Zippy offensive dilemma boiling water I think I saw that on Wiki. Now I just need to get INTO a t14. Even if they all reject me, at least this will convince me to transfer, and will help others facing the same (great) decision. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=580690&forum_id=2#7607307) |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 1:47 AM Author: coral arrogant garrison bbw Good points. I tend to think of federal appellate clerkships as a tough goal--I think that I'm pretty much knocked out of contention, at least for a feeder clerkship--but GW really will make things much tougher, for something that is already really difficult. And the backup plan for federal clerkships is often a firm job, which is not so bad, especially with the rising salaries . . . (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=580690&forum_id=2#7607214) |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 1:42 AM Author: Zippy offensive dilemma boiling water "Opportunities at differently-ranked law schools converge at the top of the class, but diverge rapidly as you down the class rank."
This makes perfect sense to me, great way to put it, thanks.
I think my plan should be a risk-averse one. But I have a major fear that if i end up at GULC or Cornell they will drop out of the t14, and it will become the top 10 that is the measure of prestige. And who knows, GW will leap-frog GULC maybe. |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 2:02 AM Author: charismatic love of her life mexican You're putting *way* too much emphasis on U.S. News.
U.S. News T14 =/= the T14 we're talking about here. |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 2:06 AM Author: Zippy offensive dilemma boiling water really? I never new that. They just happen to be the same at the moment? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=580690&forum_id=2#7607324) |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 2:20 AM Author: charismatic love of her life mexican They've always been the same, but that has more to do with the T14 just being head and shoulders above everyone else and U.S. News, while constantly changing its methodology, continuing to place a heavy emphasis on stuff that is at least correlated with employment (reputation, student quality, etc.).
Basically, the reasoning behind the T14 is that you could make an extremely strong argument that all 14 of them are "top 10" schools (in fact, those 14 schools are the only ones to have been in the U.S. News top 10 at some point). |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 2:21 AM Author: Zippy offensive dilemma boiling water ok, makes sense. can you tell me what you think about below. re:ucla/tex/usc vs. GW full ride? |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 2:14 AM Author: coral arrogant garrison bbw Law schools, especially those associated with major research and undergraduate universities, are institutions with enormous staying power. GULC and Cornell aren't going to leave the T14, period.
Granted, I don't mean to bash GW. It's a very solid school with smart students (indeed, this is the problem if you plan on any kind of transfer / high rank), and the top 10%/LR folks there are hot-shit. A full-ride is always something to consider carefully, and if you had public-interest aspirations in becoming a prosecutor or a PD, it'd definitely be worth a closer look. But, if you're really after an appellate clerkship, choosing GW over the classical T14 (see GTO's post above) is like choosing an axe over a shotgun for a battle royale. You MIGHT make it, but it's just a lot harder. |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 2:19 AM Author: Zippy offensive dilemma boiling water No worries. I'd be happy with GW if that what it ends up coming down to and I dont get in anywhere better. I dunno why but i kinda really want to go to Cornell.
BTW, and this might be a hugh issue if I dont get into a t14, what do you think if it's UCLA/USC/Tex vs. GW full ride? |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 2:22 AM Author: charismatic love of her life mexican I'd take GW in that case. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=580690&forum_id=2#7607392) |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 2:24 AM Author: Violent bright gas station the benefit of gulc is that it's the best school in dc, which means some ppl who love the city turn down higher-ranked schools to go there. it's only ranked #14 because of its size, but it will always be prestigious, esp. if you're thinking of staying in dc.
nw is a strong university overall. cornell is an ivy, albeit a shittier one. any of these would serve you better than gw. unless you KNEW you wanted to do public interest when you left (and therefore couldn't afford to take on the debt), go to a t14.
gto, is there a place to see how many penn students get fed app clerkships? |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 2:26 AM Author: charismatic love of her life mexican Probably the best resource for that right now is lawfirmaddict's clerkship blog. I'll try to get something up and running on here by the next cycle though. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=580690&forum_id=2#7607413) |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 2:29 AM Author: Zippy offensive dilemma boiling water Hey, thanks to you and Quasar for takimg the time to help me here. I hope my decision gets a lot tougher and I will have a lot more advice to ask of you. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=580690&forum_id=2#7607426) |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 2:30 AM Author: charismatic love of her life mexican Anytime. Hope things go well for you! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=580690&forum_id=2#7607427) |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 1:42 AM Author: vigorous property this is right. and "not as rosy" is a very nice way to put it. i remember reading about a median GW graduate who couldn't find a job for about 3 years after she graduated. she was relegated to contract attorney jobs and other embarrassing work, all for having graduated in the middle of her class. that's a pretty hopeless life, and it kinda makes you wonder what happened to the people in the bottom half, or the person (most likely a URM) who graduated at the very bottom. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=580690&forum_id=2#7607191) |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 1:48 AM Author: electric locale okay, stories like that are BS or at best extreme outliers. People who graduate bottom of the class at Cooley dont take 3 years to find work, there are thousands of shit little mom and pop firms always looking for warm bodies. Shit jobs like that take NO effort to secure. The only problem is these jobs pay 40k and you might as well shoot yourself.
Crap firms dont even care about grades they just need warm bodies because they have crazy turnover. |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 9:20 AM Author: supple seedy gaming laptop haunted graveyard Actually top 20% at Nova and Temple get Big Law. Median people at both are fine for Mid-law in Philly. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=580690&forum_id=2#7607809) |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 12:51 AM Author: Pearly resort personally i couldn't believe this one:
i wouldn't have ever discovered they had one had i not seen a cite to "texas tech. l.j." |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 10:57 AM Author: Sable native preventive strike http://www.law.ttt.edu/
I fixed the url |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 10:52 AM Author: stirring wrinkle cuckold A note to the guy with the GW scholarship:
You're going to work about the same amount wherever you end up. Your grades will be more important, and exams may be more stressful at GW, but I don't think that will affect how much you work.
Besides that, I agree with the sentiment that you should take a better school. However, if the other school is at the bottom of the 14, I think it's a much, much closer call than others are making it out to be. |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 11:37 AM Author: trip institution 1. Basing the entire grade on a three-hour in-class written exam is indeed a poor way to measure law school performance. The college-course model, with multiple quizzes and papers as well as graded class participation, is a better way to sort out the top students.
2. Lower-tier schools are indeed ripping off most of their students, who won't get nearly as much value from the degree as it costs them.
3. Prospective law students are adults, and 1. and 2. are common knowledge among adults who do basic investigation, so complaining that you were shocked, shocked to discover 1. and 2. after enrolling is, well, softbatch. |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 12:25 PM Author: idiotic nighttime quadroon 2. temple is a decent school and is pretty cheap. not really similar to a true ftt private school or the like. but yeah, i agree with 3. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=580690&forum_id=2#7608403) |
|
Date: February 15th, 2007 12:35 PM Author: Odious Pungent Legend I haven't read this thread, but I just wanted to chime in that I love the "lengthy screed" meme. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=580690&forum_id=2#7608456) |