« on: August 11, 2009, 04:23:20 PM »
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Topics - The Artist
Due to a minority program (I'm a minority, not an URM) at my law school (mid-T1 school in the Midwest) I was able to secure a SA position at a big firm in the Midwest this summer (the particular office I'm working at has over 200 attorneys and pays market to SA). I'm understandably happy and thankful for this opportunity. However, I can't help but look ahead and get a bit worried about 2L summer. My grades were not very good (below the median), and I have no desire to live in the Midwest after graduation (I'm from California and would like to return there). So while I might be able to bust my ass this summer and get an offer to return to THAT firm for 2L summer, I'm scared that all the California firms won't give me time of day, despite my work experience, simply because of my grades and school location.
Any advice? Other than obviously trying to improve my grades.
One thing I know is that I don't want Biglaw. I probably want to work a mid-sized firm between 10-50 attorneys with reasonable hours. $60-80k starting pay. I attend a mid T-1. Given that, do my grades really matter that much?
1) Do law schools care about your grades when you apply to be a visiting student?
2) Most law schools say you need a 'compelling reason' to be a visiting student. Would wanting to work in that immediate area as opposed to my current school thousands of miles away count as a compelling reason, or would there need to be something more like to be close to a sick relative?
Our Ks prof told us our final will have one policy question on it. We haven't really learned that much policy in our Ks class though (no Law and Economics or anything like that). So what kind of policy question should I expect to see?
I currently attend a Midwest law school ranked between 30-40 in US News. I want to transfer back home to a CA law school of similar ranking (Hastings or Davis) so that it will be easier to secure a job in the area of the country I have spent my entire life before this year. Not sure if it makes a difference, but when I initially applied I was accepted to Hastings and waitlisted at Davis.
What ranking would I need in my 1L year to go back home?
I'm pretty sure what to expect on my exams in most of my classes. Not so much in Crim though. There are no practice exams available for this teacher, and the way crim is taught in general makes me more confused than I am in other classes. The reason for this is in most classes we begin by dividing into topics of that course (for example, in Torts we start with Battery, then move to assault, etc). Crim is weird in that it starts with 'justifications of punishment', where we learn about theories of why punishment exists. Then we go into the idea of actus rea, then mens rea, then mistake of fact/law, etc. It took more than half of the class to get to homicide (the first what I consider 'real' crim topic). From what I hear most crim law classes are taught that way.
So what the heck are we gonna be tested on? Will there be questions about justifications of punishment? What about mistakes of law/fact? How do we get tested on actus and mens rea? Also my prof has a huge emphasis on statutes (usually she will put one on the board and have us answer questions based on the statute). Is it common for statutues to be provided on an exam?
« on: November 09, 2008, 02:45:35 AM »
I have two questions for 2Ls and older:
1) Would you say most students spot all the issues on exams? What percentage of students would you guess are able to spot all the issues?
2) How big of a factor is time pressure on exams? If (hypothetically) you were able to get 1.5 times the regularly alloted time, would you expect a student to get top 10% as a result (I know there is no chance in hell I'll be able to get extra time, but I'm just curious if the time factor is as big of a cause of students doing poorly as not spotting all the issues).