Law School Discussion

Show Posts

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.

Messages - Sooner

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 47
While small, the 14-10 schools do offer a placement advantage in Texas.  Is it worth giving up instate tuition (and probably a scholarship on top if you can get into T14)?  Maybe not.

Lets just say, a lot of in-state UTexas students would never have this option. 

It’s tough to see GULC or Cornell having a placement advantage over UT in Texas…if it’s there, it’s tough to measure. Something that negligible isn’t something worth considering. I guess I should have said that some of the top 14 schools probably don’t offer a significant placement advantage over UT. NW and Duke may do a little better…but I think you have to look at HYSCCNMVP for a real difference.

vercingetorix, get down to Texas much? You seem to know so much about it. Let us know when you start your job search. You're as green as anyone else when it comes to securing employment as an attorney. I think your "it's mostly about whom you know" concept is naive, or at the least misapplied as a cliche. More likely, it's mostly about the numbers and your relative position in the class...just as it's always been...just as it was when you applied to law school...because you'll be appealing to strangers for a job. I don't see how going to the large state school makes you so much more familiar to the top employers in the state. They see 300 eager faces when they visit that school and only 20 when they go to a Chicago or Columbia (yes they actually visit those schools too). Nepotism applies to family members, not strangers who went to the same school. Hell, most of the people that go through UT-Law didn't go to UT undergrad...and isn't undergrad where you develop your school pride/loyalty and all that? This is much more sophisticated than you make it sound. These are intelligent people making intelligent choices, not just picking the colors they like best. You have in mind an office of 10 attorneys, all of whom went to UT. I have in mind an office of 200 attorneys from disparate backgrounds and schools that sends people to schools across the country to recruit new attorneys. Yes, that's what really happens. 

Oh, Top-14 & huge debt versus UT & low debt is a false choice. Many people actually get decent scholarships to top-14 schools. 

There are grade cutoffs at firms. The cutoffs are more lenient or non-existent at some of the top 10 schools. That's why you would choose an out of state school over UT even though you plan on returning to Texas to work. I live in Texas now, and I plan to work in Dallas or Houston after I graduate from law school. I have a significant scholarship commitment from UChicago, and I’ll be there this coming fall.

Sure, there are many partners in Texas who went to UT, and those people are smart enough to know that diversity of thought/perspective is essential to success. And even Texas trolls admit that HYSCCN are notches above UT. I’m sure many of those UT alums were actually rejected from the top 6. These people probably aren’t the simplistic good ol’ boys they are projected as here. In hiring, we’re talking about strangers interviewing strangers. These hiring decisions cost partners money…and nothing is more serious than that. It’s a business relationship, not a tailgate party. I also find the “connections” argument laughable. How many new people can you substantially connect with in law school? Ten people? Out of a graduating class at UT of 500 each year…a class that is going to disperse across Texas and the U.S….and how much have alumni connections from your undergrad helped you in the world so far? That stuff is mythical. I think that most meaningful networking connections between lawyers are formed at their first jobs…not in school. Some people you will work with at the firm will move on to be corporate counsel somewhere…and that’s when you work them for business.

Many of the top 14 schools probably don’t offer a placement advantage over UT. So it’s not a no-brainer. And, for an in-state student, the financial side of things points towards UT most of the time. Thus, I think this is only a tough call for the very top students facing this dilemma…admits to the top 6 schools with $...or Darrow (Mich full ride) or Wigmore (NW full ride) people… 

Law School Admissions / Re: ITT help me identify target schools
« on: May 24, 2007, 02:59:19 PM »
UT does BS around these days...I see on LSN that this cycle they WL and deferred a bunch of people with around this guy's I wouldn't chalk up the auto-admit with $$$ at UT thing just yet.

Do well on the June could use at least 2 or 3 more LSAT points (silly, I know) to really get in the sweet spot.

Law School Admissions / Re: Breakthrough?!?!
« on: May 24, 2007, 02:49:16 PM »
Those old exams (and yes, June '95 is old) are actually a lot different from the most recent ones in terms of emphasis.

You're obviously still in improvement/learning mode, but I don't think you've solidified things just yet. That's not the state you want to be in when you record your final score. I think you should take this test in June without putting too much pressure on yourself...plan now to take it again in October and use June as a means to learn more about the actual experience and more about your weaknesses. Just relax. You don't have to worry about canceling the score...almost all schools now seem to look exclusively at the highest score. There is no rush.

Law School Admissions / Re: Univ. of Texas check in...
« on: May 17, 2007, 09:57:15 AM »


Elicited a reaction in me

Why?  Remember, what may be right for you, isn't always right for everyone else.  As long as she's happy with her decision, that's all that should matter.

Well, that's one way of looking at it. Another way is noting that she eschewed a full ride at UT to go to SMU. I think this would have gotten a more interesting reaction here in the not-so-distant past, considering the protracted UT obsession we saw in this thread. I guess everyone's had time to come back down and settle on destinations. It's a lot more fair and balanced here. But I do think what's right for me is always right for everyone else.

Yes, Tony, it is difficult to put someone else's decision in context...obviously, more so in certain cases.

Law School Admissions / Re: Univ. of Texas check in...
« on: May 17, 2007, 07:15:29 AM »

Incoming 1Ls / Re: University of Chicago Class of 2010
« on: May 17, 2007, 07:04:12 AM »

I don't want to badmouth my school too much, since (a) my real name is linked to this username, (b) there are people from my school that post here, and (c) I still need to graduate... but yes. Administration wise it is the saddest school ever. If it weren't for some exceptional faculty over the last four years, and a great city, I'd write it off as a total disappointment. Its the administration that truly blows. Not many universities would publicly come out and say that they feel the school should be run like a "for-profit business".

Let me just put it this way: I'm wondering at what point its acceptable to remove one's undergraduate school from a resume. Or at least at what point you can limit it to a single sentence (e.g., "B.S., [major], [honors] [university], [year]"). I'd prefer to not link my name to this place more than absolutely necessary. I made some horrible, and completely ill-informed, decisions when I was applying to colleges. I'm so happy the same thing didn't happen with law school.

University of Phoenix? :o Outed.

Bearly, I'm just saying that you may not be as strong at RC and LR as you think, and those sections constitute most (3/4) of the test. The test writers throw a lot of curve balls in the LR sections in particular. I notice a lot of monovision on this site with repect to studying for the LSAT and the LG section. Clearly you need to improve at LG, but don't discount needing to improve at LR and RC. Again, that's 3/4 of the test...and 85% to 100% is a variance of 4 or 5 questions in a section...that's a variance you want to eliminate. You should at least give that a little more effort to make sure those sections really are your strength.

85% * 3 sections = 12 questions missed
2 full games answered randomly = 10-14 questions missed?

It's not as inconsequential as first perceived.

Remember, also, that the real thing is a lot different than practice. The stress can force you to make quick decisions. People frequently do much worse on the real thing than they did during practice.

Well, it looks like the lowest LSN GPA for a WL-->accept is 3.86 :D
Same as last year

I wish HLS would have just sent me the rejection letter six years ago...

Why not add Brooklyn and Cornell to your list?

I'll bet that you would be competitive at Cornell with a 3.9/166.

Also, I don't think you should neglect studying for the other sections because you think that you're strong at them and that games will be your may be surprised at the results for the actual test when you get an easy games section and a "ridiculously hard" RC/LR section. Maybe you should work harder on your LR and RC abilities to hedge against your expected bad score in the games section. I assume you're not getting perfect scores in RC & LR.

Generally, you're going to need to score in the low to mid 160s to get to your targets. The time to worry about targets is after the LSAT, though. Retake in October if necessary.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 47