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 - remiz22
Pages: 1 2 3  5 6 7 8 9 ... 21
« on: March 24, 2008, 03:50:31 PM »
I really think I need to somehow amend my application. I list my position different than what it really is. I said I was a cook, but in reality I was a dishwasher. My biggest fear is that this will somehow come in the character and fitness section of the bar exam. Any thoughts?
I sent you a PM
« on: March 24, 2008, 03:35:23 PM »
What do you think? I want to live in the South...do you think W&L's career prospects are worth the additional cash?
For three years Temple's total cost of attendance would be about 60k....W&L about 115k.
Yes, W&L is worth the extra cost. This is especially
true if you plan to work in the South
« on: March 24, 2008, 10:20:07 AM »
Interesting article today on Leiter Reports about W&L plan to not have students take any traditional law school classes during their third year...
Washington & Lee's Radical Transformation of the 3rd Year of Law School
One law professor at another school, who called the proposal to my attention, wrote to me with some reasonable concerns about this curricular change:
If 100% practice is the way to run the third year, isn't the obvious answer to make a J.D. program a two year affair? Also, it creates horrible choices for students, who have only the 2L year in which to take electives. If Jurisprudence conflicts on the schedule with Evidence, you have to take one or the other, but you can't take both. (W & L has a small faculty and on small faculties many electives are offered only one time per academic year, and in some cases only every other academic year.) Similarly, even if the conflict is between Jurisprudence and Partnership Tax, it forces choices on students that they should not face. And, you also have to ask about how a practical curriculum will (must?) affect faculty hiring choices -- are traditional hiring criteria the appropriate standards for faculty for the 3L year? I'm guessing "no," on the theory that J.D./D. Phil. isn't likely able (or very much interested) in teaching a civil practice clinic or a practicum on drafting wills. . . Maybe there's some merit to this "reform" that I'm just not seeing, but it seems like a very risky, "all in" kind of move.
It is clearly very risky: if it succeeds, it will transform Washington & Lee into a leader in legal education, to which the top firms will flock for new hires; if it fails--because, for example, good students and faculty choose to go elsewhere--Washington & Lee may never recover as a top 30-35 law school with a quasi-national status. The risk, put simply, is that within the legal academy, interdisciplinary scholarship is the coin of prestige in the realm, which is why one finds schools like Stanford, under Dean Larry Kramer, touting initiatives like more JD/PhD programs, and why elite law schools hire almost exclusively interdisciplinary scholars. Washington & Lee is, as my correspondent noted, going to have to do very different faculty hiring in order to staff this ambitious new program. If it succeeds, students and ultimately employers will be the beneficiaries, and other schools will no doubt follow suit. But in the short term there is a real risk that Washington & Lee's reputation among legal academics may take a real hit.
« on: March 23, 2008, 11:56:42 PM »
I'm something of a lay-prestige whore, and though people know Emory, people know moreso that Cornell is Ivy League. Am I stupid to pass up the scholarship at Emory for probably nothing at Cornell?
Enjoy Cornell. Congrats
« on: March 22, 2008, 10:15:02 PM »
Also, I never picked up on any anti-GW trolling until this thread. It seems like everyone dislikes law school at this place
This seems to be very true. The three people I know who go there b*tch all the time and want to transfer to G-town.
« on: March 22, 2008, 10:12:50 PM »
Plus, ND is such an UG school. Who wants to be in the middle of nowhere and freeze for law school?
LOL. Very true.
Although, to be fair, Emory is a notoriously lame school and Atlanta it a drivers nightmare.
« on: March 22, 2008, 10:09:37 PM »
I was thinking I'd go to W&M but then I got accepted to W&L. W&L is ranked better at 25th compared to W&M at 31, but I'm having trouble figuring out why!? The salaries listed on US News are a lot lower than W&M, and the acceptance numbers are about the same. W&L doesn't seem like it belongs with Fordham and Illinois, maybe not even with W&M. Is there something I'm missing?
W&L definitely belongs with Fordham and Illinois. It is a legit top 25 school.
The salary info for US News is very misleading. It is derived only from the people who respond. For example, only 65% of students at Fordham responded with their salary info. This is in contrast to 82% reporting from W&L. It might be the case that only the best performers are reporting their salary to Fordham, thus inflating their salary figure.
A second point is cost of living. Many W&L people settle in to secondary markets. Fordham is basically a NY-only feeder. It is important to consider that 165k in NY is like making 90k Richmond. The median salary at Fordham might not reflect the true value of the salary
« on: March 22, 2008, 11:26:03 AM »
I got into those three schools and from the rest, UC Davis is the other school high on my list. I am interested in public service positions, particularly in criminal, immigration and international law, but I want to keep my options open (I also have an unexplained interest in taxation). I'd like to study in a school that is strong in their region and offers practical experience.
Temple - They gave me a full tuition scholarship that, if I keep it, I would have more freedom when choosing a job. I love that they are in a big city, but I have never been in Philadelphia and don't know the city. They also have a strong litigation and writing program, which for me, are very appealing.
Northeastern - I've worked with Northeastern graduates and can see firsthand that the school produces attorneys with practical experience. I like the opportunities that the coop program can bring the students but I do not like the fact that every three months, I would start a new job search and have to find housing if I get a coop out of Boston. I also love that the school has a strong focus on public interest but am afraid that Northeastern's strong focus on public interst could close doors should I decide to go a different route.
American - At one point, it was my top choice but it is very pricey. The other schools have given me a scholarship but I have heard nothing on that regard from American. However, American is strong in international law, particularly with Latin America. I've focused on this region at work and at college and would love to also pursue it in law school.
(maybe) Davis - Ok, I have not gotten into Davis yet (they take too darn long to review an application). Davis seems to have some good clinics (particularly the immigration clinic). Also, the school seems to be pretty laid back and could open doors to more jobs than the other schools. I am not a California resident but I would make arrangements to become a resident after 1L.
Which school should I choose if I get into Davis? If I do not get into Davis, which school should I choose? Opinions?
Considering you are interested in public service or criminal law, I think you should choose Temple. Finishing with no debt makes public interest law a much more practical option. In addition, Temple has a very good record of producing criminal attorneys in Philly.
The choice would be tougher if you got into Davis.
« on: March 22, 2008, 11:18:39 AM »
So, I'm from Chicago and eventually want to have a career in Chicago. My acceptances have been Wisconsin, Kent $$, Loyola $$, and Depaul $$. Now, I know what you're thinking: Wisconsin is a no-brainer. Well, that's what I was thinking as well. However, after visiting this school sometime during the past month, I am completely unsold on Wisconsin. I didn't like the city, the surrounding campus area, the campus, the law building, the classrooms, etc. Overall, I just could not picture myself spending 3 years there and being happy in any manner whatsoever. So, as you can imagine, this leads to some major problems. We all know Wisconsin has as good (if not better) placement in Chicago big firms, than do the Chicago TTT's. BUT, I really don't want to go to Wisconsin. Whatever shall I do? Which Chicago TTT is better, Loyola or Kent? Should I suck it up and go to Wisconsin and be miserable for 3 years anyways? Before the visit I was sold on Wisconsin; now I am unsure about all of the schools and dreading the rapidly approaching deadlines, help!
First off, congrats on the acceptances.
The conventional wisdom seems to be that Loyola and Kent are fairly equal. It is often said that Kent might have more potential while Loyola might currently have better alumni.
What did you dislike about Wisconsin if I may ask? Was there anything you did like at Wisconsin?
« on: March 22, 2008, 10:56:35 AM »
Columbia. Case closed.
Pages: 1 2 3  5 6 7 8 9 ... 21