Law School Discussion

Quote from: johnromero on February 06, 2007, 08:34:31 PM

Quote from: Brito Lisa on February 06, 2007, 06:02:27 PM

Ah, count me in on the Columbia hold, too.

Oh no, not you too Brito! It seems like Columbia and Chicago are being very like-minded this cycle...many applicants that were put on hold by one are getting held by the other as well.

On another note, have you had your phone call w/ TStock yet? An acceptance from H would certainly take the sting out of these two deferrals.

I'm waiting for a Chitown deferral as well. If Columbia deferred me, it's looking more and more like Chicago will too.

Yes, I talked with him today.  And you're right about taking the sting out!  An H acceptance would certainly do the trick.  This is the first time in the cycle when Harvard has seemed like a plausible destination.  We'll see how the next week or so goes.

I won't bother actually scouring LSN, but this must be a very rare occasion when someone was held at CC but accepted at Harvard (well the latter part will have to wait a week). Actually, nvm, that person named aad.. on LSN actually does fall in this situation for this cycle. So far this cycle, HLS has been a safety for some applicants who can't get into CC.

NYU on the other hand has been a reliable acceptor of strong number applicants, as always.

Quote from: Britomiel on February 05, 2007, 08:37:39 PM

I'm on hold at Chicago.  Quite a blow, really.

Sorry to hear that. I guess they must've found out about your Harvard interview.

(Sorta off topic, but both Chicago and Columbia seem to be deferring a lot of HYS admits this year. Did the same thing happen to the same degree last year, or are the two Cs being more cautious this year about whom they admit?)

Looking at LSN from previous cycles, Chicago has had a rather idiosyncratic admissions process, probably due to their small class size and yield issues. I don't think they really care that much about soft factors but do look for a certain "fit" from the application. Columbia is more numbers (re LSAT) driven, but every year they have some weird deferrals/waitlists (ppl with 4.5+ index numbers, I'd like to include myself to that list for this year). My personal OPINION and I know there will be some disagreement on what I say next, is that Columbia, ever since they've had a new dean of admissions 2 years ago, have increased their LSAT requirements, begun to shun engineers and hard science ppl, and generally look for ppl with interesting personalities and experiences (perhaps to counteract their previous reputation for churning out robotic corporate lawyers...now they produce err... less robotic corporate lawyers!)   

I've been looking over Leiter's blog and some XOXO threads on the topic, and it seems like UChicago (a school known for its highly venerable faculty) has trouble retaining some of its top professors, particularly over the last 3-5 years. HLS and others have taken a few of Chicago's faculty. In fact, among the T6 schools, Chicago has taken the biggest losses in faculty over the past few years, while HLS, NYU, etc. have really boosted their faculty mostly with young "superstars". On top of that, Chicago's strength has always been in Law and Economics, and the faculty members who helped develop this area aren't getting any younger and are likely to retire in the coming years. In fact, this also applies to much of Chicago's star faculty (i.e., getting old, retiring soon). Moreover, it seems like Chicago, despite its overall faculty strength, has glaring weaknesses (for a school of its stature) in IP and International Law, two areas that really appeal to at least prospective students.

All this isn't really a question, but wondering if MTG or any other ppl with knowledge on the topic have any comments or substantiated disagreements? Fyi, I personally am really interested in attending UChi next fall, its probably my top choice right now, but this recent and potential future decline in faculty concerns me.

Even taking inflation into account, they're still coming out on top.  I'd have to go back and look again but I beleive I have somewhere around 50k which I consolidated at 2.8% when the interest rate dropped down to its lowest point in years, and then another 20k at somewhere around 3.25% and another 20k this year that will probably be at like 6% or whatever the interest rate ends up being.  So something like 90k, which if stretched out over 30 years literally becomes over $160k.  $70k in interest on a 90k loan??  Amazing.

Why would you take 30 years to pay off 90k in loans with a Biglaw salary? At 145k/year (soon 160k), and bonuses, you could easily pay off 90k within 5 years. That's about 22k/year repayment, not a huge cost at that salary.

Quote from: lonewolf on January 24, 2007, 12:01:38 PM

Just a stupid question- so since GW's median salary is 125K does it mean that rougly half of the graduates will earn 125 k?

Look at the NLJ.com article re: % of graduates at NLJ250 firms and that'll give you a good idea of BIGLAW prospects.  I think GW is at about 40%. 

As a side note, the market for BIGLAW in NY is in the process of being bumped to 160K.

I dont want to be TOO much of a money grubbing whore, but where is this 160K number coming from (its been mentioned in this thread a few times)? Didn't NYC just very recently go up to 145K and in fact some firms have yet to even raise from 125 to 145? Haven't seen too much news on this on xoxo.

Sorry for the slight hijack.