|
|
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 - sockpuppet
12
« on: March 28, 2008, 04:18:38 AM »
14
« on: March 20, 2008, 02:37:04 AM »
I give them a 180 for the partner comments alone: Stanford: "Unprepared and uninterested in private practice; entitled"
Columbia: "Our associates from this school have an inability to see the big picture."
Michigan: "Not impressed"
NYU: "Generally very good, but seem to be developing an attitude as the school rises in the USNWR reports"
Virginia: "Maybe it's the law school's emphasis on softball and beer, but the lack of work ethic shows in recent grads."
NU: "Typically smart, occasionally not as creative as one would hope"
Georgetown: "We've hired several lawyers from this school and they all have poor people skills and produce low-quality work."
GW: "A law school on the rise, but not there yet"
Vanderbilt: "The little law school that could"
UCLA: "The Fordham of the west coast" And my favorite: Yale: "Great lawyers if you can get them to focus on real world business issues instead of how they'd run the country" Best stuff I've read about law school in at least two years.
15
« on: March 19, 2008, 03:13:32 AM »
I concur that if you had BC or BU on the table and really favor Boston, then you would have a clear choice. But with half tuition, and the huge gap in reputation between GW and these other schools, I would say GW is by far your best option now. I would not at any event take Northeastern with no money over GW with $$, no matter where I wanted to work. I would still expect GW to be competitive even with a softer curve. But at least if you work your ass off and make it into that top 1/3, then you get a real payoff in terms of mobility and choice. If you bust your ass at Suffolk or Northeastern, then the most you're buying is a shot at Big Law in Boston. As far as I can tell, the top 1/3 at GW will at least have a spot in line ahead of anyone at Northeastern or Suffolk for jobs in Boston, no matter how much street cred these local schools have. Lots of local school alumni get jobs in Boston of course, but it won't be at the expense of the top candidates that firms can lure from elsewhere.
16
« on: March 18, 2008, 11:18:56 PM »
I guess I'm just wondering about GWs reach to Boston. I'm wondering why there's not a lot of GW grad in Boston. From the chart though, even Harvard grads don't dominate Boston- it's mainly ruled by BU/BC grads. That depends on how many seem like "a lot." GW seems to do well compared to other schools not in New England. If we leave out Harvard / BU / BC, then only four schools have more graduates in the region: Georgetown (1,197); NYU (792); Cornell (715); Yale (691); and Columbia (688). With 618, GW seems to be in some pretty good company, and not far behind these other schools. Local schools are always going to have a five or ten to one advantage over any individual out of state school. But there are 51,000 lawyers in the New England region total, and even Harvard / BC / BU taken together only account for 20% of those. Considering that it's not local, I'd say GW's numbers seem respectable.
17
« on: March 18, 2008, 10:40:35 PM »
Is alumni reach indicative of where you can get a job - or just where alumni tend to settle?
The numbers there only show where alumni settle. If you think more alumni = better chance of getting a job, then you might assume a correlation. Graduates from Top 10 schools can most likely get a job in any region they want. Graduates of Tier 4 schools are most likely looking at decent prospects only in their immediate area. In between it's not always clear. One thing you can say is that a school that has large numbers of alumni everywhere has proved that you can travel far and wide if you go there. A school with a very regional network might give you the same options but just happen to attract people who never want to leave. With the first school you have proof of something positive, and with the second you just have no proof of anything negative. With the second school you will have to look for data beyond alumni distributions to figure out whether it's mainly by choice or by lack of it that people stick around.
18
« on: March 18, 2008, 01:17:10 AM »
Thanks for posting this - really interesting!
Welcome.
19
« on: March 17, 2008, 09:01:49 PM »
20
« on: January 31, 2008, 02:52:43 AM »
I was about to yell at you for spamming, but it's actually a pretty nice site. Thanks. Yeah. In retrospect this just seemed off-topic for the off-topic forum, so I thought I would move it. I did delete the original post in order to avoid clutter.
|
Discussion
Resources