« on: February 01, 2005, 12:43:13 AM »
I like Vandy's summer in venice thing.. and it's open to students from other law schools. Are there any other top schools that offer such programs?
Messages - bhvexille
Law School Applications / Re: BC has the second lowest job placement rate among top 40. No wonder it's TTT« on: February 01, 2005, 12:22:10 AM »
I know, I was just saying in another thread that the vault surveys for BC and BU scared me, even though both have over 90% of grads employed @ graduation. But I think there are different strata of bad employment prospects.
I think people at BU (for example) are upset if they don't have a job by christmas of 3L (students at top schools usually get their job offers shortly after their 2L summer, from their summer firms).. and so they complain, a lot.. but then they go on to find something by may.
On the other hand, in the stratum below BU, a lot of Hastings grads don't have jobs by 3L christmas. They don't have jobs by graduation. A lot of them have to wait until they pass the bar before they can get the jobs they're looking for (9 months after grad.), and that is what really scares me.. and I think that the employed @ grad #s can be useful data in that regard.
Law School Applications / Re: BC has the second lowest job placement rate among top 40. No wonder it's TTT« on: February 01, 2005, 12:15:52 AM »
But it doesn't say "graduates who got oci interviews".. it says "Graduates that are known to be employed at graduation"
I don't see how you can rationally conclude that it doesn't mean exactly that: "Graduates that are known to be employed at graduation".
By your logic it could just as easily mean "Graduates that would like to have pink elephants as pets that were employed at graduation". Again, occam's razor, not to mention the huge leap of logic.
BTW i hope you understand, I'm not emotionally invested in this argument, just playing devil's advocate.
Law School Applications / Re: BC has the second lowest job placement rate among top 40. No wonder it's TTT« on: February 01, 2005, 12:06:08 AM »
What's a realistic explanation?
I don't see any logical reason to conclude that these numbers are incorrect, especially as they are clearly not positively skewed by people failing to report their status.
"% known to be employed upon graduation" is not to be affected by people not reporting.. only the employed after 9 months is affected by people not reporting
Graduates known to be employed at graduation: 87.3%
Graduates known to be employed nine months after graduation (including 25 percent of those with unknown status): 97.8%
You see how the first one is not skewed?
I find the "employed upon graduation" stats very useful.. you just have to be wary when the % into clerkships is super-high (seton hall), or the % in acadamia is too high (bloomington)
« on: January 31, 2005, 11:20:55 PM »
It doesn't matter.. ability to get into a higher school is a euphemism for LSAT/GPA.
A study showed that only about 15% of LS success (grades) can be accounted for by LSAT/GPA. It was cited in the 2004 bcguide (PDF), if you want to look it up. The other 85% is probably due to hard work, and good LS exam writing ability (not tested by LSAT or UGPA).
So, it's irrational to assume that it would be easier to be at the top of your class at a worse school. In fact it's probably harder because there is more pressure for EVERYONE to work hard, because if they don't finish at the top, they sleep in the park.
What scared me away? Basically that the students at the schools are very competitive, and that employment prospects outside the top of the class suck.
And.. I guess you can take the surveys with a grain of salt.. but it's like interviewing students and graduates about employment prospects, etc... very valuable knowledge, I think.