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 - Revenant

Pages: 1 ... 27 28 29 30 31 [32]
311
Choosing the Right Law School / Re: Are these US News Rankings real?
« on: March 14, 2004, 10:56:38 AM »
One reason why this could be real... Univ. of Washington's ranking is fixed. ^^

312
heh, as if to make my decision harder, the supposed new usnews rankings has Temple picking up 14 places from 64 to 50, though of course, there isn't much of a difference between the 40s and the 70s so I guess it shouldn't be too surprising.

I guess I'm trying to find a good reason not to go to Cardozo.  They won me over with the way they've presented themselves so far, and I get to start school a semester early and take fewer classes during the regular year (should be an advantage for the tough 1L year).  But the difference in money is almost $70k over 3 years.  Is an advantage in getting into NYC Big Law worth that much?

313
Choosing the Right Law School / Re: purported new US News rankings
« on: March 13, 2004, 07:53:22 PM »
Well, if there's one reason why it might be real -- University of Washington is back where they should be, in the 20s instead of last year's 45.  Would be an extra mental step for someone to make that correction and then fudge the rankings however they pleased.  Though you never know... ;)

314
Choosing the Right Law School / Re: Looking for Advice- NY Schools
« on: March 12, 2004, 05:39:35 PM »
The nice parts are great - but generally, you will have to deal with things like riding on an all black subway to get into Manhattan. 

Chris

And what's wrong with that? o.O

315
Choosing the Right Law School / Cardozo vs Temple
« on: March 12, 2004, 05:37:39 PM »
EDIT

Hey all,

Any insight on these two schools would be much welcomed! :)

They're both 2nd Tier, but location and cost varies tremendously.  I've listed some info (figures based on previous year) for each of them:

Cardozo - $56,320/year (~169k) - 110k median salary - 80%/98% job rate
Temple - $39,870/year (~120k) - 71 or 92k?? median salary - 64%/91% job rate

I'm considering public interest law but as everyone has pointed out, I shouldn't limit my options in case I want to try BigLaw.  Ideally, I'd like to work either in San Fran, NYC or Boston -- basically any big cities with good diversity.  My pick of the two has been Cardozo, due to its location and much better placement rate.  However, it also happens to be the most expensive by far.  Am I correct that if I want to practice BigLaw in NYC, Cardozo should be my choice hands down?  Temple seems to limit my work possibilities to Pennsylvania, and their expected salary is a bit lower (though that's probably just from their associated lower cost of living).  Oh yeah, Temple has offered me almost $20k in scholarship money (over 3 years, not per year), and I might be able to save some more money by getting the in-state tuition rate since I attended college in Philly for 4.5 years.

Ideally, Boston U would accept me and I wouldn't have to worry about picking from these four, but after recently receiving a postcard telling me they're missing my dean's certification (dang it, must have been lost somewhere in between my school's career services office and their admissions office), I'm about to give up hope.

Also, what if a school like Fordham, UCHastings or William & Mary were to accept me?  So far, Cardozo has given me the best overall impression so I feel a little iffy about going to a school that is relatively unknown to me.

Thanks SOOOO very much in advance. :)

316
Law School Admissions / Re: Index Number Site
« on: March 03, 2004, 12:44:59 PM »
The LSAC site has a complete list of all the multipliers used by each school.  I used it a couple months ago to see which schools valued GPAs more than LSAT scores (at least relatively) and vice versa (fyi, berkeley valued GPA the second highest out of all the 160-something schools on the LSAC multiplier list, trailing only U of Puerto Rico, both of which value GPA almost three times more than the average school, which treats 1 point on the LSAT as equal to 0.08 GPA points).

Does anyone have any insight on why schools bother with adding a constant to the estimated AI?  The only reason I can tell is to modify the perception of differences between AI.  For instance, the difference between an AI of 24 as compared to 26 may seem a lot bigger than that between 94 and 96 (constant of 70).  Otheriwse, the constant is worthless since the AIs can't be compared with the AIs of other schools.

EDIT

A caveat for all of you who are using the spreadsheets.  They assume:

1) that the median LSAT is dead center between the 75th and 25th percentile values when top schools seem to have median scores closer to the 75th percentile.  Same goes for GPAs.

2) that each X-th percentile admissions index for each school is equivalent to a student with a X-th percentile LSAT and X-th percentile GPA (i.e. 50th percentile admittee = 50th percentile LSAT and 50th percentile GPA).  This can differ enough to bump a prediction from one range to another depending on how the actual scores are paired up.

3) that applicant pool inflation is equal to the percentage change in scores, NOT percentage change in # of applicants (this would be ridiculous as a 6% increase in applicants -- a stat from a previous year -- would lead to a school going from a LSAT score of 160 to 169.6.  Thus the best number to use here is probably 1.01, as scores go up for each school about 1 point every year.  Also, you may want to change the formula used to apply the inflation multiplier as it is currently applied to not only the LSAT and GPA scores but the constant added as well.  The constant should remain unaffected unless the school actually modifies the multipliers used.

4) that if you score the same as the X-th percentile index score, you have a X percent chance of getting into the school.  You can still use the prediction ranges relative to each other but I don't see why 50th percentile index means 50% acceptance probability.  For one thing, the percentages are at the very least skewed in favor of those considered as strongly qualified at a particular school.  The reason for this is simple.  Students tend to attend the higher ranking schools to which they are accepted, so you dont need to accept nearly as many 25th percentile students as you would 75th percentile students (who you would have increased competition for).

Anyone else have any thoughts?

317
Law School Admissions / Re: Index Number Site
« on: March 03, 2004, 12:28:57 PM »
Guys, whether or not you have excel does not affect whether or not you can access the site.  Considering the responses, the server for nutechseed.com seems to be down alot, so just try and try again.  Your operating system has no bearing on your success with the site, and having excel just allows you to open the file.  You should be able to at least download the file even without excel (though of course it would be useless unless you have another xls-compatible reader).

318
Incoming 1Ls / Re: Accuracy of http://nutechseed.com/law/ index site
« on: March 03, 2004, 12:23:19 PM »
I had the luck to graduate from Penn and our mean GPA is 3.6. ^^

However, the mean GPA for students coming out of Penn's engineering school (or at least those of majors like bioengineering, comp sci, etc.) is nowhere near that high.  Depending on whose estimate I trust, comp sci majors, for instance, have a mean varying from 2.7 to 3.0.

Am I screwed then? :)  My engineering GPA was around 2.8 but my GPA for courses I took for my 2nd degree (non-engineering) was 3.7, but since I spent a lot more time on engineering courses, I finished with around a 3.1, which is much lower than Penn's mean (Penn has a 4 to 1 ratio of non-engineering to engineering students, and thats not talking about the ones who actually apply to law, which would probably be even higher in favor of non-engineering students).

319
Choosing the Right Law School / Error in USNews ranking?
« on: March 03, 2004, 12:09:02 PM »
Hey all,

I don't know if anyone else noticed this but University of Washington was somewhere between 25th and 30th in last year's USNews rankings but slipped all the way to somewhere between 45th and 49th in this year's edition.  Not much has changed between the two years, and rather, UDub's stats seem to have gone up in most regards.  However, the one big difference is the 9-month employment rate.  Whereas in last years, the employment stats were 67% and 96%, this year USNews has them pegged at 77% and 75%.  Yes, 75%, as in 9 months after graduation, the total # of students employed from UDub went down instead of up.  Now, I don't know if maybe the law firms at which UDub's students were hired all went under or something, but I would guess that this is a snafu, and a really big one at that if you consider the extra weight given to those with marginally higher than average employment rates, given the skewing of the bell curve for placement statistics (I believe deloggio.com has an article on this).  Anyone else with thoughts on this?

320
Choosing the Right Law School / Re: Do rankings really matter?
« on: March 03, 2004, 11:58:50 AM »
Thanks, sagemenscircle, finally someone brings up the question I've been seeking the answer to. :)

After reading posts galore on a few too many boards, as well as the column advice from nylawyer.com, I definitely got the feeling that as far as young aspiring law students go (the type who don't have to worry about families to uproot, etc.), the higher ranking the school the better.  However, I have a couple questions perhaps some of you could answer.  Take the following situation: a student applies and is accepted to a rising? school like Cardozo (ranked #57 in USNews, but #28 in the EQR rankings) and another school that is ranked higher according to USNews (lets say around the 30-40s) but lower in EQR.  Money is the same at either school, but the location of the unnamed school is less than ideal (rural or highly suburban, and not in the state of NY, MA, CA, etc.).  However, the unnamed school is considered more of a national school, as it attracts at least twice the number of national recruiters and has a smaller student population to boot.

1) Am I correct that if I want to work at a big firm in say California, I would be better off at the higher ranked school?

2) In terms of finding a job in NYC Big Law, I understand that local schools are heavily recruited so I would probably pick Cardozo over a 40th ranked school but what about over a 28th ranked (USNews) like College of William & Mary?

3) I keep hearing "First tier matters" but there are definitely many levels of first tier schools.  Obviously the top 25 or so are no-brainers, but does it really make a difference if you're at a bottom first tier or a top 2nd tier (given that there is no money difference).  I would think that if the top 2nd tier school were to move up to the bottom of the 1st tier by the time you're looking for a job, the difference would be moot.  Am I correct in this assumption?

4) Also, I've read from nylawyer.com that sometimes, the school you choose will come back to haunt you 30 years down the road when you're trying to transfer laterally and the hiring partner at the firm you're trying to transfer to is completely absorbed about hiring only so-called first tier graduates.  Will it matter that the school you attended used to be 2nd tier?  I imagine if the school you attended was 4th tier during your tenure there but 30 years later is 1st tier, people would still say "oh, the guy graduated from there when the school wasn't that good."

5) Going along with the whole idea of hiring biased towards first tier schools, does anyone have any experiences regarding companies looking down upon a school that is 2nd tier at #51 versus a school that is 1st tier at #47?  I would imagine that a school that close to falling out of the first tier shouldn't be considered any higher than a school just as likely to join the first tier, although from what I've read, it seems first tier carries extra weight.  I don't know if the people using the term are actually thinking of top 25 schools when they say first tier, as there is a big difference between the top 25 first tier schools and the next 25.

Thanks in advance for any insights offered!

Pages: 1 ... 27 28 29 30 31 [32]