Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Poll

WHERE TO GO?

Wayne State
 4 (28.6%)
Chapman
 3 (21.4%)
Pace
 1 (7.1%)
New York Law
 6 (42.9%)

Total Members Voted: 14

Author Topic: (POLL) Wayne State v. Chapman v. Pace v. New York Law School? (Help me!!!)  (Read 2503 times)

YBC15

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 25
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Wayne State v. Chapman v. New York Law School? (Help me!!!)
« Reply #10 on: April 24, 2008, 10:47:48 PM »
Again, both NYC and LA are fine with me.  What I would like to know is which law school (Chapman, New York Law, Pace, and Wayne State) would give me a best chance to get at least a decent job. 

plex

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 146
    • View Profile
Re: Wayne State v. Chapman v. New York Law School? (Help me!!!)
« Reply #11 on: April 25, 2008, 12:39:07 AM »
Here is your answer for best chance at a decent job, just looking at these schools:

OCI Statistics for 2007 (provided by lawschoolnumbers)

(US NEWS #131) Chapman:13 (1 NY/11 CA) (very regional CA)
(US NEWS #118) New York Law: 52 (27 NY/6 CA/5 DC) (regional NY)
(US NEWS #131) Pace: 16 (5 NY/1 CA/3 DC) (very regional NY)
(US NEWS #125) Wayne State: 39 (1 NY/1 CA/2 DC) (regional MI, MI is a smaller market)

1L Class sizes (so you know how many you are competing against)

Chapman: 211 (top 7% big/midlaw in CA through OCI)
New York Law: 547 (top 10% big/midlaw NY through OCI)
Pace: 273 (top 5% big/midlaw NY)
Wayne State: 211 (top 18% big/midlaw MI)

Depends on where you want to practice...while OCI is definitely not representative of how most get their jobs, it is a good indication of how many large firms from an area hire there presently. The percentages are based on how many firms there are per students, firms hire 0-4 students, so the percentages could be a good bit bigger (probably double), but for the sake of you having something to compare, I just left them as is.

Once again these schools are all REGIONAL, don't expect to have much of a shot at all outside the school's region.

Also, about transferring, unless you know you have extremely good study skills, or somehow get them fast in law school (this is very unlikely), the school you choose is where you are going to stay, large upward transfers require top 10-15% at least, which means you have to pretty much destroy the other students at studying for finals and test taking.

Special Agent Dana Scully

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 8991
  • aka MCB
    • View Profile
Re: Wayne State v. Chapman v. New York Law School? (Help me!!!)
« Reply #12 on: April 25, 2008, 12:55:05 AM »
I don't have any clue on the matter at hand.  However, OP, there is a current 2L (rising 3L) that transferred from NYLS.  Just food for thought.
Columbia 3L

YBC15

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 25
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Wayne State v. Chapman v. Pace v. New York Law School? (Help me!!!)
« Reply #13 on: April 28, 2008, 09:09:12 PM »
Thank you for many insightful advices.  However, I am still confused.... Please participate in the poll.

WSUAlum1

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 51
    • View Profile
    • Email
My advice is similar to that of other posters, albeit more long winded.  I apologize for the wind.  Please appreciate that i'm only trying to help you

First--engage in all of the fantasies you'd like.  Transferring from a T3 to a 'name brand' school is very difficult.  Only top 5% or so have any chance.  (I know--you'll be one of those 5%.  Half of your classmates will swear to the same).  The smartest thing to do is to ask: which school would I be most willing to attend if I had to stay there for all 3 years?  Pick that school. That's the A answer.  If you would not be willing to attend any of these schools for 3 years, b/c their cost is not worth the financial benefit of a T3 degree, then either 1) do something else, or 2) step out of the process for this year until you can do something that will get you into a school that you would be willing to attend (improve LSAT, get masters degree to improve GPA, etc).  Then try again.

If you insist on ignoring what I said above (& god help you if you do), then pick the T3 nearest to the name brand school you really want to attend by transfer.  If you want to transfer to a fancy school in NY, then attend a NY T3.  Same for California. 

I'll speak for the MI market by eg, b/c that's what i know best.  The top Wayne students (top 5%) can and do transfer to U of M after 1L.  U of M gets lots of those applications, and can compare you to previous apps and decide if you'd likely succeed.  The profs at Wayne can write letters that say "Jones is as good as Smith, who transferred 3 years ago, and did well at UM."  Also, the best Wayne profs will spend their sabbaticals at UM, since it is convenient and does not disrupt family life.  When UM sees a LOR from WSU profs who have taught at UM, they know that those LORs are reliable.  There is a pipeline, so to speak, from a T3 to neighboring national schools.

Since you want to end up in NY and Cali, pick one of those states, and attend a T3 there.  Since you don't want to go to a national school in MI (U of M), don't go to wayne.

Since you seem pretty stubborn, allow me to make a prediction.  You'll pick a school in the state w/ the nat'l school to which you'd like to transfer.  You will not be able to, or will not want to transfer after 1L (I'd tell you why you might not want to, but you won't believe me).  If you have energy and drive, and hustle to make contacts by clerking during law school w/ small local firms that do entertainment law, and join the entertainment law society, and make sure to meet all of the speakers who come to your school, and talk to then and impress them w/ your hustle and hard work, you will have as good or better a chance to achieve what you want than if you had transferred to nat'l school and had just relied on your fancy credential to get you through.

Five years out of school, the practice of law is much more about energy, commitment and people skills than it is about your credential. Right now, you think I'm full of *&^%.  But print this response.  When you are a lawyer, it'll be hanging on your wall.

epicac

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 64
  • press play
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Wayne State v. Chapman v. New York Law School? (Help me!!!)
« Reply #15 on: April 30, 2008, 02:55:50 PM »
Remember that you have a 10% chance of being in the top 10%. Do not bank on it.

This type of logic bothers me, as an engineer by trade.  Sorry to nitpick, but you'd only have 10% chance if the class rank was determined randomly (i.e. not due to any other factors).  I'm not saying that everyone who predicts to be in the top 10% will be, or even have a better chance to be.  But just that the statement is factually incorrect, because the class rank is determined through factors such as hard work and test taking ability in addition to the obvious luck.
riding a gravy train with biscuit wheels...

NYC2L

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 45
    • View Profile

This type of logic bothers me, as an engineer by trade.  Sorry to nitpick, but you'd only have 10% chance if the class rank was determined randomly (i.e. not due to any other factors).  I'm not saying that everyone who predicts to be in the top 10% will be, or even have a better chance to be.  But just that the statement is factually incorrect, because the class rank is determined through factors such as hard work and test taking ability in addition to the obvious luck.

You are missing the meta-point. While you are correct that other factors go into law school success, it is impossible to predict who will utilize those factors most optimally. For example, if 10 people enter law school X with scores in a similar range (as is the case with the majority of students at a given school), each student has an equal chance at each spot between 1st and 10th. Although post hoc, factors such as hard work and test taking ability serve to explain the outcome, predicting how those factors stack up among students prior to their respective performances is incredibly unlikely. Hence, class rank is random and only appears predicable after the fact. Accordingly, each individual has a 10% chance of being in the top 10%.

epicac

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 64
  • press play
    • View Profile
    • Email

This type of logic bothers me, as an engineer by trade.  Sorry to nitpick, but you'd only have 10% chance if the class rank was determined randomly (i.e. not due to any other factors).  I'm not saying that everyone who predicts to be in the top 10% will be, or even have a better chance to be.  But just that the statement is factually incorrect, because the class rank is determined through factors such as hard work and test taking ability in addition to the obvious luck.

You are missing the meta-point. While you are correct that other factors go into law school success, it is impossible to predict who will utilize those factors most optimally. For example, if 10 people enter law school X with scores in a similar range (as is the case with the majority of students at a given school), each student has an equal chance at each spot between 1st and 10th. Although post hoc, factors such as hard work and test taking ability serve to explain the outcome, predicting how those factors stack up among students prior to their respective performances is incredibly unlikely. Hence, class rank is random and only appears predicable after the fact. Accordingly, each individual has a 10% chance of being in the top 10%.

I agree with your main point.  There is no predicting who will be in the top 10% with total accuracy.  I am not saying that I accurately could pick 10% of people in a class that would be the top 10%.

Think of it this way - someone offers you a bet.  They say that they have picked 10% of a 1L class, based on LSAT and GPA, betting on several of the students to be in the top 10%.  They inform you that you can have a random list of students.  10% of the class, randomly selected.  They say that you win if your group does better, they win if theirs perform better.

Would you take the bet?

If you say no, then you are essentially agreeing with me that the top 10% of a class isn't entirely random.  Make sense?  Oh and you are also correct that on an individual basis, success can't be predicted.  I agree with that.  That's why I'm planning on 60 hour weeks my first year, I know I can't just fall into the top of the class. ;)
riding a gravy train with biscuit wheels...

NYC2L

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 45
    • View Profile
I would take the bet if I were compensated for the correlation between LSAT/GPA and law school performance, which, of course, supports your point that law school success is not entirely random in the aggregate. I do not disagree with that. Since we agree that on an individual basis success cannot be predicted, there is nothing more to do but wish you good luck.

epicac

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 64
  • press play
    • View Profile
    • Email
I would take the bet if I were compensated for the correlation between LSAT/GPA and law school performance, which, of course, supports your point that law school success is not entirely random in the aggregate. I do not disagree with that. Since we agree that on an individual basis success cannot be predicted, there is nothing more to do but wish you good luck.

Thanks, I appreciate it. 8)
riding a gravy train with biscuit wheels...