It's not ambiguous. The regions are defined by the US Census Bureau, and NALP reports employment prospects based on those regions.musicfor18 wrote:Yeah, all that strange geographical breakup ("east north central"?) seems ambiguous.
USC vs. WUSTL Forum
- NayBoer
- Posts: 1013
- Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 3:24 pm
Re: USC vs. WUSTL
- DerrickRose
- Posts: 1106
- Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2008 5:08 pm
Re: USC vs. WUSTL
Quite possibly the biggest jump between two schools ranked one spot apart is USC to WUSTL. WUSTL is not a T20 is the colloquial sense of that word, USC is. This is not a complicated one.musicfor18 wrote:Bump
Go to USC.
-
- Posts: 18203
- Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:47 pm
Re: USC vs. WUSTL
DerrickRose wrote: If I might add a personal anecdote: I wanted to get out of Champaign too. Went here for undergrad, all my friends were leaving after graduation, wanted a change of scenery.
Hey DRose, were you class of 09? I was class of 08. We might have had this convo before.
- DerrickRose
- Posts: 1106
- Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2008 5:08 pm
Re: USC vs. WUSTL
Yeah, I was an 09. Feels like a decade ago right about now.Desert Fox wrote:DerrickRose wrote: If I might add a personal anecdote: I wanted to get out of Champaign too. Went here for undergrad, all my friends were leaving after graduation, wanted a change of scenery.
Hey DRose, were you class of 09? I was class of 08. We might have had this convo before.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
- pany1985
- Posts: 386
- Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 9:08 am
Re: USC vs. WUSTL
The biggest problem with USC is that it's in such a crappy part of LA
-
- Posts: 18203
- Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:47 pm
Re: USC vs. WUSTL
USC.musicfor18 wrote: I'd like to go for the best chance of obtaining a good job.
-
- Posts: 73
- Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 2:06 am
Re: USC vs. WUSTL
pany1985 wrote:The biggest problem with USC is that it's in such a crappy part of LA
So live in a nice part of LA. Get a car.
- DerrickRose
- Posts: 1106
- Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2008 5:08 pm
Re: USC vs. WUSTL
Yeah, quit bumping this thread when it has been conclusively and universally settled that you shouldn't go to WUSTLmusicfor18 wrote:Any more thoughts?
- NayBoer
- Posts: 1013
- Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 3:24 pm
Re: USC vs. WUSTL
You prefer LA and USC has a better biglaw placement rate. Go there.
Also, if being #19 for four or five years in a row doesn't make a school a T20, then nothing does. If you meant T18, then say that. But T20 means WUSTL and at least one of: Minn/GWU/Emory.
Also, if being #19 for four or five years in a row doesn't make a school a T20, then nothing does. If you meant T18, then say that. But T20 means WUSTL and at least one of: Minn/GWU/Emory.
- DerrickRose
- Posts: 1106
- Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2008 5:08 pm
Re: USC vs. WUSTL
False. T20 has a certain "regional superpower" connotation. The correct answer is that there are only 18 T20 schools.NayBoer wrote:You prefer LA and USC has a better biglaw placement rate. Go there.
Also, if being #19 for four or five years in a row doesn't make a school a T20, then nothing does. If you meant T18, then say that. But T20 means WUSTL and at least one of: Minn/GWU/Emory.
- romothesavior
- Posts: 14692
- Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:29 pm
Re: USC vs. WUSTL
This.NayBoer wrote:You prefer LA and USC has a better biglaw placement rate. Go there.
Also, if being #19 for four or five years in a row doesn't make a school a T20, then nothing does. If you meant T18, then say that. But T20 means WUSTL and at least one of: Minn/GWU/Emory.
On both accounts.
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- NayBoer
- Posts: 1013
- Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 3:24 pm
Re: USC vs. WUSTL
Then call it T18. T20 means it's regularly in the top 20. Which WashU is.DerrickRose wrote:False. T20 has a certain "regional superpower" connotation. The correct answer is that there are only 18 T20 schools.NayBoer wrote:You prefer LA and USC has a better biglaw placement rate. Go there.
Also, if being #19 for four or five years in a row doesn't make a school a T20, then nothing does. If you meant T18, then say that. But T20 means WUSTL and at least one of: Minn/GWU/Emory.
There isn't a clear regional placement trend among 15-18. UCLA, USC and Texas all place disproportionately local. Vanderbilt places very widely, in a pattern closer to WUSTL. Just in terms of placement, WUSTL has more reach than a lot of schools ranked above it. Its limit is a lower biglaw rate, in part because St. Louis just doesn't have a large market. That's a valid reason not to go, but it doesn't make it not T20.
- Dr. Strangelove
- Posts: 557
- Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2010 5:59 pm
Re: USC vs. WUSTL
They're close. However, a smaller percentage of USC grads are unemployed. If that's your top concern.. USC>WUSTL.
- You Gotta Have Faith
- Posts: 402
- Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 5:04 am
Re: USC vs. WUSTL
With regard to your getting firms to look at you part, you presumably mean Big Law. Firms of some sort will look at grads from either school. It happens every year.papercranes wrote:This is not a good plan.You Gotta Have Faith wrote:
All that said, if you are Midwestern and choose to go to USC, you can use your Midwestern roots to catapult you back to the Midwest, and vice versa, if you're Californian and go to WUSTL, you can use your CA roots as an excuse to get back to CA. Firms in rougher economies are concerned about flight risk to some extent. And if you are actually from their region, they'll be more likely to think you will want to stay there, and consequently, stay with their firm for a number of years.
I think firms, ITE, are less likely to have any interest in interviewing someone who is out of state when they have plenty of great candidates right on their doorsteps. Why would an LA firm bother with a WUSTL kid when they can have a UCLA or USC kid? The time, effort and expense to get the WUSTL kid is not worth it. Similarly, the midwest firms have no incentive to get a USC kid when they have a WUSTL kid. The whole "ties to the region" thing gets less important once you ARE ALREADY IN THE REGION.
Don't assume you'll do well enough out of either school to have firms even look at you.
So, say you pick USC. During 1L year you can volunteer in Los Angeles at one of the various PI places and make contacts. You don't need to move for 1L summer, and you work/intern/whatever 1L summer and make more local contacts. During your 2 and 3L years you can work part time, or continue to volunteer and get academic credit. You can follow some of Matties's suggestions for general networking. If you strike out at OCI, you have in place a great back up plan for a legal job. You won't get the same opportunity to do this if you go to a school in a region you don't intend on working in.
Why would an LA firm bother with a WUSTL kid? If that WUSTL kid is from LA, well, it would make perfect sense then, wouldn't it? Why might a Midwestern firm bother with a USC kid? If that USC kid wants to get back to the Midwest. As far as firms "going out of their way" and "spending money"... if you mean BigLaw, that's just NOT an issue for them. They fly people to schools all over the friggin' country every single year to get a nice rounding out of their firm. Besides, plenty of kids are more than willing to travel themselves to a firm if they have a legitimate interview.
Now granted, there is certainly an edge to going to school in the region you want; I'm definitely not neglecting that. But the assumption that firms only recruit from the closest schools just isn't true. Sure, they recruit more from the local schools, but in any given firm that is decent sized, you will find a conglomeration of different types of grads.
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login