WUSTL(75k) vs. Illinois(90k) vs. Cornell

(Rankings, Profiles, Tuition, Student Life, . . . )
Del Fin
Posts: 25
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 4:32 pm

WUSTL(75k) vs. Illinois(90k) vs. Cornell

Postby Del Fin » Tue Mar 29, 2011 6:17 pm

Hey all,

I just wanted to see what everyone thought... I originally wanted to stay in socal to do entertainment law.. but I got WL'ed from UCLA and haven't heard back from USC so for now I'm just going to count those out. As of right now.. I don't really know what field I want to study (possibly corporate??).

My largest concern is whether or not I'll be able to come back to LA and how much easier the schools' career services/alumni will make that for me.


WUSTL:
(+):
-75k....
-Pretty reputable school with a good alumni base (at least thats what they tell me..)
-They claim to place a lot of people in California
-beautiful campus
-#18 in the nation and seems to be on an upward trend
(-):
-STL can be pretty sketchy
-Unsure whether their reputation really spans past the Midwest

Cornell (haven't visited yet)
(+):
-Ivy League ( I just really want to sport one of their shirts so people will respect me...haha)
-Well established prestigious school
-Beautiful campus
-#13 in the nation!
(-):
-Haven't heard about merit or financial aid yet (they make you fill out a ton of stuff before they tell you merit aid)
-Ithaca seems to be in the middle of no where.

Illinois
(+):
-90k!!
-Extremely nice admissions committee which leads me to believe that they have a very friendly and open faculty
-Illinois Guarantee: if tuition increase, your scholly will to
-Fairly close to Chicago which would be nice to get away to every once in a while\
(-):
-Not as well known of a school
- # 23 in the nation(dropping from 21)
- Alumni factor seems like it would be a wildcard.



BTW.. no UG debt and I'd want to go to a big law firm...

I would have listed cold weather as negatives.. but lets face it, they're all pretty cold and being a Socal boy.. well, I can only withstand temperatures as low as 50 degrees

Any suggestions? anyone in a similar predicament??

Del Fin
Posts: 25
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 4:32 pm

Re: WUSTL(75k) vs. Illinois(90k) vs. Cornell

Postby Del Fin » Tue Mar 29, 2011 6:24 pm

Sorry for the lengthyness... :oops:

User avatar
mez06
Posts: 349
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2010 4:11 pm

Re: WUSTL(75k) vs. Illinois(90k) vs. Cornell

Postby mez06 » Tue Mar 29, 2011 6:30 pm

wustl or cornell. And I'd go with Cornell.

User avatar
hokie
Posts: 339
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2010 1:32 am

Re: WUSTL(75k) vs. Illinois(90k) vs. Cornell

Postby hokie » Tue Mar 29, 2011 6:30 pm

entertainment law+wanting to be on the West Coast, these three options are not the best (I would personally take a lower rank school with $$$ in Cali if this is the direction you want to go in). However, amongst those three schools, I would say that Cornell would be your best bet for national reach towards the West Coast. WUSTL and Illinois IMO does not have enough of national reputation to have great possibility of taking you out back west. GL and congrat on the great acceptances!

User avatar
bk1
Posts: 18423
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:06 pm

Re: WUSTL(75k) vs. Illinois(90k) vs. Cornell

Postby bk1 » Tue Mar 29, 2011 6:32 pm

If you want to end up in CA then go to Cornell.

However Cornell is much riskier than Illinois considering if you miss out on biglaw at you will be saddled with a roughly $50k salary and at Cornell you will $200,000 worth of debt (which will likely take you 20 years or so to repay) versus around $100,000 worth of debt at Illinois (which is repayable in 10 years even with a $50k salary).

The question is, how much do value ending up in CA versus having a much smaller financial risk?

Del Fin
Posts: 25
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 4:32 pm

Re: WUSTL(75k) vs. Illinois(90k) vs. Cornell

Postby Del Fin » Wed Mar 30, 2011 10:59 pm

Thanks for all the input! I appreciate it guys.

Del Fin
Posts: 25
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 4:32 pm

Re: WUSTL(75k) vs. Illinois(90k) vs. Cornell

Postby Del Fin » Wed Mar 30, 2011 11:01 pm

bk1 wrote:If you want to end up in CA then go to Cornell.

However Cornell is much riskier than Illinois considering if you miss out on biglaw at you will be saddled with a roughly $50k salary and at Cornell you will $200,000 worth of debt (which will likely take you 20 years or so to repay) versus around $100,000 worth of debt at Illinois (which is repayable in 10 years even with a $50k salary).

The question is, how much do value ending up in CA versus having a much smaller financial risk?


Out of curiosity, how are you able to find that statistic (50k if I don't get biglaw)? It seems extremely low considering that their median private sector is 140k or so....

User avatar
ndirish2010
Posts: 2950
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 4:41 pm

Re: WUSTL(75k) vs. Illinois(90k) vs. Cornell

Postby ndirish2010 » Wed Mar 30, 2011 11:29 pm

I would go with Illinois over WUSTL here. Not sure if I would go with Illinois over Cornell, that is a flip a coin decision. What's more important, biglaw or low debt?

User avatar
BrianGriffintheDog
Posts: 157
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 1:14 am

Re: WUSTL(75k) vs. Illinois(90k) vs. Cornell

Postby BrianGriffintheDog » Thu Mar 31, 2011 12:03 am

Never underestimate the power of Ivey. That is all.

Del Fin
Posts: 25
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 4:32 pm

Re: WUSTL(75k) vs. Illinois(90k) vs. Cornell

Postby Del Fin » Thu Mar 31, 2011 12:07 am

BrianGriffintheDog wrote:Never underestimate the power of Ivey. That is all.


We seem to share similar choices in law school applications... If you don't mind me asking, where did you get into/seriously considering?

User avatar
bk1
Posts: 18423
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:06 pm

Re: WUSTL(75k) vs. Illinois(90k) vs. Cornell

Postby bk1 » Thu Mar 31, 2011 12:22 am

Del Fin wrote:Out of curiosity, how are you able to find that statistic (50k if I don't get biglaw)? It seems extremely low considering that their median private sector is 140k or so....


The median private sector income is out of reported salaries. Meaning that people who don't report (who are usually not making much money) don't affect the median.

Take a look at the Cornell data here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=150681 From the salary breakdown graph, the only thing you can tell is that 50% of their graduates make $160k and 50% make less than $160k (how much is uncertain). Considering the class of 2009 did OCI in 2007 (before the economy tanked), 2009 stats are likely rosier than it will be current grads.

Now look at the 2009 overall salary distribution here: http://www.nalp.org/salarydistrib If you look you will notice that roughly 50% of all starting salaries are between $40k and $60k. There are very few jobs between the $160k peak and the $50k peak so if you miss out on biglaw, it is a pretty fair assumption that you will most likely be making something in the $50k range than outside of that range.

Del Fin
Posts: 25
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 4:32 pm

Re: WUSTL(75k) vs. Illinois(90k) vs. Cornell

Postby Del Fin » Thu Mar 31, 2011 12:54 am

bk1 wrote:
Del Fin wrote:Out of curiosity, how are you able to find that statistic (50k if I don't get biglaw)? It seems extremely low considering that their median private sector is 140k or so....


The median private sector income is out of reported salaries. Meaning that people who don't report (who are usually not making much money) don't affect the median.

Take a look at the Cornell data here: http://top-law-schools.com/forums/viewt ... 1&t=150681 From the salary breakdown graph, the only thing you can tell is that 50% of their graduates make $160k and 50% make less than $160k (how much is uncertain). Considering the class of 2009 did OCI in 2007 (before the economy tanked), 2009 stats are likely rosier than it will be current grads.

Now look at the 2009 overall salary distribution here: http://www.nalp.org/salarydistrib If you look you will notice that roughly 50% of all starting salaries are between $40k and $60k. There are very few jobs between the $160k peak and the $50k peak so if you miss out on biglaw, it is a pretty fair assumption that you will most likely be making something in the $50k range than outside of that range.


Interesting... Ok... so, I think I understand the data, but for clarification purposes:

If the NALP distribution is overall starting salaries of JD's from different schools and different legal interests, wouldn't most of the 50k salaries come from schools of lower rankings and students interested in public sector work? I feel like it would be safe to say that nearly all 160k salaries are from t20ish students with interest in private work and not a ton of t20 or so students that are doing private sector fall in the 50k salaries. This would also account for the fact that there are less people in the 160k area than the 40-60k area (since there are collectively less students in the top 20 than the other 100+ law schools).

Also, I wouldn't argue that its likely that the 50% below 160k are working at 50k. My reasoning is that even though there are spikes at 160k and at 50k, there are still people working at salaries between 50 and 160. It is definitely more likely a t14 grad in the private sector is in that area than someone who went to a school outside of t14. I'm sure the amount of salaries on the higher side of the 50-160 range is comparable to the amount of t14 graduates w/ <160k salaries who are in the private sector.

According to the 2010 raw NLJ250 data (http://www.lawschooltransparency.com/20 ... tatistics/), t14 places on average about 40ish% of their students in biglaw. Now out of the remaining 60%, lets say 10% is interested in public sector. You don't think that the amount of people with salaries of 100-160k is pretty close to 50% of t14 graduates?

I'm not arguing with you, just trying to see the data from different interpretations/perspectives.

Also, I might be interpreting this data completely wrong... Just trying to wrap my head around these statistics... That and the fact that it's really hard to be told that I'm going to make the same amount of money going to law school as I am with my undergrad degree as an accountant....haha

User avatar
bk1
Posts: 18423
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:06 pm

Re: WUSTL(75k) vs. Illinois(90k) vs. Cornell

Postby bk1 » Thu Mar 31, 2011 1:07 am

Del Fin wrote:Interesting... Ok... so, I think I understand the data, but for clarification purposes:

If the NALP distribution is overall starting salaries of JD's from different schools and different legal interests, wouldn't most of the 50k salaries come from schools of lower rankings and students interested in public sector work? I feel like it would be safe to say that nearly all 160k salaries are from t20ish students with interest in private work and not a ton of t20 or so students that are doing private sector fall in the 50k salaries. This would also account for the fact that there are less people in the 160k area than the 40-60k area (since there are collectively less students in the top 20 than the other 100+ law schools).

Also, I wouldn't argue that its likely that the 50% below 160k are working at 50k. My reasoning is that even though there are spikes at 160k and at 50k, there are still people working at salaries between 50 and 160. It is definitely more likely a t14 grad in the private sector is in that area than someone who went to a school outside of t14. I'm sure the amount of salaries on the higher side of the 50-160 range is comparable to the amount of t14 graduates w/ <160k salaries who are in the private sector.

According to the 2010 raw NLJ250 data (http://www.lawschooltransparency.com/20 ... tatistics/), t14 places on average about 40ish% of their students in biglaw. Now out of the remaining 60%, lets say 10% is interested in public sector. You don't think that the amount of people with salaries of 100-160k is pretty close to 50% of t14 graduates?

I'm not arguing with you, just trying to see the data from different interpretations/perspectives.

Also, I might be interpreting this data completely wrong... Just trying to wrap my head around these statistics... That and the fact that it's really hard to be told that I'm going to make the same amount of money going to law school as I am with my undergrad degree as an accountant....haha


The number of firms outside of the NLJ250 that pay six figures is very slim, especially in the large markets (NYC/DC/Chi). I would hazard that a lot of the salaries between 60k and 160k are the big firms in places where the market rate isn't 160k and is more like 120k (e.g. St. Louis, Cincinnati, etc). Plus, even if you find a firm in let's say NYC that is midlaw and pays between the two peaks, these firms are supposedly just as competitive as biglaw.

If you scroll down to the bottom of the first post here (viewtopic.php?f=1&t=150681), you have the percentage of people making six figures. This is for the class of 2009 (who did OCI in 2007, prior to the economy crashing). At the top schools it is around 50-60% and it is probably a bit worse now. I would say, accounting for those who want PI, at the low T14 you have a 1/3-1/2 chance of ending up with a small salary (closer to 1/2 at Cornell/GULC, imo). Even if it were 1/3, that's a 1/3 chance that you end up with a 50k job and 200k debt. To me that seems really really risky.

One final thing, if you're going to law school to make more money then you are going for the wrong reasons. The only reason that making a lot of $ from law school would be of supreme importance to me would be because of the amount I might be taking out in loans. If I wasn't taking a lot out in loans, a merely livable salary would be more than okay by me.

Del Fin
Posts: 25
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 4:32 pm

Re: WUSTL(75k) vs. Illinois(90k) vs. Cornell

Postby Del Fin » Thu Mar 31, 2011 1:17 am

bk1 wrote:
Del Fin wrote:Interesting... Ok... so, I think I understand the data, but for clarification purposes:

If the NALP distribution is overall starting salaries of JD's from different schools and different legal interests, wouldn't most of the 50k salaries come from schools of lower rankings and students interested in public sector work? I feel like it would be safe to say that nearly all 160k salaries are from t20ish students with interest in private work and not a ton of t20 or so students that are doing private sector fall in the 50k salaries. This would also account for the fact that there are less people in the 160k area than the 40-60k area (since there are collectively less students in the top 20 than the other 100+ law schools).

Also, I wouldn't argue that its likely that the 50% below 160k are working at 50k. My reasoning is that even though there are spikes at 160k and at 50k, there are still people working at salaries between 50 and 160. It is definitely more likely a t14 grad in the private sector is in that area than someone who went to a school outside of t14. I'm sure the amount of salaries on the higher side of the 50-160 range is comparable to the amount of t14 graduates w/ <160k salaries who are in the private sector.

According to the 2010 raw NLJ250 data (http://www.lawschooltransparency.com/20 ... tatistics/), t14 places on average about 40ish% of their students in biglaw. Now out of the remaining 60%, lets say 10% is interested in public sector. You don't think that the amount of people with salaries of 100-160k is pretty close to 50% of t14 graduates?

I'm not arguing with you, just trying to see the data from different interpretations/perspectives.

Also, I might be interpreting this data completely wrong... Just trying to wrap my head around these statistics... That and the fact that it's really hard to be told that I'm going to make the same amount of money going to law school as I am with my undergrad degree as an accountant....haha


The number of firms outside of the NLJ250 that pay six figures is very slim, especially in the large markets (NYC/DC/Chi). I would hazard that a lot of the salaries between 60k and 160k are the big firms in places where the market rate isn't 160k and is more like 120k (e.g. St. Louis, Cincinnati, etc). Plus, even if you find a firm in let's say NYC that is midlaw and pays between the two peaks, these firms are supposedly just as competitive as biglaw.

If you scroll down to the bottom of the first post here (http://top-law-schools.com/forums/viewt ... 1&t=150681), you have the percentage of people making six figures. This is for the class of 2009 (who did OCI in 2007, prior to the economy crashing). At the top schools it is around 50-60% and it is probably a bit worse now. I would say, accounting for those who want PI, at the low T14 you have a 1/3-1/2 chance of ending up with a small salary (closer to 1/2 at Cornell/GULC, imo). Even if it were 1/3, that's a 1/3 chance that you end up with a 50k job and 200k debt. To me that seems really really risky.

One final thing, if you're going to law school to make more money then you are going for the wrong reasons. The only reason that making a lot of $ from law school would be of supreme importance to me would be because of the amount I might be taking out in loans. If I wasn't taking a lot out in loans, a merely livable salary would be more than okay by me.


Thanks for running me through the thought process... as for your final note... obviously, I will be taking out a ttttoonnn of loans to pay for law school, especially if I go to Cornell. Even still, who doesn't want more money??? I just find it a bit depressing that investing that much more time and money into one's career doesn't likely translate to an increased monetary return of investment.

User avatar
bk1
Posts: 18423
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:06 pm

Re: WUSTL(75k) vs. Illinois(90k) vs. Cornell

Postby bk1 » Thu Mar 31, 2011 1:19 am

Del Fin wrote:Thanks for running me through the thought process... as for your final note... obviously, I will be taking out a ttttoonnn of loans to pay for law school, especially if I go to Cornell. Even still, who doesn't want more money??? I just find it a bit depressing that investing that much more time and money into one's career doesn't likely translate to an increased monetary return of investment.


No problem.

More money is nice, but having that as a goal means that you will more often than not (and still half of the time at a T14) be disappointed.

seriously????
Posts: 222
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 1:15 am

Re: WUSTL(75k) vs. Illinois(90k) vs. Cornell

Postby seriously???? » Thu Mar 31, 2011 1:42 am

bk1 wrote:
Del Fin wrote:Thanks for running me through the thought process... as for your final note... obviously, I will be taking out a ttttoonnn of loans to pay for law school, especially if I go to Cornell. Even still, who doesn't want more money??? I just find it a bit depressing that investing that much more time and money into one's career doesn't likely translate to an increased monetary return of investment.


No problem.

More money is nice, but having that as a goal means that you will more often than not (and still half of the time at a T14) be disappointed.


i think you are exaggerating a tad. its less than half that are disappointed. you shouldn't forget about a significant percentage who are on scholarship, and because of small debt may not even be looking towards biglaw. plus you need to consider federal clerkships, and sure those high paying boutique firms are competitive, which is why students from the T14 are the ones who are getting those jobs. odds are in your favor to get biglaw, but certainly there is room for failure. cornell gives you much easier access to NYC, which could provide a transition back west.
I will say with regards to WUSTL, if you are a top student, and maybe even top 20% you can land a biglaw gig in CA. All of the WUSTL kids I saw who practice biglaw in CA were from there, so if anyone has a shot, it would be you.
good luck with whatever decision you make.

User avatar
bk1
Posts: 18423
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:06 pm

Re: WUSTL(75k) vs. Illinois(90k) vs. Cornell

Postby bk1 » Thu Mar 31, 2011 2:48 am

seriously???? wrote:i think you are exaggerating a tad. its less than half that are disappointed. you shouldn't forget about a significant percentage who are on scholarship, and because of small debt may not even be looking towards biglaw. plus you need to consider federal clerkships, and sure those high paying boutique firms are competitive, which is why students from the T14 are the ones who are getting those jobs. odds are in your favor to get biglaw, but certainly there is room for failure. cornell gives you much easier access to NYC, which could provide a transition back west.
I will say with regards to WUSTL, if you are a top student, and maybe even top 20% you can land a biglaw gig in CA. All of the WUSTL kids I saw who practice biglaw in CA were from there, so if anyone has a shot, it would be you.
good luck with whatever decision you make.


Clerkships are no more than 5% or so. And while I agree that scholarship kids who end up in the bottom half help round out those who are disappointed, considering OP doesn't have a scholarship and has the same chance of ending up below median, I think that is irrelevant to the question here.

User avatar
JusticeHarlan
Posts: 1434
Joined: Tue Dec 15, 2009 2:56 pm

Re: WUSTL(75k) vs. Illinois(90k) vs. Cornell

Postby JusticeHarlan » Thu Mar 31, 2011 7:12 am

Del Fin wrote:Cornell (haven't visited yet)
(+):
-Ivy League ( I just really want to sport one of their shirts so people will respect me...haha)

Image

In all serious, if you decide on Cornell, be prepared to hedge your bets during OCI and bid on some NYC firms; I wouldn't go there if I was Cali or bust, especially at sticker when you'll need biglaw to help pay down the debt.

User avatar
romothesavior
Posts: 14772
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:29 pm

Re: WUSTL(75k) vs. Illinois(90k) vs. Cornell

Postby romothesavior » Fri Apr 01, 2011 2:58 am

UIUC

Slevin Kelevra 2011
Posts: 271
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2011 3:55 pm

Re: WUSTL(75k) vs. Illinois(90k) vs. Cornell

Postby Slevin Kelevra 2011 » Fri Apr 01, 2011 11:16 am

Cornell is worth the cost given the placement stats of these three.

alumniguy
Posts: 426
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2011 3:24 pm

Re: WUSTL(75k) vs. Illinois(90k) vs. Cornell

Postby alumniguy » Fri Apr 01, 2011 11:55 am

I feel like I am beginning to be the "father time" poster on this site.

I think OP needs to seriously consider why he is going to law school. I mean you originally wanted to entertainment law but since you didn't get into UCLA or any other California school you've decided that maybe you want corporate law instead? Perhaps you just didn't accurately express your thoughts, but I would caution anyone in incurring $150k in debt when they have no idea what they want to do in life.

Entertainment law if a pretty small niche area that for whatever reason, is highly desirable to law students. I think it is probably because people think it will be more glamorous than corporate or finance. Not sure, but I'd be curious as to why you want to go into entertainment law. Also, what exactly do you mean by entertainment law? Do you want to draft contracts related to the entertainment field? Do you want to represent stars? Regardless, it is a difficult field get your foot in the door. I don't think Cornell has any strengths over the other choices if OP is really only considering entertainment law (I'm thinking the chances of getting this type of job are pretty slim and will require a lot of hard work finding these jobs).

However, for corporate law, Cornell is the clear winner, but the problem is the debt! If OP seemed like he really wanted to be a lawyer and would be happy in biglaw for more than 5 years, I'd say that Cornell is a great choice. I just don't get the feeling that this is the case. If you can only last in biglaw for 2 to 3 years, no school at $150k debt is worth it. Period.

To dispell some of your positives and negatives.

WUSTL is not on an upward trend. It is one of several schools bunched together between about 18 and the low 30s. The only reason it appears to be on an upward trend is for USNews to sell magazines. No practicing attorney believes that WUSTL students are somehow more desirable than they were 10 years ago. Also, I would be very cautious of what the admissions office/career services is telling you. Look at the statistics, talk to practicing attorneys in the areas you want to live, etc. But do you really believe that WUSTL would tell you that they don't place their graduates in California after you just told them you wanted to go back to California? They want your tuition dollars plain and simple.

Similarly, Illinois is not on a decline. A move from 21 to 23 is absolutely meaningless. Reputations evolve over many, many years. The mere fact that you've highlighted this tells me that you're fairly naive about law schools (and probably the practice of law too). You haven't done your research (maybe you're doing it now). Is Illinois on a gradual decline from the 20s to the 30s? Perhaps, but it certainly won't impact your job search. For what it's worth, historically, and by this I mean 20 years ago, many of the Midwestern state schools had some of the best law schools in the country. Pre USNews, it was probably the T-14, then the top Midwestern and California state schools, then the good private colleges (ND, BC, BU, Emory, etc.) Students back then would take the Midwestern state schools because they had the best reputations in their locations and it was significantly cheaper to go to a state school over a private institution. Few people from Illinois would go to Emory over Illinois if they knew they wanted to be practicing in Illinois. The advent of USNews altered that dynamic (along with the consolidation of the legal market and the increase in the number of big law firms on the coasts) and private schools that had ties to the major Eastern/Western cities, started to send their grads into biglaw firms (which in turn makes these schools perform well in USNews because they get their grads jobs). That trend has continued and with the importance that USNews places on career statistics, the private institutions have started to eclipse the state schools because more of their grads go into biglaw (which is mostly found on the East/West coasts). At the moment, I'd say the state schools and good privates are equal because older attorneys still believe that the Midwestern schools are great places to get an education (I'm not saying they aren't) and accordingly, they have high reputation scores in the USNews survey. In 20 or 30 years, I'd imagine that the good privates will have completly eclipsed the state schools.

User avatar
romothesavior
Posts: 14772
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:29 pm

Re: WUSTL(75k) vs. Illinois(90k) vs. Cornell

Postby romothesavior » Fri Apr 01, 2011 12:00 pm

alumniguy, I really like your posts. The above advice is great advice for OP. I disagree a bit about WUSTL students not being more desirable now than they were 10 years ago, because our biglaw placement has improved substantially in relation to our peers over the past decade or so, and our CSO continues to grow our OCI by bringing in new firms every year. But I am with you in that I hate the term "upward trend" and I don't think anyone should pick WUSTL simply because of a higher ranking. I just think that in the aggregate, our employment prospects at big firms have gotten better (of course, the downturn has changed a lot of this). That said, I don't recommend WUSTL to OP in this situation.

Just wanted to say that your insights and opinions are appreciated. Please continue to contribute.

alumniguy
Posts: 426
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2011 3:24 pm

Re: WUSTL(75k) vs. Illinois(90k) vs. Cornell

Postby alumniguy » Fri Apr 01, 2011 12:13 pm

romothesavior wrote:alumniguy, I really like your posts. The above advice is great advice for OP. I disagree a bit about WUSTL students not being more desirable now than they were 10 years ago, because our biglaw placement has improved substantially in relation to our peers over the past decade or so, and our CSO continues to grow our OCI by bringing in new firms every year. But I am with you in that I hate the term "upward trend" and I don't think anyone should pick WUSTL simply because of a higher ranking. I just think that in the aggregate, our employment prospects at big firms have gotten better (of course, the downturn has changed a lot of this). That said, I don't recommend WUSTL to OP in this situation.

Just wanted to say that your insights and opinions are appreciated. Please continue to contribute.


Thanks. Curious what you mean by "our biglaw placement has improved substantially in relation to our peers over the past decade or so".

Are you saying that WUSTL is now placing more grads compared to similarly ranked schools than it has historically placed? Doesn't the NLJ250 negate this position, i.e., WUSTL doesn't place significantly better than the other 20s/30s schools?
Or are you talking about placing more grads than it use to? This is a function of the economy and it has happened at every school.

User avatar
romothesavior
Posts: 14772
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:29 pm

Re: WUSTL(75k) vs. Illinois(90k) vs. Cornell

Postby romothesavior » Fri Apr 01, 2011 12:27 pm

alumniguy wrote:
romothesavior wrote:alumniguy, I really like your posts. The above advice is great advice for OP. I disagree a bit about WUSTL students not being more desirable now than they were 10 years ago, because our biglaw placement has improved substantially in relation to our peers over the past decade or so, and our CSO continues to grow our OCI by bringing in new firms every year. But I am with you in that I hate the term "upward trend" and I don't think anyone should pick WUSTL simply because of a higher ranking. I just think that in the aggregate, our employment prospects at big firms have gotten better (of course, the downturn has changed a lot of this). That said, I don't recommend WUSTL to OP in this situation.

Just wanted to say that your insights and opinions are appreciated. Please continue to contribute.


Thanks. Curious what you mean by "our biglaw placement has improved substantially in relation to our peers over the past decade or so".

Are you saying that WUSTL is now placing more grads compared to similarly ranked schools than it has historically placed? Doesn't the NLJ250 negate this position, i.e., WUSTL doesn't place significantly better than the other 20s/30s schools?
Or are you talking about placing more grads than it use to? This is a function of the economy and it has happened at every school.

I'm saying that up until a few years ago, we weren't anywhere near the top 25 in NLJ placement. Yes, we still lag our USNWR rankings, and I think USNWR rankings are pretty useless. I just think that totally aside from USNWR, WUSTL has gotten better over the last decade or two (ask any WUSTL alum from the 80s or 90s and they'll agree), and I think some of the things our CSO is doing now will benefit students in the future. But these improvements are slow and incremental, so I don't think students should rely on them solely in making a decision.

Slevin Kelevra 2011
Posts: 271
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2011 3:55 pm

Re: WUSTL(75k) vs. Illinois(90k) vs. Cornell

Postby Slevin Kelevra 2011 » Fri Apr 01, 2011 12:33 pm

WUSTL places better than it used to, but not as well as the east coast privates (bc, bu, fordham, gw, etc.).




Return to “Choosing a Law School”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: andpeggy, grandpapy360, jjcorvino and 7 guests