The Truth About Yale Forum

[icpb]

I don't understand why some law school students are so insecure. You got into Harvard, Yale, and/or Stanford. These are the biggest names in higher education. Just go to the one that you feel that would suit your career goals the most and/or that you would enjoy the most.

I don't see this kind of insecurity in medicine or business. Harvard Medical School has yield of ~70% overall; the yield for the MD-only program HMS is even lower. Same goes for Hopkins. People are secure about choosing other schools (UCSF, Stanford, Penn, WashU, Mayo, etc.) over Hopkins/Harvard. For MBA, people are comfortable choosing Penn Wharton and even Chicago Booth over Harvard/Stanford. On this site, the outrageous claims that it would be stupid to choose Harvard over Stanford/Yale or to choose Columbia over Harvard is just a manifestation of TLSers' insecurity. Harvard Law people want to claim that they are the best because they are insecure about Harvard being ranked behind Yale and Stanford. Yale Law people are insure because they will have the Yale name instead of the Harvard name, which translate to weaker lay prestige and international reputation. Just chill out and choose the school that's most appropriate for your personality and career goals.

[thederangedwang]

Those numbers are basically equal. When you couple that with the fact that the Harvard group is so much larger, Harvard gets the clear advantage. Harvard just has more of the talented, outstanding students. Yale has a particular subset of that group that is largely focused on academia.

From an employer's perspective, I'm obviously going to be focused on Harvard. That's where I'll go first to meet people and recruit.

If Yale wanted to be a complete douche and focus on numbers (admit only high numbers), they would smash harvard in the numbers battle.

Fact of the matter is, Yale usually wins around 75-80% of its cross admits. They could have really high medians if they wanted to..they choose to focus on softs as well..good for them

[soj]

I can't wait to see slsorhls and TaipeiMort debate.

[Perdevise]

Those numbers are basically equal. When you couple that with the fact that the Harvard group is so much larger, Harvard gets the clear advantage. Harvard just has more of the talented, outstanding students. Yale has a particular subset of that group that is largely focused on academia.

From an employer's perspective, I'm obviously going to be focused on Harvard. That's where I'll go first to meet people and recruit.

If Yale wanted to be a complete douche and focus on numbers (admit only high numbers), they would smash harvard in the numbers battle.

Fact of the matter is, Yale usually wins around 75-80% of its cross admits. They could have really high medians if they wanted to..they choose to focus on softs as well..good for them

Bingo. If Yale is so bad, why does it win over Y/H cross admits? Do all Y/H cross admits decide "Oh, I guess I want to do academia now?" Or do they decide to go to Yale b/c of superior opportunities? 0Ls vote with their feet, and Yale crushes on yield rates.

[Samara]

I can't wait to see slsorhls and TaipeiMort debate.

Somebody throw up the maroonsignal. Maybe if we start talking about how Chicago doesn't even have the highest biglaw placement in its own namesake city. Man, what a TTT.

[FryBreadPower]

0Ls make me want to hurt myself.

[AttaBoy]

Those numbers are basically equal. When you couple that with the fact that the Harvard group is so much larger, Harvard gets the clear advantage. Harvard just has more of the talented, outstanding students. Yale has a particular subset of that group that is largely focused on academia.

From an employer's perspective, I'm obviously going to be focused on Harvard. That's where I'll go first to meet people and recruit.

If Yale wanted to be a complete douche and focus on numbers (admit only high numbers), they would smash harvard in the numbers battle.

Fact of the matter is, Yale usually wins around 75-80% of its cross admits. They could have really high medians if they wanted to..they choose to focus on softs as well..good for them

Bingo. If Yale is so bad, why does it win over Y/H cross admits? Do all Y/H cross admits decide "Oh, I guess I want to do academia now?" Or do they decide to go to Yale b/c of superior opportunities? 0Ls vote with their feet, and Yale crushes on yield rates.

People who want academia at Y are a minority. Most people end up practicing. Literally everyone at Y gets offers if they participate in OCI (although it's true that many people don't participate). There is no way to do poorly here. People at Y are happy.

That's why everyone picks Y over H. I don't think it has anything to do with USNWR.

[bernaldiaz]

I don't understand why some law school students are so insecure. You got into Harvard, Yale, and/or Stanford. These are the biggest names in higher education. Just go to the one that you feel that would suit your career goals the most and/or that you would enjoy the most.

I don't see this kind of insecurity in medicine or business. Harvard Medical School has yield of ~70% overall; the yield for the MD-only program HMS is even lower. Same goes for Hopkins. People are secure about choosing other schools (UCSF, Stanford, Penn, WashU, Mayo, etc.) over Hopkins/Harvard. For MBA, people are comfortable choosing Penn Wharton and even Chicago Booth over Harvard/Stanford. On this site, the outrageous claims that it would be stupid to choose Harvard over Stanford/Yale or to choose Columbia over Harvard is just a manifestation of TLSers' insecurity. Harvard Law people want to claim that they are the best because they are insecure about Harvard being ranked behind Yale and Stanford. Yale Law people are insure because they will have the Yale name instead of the Harvard name, which translate to weaker lay prestige and international reputation. Just chill out and choose the school that's most appropriate for your personality and career goals.

Obviously this is totally trivial and unimportant, but I can imagine as a Yale student sometimes people (jokingly) say something along the lines of , "Oh only Yale Law? What happened? You didn't get in to Harvard?". This wouldn't necessarily (or at all, actually) make me insecure about being at Yale, but I imagine it's mildly annoying.

[Blessedassurance]

If Yale is so bad, why does it win over Y/H cross admits? Do all Y/H cross admits decide "Oh, I guess I want to do academia now?" Or do they decide to go to Yale b/c of superior opportunities? 0Ls vote with their feet, and Yale crushes on yield rates.

I don't think anyone has suggested Yale is bad. Yale doesn't provide "superior" opportunities relative to its peers for reasons that have been argued in this thread and elsewhere.

I'm not going to pretend I understand what you're trying to say in regards to "0L's voting with their feet" but if it means what I think it means, it's not a particularly effective argument. There are various factors that influence consumer choices etc., and other considerations. For example, they could be choosing Yale because TLS has told them to choose Yale or they might believe Yale's environment is more welcoming etc. This is to say nothing of the validity of their beliefs or the information upon which they base their decisions.

Stanford's yield rate is relatively low compared to its peers (below 50% I think, but I stand corrected). I doubt one could use this as justification for an assertion that Stanford is inferior to its peers.

In fact, what exactly does the phrase "0l's vote with their feet" mean?

[lsatcrazy]

The herp in this thread puts The Situation to shame.

[Perdevise]

If Yale is so bad, why does it win over Y/H cross admits? Do all Y/H cross admits decide "Oh, I guess I want to do academia now?" Or do they decide to go to Yale b/c of superior opportunities? 0Ls vote with their feet, and Yale crushes on yield rates.

I don't think anyone has suggested Yale is bad. Yale doesn't provide "superior" opportunities relative to its peers for reasons that have been argued in this thread and elsewhere.

I'm not going to pretend I understand what you're trying to say in regards to "0L's voting with their feet" but if it means what I think it means, it's not a particularly effective argument. There are various factors that influence consumer choices etc., and other considerations. For example, they could be choosing Yale because TLS has told them to choose Yale or they might believe Yale's environment is more welcoming etc. This is to say nothing of the validity of their beliefs or the information upon which they base their decisions.

Stanford's yield rate is relatively low compared to its peers (below 50% I think, but I stand corrected). I doubt one could use this as justification for an assertion that Stanford is inferior to its peers.

In fact, what exactly does the phrase "0l's vote with their feet" mean?

Well, if you say you're not going to pretend, then don't. I apologize if you found it a little complicated - that cross admits prefer Yale to Harvard, and that reflects the higher value they place on Yale. I admit 'bad' was vague, but my point was that its unlikely that most H/Y cross admits were primarily interested in academia, and that its reasonable they think Yale will provide greener pastures (i.e., more than just big law, which is the case).

[bernaldiaz]

If Yale is so bad, why does it win over Y/H cross admits? Do all Y/H cross admits decide "Oh, I guess I want to do academia now?" Or do they decide to go to Yale b/c of superior opportunities? 0Ls vote with their feet, and Yale crushes on yield rates.

I don't think anyone has suggested Yale is bad. Yale doesn't provide "superior" opportunities relative to its peers for reasons that have been argued in this thread and elsewhere.

I'm not going to pretend I understand what you're trying to say in regards to "0L's voting with their feet" but if it means what I think it means, it's not a particularly effective argument. There are various factors that influence consumer choices etc., and other considerations. For example, they could be choosing Yale because TLS has told them to choose Yale or they might believe Yale's environment is more welcoming etc. This is to say nothing of the validity of their beliefs or the information upon which they base their decisions.

Stanford's yield rate is relatively low compared to its peers (below 50% I think, but I stand corrected). I doubt one could use this as justification for an assertion that Stanford is inferior to its peers.

In fact, what exactly does the phrase "0l's vote with their feet" mean?

Well, if you say you're not going to pretend, then don't. I apologize if you found it a little complicated - that cross admits prefer Yale to Harvard, and that reflects the higher value they place on Yale. I admit 'bad' was vague, but my point was that its unlikely that most H/Y cross admits were primarily interested in academia, and that its reasonable they think Yale will provide greener pastures (i.e., more than just big law, which is the case).

Right, but he is saying that reality does not necessarily correspond to perception.

[Perdevise]

If Yale is so bad, why does it win over Y/H cross admits? Do all Y/H cross admits decide "Oh, I guess I want to do academia now?" Or do they decide to go to Yale b/c of superior opportunities? 0Ls vote with their feet, and Yale crushes on yield rates.

I don't think anyone has suggested Yale is bad. Yale doesn't provide "superior" opportunities relative to its peers for reasons that have been argued in this thread and elsewhere.

I'm not going to pretend I understand what you're trying to say in regards to "0L's voting with their feet" but if it means what I think it means, it's not a particularly effective argument. There are various factors that influence consumer choices etc., and other considerations. For example, they could be choosing Yale because TLS has told them to choose Yale or they might believe Yale's environment is more welcoming etc. This is to say nothing of the validity of their beliefs or the information upon which they base their decisions.

Stanford's yield rate is relatively low compared to its peers (below 50% I think, but I stand corrected). I doubt one could use this as justification for an assertion that Stanford is inferior to its peers.

In fact, what exactly does the phrase "0l's vote with their feet" mean?

Well, if you say you're not going to pretend, then don't. I apologize if you found it a little complicated - that cross admits prefer Yale to Harvard, and that reflects the higher value they place on Yale. I admit 'bad' was vague, but my point was that its unlikely that most H/Y cross admits were primarily interested in academia, and that its reasonable they think Yale will provide greener pastures (i.e., more than just big law, which is the case).

Right, but he is saying that reality does not necessarily correspond to perception.

Agreed.

[slsorhls]

The yield rate is because of tls thinking, which has been exhibited in this thread. It could also be because yale professors do a good job selecting people who are in fact academia-interested. Thus we could say that the high yield is partly because a lot of those people want academia.

the idea that yale students are all happy and in paradise is absurd. Talk to the students. They have their own gripes and concerns about their school. Many complain about the lack of grades, especially 1l first semester. It pushes merit outside if the classroom.

merely repeating tls groupthink about yale doesn't prove anything.

[Samara]

merely repeating tls groupthink about yale doesn't prove anything.

Neither does repeating unfounded conjecturing. HTH

[slsorhls]

Those numbers are basically equal. When you couple that with the fact that the Harvard group is so much larger, Harvard gets the clear advantage. Harvard just has more of the talented, outstanding students. Yale has a particular subset of that group that is largely focused on academia.

From an employer's perspective, I'm obviously going to be focused on Harvard. That's where I'll go first to meet people and recruit.

If Yale wanted to be a complete douche and focus on numbers (admit only high numbers), they would smash harvard in the numbers battle.


Fact of the matter is, Yale usually wins around 75-80% of its cross admits. They could have really high medians if they wanted to..they choose to focus on softs as well..good for them

I already pointed out why that's incorrect. the numbers also show stanford does that, hardly yale. Yale and Harvard are taking from the very very top of the curve. You can't get any higher without reducing class size--if yale dropped to 50 students, they could do it.

[Tiago Splitter]

Yale and Harvard are taking from the very very top of the curve. You can't get any higher without reducing class size--if yale dropped to 50 students, they could do it.

Both schools could relax GPA and LSAT floors and improve their medians that way.

[Doorkeeper]

This entire thread is pretty pointless.

Is TLS wisdom of "Yale or gtfo" oversimplified? Yes, a bit.

Can you get anywhere you want to go in life from H, Y, or S? Yes.

[brown822015]

Raise your hand if you think blessedassurance and slsorhls are the same person! *raises hand*

[Julio_El_Chavo]

This thread rocks.

[chasgoose]

Those numbers are basically equal. When you couple that with the fact that the Harvard group is so much larger, Harvard gets the clear advantage. Harvard just has more of the talented, outstanding students. Yale has a particular subset of that group that is largely focused on academia.

From an employer's perspective, I'm obviously going to be focused on Harvard. That's where I'll go first to meet people and recruit.

If Yale wanted to be a complete douche and focus on numbers (admit only high numbers), they would smash harvard in the numbers battle.


Fact of the matter is, Yale usually wins around 75-80% of its cross admits. They could have really high medians if they wanted to..they choose to focus on softs as well..good for them

I already pointed out why that's incorrect. the numbers also show stanford does that, hardly yale. Yale and Harvard are taking from the very very top of the curve. You can't get any higher without reducing class size--if yale dropped to 50 students, they could do it.

If we are defining "top of the curve" to be the best of the best from the applicant pool, then Yale beats Harvard easily. I would imagine that the majority of people at Yale also were accepted by Harvard. The same can't be said the other way around. Only 44 people actually turned down YLS last year. Even if all of them chose Harvard, that's less than 10% of their class. Also, if you want to do big law and you go to Yale, you will get a job unless you are a total freak and do something insane during the interview. At HLS there are still about 100 kids at the bottom 20% of the class sweating getting a job every year and a few that don't get one. That doesn't mean YLS is the best for every student, but YLS should be the default response for most with the option to go.

[jd5]

Only 44 people actually turned down YLS last year. Even if all of them chose Harvard, that's less than 10% of their class.

Right, and in reality probably closer to half of those 44 chose HLS. SLS certainly gets a healthy portion, as well as people with Hamiltons/Rubensteins/Darrows/etc.

The yield rate is because of tls thinking

I really don't think enough people use TLS for it to have a statistically significant effect on yield rates at HLS and YLS. Besides, it's at least plausible to argue that any TLS bias in favor of YLS is more than outweighed by HLS dominating YLS in lay prestige.

[RedBirds2011]

Why is this thread still alive? Trivial discussion/argument is trivial.

[JasonR]

However, if YLS adopted HLS's admissions model (meaning selection criteria, not class size), I don't think there's any doubt that YLS could have a 25/75 LSAT range of 175/178, or better.

Actually, that would be impossible. Once you get to the tippytop of the pyramid, you're not going to have enough people with those numbers and high GPAs. You couldn't build a 50 person class, let alone 200.

Without knowing the GPA spreads of the very top scorers, it's all speculation, but there are ~125-175 people every year who score a 178 and ~750-1,000 who score a 175. It's very much within reason to suggest that Yale could do it.

In fact, one of the most important considerations in choosing a law school is your fellow students.

Top caliber fellow students = better education.

Every top school has that covered. Sheer numbers are pretty unimportant. You're not going to form deep bonds and have compelling discussions and interactions with even close to everyone in your class at even a smaller school.

Whatever you think of legal academia, there's no question that it's a far more difficult job to land than almost all of the firm jobs that most Harvard grads aim for.

I've seen this a few times now--that HLS people are solely going after firms. Not true at all.

So where did you see it in my post? If you're going to knock over a strawman, one might expect a future HLS student to be more subtle about it, at least.

Harvard truly is the most diverse in terms of career outcomes.

Bzzzt. Wrong again. Every year, 60-65% of HLS grads head directly for firms. Again, a greater percentage of YLS grads end up in every other category of legal employment.

Meanwhile--and this is going to burst the TLS bubble--Yale is in fact narrowly focused on academia. They basically take from the same pool Harvard takes from with the exception that they particularly look for people who are well-suited for and interested in academia. I'm sure part of that is the fact that all the professors get involved in making the admissions decisions. The professors choose people who they would see as colleagues in the making. Arguably, it creates a class filled with overly academic, absorbed in books, disconnected from the real world folks.

This is just too stupid for words. A tiny minority of YLS students pursue careers in legal academia. The "real world" must only be large firms to you, because Yale students are much more involved across the spectrum of public interest law, before and after graduation, than HLS students, on average.

Really, the rest of your post is the same uninformed babble as the first parts I've quoted, but I don't really have the time or interest to take the rest of it apart.

[JasonR]

Those numbers are basically equal. When you couple that with the fact that the Harvard group is so much larger, Harvard gets the clear advantage. Harvard just has more of the talented, outstanding students. Yale has a particular subset of that group that is largely focused on academia.

From an employer's perspective, I'm obviously going to be focused on Harvard. That's where I'll go first to meet people and recruit.

If Yale wanted to be a complete douche and focus on numbers (admit only high numbers), they would smash harvard in the numbers battle.


Fact of the matter is, Yale usually wins around 75-80% of its cross admits. They could have really high medians if they wanted to..they choose to focus on softs as well..good for them

I already pointed out why that's incorrect. the numbers also show stanford does that, hardly yale. Yale and Harvard are taking from the very very top of the curve. You can't get any higher without reducing class size--if yale dropped to 50 students, they could do it.

Again, you didn't show shit. You just made yet another lazy and unfounded claim. The numbers clearly show that Yale rejects a far higher proportion of 3.9+/175+ students than Harvard. If YLS decided to take a more numbers-driven approach, like Harvard, they could very easily raise their numbers significantly, especially their LSAT 25th percentile.