Stanford vs. Duke w/ Full Tuition Forum

[bluepenguin]

I guarantee all of those SCOTUS clerks at Duke still aced their exams, which OP will still have to do in order to have the sort of outcome that puts him/her where she/he would've been at Stanford.

Stanford grads don't need H's to get SCOTUS clerkships?

[grapefruits]

OP, congratulations. However, I am a little confused about the advice in this thread. If the choice was Stanford v. Duke, costs equal, everyone would say Stanford because the employment outcomes (biglaw, not just academia/clerkships) are far better. Yet, because Duke is free, everyone seems to be implying that the Duke will get you wherever you want to go. The cost of Duke does not change the fact that once you are there, your chance of doing IP stuff in NYC is still only about 50-60% (OP has not said that they are IP secure, we are talking about entertainment here).
So, my point, choose Duke for monetary reasons if you wish, but do not conflate money with prospects the way much of this thread has.

Ehh. Getting the Mordecai lets future employers know that you were an HYS candidate. You won't get a better education at Stanford. Employment prospects for duke grads and Mordecai scholars actually are different. Of recent duke scotus clerks, I'm pretty sure most, if not all, were Mordecai scholars. My advice is to not take any advice from tls at face value. There are a lot of people who just present opinions as fact.

I think you overestimate what employers will assume. More importantly, I guarantee all of those SCOTUS clerks at Duke still aced their exams, which OP will still have to do in order to have the sort of outcome that puts him/her where she/he would've been at Stanford. Again, I think Duke is a fine option here, as long as it comes with the acknowledgment that life in law school and in the job hunt will be more stressful.

Nope. Disclaimer: I'm not a partner at a big IP firm, so
I can't give first-hand insight into what firms think about a highly prestigious scholarship used to lure the top students away from HYS, but I'm guessing that if people know what the Mordecai is, they know what kind of students are offered them. That being said, being selected for a Mordecai is Duke's vote of confidence that you will finish in the top 10% of your class, and seeing how LSAT score corresponds almost perfectly with 1L performance, and being admitted at Stanford and selected for a Mordecai means you probably scored in the highest bracket, I bet you'll do fine; not to mention, OP will have a much easier time out performing Duke students than Stanford students.

ETA: except now I see that you got a 166, so I'm going to recommend Stanford, because neither school is going to be a cakewalk for you, and placing in the bottom half of your class at Duke is likely to present a problem for you. I had never heard of anyone getting a Mordecai with under a 170 before.

[kalvano]

how LSAT score corresponds almost perfectly with 1L performance

LOL wut?

[grapefruits]

how LSAT score corresponds almost perfectly with 1L performance

LOL wut?

Didn't know this was debated

[spicyyoda17]

how LSAT score corresponds almost perfectly with 1L performance

LOL wut?

Didn't know this was debated

Uncomfortable this just got.

[suralin]

how LSAT score corresponds almost perfectly with 1L performance

LOL wut?

Didn't know this was debated

Uncomfortable this just got.

LOL

[suralin]

how LSAT score corresponds almost perfectly with 1L performance

LOL wut?

Yeah, I was kind of going along with grapefruits there, but reading that I was just like uhh... no.

[Yukos]

Is the fact that firms know you could've gone to Stanford (based on your named scholarship) that important? I thought the reasons top schools had an edge was showing off to clients and alumni networks. This isn't accusatory I'm just trying to figure out why the hiring process works the way it does.

[grapefruits]

Can someone disprove what I said? Obviously there are outliers, but the LSAT has proved time and again to be an almost perfect test. I've heard this from dozens of sources, most recently, 2 days ago from a UVA professor in a video posted on here... I'm all up for being corrected; I'm really not stubborn.

[domino]

^^
Not sure if you are serious--a panel of deans from a few top law schools came to my college a few years ago and actually addressed how LSATs are really bad indicators of grades. They were defending why they care so much about the LSAT in admissions when it doesn't match up to success in law school (I don't remember any discussion of how it tracks afterward). They attributed the poor correlation to differences in how hard the students worked--I'm guessing that's an answer that has some right and wrong in it, but that's what they offered FWIW.

[kalvano]

There is a good deal of assuming going here.

1) OP will want to stick with NYC Biglaw after being in law school. I'm always skeptical of 0L's who know exactly what they want to do, because so many of my classmates changed their mind. I did too. Actually doing real legal work in the area you think might want to do has a way of changing people's minds, not to mention the exposure to other areas that may be more interesting.

2) That employers will know what it takes to get a Mordecai at Duke. Maybe they will, maybe they won't. But everyone knows what a phenomenal school Stanford is, and that being admitted is an accomplishment in and of itself. Having Stanford Law School on your resume is something that needs no explanation and will open many, many doors that might otherwise be closed. That's a proven fact. It's an assumption and a gamble to assume that the Mordecai will do the same.

[Dmini7]

Can someone disprove what I said? Obviously there are outliers, but the LSAT has proved time and again to be an almost perfect test. I've heard this from dozens of sources, most recently, 2 days ago from a UVA professor in a video posted on here... I'm all up for being corrected; I'm really not stubborn.

The terms your using to describe it are too strong. Also the video you saw discussed how the correlation was actually stronger with predictive ability for AA students, not in general. It also stated it predicts around 20% of your 1L grades not 100%. So yes, it is a strong test, and one of the best available, but it is by no means perfect or almost perfect.

[grapefruits]

Can someone disprove what I said? Obviously there are outliers, but the LSAT has proved time and again to be an almost perfect test. I've heard this from dozens of sources, most recently, 2 days ago from a UVA professor in a video posted on here... I'm all up for being corrected; I'm really not stubborn.

The terms your using to describe it are too strong. Also the video you saw discussed how the correlation was actually stronger with predictive ability for AA students, not in general. It also stated it predicts around 20% of your 1L grades not 100%. So yes, it is a strong test, and one of the best available, but it is by no means perfect or almost perfect.

He uses the words, "almost perfect" around the 20 min mark. But that isn't that important. I think the LSAT places a ceiling, but not a floor, on 1l performance for the vast majority of people. At least that's what Ive read up until now

[twenty]

But would it be crazy to turn down the opportunity to attend Stanford, just because I'm a little debt adverse?

You have to factor in that by going to Stanford, you take 20k-30k out of your yearly pay just to cover student loans for the next ten years. Turning down that for Duke is definitely not crazy.

[jstr00az]

There is a good deal of assuming going here.

1) OP will want to stick with NYC Biglaw after being in law school. I'm always skeptical of 0L's who know exactly what they want to do, because so many of my classmates changed their mind. I did too. Actually doing real legal work in the area you think might want to do has a way of changing people's minds, not to mention the exposure to other areas that may be more interesting.

2) That employers will know what it takes to get a Mordecai at Duke. Maybe they will, maybe they won't. But everyone knows what a phenomenal school Stanford is, and that being admitted is an accomplishment in and of itself. Having Stanford Law School on your resume is something that needs no explanation and will open many, many doors that might otherwise be closed. That's a proven fact. It's an assumption and a gamble to assume that the Mordecai will do the same.

So put on your Resume - "Admitted at Stanford, etc. but took the free ride at Duke." NO ONE is going to think twice about why that choice was made.

[jstr00az]

how LSAT score corresponds almost perfectly with 1L performance

LOL wut?

Didn't know this was debated

Well you learn something every day, don't you.

[suralin]

There is a good deal of assuming going here.

1) OP will want to stick with NYC Biglaw after being in law school. I'm always skeptical of 0L's who know exactly what they want to do, because so many of my classmates changed their mind. I did too. Actually doing real legal work in the area you think might want to do has a way of changing people's minds, not to mention the exposure to other areas that may be more interesting.

2) That employers will know what it takes to get a Mordecai at Duke. Maybe they will, maybe they won't. But everyone knows what a phenomenal school Stanford is, and that being admitted is an accomplishment in and of itself. Having Stanford Law School on your resume is something that needs no explanation and will open many, many doors that might otherwise be closed. That's a proven fact. It's an assumption and a gamble to assume that the Mordecai will do the same.

So put on your Resume - "Admitted at Stanford, etc. but took the free ride at Duke." NO ONE is going to think twice about why that choice was made.

This sounds really clunky and awkward.

Disclaimer: Not in law school.

[jstr00az]

There is a good deal of assuming going here.

1) OP will want to stick with NYC Biglaw after being in law school. I'm always skeptical of 0L's who know exactly what they want to do, because so many of my classmates changed their mind. I did too. Actually doing real legal work in the area you think might want to do has a way of changing people's minds, not to mention the exposure to other areas that may be more interesting.

2) That employers will know what it takes to get a Mordecai at Duke. Maybe they will, maybe they won't. But everyone knows what a phenomenal school Stanford is, and that being admitted is an accomplishment in and of itself. Having Stanford Law School on your resume is something that needs no explanation and will open many, many doors that might otherwise be closed. That's a proven fact. It's an assumption and a gamble to assume that the Mordecai will do the same.

So put on your Resume - "Admitted at Stanford, etc. but took the free ride at Duke." NO ONE is going to think twice about why that choice was made.

This sounds really clunky and awkward.

Disclaimer: Not in law school.

Sheesh. Word it better. I'm not designing a damn resume, I'm giving some advice about why maybe, if you're accepted to one of the top law schools in the country on a free ride, it's kind of stupid to turn that down and go to one that's a little better so you can put that on a resume. You know what's really awkward and clunky? $200,000 in debt.

[Big Dog]

while the lsat maybe a better predictor of 1L grades than gpa (which kinda makes sense since there are several thousand undergrad colleges awarding A's, ranging from HYP to directional state bumpkus juco), it is far from "perfect" according to its owner.

http://www.lsac.org/jd/pdfs/lsat-score- ... rmance.pdf

[grapefruits]

how LSAT score corresponds almost perfectly with 1L performance

LOL wut?

Didn't know this was debated

Well you learn something every day, don't you.

Are you guys sure this isn't, "math you do as a Republican to
Make yourselves feel better?"

[GimmeThatJD]

Duke hands down!!!! Debt free is AMAZING!!! And you can use spare money to invest in business if your are entrepreneurial. If you are plagued with debts, it will take nearly a decade before you can invest in the business or idea of your dreams.

Yeah but if you are just going to do the whole law firm thing for life with no entrepreneurial interests and be a corporate b!tch, then just do Stanford. Ask yourself: Who are you.

Gimme

[Yukos]

Duke hands down!!!! Debt free is AMAZING!!! And you can use spare money to invest in business if your are entrepreneurial. If you are plagued with debts, it will take nearly a decade before you can invest in the business or idea of your dreams.

Yeah but if you are just going to do the whole law firm thing for life with no entrepreneurial interests and be a corporate b!tch, then just do Stanford. Ask yourself: Who are you.

Gimme

You are a strange person.

[suralin]

Duke hands down!!!! Debt free is AMAZING!!! And you can use spare money to invest in business if your are entrepreneurial. If you are plagued with debts, it will take nearly a decade before you can invest in the business or idea of your dreams.

Yeah but if you are just going to do the whole law firm thing for life with no entrepreneurial interests and be a corporate b!tch, then just do Stanford. Ask yourself: Who are you.

Gimme

You are a strange person.

+1

[Tom Joad]

So put on your Resume - "Admitted at Stanford, etc. but took the free ride at Duke." NO ONE is going to think twice about why that choice was made.

I would never put that on a resume even if you made one just for fun and then fed it to your dog. However if you get an interview lots of times they will ask you why you chose your school. You could tactfully bring it up there. However I doubt it would be a boost.

[kalvano]

There is a good deal of assuming going here.

1) OP will want to stick with NYC Biglaw after being in law school. I'm always skeptical of 0L's who know exactly what they want to do, because so many of my classmates changed their mind. I did too. Actually doing real legal work in the area you think might want to do has a way of changing people's minds, not to mention the exposure to other areas that may be more interesting.

2) That employers will know what it takes to get a Mordecai at Duke. Maybe they will, maybe they won't. But everyone knows what a phenomenal school Stanford is, and that being admitted is an accomplishment in and of itself. Having Stanford Law School on your resume is something that needs no explanation and will open many, many doors that might otherwise be closed. That's a proven fact. It's an assumption and a gamble to assume that the Mordecai will do the same.

So put on your Resume - "Admitted at Stanford, etc. but took the free ride at Duke." NO ONE is going to think twice about why that choice was made.

Yeah, they will. Duke for free over Columbia or NYU or someplace like that, no one would question it, but more than a few are going to question why someone turned down H/Y/S for another school.