Michigan v Georgetown v Vandy v Cornell Forum

[arivtal]

Hi everyone, and thank you for taking a look.

I've been accepted to Michigan, GULC, Vanderbilt, and (based on probability calculators) presume there is a good chance that I get into Cornell.

Rejected from Harvard, Penn, Berkeley.

Waitlisted at Columbia and Virginia.

LSAT: 168 (took it one time; was PT'ing in the high 160's - low 170's). I'm unsure about retaking, for fear that I don't do better and then the schools I've gotten into this time reject me next time. I understand that I can retake in June, and then if I do much better cancel the deposit I've made and reapply next year. BUT, I want to defer for a year, so I will likely have to sign a commitment to attend whichever school I choose.

GPA: International "Superior"

Cost of Attendance: Is an issue, but not a vital one for me. I will not have to take out big loans.

Me: I am Colombian-American with lots of experience living in different countries. I am K-JD, but definitely not traditional: got my degree abroad, took time off to intern with State Dept., co-founded an important non-profit.

Career goals: Fluctuating a lot. Plan at the moment is Big Law for 10 or so years, and then non-profit work. May also go straight into non-profit, so it's up in the air. I want a school that opens the door to whatever I decide on doing. I prefer not to live in NYC, solely because of the cost of living, but it's not the end of the world if I do. Working in the Bay Area would be the dream.


I'm stuck between Michigan and GULC. I know Michigan is a better school, but I love the idea of living in D.C. I have a small but powerful network there, and would like the chance to develop it.

Bottom line: Because I'm undecided about the direction of my career, I want a school that opens as many doors as possible.

Would appreciate your thoughts. I'm open to all advice, criticism, whatever.

Thank you!

[Pneumonia]

If COA really isn't an issue then Georgetown might be a good choice here because of the networking and the location, but don't count on snagging BigLaw. You can nix Vandy. I'd go Columbia or Virginia if you get in though.

[akg144]

Sounds to me if you want to do non-profit waiting for 10 years might not be the best idea if you get 120 months of non-profit legal work your federal Gradplus loans will be entirely forgiven I don't see why you wouldn't just begin with non-profit get your debt completely freed up since you plan to go into a Fed/State/Munic./Non-Profit job long term anyways why not reap the max benefit from it? but I suppose to each their own

[OfThriceandTen]

Between Michigan and GULC, the answer is almost assuredly Michigan if you plan on any biglaw. However, if you're D.C. (biglaw/biggov) or bust, GULC is preferable (although not as preferable as Columbia or NYU) -- but be honest with yourself about your chances at snagging something.

If you snagged these schools with a 168, it's probably good enough to crack CCN with 170+. If you're taking a year off anyway, why not? Apps are on the decline and there's no show of that stopping. Signing a binding deferral in this buyer's market is nuts.

Oh I missed the fact that you eventually want to work in the Bay Area - either biglaw or nonprofit. In that scenario there is no reason to take GULC over Michigan. Michigan has a strong presence on the West Coast, mostly in the Bay Area, and it has very good non-profit placement.

[arivtal]

Thanks a lot. Great feedback. Will like to give a more thoughtful reply later in the day

[arivtal]

Sounds to me if you want to do non-profit waiting for 10 years might not be the best idea if you get 120 months of non-profit legal work your federal Gradplus loans will be entirely forgiven I don't see why you wouldn't just begin with non-profit get your debt completely freed up since you plan to go into a Fed/State/Munic./Non-Profit job long term anyways why not reap the max benefit from it? but I suppose to each their own

Thanks for your thoughts. My ultimate dream is to be an animal rights litigator, but there are (from what I understand) only a handful of positions available. So, I want to do Big Law for 10 or so years so that I can invest as much as possible into properties, and then accumulate enough rent money to be able to retire from Big Law and become an independent, self-supporting pro-bono attorney.

What do you think?

[arivtal]

Between Michigan and GULC, the answer is almost assuredly Michigan if you plan on any biglaw. However, if you're D.C. (biglaw/biggov) or bust, GULC is preferable (although not as preferable as Columbia or NYU) -- but be honest with yourself about your chances at snagging something.

If you snagged these schools with a 168, it's probably good enough to crack CCN with 170+. If you're taking a year off anyway, why not? Apps are on the decline and there's no show of that stopping. Signing a binding deferral in this buyer's market is nuts.

Oh I missed the fact that you eventually want to work in the Bay Area - either biglaw or nonprofit. In that scenario there is no reason to take GULC over Michigan. Michigan has a strong presence on the West Coast, mostly in the Bay Area, and it has very good non-profit placement.

Something to think about. Thank you.

Michigan's placement in the West Coast is definitely something to consider.

[Nelson]

You want to defer a year? Retake, retake, retake.

[arivtal]

Happy to say I was just admitted into Cornell

[CTT]

Happy to say I was just admitted into Cornell

Congrats. You ought to be able to convince Cornell to offer you some cash to try to convince you to come there instead of Michigan. I would expect Michigan to match or nearly match an offer from Cornell, unless they've offered you $$ already.

You should go to the preview days at both Michigan and Cornell. I suggest not bothering with Georgetown, unless you really want to do government work, which it doesn't sound like you do. I was accepted at these three schools and offered more money by Cornell and Georgetown than by Michigan, but in the end I thought Michigan was a better fit for the following reasons.
1) More geographical diversity for after law school. It seemed like everyone at Cornell wanted to do NYC Biglaw, and if that's your only ambition, then it may be a good fit, but Michigan is going to give you a broader network in other cities and outside of firms.
2) There a community feel that both Michigan and Cornell have the Georgetown didn't seem to.
3) Ann Arbor is a much better town than Ithaca.
4) The living situation at Michigan, especially if you're going to live on campus, is a hell of a lot better than at Cornell.
5) Construction at Michigan was complete. Cornell, if I'm not mistaken, is in the middle of a multi-year project.
6) The job prospects coming out of Michigan seemed better. Sure, Cornell students do well getting into NYC biglaw. But that's why you go to Cornell. If you want options in D.C., Chicago, LA, San Fran. etc., Michigan is a better fit.
7) Michigan's law school is a ton nicer than Cornell's or Georgetown's.

On the retake thing. Retaking in June (that's the next one, right?) is probably a good idea. If you score more than a point better, then it's likely to be worth waiting a year and reapplying, taking an offer off a waitlist, or taking more money from Michigan or Cornell.

[SLS_AMG]

I was accepted at these three schools and offered more money by Cornell and Georgetown than by Michigan, but in the end I thought Michigan was a better fit for the following reasons.
1) More geographical diversity for after law school. It seemed like everyone at Cornell wanted to do NYC Biglaw, and if that's your only ambition, then it may be a good fit, but Michigan is going to give you a broader network in other cities and outside of firms.
2) There a community feel that both Michigan and Cornell have the Georgetown didn't seem to.
3) Ann Arbor is a much better town than Ithaca.
4) The living situation at Michigan, especially if you're going to live on campus, is a hell of a lot better than at Cornell.
5) Construction at Michigan was complete. Cornell, if I'm not mistaken, is in the middle of a multi-year project.
6) The job prospects coming out of Michigan seemed better. Sure, Cornell students do well getting into NYC biglaw. But that's why you go to Cornell. If you want options in D.C., Chicago, LA, San Fran. etc., Michigan is a better fit.
7) Michigan's law school is a ton nicer than Cornell's or Georgetown's.

On the retake thing. Retaking in June (that's the next one, right?) is probably a good idea. If you score more than a point better, then it's likely to be worth waiting a year and reapplying, taking an offer off a waitlist, or taking more money from Michigan or Cornell.

This is objectively bad advice and most of these factors should play zero part in your decision on where to attend school.

1. Michigan may have more geographical diversity than Cornell, but that's only because Michigan doesn't have a home market. It no longer places well in Chicago, and it doesn't place any better than other lower T14s in New York (with the exception of Georgetown). In fact, it probably has the worst NY placement of the T13 schools. And in the Bay Area, Michigan may have more alums than Cornell, but that isn't really going to matter. If you have no connections to San Francisco before going to Michigan, all I can say is good luck.

2. Community feel should be a non-factor in your decision.

3. And DC is a much better town than Ann Arbor.

4. Can't comment on this, but this is a small factor to consider at best.

5. Construction completion rate should be a non-factor in your decision.

6. Leaving Georgetown aside for a minute (as everyone knows it has the worst placement among the T14 schools), in what world does Michigan have better placement than Cornell? You absolutely do NOT go to Michigan if your end game is to get to LA, DC, SF, Boston and you have no ties. SF (OP's desired market) is in actuality a small market that is very hard to break into. At Michigan you will be well behind HYS and Berkeley grads, many of whom want to be in SF.

7. Again, this should be a non-factor. Most people would go to law school in a cardboard box if it meant that they were guaranteed a job at Wachtell post-grad.

Do not interpret my post as a slam on Michigan. But it's no secret that Michigan has, over the last several years, had the second weakest job placement numbers in the T14 after Georgetown. That should be your #1 concern.

[CTT]

I was accepted at these three schools and offered more money by Cornell and Georgetown than by Michigan, but in the end I thought Michigan was a better fit for the following reasons.
1) More geographical diversity for after law school. It seemed like everyone at Cornell wanted to do NYC Biglaw, and if that's your only ambition, then it may be a good fit, but Michigan is going to give you a broader network in other cities and outside of firms.
2) There a community feel that both Michigan and Cornell have the Georgetown didn't seem to.
3) Ann Arbor is a much better town than Ithaca.
4) The living situation at Michigan, especially if you're going to live on campus, is a hell of a lot better than at Cornell.
5) Construction at Michigan was complete. Cornell, if I'm not mistaken, is in the middle of a multi-year project.
6) The job prospects coming out of Michigan seemed better. Sure, Cornell students do well getting into NYC biglaw. But that's why you go to Cornell. If you want options in D.C., Chicago, LA, San Fran. etc., Michigan is a better fit.
7) Michigan's law school is a ton nicer than Cornell's or Georgetown's.

On the retake thing. Retaking in June (that's the next one, right?) is probably a good idea. If you score more than a point better, then it's likely to be worth waiting a year and reapplying, taking an offer off a waitlist, or taking more money from Michigan or Cornell.

This is objectively bad advice and most of these factors should play zero part in your decision on where to attend school.

1. Michigan may have more geographical diversity than Cornell, but that's only because Michigan doesn't have a home market. It no longer places well in Chicago, and it doesn't place any better than other lower T14s in New York (with the exception of Georgetown). In fact, it probably has the worst NY placement of the T13 schools. And in the Bay Area, Michigan may have more alums than Cornell, but that isn't really going to matter. If you have no connections to San Francisco before going to Michigan, all I can say is good luck.

2. Community feel should be a non-factor in your decision.

3. And DC is a much better town than Ann Arbor.

4. Can't comment on this, but this is a small factor to consider at best.

5. Construction completion rate should be a non-factor in your decision.

6. Leaving Georgetown aside for a minute (as everyone knows it has the worst placement among the T14 schools), in what world does Michigan have better placement than Cornell? You absolutely do NOT go to Michigan if your end game is to get to LA, DC, SF, Boston and you have no ties. SF (OP's desired market) is in actuality a small market that is very hard to break into. At Michigan you will be well behind HYS and Berkeley grads, many of whom want to be in SF.

7. Again, this should be a non-factor. Most people would go to law school in a cardboard box if it meant that they were guaranteed a job at Wachtell post-grad.

Do not interpret my post as a slam on Michigan. But it's no secret that Michigan has, over the last several years, had the second weakest job placement numbers in the T14 after Georgetown. That should be your #1 concern.

First, you are choosing a place to spend three years of your life, excepting summers and holidays. Choose a place you're going to like being; it will make law school a better and more educating experience. Obviously, there are many differences between Ann Arbor or Ithaca and D.C., and the most substantial is cost of living. The other big difference is that you will be closer to your classmates at Michigan or Cornell than you would be at Georgetown. I don't know whether that's a good or bad thing, but I believe it's true. As for D.C. being a better town than Ann Arbor, It depends on what you want. D.C. is a city; Ann Arbor and Ithaca are large towns. You're comparing apples and oranges and concluding that because you like apples, they're better than oranges for others.

Neither Harvard nor Yale can guarantee you a job at Wachtell. People go to Cornell because they want to do BigLaw in NYC. As a result, Cornell places a lot of students into BigLaw firms in NYC. If you want to be surrounded by people who want to do that and only that, Cornell could be a great fit. I think when I was applying to law school the most recent graduating class at Cornell had 1 or 2 graduating students going into public interest work. At Michigan, a substantial portion of my friends have no ambition of doing OCI or going into BigLaw. They want to do public interest work. These are not students who are at the bottom of the class and have resigned themselves to that outcome. Most of them have done very well and simply know they want something in life other than money, namely, a real belief in the work that they do everyday. Why didn't they go to Cornell? Because comparatively few people at Cornell care about that stuff, and they were fighting against the tide as it was.

People on TLS can't help but rank things. They rank everything. These are their assumptions:
Employers with more than 499 lawyers are inherently better than those with fewer than 500.
Those with more than 249 lawyers are better than those with fewer than 250.
Employers with fewer than 100 lawyers are a waste of time.
Students who go into non-profit, corporate or government work wish they had biglaw jobs.
Every student's objective is to make a shit load of money.

I chose Michigan because I liked it here; because I thought it would give me good job prospects, and because I wanted to be surrounded by people who had ambitions different than my own. I have no regrets. No school can guarantee you a job at Wachtell. But there are people in the world who think that many things matter more than Vault rankings. I appreciate that people who hold that view frequently decide to come to Michigan.

[arivtal]

Great perspectives. Thanks a lot for taking the time.

What are the chances of transferring to HYS from a school like Michigan or Cornell? What would it require? I know it's easier to just retake, but I'm curious...

[Optimist Prime]

.

[CTT]

Great perspectives. Thanks a lot for taking the time.

What are the chances of transferring to HYS from a school like Michigan or Cornell? What would it require? I know it's easier to just retake, but I'm curious...

I don't know. I also don't know anyone who has seriously considered transferring. I think it's true that highly ranked law schools only want to accept transfers when there's a compelling reason for the geographic move (family issues or whatever).

You're looking at it from the perspective of someone who hasn't built a network of friends yet. My strong suspicion is that if you go to Michigan or Cornell and do well enough to transfer up the USNWR rankings, you'll have built a network or friends and professors that you will not want to abandon. You'll also probably be high enough in the class to have your pick of employers anyway, so you won't have a real incentive to transfer. Remember that firm hiring happens after your first year. I have no idea how student who transfer handle the OCI issue. If you're public interest, it could make more sense.

Say you do well enough to land a job at a V10 firm, which is probably good experience plus 3.65 and up. After you're offered a summer associate job at Cravath or Sullivan and Cromwell or Skadden or wherever, are you really going to transfer away from a school that's worked well for you because Harvard is six spots higher on the USNWR list? I doubt it.

Also, on the idea that Michigan isn't a good place to go for LA, San Fran, etc. Employers from those cities do come to OCI here. In the last 6 years the California offices of firms have made about 240 offers to Michigan students stemming from OCI interviews. Obviously that's far lower than NYC, Chicago or D.C., but it's not insignificant. California is the fifth most common place for students to go, with about 10 percent of the class heading there in an average year.

http://www.law.umich.edu/careers/classs ... stats.aspx

[Real Madrid]

Great perspectives. Thanks a lot for taking the time.

What are the chances of transferring to HYS from a school like Michigan or Cornell? What would it require? I know it's easier to just retake, but I'm curious...

I don't know. I also don't know anyone who has seriously considered transferring. I think it's true that highly ranked law schools only want to accept transfers when there's a compelling reason for the geographic move (family issues or whatever).

You're looking at it from the perspective of someone who hasn't built a network of friends yet. My strong suspicion is that if you go to Michigan or Cornell and do well enough to transfer up the USNWR rankings, you'll have built a network or friends and professors that you will not want to abandon. You'll also probably be high enough in the class to have your pick of employers anyway, so you won't have a real incentive to transfer. Remember that firm hiring happens after your first year. I have no idea how student who transfer handle the OCI issue. If you're public interest, it could make more sense.

Say you do well enough to land a job at a V10 firm, which is probably good experience plus 3.65 and up. After you're offered a summer associate job at Cravath or Sullivan and Cromwell or Skadden or wherever, are you really going to transfer away from a school that's worked well for you because Harvard is six spots higher on the USNWR list? I doubt it.

Also, on the idea that Michigan isn't a good place to go for LA, San Fran, etc. Employers from those cities do come to OCI here. In the last 6 years the California offices of firms have made about 240 offers to Michigan students stemming from OCI interviews. Obviously that's far lower than NYC, Chicago or D.C., but it's not insignificant. California is the fifth most common place for students to go, with about 10 percent of the class heading there in an average year.

--LinkRemoved--

Michigan isn't a good place for California. 10% of the class may have gone there, but I'd bet 8-9% are from CA or have lived there before. You obviously do not move from New York or Texas or Florida to Ann Arbor if your end game is San Francisco or LA.

And why would you already have completed your job search before transferring? Also, good luck getting SullCrom from Michigan. I think they hired one M student last year.

[BurkeFor3]

Great perspectives. Thanks a lot for taking the time.

What are the chances of transferring to HYS from a school like Michigan or Cornell? What would it require? I know it's easier to just retake, but I'm curious...

I don't know. I also don't know anyone who has seriously considered transferring. I think it's true that highly ranked law schools only want to accept transfers when there's a compelling reason for the geographic move (family issues or whatever).

You're looking at it from the perspective of someone who hasn't built a network of friends yet. My strong suspicion is that if you go to Michigan or Cornell and do well enough to transfer up the USNWR rankings, you'll have built a network or friends and professors that you will not want to abandon. You'll also probably be high enough in the class to have your pick of employers anyway, so you won't have a real incentive to transfer. Remember that firm hiring happens after your first year. I have no idea how student who transfer handle the OCI issue. If you're public interest, it could make more sense.

Say you do well enough to land a job at a V10 firm, which is probably good experience plus 3.65 and up. After you're offered a summer associate job at Cravath or Sullivan and Cromwell or Skadden or wherever, are you really going to transfer away from a school that's worked well for you because Harvard is six spots higher on the USNWR list? I doubt it.

Also, on the idea that Michigan isn't a good place to go for LA, San Fran, etc. Employers from those cities do come to OCI here. In the last 6 years the California offices of firms have made about 240 offers to Michigan students stemming from OCI interviews. Obviously that's far lower than NYC, Chicago or D.C., but it's not insignificant. California is the fifth most common place for students to go, with about 10 percent of the class heading there in an average year.

--LinkRemoved--

Michigan isn't a good place for California. 10% of the class may have gone there, but I'd bet 8-9% are from CA or have lived there before. You obviously do not move from New York or Texas or Florida to Ann Arbor if your end game is San Francisco or LA.

And why would you already have completed your job search before transferring? Also, good luck getting SullCrom from Michigan. I think they hired one M student last year.

Maybe you should stop betting then. Of my 9 closest friends, 5 are going to CA, only 2 are from there (my first visit was during one of my callbacks), and only 1 is above median. This is not representative of the entire school, obviously, but this is just to illustrate that don't know what you're talking about.

And Sullivan & Cromwell made 38 2L offers here in the past 5 years and several more 3L offers. 13 2L offers just last year. There would have been even more (100% of Michigan callbacks resulted in an offer last year), but 1/3 of the students declined their callback invitations. They just aren't popular here lately (average 1-2 per year). I'm not saying Michigan is better than Cornell for people set on S&C New York, because I don't know what the numbers are like at Cornell. I am only saying that you don't have any insight to contribute here.

[Nelson]

Maybe you should stop betting then. Of my 9 closest friends, 5 are going to CA, only 2 are from there (my first visit was during one of my callbacks), and only 1 is above median. This is not representative of the entire school, obviously, but this is just to illustrate that don't know what you're talking about.

And Sullivan & Cromwell made 38 2L offers here in the past 5 years and several more 3L offers. 13 2L offers just last year. There would have been even more (100% of Michigan callbacks resulted in an offer last year), but 1/3 of the students declined their callback invitations. They just aren't popular here lately (average 1-2 per year). I'm not saying Michigan is better than Cornell for people set on S&C New York, because I don't know what the numbers are like at Cornell. I am only saying that you don't have any insight to contribute here.

Great first post. Welcome to TLS random Michigan 2L.

[Real Madrid]

Great perspectives. Thanks a lot for taking the time.

What are the chances of transferring to HYS from a school like Michigan or Cornell? What would it require? I know it's easier to just retake, but I'm curious...

I don't know. I also don't know anyone who has seriously considered transferring. I think it's true that highly ranked law schools only want to accept transfers when there's a compelling reason for the geographic move (family issues or whatever).

You're looking at it from the perspective of someone who hasn't built a network of friends yet. My strong suspicion is that if you go to Michigan or Cornell and do well enough to transfer up the USNWR rankings, you'll have built a network or friends and professors that you will not want to abandon. You'll also probably be high enough in the class to have your pick of employers anyway, so you won't have a real incentive to transfer. Remember that firm hiring happens after your first year. I have no idea how student who transfer handle the OCI issue. If you're public interest, it could make more sense.

Say you do well enough to land a job at a V10 firm, which is probably good experience plus 3.65 and up. After you're offered a summer associate job at Cravath or Sullivan and Cromwell or Skadden or wherever, are you really going to transfer away from a school that's worked well for you because Harvard is six spots higher on the USNWR list? I doubt it.

Also, on the idea that Michigan isn't a good place to go for LA, San Fran, etc. Employers from those cities do come to OCI here. In the last 6 years the California offices of firms have made about 240 offers to Michigan students stemming from OCI interviews. Obviously that's far lower than NYC, Chicago or D.C., but it's not insignificant. California is the fifth most common place for students to go, with about 10 percent of the class heading there in an average year.

--LinkRemoved--

Michigan isn't a good place for California. 10% of the class may have gone there, but I'd bet 8-9% are from CA or have lived there before. You obviously do not move from New York or Texas or Florida to Ann Arbor if your end game is San Francisco or LA.

And why would you already have completed your job search before transferring? Also, good luck getting SullCrom from Michigan. I think they hired one M student last year.

Maybe you should stop betting then. Of my 9 closest friends, 5 are going to CA, only 2 are from there (my first visit was during one of my callbacks), and only 1 is above median. This is not representative of the entire school, obviously, but this is just to illustrate that don't know what you're talking about.

And Sullivan & Cromwell made 38 2L offers here in the past 5 years and several more 3L offers. 13 2L offers just last year. There would have been even more (100% of Michigan callbacks resulted in an offer last year), but 1/3 of the students declined their callback invitations. They just aren't popular here lately (average 1-2 per year). I'm not saying Michigan is better than Cornell for people set on S&C New York, because I don't know what the numbers are like at Cornell. I am only saying that you don't have any insight to contribute here.

You have no idea what I know. And I can guarantee you I know more about the SF market than you do. Going to Michigan expecting to end up in SF with no ties is just foolish.

Why do Michigan students always jump in on these threads? Despite their numerous anecdotes, the actual numbers don't lie: Michigan's placement power has plummeted in recent years. That's a fact.

[CTT]

You have no idea what I know. And I can guarantee you I know more about the SF market than you do. Going to Michigan expecting to end up in SF with no ties is just foolish.

Why do Michigan students always jump in on these threads? Despite their numerous anecdotes, the actual numbers don't lie: Michigan's placement power has plummeted in recent years. That's a fact.

Michigan sends a lower percent of the class to law firms with more than 100 lawyers than many comparable law schools. You are making a logical error in concluding that a school that places a larger emphasis on public interest and government work and also sends a higher proportion of students into those areas is necessarily worse for BigLaw. It appears that while we may not know what you know, you don't know what you don't know.

[BurkeFor3]

You have no idea what I know. And I can guarantee you I know more about the SF market than you do. Going to Michigan expecting to end up in SF with no ties is just foolish.

Why do Michigan students always jump in on these threads? Despite their numerous anecdotes, the actual numbers don't lie: Michigan's placement power has plummeted in recent years. That's a fact.

I jumped in because I had tangible data points to contribute to the discussion. Why did you?

I think I acknowledged the weakness of anecdotes. For all their shortcomings though, aren't anecdotes infinitely more helpful than pure, shameless conjecture? For example:

10% of the class may have gone there, but I'd bet 8-9% are from CA or have lived there before.

You are trying to point to "the actual numbers" as proof that Michigan's placement power has plummeted. The problem is that "the actual numbers" don't quantify that, nor do they attempt to. To reach conclusions about placement "power," you have to couple data about placement with other assumptions. Based on what we know about Harvard and Michigan, I think it's perfectly reasonable to assume that Harvard's placement advantage is due to "power." I think it's much less reasonable to assume that Duke's is. According to the latest NLJ numbers from the other thread, the two are separated by about 7 percentage points, which corresponds to about 25 students in my current class. I personally know almost that many who did not participate in OCI because they are pursuing various PI. The relatively slim placement margin, combined with the fact that this campus seems to be full of liberal do-gooder hippies, makes the self-selection explanation seem much more reasonable to me than any discrete disparities in placement power.

Yes, it's anecdotal, but this is an inherently imperfect metric. I am speculating, and so are you.

[cotiger]

You have no idea what I know. And I can guarantee you I know more about the SF market than you do. Going to Michigan expecting to end up in SF with no ties is just foolish.

Why do Michigan students always jump in on these threads? Despite their numerous anecdotes, the actual numbers don't lie: Michigan's placement power has plummeted in recent years. That's a fact.

Michigan sends a lower percent of the class to law firms with more than 100 lawyers than many comparable law schools. You are making a logical error in concluding that a school that places a larger emphasis on public interest and government work and also sends a higher proportion of students into those areas is necessarily worse for BigLaw. It appears that while we may not know what you know, you don't know what you don't know.

While I have no direct knowledge of Michigan's placement, I don't think PI/Gov emphasis can explain the entire placement gap. Taking all PI/Gov grads out of the equation, Michigan placed an average of 61% of the rest their classes in biglaw/fedclerk over the last three years. This is the second lowest of the T14 besides GULC (Duke 66.2 > NU 63.5 > Michigan 61 > GULC 53.2). The most comparably PI/Gov-focused school, Berkeley, comes in at 68.4%.

[OfThriceandTen]

I mean, as a Michigan student, we have our strengths and our weaknesses, as most non-Yale schools do. LST shows a general clump roughly around mid-80% for Michigan, Duke, Northwestern, Penn, Cornell. (UVA's is an impressive anomoly and I'm not 100% sure why?) There are trade-offs to each. Duke has a higher percentage of fed. clerkships but almost no one going into PI, Cornell has almost as many PI students as Michigan (although MI is the top of that list), but not as many clerkships. All of these schools have better NLJ250 ratings, but when we have such a high percentage doing PI, is that a complete surprise?

If you have lower-T14 numbers and you want California, go to Berkeley. If Berkeley doesn't accept you, I don't know why a couple of percentage points on NLJ250 should put Cornell higher than Michigan on your radar. It doesn't explain all that much when Michigan has probably the largest PI contingent in the lower T-14. It's not a guarantee that Michigan can get you California biglaw (especially without ties), but it's going to get you a whole lot further than Cornell.

[OfThriceandTen]

You have no idea what I know. And I can guarantee you I know more about the SF market than you do. Going to Michigan expecting to end up in SF with no ties is just foolish.

Why do Michigan students always jump in on these threads? Despite their numerous anecdotes, the actual numbers don't lie: Michigan's placement power has plummeted in recent years. That's a fact.

Michigan sends a lower percent of the class to law firms with more than 100 lawyers than many comparable law schools. You are making a logical error in concluding that a school that places a larger emphasis on public interest and government work and also sends a higher proportion of students into those areas is necessarily worse for BigLaw. It appears that while we may not know what you know, you don't know what you don't know.

While I have no direct knowledge of Michigan's placement, I don't think PI/Gov emphasis can explain the entire placement gap. Taking all PI/Gov grads out of the equation, Michigan placed an average of 61% of the rest their classes in biglaw/fedclerk over the last three years. This is the second lowest of the T14 besides GULC (Duke 66.2 > NU 63.5 > Michigan 61 > GULC 53.2). The most comparably PI/Gov-focused school, Berkeley, comes in at 68.4%.

What. You basically said you don't think the PI/Gov emphasis can explain the gap, and proceed to "prove" that by taking all of the PI/Gov jobs out of your equation?

[Tiago Splitter]

What. You basically said you don't think the PI/Gov emphasis can explain the gap, and proceed to "prove" that by taking all of the PI/Gov jobs out of your equation?

He's looking at the percentage of the class that got biglaw/fed clerk if you take out all of the PI/Gov people. Meaning Michigan is putting a bigger percentage of the class into things like business/industry and small firm jobs. The limitation on that analysis is that it doesn't account for people with strong grades self-selecting away from biglaw.