How do law school admissions people evaluate applicants?

(Applications Advice, Letters of Recommendation . . . )
User avatar
ResolutePear
Posts: 8614
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2010 10:07 pm

Re: How do law school admissions people evaluate applicants?

Postby ResolutePear » Sun Jul 11, 2010 3:21 pm

HarveyBirdman wrote:
ResolutePear wrote:
HarveyBirdman wrote:what chance does a T4 grad have? I'll tell you: none.


why though? is the quality of the education at a lower ranked school really lower than at a top school? if a student excels on a personal level, why does it matter where they went to school? i understand logistical limitations in recruiting, but you expect me to believe an average top law school student is going to be a better lawyer/employee than someone graduating from an unranked law school who was at the top of their class?

i just don't like the non-individual view of the process. i feel like the rankings are flawed and illogical and the whole system just makes me want to throw shit off my desk.

what this comes down to is i think as i finish my undergrad degree in the next year and a half or so, assuming my academic success continues, i'm eventually going to have to make a choice between going to the best law school i will get into at a high price, or a possibly unranked in-state school for free (the two extremes). and i don't like the idea of thinking that if my choice reflects fiscal responsibility that my career is then going to suck and be limited to the 3 block radius around the law school, when my personal abilities would be the same either way.


People with low stats go to low-stat schools. People with excellent stats go to excellent schools. You're not bunching everybody together, "just because". The top law student at a T4 vs the average HYS student is like comparing "the best of the worst" to "the average best that you're going to get".

The stats weren't created before some of these law schools were. They're top because an independent company evaluates these schools and finds these schools to be favorable schools to go to. They're reliable ratings, hence everybody follows them. Going back to the alumni - chances are a hiring partner that's a HYS alumni is going to by soliciting to HYS - maybe CCN.. but they're not going to stray too far from that before putting an ad.

Theres more T14 partners than T4 partners. There's no, "ah, you're a nice guy... you got the job!". Even if it does happen, it's up to an employer and chances are that he's going to take a risk which is directly correlated to your salary.

Like I said: If you're so intent on going to biglaw, study hard and bang out a 180 on the LSAT.

EDIT: Oh, and as for your argument on your skills, etc. being reflected by your LS career - that's exactly what it is. If you havn't done law review, moot court, clinics, externships, clerkships, internships, whatever-other-ships, etc. AND going to a T4.. it's pretty much saying: Yeah, I'm a lazy asshole. Top schools aren't exempt from this, but they're more *rare* - they're competing vs the best where a T4 student isn't.

For instance, in Yale Law, there are Rhodes scholars, well known PhD's, proven business people, etc. attending. Are you going to tell me you can compete with these people in academia or anything else in law school if you have T4 stats? Unlikely. This isn't a Disney afternoon special.
Last edited by ResolutePear on Sun Jul 11, 2010 3:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Cleareyes
Posts: 408
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2009 5:59 pm

Re: How do law school admissions people evaluate applicants?

Postby Cleareyes » Sun Jul 11, 2010 3:26 pm

I'd like to add something that seems glossed over here. Marketability. It's a lot easier to tell a client that you're charging him $450 an hour for the labor of a guy who was on Cornell Law Review than a guy who was on Law Review at Touro. Call that prejudice or elitism, but it is the way it is.

User avatar
ResolutePear
Posts: 8614
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2010 10:07 pm

Re: How do law school admissions people evaluate applicants?

Postby ResolutePear » Sun Jul 11, 2010 3:35 pm

Cleareyes wrote:I'd like to add something that seems glossed over here. Marketability. It's a lot easier to tell a client that you're charging him $450 an hour for the labor of a guy who was on Cornell Law Review than a guy who was on Law Review at Touro. Call that prejudice or elitism, but it is the way it is.


Agreed. If I shot and killed everybody then faced capital punishment - I want the best of the best.

User avatar
Cleareyes
Posts: 408
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2009 5:59 pm

Re: How do law school admissions people evaluate applicants?

Postby Cleareyes » Sun Jul 11, 2010 3:38 pm

ResolutePear wrote:
Cleareyes wrote:I'd like to add something that seems glossed over here. Marketability. It's a lot easier to tell a client that you're charging him $450 an hour for the labor of a guy who was on Cornell Law Review than a guy who was on Law Review at Touro. Call that prejudice or elitism, but it is the way it is.


Agreed. If I shot and killed everybody then faced capital punishment - I want the best of the best.


If you shot and killed everybody there'd be nobody to punish you or defend you.

User avatar
doyleoil
Posts: 631
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2008 2:59 pm

Re: How do law school admissions people evaluate applicants?

Postby doyleoil » Sun Jul 11, 2010 3:40 pm

Cleareyes wrote:
ResolutePear wrote:
Cleareyes wrote:I'd like to add something that seems glossed over here. Marketability. It's a lot easier to tell a client that you're charging him $450 an hour for the labor of a guy who was on Cornell Law Review than a guy who was on Law Review at Touro. Call that prejudice or elitism, but it is the way it is.


Agreed. If I shot and killed everybody then faced capital punishment - I want the best of the best.


If you shot and killed everybody there'd be nobody to punish you or defend you.


I'm just trying to work through the mechanics of the pear pulling the trigger.

User avatar
Cleareyes
Posts: 408
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2009 5:59 pm

Re: How do law school admissions people evaluate applicants?

Postby Cleareyes » Sun Jul 11, 2010 3:42 pm

doyleoil wrote:
Cleareyes wrote:
ResolutePear wrote:
Cleareyes wrote:I'd like to add something that seems glossed over here. Marketability. It's a lot easier to tell a client that you're charging him $450 an hour for the labor of a guy who was on Cornell Law Review than a guy who was on Law Review at Touro. Call that prejudice or elitism, but it is the way it is.


Agreed. If I shot and killed everybody then faced capital punishment - I want the best of the best.


If you shot and killed everybody there'd be nobody to punish you or defend you.


I'm just trying to work through the mechanics of the pear pulling the trigger.


Prehensile stem.

User avatar
ResolutePear
Posts: 8614
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2010 10:07 pm

Re: How do law school admissions people evaluate applicants?

Postby ResolutePear » Sun Jul 11, 2010 3:58 pm

Cleareyes wrote:
doyleoil wrote:
Cleareyes wrote:
ResolutePear wrote:
Agreed. If I shot and killed everybody then faced capital punishment - I want the best of the best.


If you shot and killed everybody there'd be nobody to punish you or defend you.


I'm just trying to work through the mechanics of the pear pulling the trigger.


Prehensile stem.


Indeed. Indeed. So, what you're suggesting is that I kill all the lawyers; just like Shakespeare suggested?

User avatar
kalvano
Posts: 11723
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 2:24 am

Re: How do law school admissions people evaluate applicants?

Postby kalvano » Sun Jul 11, 2010 4:00 pm

It's a start.

Also, less competition.

User avatar
Cleareyes
Posts: 408
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2009 5:59 pm

Re: How do law school admissions people evaluate applicants?

Postby Cleareyes » Sun Jul 11, 2010 4:00 pm

ResolutePear wrote:
Indeed. Indeed. So, what you're suggesting is that I kill all the lawyers; just like Shakespeare suggested?


Just the T4 grads. You'd be doing them a favor.

See what I did? I brought us back on topic.

User avatar
ResolutePear
Posts: 8614
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2010 10:07 pm

Re: How do law school admissions people evaluate applicants?

Postby ResolutePear » Sun Jul 11, 2010 4:01 pm

kalvano wrote:It's a start.

Also, less competition.

--ImageRemoved--

User avatar
ResolutePear
Posts: 8614
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2010 10:07 pm

Re: How do law school admissions people evaluate applicants?

Postby ResolutePear » Sun Jul 11, 2010 4:03 pm

Cleareyes wrote:
ResolutePear wrote:
Indeed. Indeed. So, what you're suggesting is that I kill all the lawyers; just like Shakespeare suggested?


Just the T4 grads. You'd be doing them a favor.

See what I did? I brought us back on topic.


But, I hear that T4 grads are in with the local gangs. My pear would get totally smashed.

User avatar
PDaddy
Posts: 2073
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 4:40 am

Re: How do law school admissions people evaluate applicants?

Postby PDaddy » Sun Jul 11, 2010 4:03 pm

Cleareyes wrote:
LSAT predicts grades (to some degree.)

Legal employers (at least prestigious ones) seem to believe that grades predict performance as a lawyer at least in certain circumstances. Big firms don't hire associates with top grades because they think those who have them deserve the job. They hire them because they think they'll be better performers (and to some degree because clients think they'll be better performers and are willing to pay for them.) The same of DOJ Honors, federal judges, etc...

Now maybe grades don't predict performance, but that means that an awful lot of really smart people have this whole thing wrong and have for many years.


Well...they DO have it wrong, if the current crop of practicing attorneys is any indication. Most of them are apathetic, lazy ambulance chasers whose daily habits exhibit none of the promises they made in their personal statements back when they applied to law school. Most lawyers don't even want to be lawyers; they just want to make a quick buck. I often ask lawyers what their essays were about, and then I ask them if they are doing what they said they would do...if they are keeping their promises. Invariably, they either have no response or they get defensive. But no one has devised and implemented a better way of filtering out candidates (Berkeley notwithstanding).

I asked one such lawyer why he decided to go to law school. He told me that he couldn't do much with his psychology degree. That's sad. I didn't feel sad for him, I felt sad for his clients, not to mention all of the people who come to him for help but whose cases he rejects because he has no passion, doesn't want to work too hard, or finds the case too "risky". The guy has no business in the profession, and the profession has no place for him. But he doesn't realize it. Some people with lower grades ands/or LSAT's would make good lawyers, but they are the exceptions to the rule(s). More often, however, there are academic standouts who do not belong in the profession.

User avatar
ResolutePear
Posts: 8614
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2010 10:07 pm

Re: How do law school admissions people evaluate applicants?

Postby ResolutePear » Sun Jul 11, 2010 4:05 pm

PDaddy wrote:
Cleareyes wrote:
LSAT predicts grades (to some degree.)

Legal employers (at least prestigious ones) seem to believe that grades predict performance as a lawyer at least in certain circumstances. Big firms don't hire associates with top grades because they think those who have them deserve the job. They hire them because they think they'll be better performers (and to some degree because clients think they'll be better performers and are willing to pay for them.) The same of DOJ Honors, federal judges, etc...

Now maybe grades don't predict performance, but that means that an awful lot of really smart people have this whole thing wrong and have for many years.


Well...they DO have it wrong, if the current crop of practicing attorneys is any indication. Most of them are apathetic, lazy ambulance chasers whose daily habits exhibit none of the promises they made in their personal statements back when they applied to law school. Most lawyers don't even want to be lawyers; they just want to make a quick buck. I often ask lawyers what their essays were about, and then I ask them if they are doing what they said they would do...if they are keeping their promises. Invariably, they either have no response or they get defensive. But no one has devised and implemented a better way of filtering out candidates (Berkeley notwithstanding).

I asked one such lawyer why he decided to go to law school. He told me that he couldn't do much with his psychology degree. That's sad. I didn't feel sad for him, I felt sad for his clients, not to mention all of the people who come to him for help but whose cases he rejects because he has no passion, doesn't want to work too hard, or finds the case too "risky". The guy has no business in the profession, and the profession has no place for him. But he doesn't realize it. Some people with lower grades ands/or LSAT's would make good lawyers, but they are the exceptions to the rule(s). More often, however, there are academic standouts who do not belong in the profession.


He would probably make more use of his Psych degree in Family Law.




Return to “Law School Admissions Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: jtawil, Thomas Hagan, ESQ., Yahoo [Bot] and 9 guests