MUST have WE for NU law?

(Applications Advice, Letters of Recommendation . . . )
StateSchoolSplitter
Posts: 111
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2010 7:53 pm

MUST have WE for NU law?

Postby StateSchoolSplitter » Wed Nov 17, 2010 4:44 pm

3ish GPA with a 173 lsat, pt WE in college, straight out of UG

gambelda
Posts: 300
Joined: Tue Sep 28, 2010 11:44 am

Re: MUST have WE for NU law?

Postby gambelda » Wed Nov 17, 2010 4:49 pm

No, but NU values WE more than most law schools so it's certainly a bump. and what's 3ish? 2.98? 3.0? 3.2? Massive difference between all three.

User avatar
Spinozist21
Posts: 522
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 11:23 am

Re: MUST have WE for NU law?

Postby Spinozist21 » Wed Nov 17, 2010 4:56 pm

gambelda wrote:No, but NU values WE more than most law schools so it's certainly a bump. and what's 3ish? 2.98? 3.0? 3.2? Massive difference between all three.


Yeah, "3ish" is a little vague.

StateSchoolSplitter
Posts: 111
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2010 7:53 pm

Re: MUST have WE for NU law?

Postby StateSchoolSplitter » Wed Nov 17, 2010 5:04 pm

gambelda wrote:No, but NU values WE more than most law schools so it's certainly a bump. and what's 3ish? 2.98? 3.0? 3.2? Massive difference between all three.


3 now, if I went for WE it would go up maybe .1 points

User avatar
hipstermafia
Posts: 1053
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2010 12:45 pm

Re: MUST have WE for NU law?

Postby hipstermafia » Wed Nov 17, 2010 5:12 pm

StateSchoolSplitter wrote:3 now, if I went for WE it would go up maybe .1 points

WE does not raise your gpa.

User avatar
Marionberry
Posts: 1302
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2010 9:24 pm

Re: MUST have WE for NU law?

Postby Marionberry » Wed Nov 17, 2010 5:15 pm

About 95% of NUs entering 1Ls have at least one year of full-time, post graduate work experience. It's damn near a necessity.

User avatar
kaftka juice
Posts: 97
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2010 9:49 pm

Re: MUST have WE for NU law?

Postby kaftka juice » Wed Nov 17, 2010 5:23 pm

And if you are interested in big law, remember that you will be competing with people who have a bunch of WE during OCI

kehoema2
Posts: 135
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2010 10:52 pm

Re: MUST have WE for NU law?

Postby kehoema2 » Wed Nov 17, 2010 5:35 pm

Correct me if I'm wrong, I thought I looked into this statistic and it said 2% of the entering class have 0 WE.

If I'm wrong, sorry don't know why I remember looking up and seeing that stat.

User avatar
Marionberry
Posts: 1302
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2010 9:24 pm

Re: MUST have WE for NU law?

Postby Marionberry » Wed Nov 17, 2010 5:38 pm

kehoema2 wrote:Correct me if I'm wrong, I thought I looked into this statistic and it said 2% of the entering class have 0 WE.

If I'm wrong, sorry don't know why I remember looking up and seeing that stat.


You may be right, 5% is just the number I had in my head but I'm positive about it. Either way, it appears you'd need to be pretty special to get in without it.

gambelda
Posts: 300
Joined: Tue Sep 28, 2010 11:44 am

Re: MUST have WE for NU law?

Postby gambelda » Wed Nov 17, 2010 6:11 pm

hipstermafia wrote:
StateSchoolSplitter wrote:3 now, if I went for WE it would go up maybe .1 points

WE does not raise your gpa.


Yeah, the fuck? Anyways. There's really no reason you SHOULDN'T work before law school. See the millions of posts on this forums that describe the benefits associated with doing so. You will thank everyone later. Personally, I think any person who goes staright to law school deprives themselves of a number of opportunities.

Imagine when you graduate law school and realize you absolutely hate law....congrats, your 150K in debt, have no work experience, AND you experienced nothing when you had the chance. Now you don't have that chance because your debt follows you everywhere forcing you to work and/or off yourself. Personally, I favor the latter. Help control the population. HAVE YOUR HUMAN SPAID OR NEUTERED.

User avatar
rayiner
Posts: 6184
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 11:43 am

Re: MUST have WE for NU law?

Postby rayiner » Wed Nov 17, 2010 6:15 pm

gambelda wrote:No, but NU values WE more than most law schools so it's certainly a bump. and what's 3ish? 2.98? 3.0? 3.2? Massive difference between all three.


No difference between those.

canuck
Posts: 222
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2010 7:26 pm

Re: MUST have WE for NU law?

Postby canuck » Wed Nov 17, 2010 6:31 pm

gambelda wrote:
hipstermafia wrote:
StateSchoolSplitter wrote:3 now, if I went for WE it would go up maybe .1 points

WE does not raise your gpa.


Yeah, the fuck? Anyways. There's really no reason you SHOULDN'T work before law school. See the millions of posts on this forums that describe the benefits associated with doing so. You will thank everyone later. Personally, I think any person who goes staright to law school deprives themselves of a number of opportunities.

Imagine when you graduate law school and realize you absolutely hate law....congrats, your 150K in debt, have no work experience, AND you experienced nothing when you had the chance. Now you don't have that chance because your debt follows you everywhere forcing you to work and/or off yourself. Personally, I favor the latter. Help control the population. HAVE YOUR HUMAN SPAID OR NEUTERED.


Getting all your education as early as possible is the only rational thing to do. Why spend years in a different career earning less than you would with your education?

whymeohgodno
Posts: 2508
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 8:15 pm

Re: MUST have WE for NU law?

Postby whymeohgodno » Wed Nov 17, 2010 7:02 pm

canuck wrote:
gambelda wrote:
hipstermafia wrote:
StateSchoolSplitter wrote:3 now, if I went for WE it would go up maybe .1 points

WE does not raise your gpa.


Yeah, the fuck? Anyways. There's really no reason you SHOULDN'T work before law school. See the millions of posts on this forums that describe the benefits associated with doing so. You will thank everyone later. Personally, I think any person who goes staright to law school deprives themselves of a number of opportunities.

Imagine when you graduate law school and realize you absolutely hate law....congrats, your 150K in debt, have no work experience, AND you experienced nothing when you had the chance. Now you don't have that chance because your debt follows you everywhere forcing you to work and/or off yourself. Personally, I favor the latter. Help control the population. HAVE YOUR HUMAN SPAID OR NEUTERED.


Getting all your education as early as possible is the only rational thing to do. Why spend years in a different career earning less than you would with your education?


This kind of blanket statement is stupid.

User avatar
rayiner
Posts: 6184
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 11:43 am

Re: MUST have WE for NU law?

Postby rayiner » Wed Nov 17, 2010 7:06 pm

canuck wrote:Getting all your education as early as possible is the only rational thing to do. Why spend years in a different career earning less than you would with your education?


You'll earn more having pre-LS experience. You'll do better at OCI which will give you enhanced job prospects down the line. You'll do better at school because you'll have some experience with managing real world demands on your time. You'll do better at life because you'll have some time to think about what you actually want to do instead of blindly stumbling into law school.

canuck
Posts: 222
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2010 7:26 pm

Re: MUST have WE for NU law?

Postby canuck » Wed Nov 17, 2010 7:39 pm

This is nice that you two have found a way to rationalize it to yourself, but the fact remains from an economic standpoint it's better to get educated first. Of course there are some benefits to having WE, but they don't outweigh the benefits of spending those years as a lawyer.

User avatar
Lwoods
Posts: 1484
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2010 7:27 am

Re: MUST have WE for NU law?

Postby Lwoods » Wed Nov 17, 2010 7:44 pm

rayiner wrote:
canuck wrote:Getting all your education as early as possible is the only rational thing to do. Why spend years in a different career earning less than you would with your education?


You'll earn more having pre-LS experience. You'll do better at OCI which will give you enhanced job prospects down the line. You'll do better at school because you'll have some experience with managing real world demands on your time. You'll do better at life because you'll have some time to think about what you actually want to do instead of blindly stumbling into law school.


+1

Also, why assume WE prior to LS will necessarily pay less than your eventual career without that WE? The typically practicing attorney makes roughly $70k/year. A first year analyst at any major bank makes over twice that.

McDeere
Posts: 86
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2010 1:24 am

Re: MUST have WE for NU law?

Postby McDeere » Wed Nov 17, 2010 7:51 pm

Someone said this to me before when I was considering NU. Only 2% or so of NU students have no we. Do you really want to be one of those couple of kids with zero we at OCIs?

User avatar
CryingMonkey
Posts: 150
Joined: Tue May 04, 2010 1:22 pm

Re: MUST have WE for NU law?

Postby CryingMonkey » Wed Nov 17, 2010 8:05 pm

canuck wrote:This is nice that you two have found a way to rationalize it to yourself, but the fact remains from an economic standpoint it's better to get educated first. Of course there are some benefits to having WE, but they don't outweigh the benefits of spending those years as a lawyer.


Throwing this out there, if a couple of years of WE leads to a better law school, you'll probably come out ahead in the long run. As an example, NU's median is 3.7/170. With those numbers, you aren't T-14 secure; with a couple years work experience, though, you have a good shot at NU. So working somewhere else for two years is the difference between NU and a shot at Biglaw and GW and a much, much smaller chance of making the big bucks. Looks like the benefits of that work experience outweighed the benefits of pushing straight through.

Also, the points about having WE leading to better OCI isn't a "rationalization"; if you go straight through and get passed over at OCI in favor of people with WE, then you made a poor economic choice.

Furthermore, the point about realizing after two years of LS that you hate the law isn't an unreasonable one; presumably, someone with some WE has at least an idea what's actually out there and will make a more informed decision about going to law school (instead of the not-at-all-uncommon I'm graduating and don't know what to do so I'm going to go to law school phenomenon).

That's just off the top of my head, it's clearly a ridiculous statement.

User avatar
mrmangs
Posts: 674
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 1:28 pm

Re: MUST have WE for NU law?

Postby mrmangs » Wed Nov 17, 2010 8:07 pm

rayiner wrote:
canuck wrote:Getting all your education as early as possible is the only rational thing to do. Why spend years in a different career earning less than you would with your education?


You'll earn more having pre-LS experience. You'll do better at OCI which will give you enhanced job prospects down the line. You'll do better at school because you'll have some experience with managing real world demands on your time. You'll do better at life because you'll have some time to think about what you actually want to do instead of blindly stumbling into law school.


This.

canuck
Posts: 222
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2010 7:26 pm

Re: MUST have WE for NU law?

Postby canuck » Wed Nov 17, 2010 8:29 pm

Agree to disagree

User avatar
Stringer Bell
Posts: 1914
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 9:43 pm

Re: MUST have WE for NU law?

Postby Stringer Bell » Wed Nov 17, 2010 8:35 pm

canuck wrote:This is nice that you two have found a way to rationalize it to yourself, but the fact remains from an economic standpoint it's better to get educated first. Of course there are some benefits to having WE, but they don't outweigh the benefits of spending those years as a lawyer.


So inaccurate

User avatar
im_blue
Posts: 3276
Joined: Sun Apr 12, 2009 3:53 am

Re: MUST have WE for NU law?

Postby im_blue » Wed Nov 17, 2010 8:41 pm

Only 2% of their most recent class did not have at least a year of full-time WE. http://www.law.northwestern.edu/admissions/profile/

Those 5-6 people typically have CCN numbers and impressive internships and other part-time experience.

User avatar
vanwinkle
Posts: 9740
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 3:02 am

Re: MUST have WE for NU law?

Postby vanwinkle » Thu Nov 18, 2010 11:20 pm

canuck wrote:This is nice that you two have found a way to rationalize it to yourself, but the fact remains from an economic standpoint it's better to get educated first. Of course there are some benefits to having WE, but they don't outweigh the benefits of spending those years as a lawyer.

Completely and ridiculously untrue. Let's break down the ways my 5 years of WE have helped me:

1) I could talk about maturity since UG, which helped turn focus away from my poor GPA and toward my high LSAT. (Maturity also told me to prep for the LSAT and take it very seriously, something I would not personally have known to do in UG, but nowadays TLS is here to tell you to do that if you don't know it already.)

2) I actually had more maturity, which helped me do remarkably well in 1L. Hint: 1L is really freaking hard. It is more like a real job than UG is. If you couldn't do better than a 3.0 in UG, you probably need the time and experience that real-world WE gives you in order to succeed. And that success is measured in terms of better 1L grades.

3) Awesome 1L grades + WE/maturity + other softs = HLS transfer.

4) Even at HLS there are better and worse performers ITE. Lots of folks come here thinking HLS = guaranteed V20/mad dollaz/G5, but it's not like that. But I had firms and PI orgs that LOVED my 1L grades and my WE. They both made me stand out, and since I doubt I would've gotten grades that high without the WE, both factors are due to the time off.

Everything--the T14 admission, the very successful 1L, the transfer to HLS, the job junt success--it's all connected to the additional skills and maturity I developed between UG and LS. It may also mean I'm less likely to burn out as a lawyer, since unlike folks who came straight through, I have a good idea what to expect when I graduate.

Economically, it's hard to tell how much I'll make in the future, but taking the best case scenario, it could be millions more total in my lifetime. That's assuming I would not have done nearly this well at every stage of law school if I'd gone straight in from UG, but I assure you that's a fair assumption. So much of your future success as a lawyer is based on what school you get into and how well you do there, and since WE helps there in a number of ways, it makes a huge difference over the span of your lifetime.

The only reason starting earlier makes better financial sense is if you would've had the same outcome either way. That view can seem to make sense hypothetically, but is simplistic and ignores reality. In reality, and this is true especially for folks with low GPAs like OP, some delay to prepare can cause lower short-term earnings but lay a foundation for success that eclipses anything you could've ever achieved without it.

User avatar
rayiner
Posts: 6184
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 11:43 am

Re: MUST have WE for NU law?

Postby rayiner » Fri Nov 19, 2010 12:30 am

I have to concur with ^^^.

I worked during UG and for two years before LS. As with vanwinkle, my UGPA sucked and my WE was instrumental in getting my into a T14. Then my WE helped tremendously in getting good grades, because I was used to working near burnout for weeks on end from my job. Then after 1L my WE was directly responsible for the 1L job I got, which factored prominently in my 2L job interviews. I ended up with offers at two of my biggest reaches and after talking to people at both firms I was told my WE was a big factor.

Working was hands down the best decision I've ever made. Without WE my outcome likely would've been epic failure.

User avatar
URMdan
Posts: 402
Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2010 8:03 pm

Re: MUST have WE for NU law?

Postby URMdan » Fri Nov 19, 2010 12:35 am

.
Last edited by URMdan on Fri Nov 19, 2010 12:47 am, edited 1 time in total.




Return to “Law School Admissions Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests