Cooley

(Applications Advice, Letters of Recommendation . . . )
ATR
Posts: 1118
Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 9:18 pm

Re: Cooley

Postby ATR » Thu Jan 20, 2011 12:39 am

TommyK wrote:Is it possible to untag a thread. :roll:

LOL at you deciding to tag a Cooley thread on TLS.

GreenHeels
Posts: 58
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 11:48 pm

Re: Cooley

Postby GreenHeels » Thu Jan 20, 2011 12:42 am

Without reading anything else but the thread title and the OP's question:

Does Cooley even require an LSAT score? If you're willing to pay for the ride, you can get on, as far as I know.

And, seriously, have you read anything about the legal job market today? Anyone who is seriously planning on going to Cooley needs to just throw their money in the Grand River (waterway through Lansing, MI, home of Cooley main campus - I lived in that town, it's lousy with waitress/busboy Cooley grads)

sethc
Posts: 208
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2010 1:55 pm

Re: Cooley

Postby sethc » Thu Jan 20, 2011 1:52 am

GreenHeels wrote:Without reading anything else but the thread title and the OP's question:

Does Cooley even require an LSAT score? If you're willing to pay for the ride, you can get on, as far as I know.

And, seriously, have you read anything about the legal job market today? Anyone who is seriously planning on going to Cooley needs to just throw their money in the Grand River (waterway through Lansing, MI, home of Cooley main campus - I lived in that town, it's lousy with waitress/busboy Cooley grads)



That's harsh.. have you been/do you go there? I mean no offense, I'm just wondering what your experience is. But to answer your question, I am pretty sure you have to have an LSAT score but I can't be certain. I do know that if it's below their "cutoff" or whatever you want to call it, they'll enroll you in one of those remedial/conditional classes or whatever.. but it seems like they're willing to work with you - that's worth something. I know they're a business and want to profit like most other businesses, but they could be much more devious.. low-tiers aren't quite the snake oil salesmen that a lot of them get the rep for, IMO. Reputation/prestige notwithstanding, I'm at a low-tier and felt pretty content with the overall quality of education. Put differently, I'm not so sure that I would have been any better educated after 1 term anywhere else.. (T25 notwithstanding) but I dunno, I could be way off. Maybe I lucked out on profs. I'll worry about job prospects along the way because that's contingent on grades no matter where you go.

r6_philly
Posts: 10707
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 4:32 pm

Re: Cooley

Postby r6_philly » Thu Jan 20, 2011 2:02 am

sethc wrote: Put differently, I'm not so sure that I would have been any better educated after 1 term anywhere else.. (T25 notwithstanding) but I dunno, I could be way off. Maybe I lucked out on profs. I'll worry about job prospects along the way because that's contingent on grades no matter where you go.


Most of us are not paying primarily for the education. As any other professional graduate programs, we are looking for benefits at/after graduation. The problem with low tiers is that the jobs that most people here want will never recruit at the low tiers. Since first year associate positions are slim, you would need a good GPA in a top school to get them, and there will not be many left over for low tiers. Not to say that you can't get jobs out of low tiers, but those jobs may not warrant going to law school. If the end result is a 45k-60k job, then there are other options at 1/3 of the price at 1/3 of time investment, or no cost at all if you use your BA/BS. So people buy into top schools for an upgrade in options that lower tiers can't deliver. They are all law schools, but they don't offer the same returns.

User avatar
DeeCee
Posts: 1352
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2010 4:09 am

Re: Cooley

Postby DeeCee » Thu Jan 20, 2011 2:07 am

r6_philly wrote:
sethc wrote: Put differently, I'm not so sure that I would have been any better educated after 1 term anywhere else.. (T25 notwithstanding) but I dunno, I could be way off. Maybe I lucked out on profs. I'll worry about job prospects along the way because that's contingent on grades no matter where you go.


Most of us are not paying primarily for the education. As any other professional graduate programs, we are looking for benefits at/after graduation. The problem with low tiers is that the jobs that most people here want will never recruit at the low tiers. Since first year associate positions are slim, you would need a good GPA in a top school to get them, and there will not be many left over for low tiers. Not to say that you can't get jobs out of low tiers, but those jobs may not warrant going to law school. If the end result is a 45k-60k job, then there are other options at 1/3 of the price at 1/3 of time investment, or no cost at all if you use your BA/BS. So people buy into top schools for an upgrade in options that lower tiers can't deliver. They are all law schools, but they don't offer the same returns.


+1000.

sethc
Posts: 208
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2010 1:55 pm

Re: Cooley

Postby sethc » Thu Jan 20, 2011 2:18 am

r6_philly wrote:
sethc wrote: Put differently, I'm not so sure that I would have been any better educated after 1 term anywhere else.. (T25 notwithstanding) but I dunno, I could be way off. Maybe I lucked out on profs. I'll worry about job prospects along the way because that's contingent on grades no matter where you go.


Most of us are not paying primarily for the education. As any other professional graduate programs, we are looking for benefits at/after graduation. The problem with low tiers is that the jobs that most people here want will never recruit at the low tiers. Since first year associate positions are slim, you would need a good GPA in a top school to get them, and there will not be many left over for low tiers. Not to say that you can't get jobs out of low tiers, but those jobs may not warrant going to law school. If the end result is a 45k-60k job, then there are other options at 1/3 of the price at 1/3 of time investment, or no cost at all if you use your BA/BS. So people buy into top schools for an upgrade in options that lower tiers can't deliver. They are all law schools, but they don't offer the same returns.


Oh, that makes sense. I just think that if that's the sole reason, then some people (not saying you) might be selling themselves short. I don't know, I mean I've always had a personal penchant for academic learning - so long as it was something I enjoyed & was interested in. I suppose it's not exactly a shock that people shoot to law school for income. Not saying that has nothing to do with my decision to go - I want to be able to live lol.. but 45-60K can be shitty as fuck or it can be avg/above avg living depending on where you're living/practicing. But, that's nothing new. I guess that just makes it all the more clear that I'm taking more of a personal/jaded look at it. I can definitely say that I wouldn't have a different outlook if I was anywhere else. I'd definitely be more stoked about the doors opening up for me, but I've alluded to it before I guess.. I enjoy the chance to prove myself. If I can get 5 minutes with an employer I deserve/want to work for, I know I can sell myself to at least advance on in the hiring process.. maybe not hired, of course, but I guess the point is that I think I can make lemons-->lemonade here. A little confidence is dangerous, sometimes.

r6_philly
Posts: 10707
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 4:32 pm

Re: Cooley

Postby r6_philly » Thu Jan 20, 2011 2:31 am

sethc wrote:Oh, that makes sense. I just think that if that's the sole reason, then some people (not saying you) might be selling themselves short. I don't know, I mean I've always had a personal penchant for academic learning - so long as it was something I enjoyed & was interested in. I suppose it's not exactly a shock that people shoot to law school for income. Not saying that has nothing to do with my decision to go - I want to be able to live lol.. but 45-60K can be shitty as fuck or it can be avg/above avg living depending on where you're living/practicing. But, that's nothing new. I guess that just makes it all the more clear that I'm taking more of a personal/jaded look at it. I can definitely say that I wouldn't have a different outlook if I was anywhere else. I'd definitely be more stoked about the doors opening up for me, but I've alluded to it before I guess.. I enjoy the chance to prove myself. If I can get 5 minutes with an employer I deserve/want to work for, I know I can sell myself to at least advance on in the hiring process.. maybe not hired, of course, but I guess the point is that I think I can make lemons-->lemonade here. A little confidence is dangerous, sometimes.


That makes sense, but traditionally if you want to pursue your intellectual curiosity you go for a PhD which is an academic/research/scholarly degree. Law, as well as med, vet, dental, etc. are professional degrees - which are really just post-bac vocational training. PhDs allow you to learn, research, explore and contribute to the discipline, while professional doctorates just hone your skills at doing a job. If you are interested in legal studies, you can go for a JSD, which is not as competitive as JDs. The reason JD admission is so competitive (and MD as well) is because people are rushing in to make money. Graduate legal degrees (and other advanced academic/research degrees) are easier to get into in comparison because they don't offer the same income potential.

User avatar
DeeCee
Posts: 1352
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2010 4:09 am

Re: Cooley

Postby DeeCee » Thu Jan 20, 2011 2:39 am

r6_philly wrote:
sethc wrote:Oh, that makes sense. I just think that if that's the sole reason, then some people (not saying you) might be selling themselves short. I don't know, I mean I've always had a personal penchant for academic learning - so long as it was something I enjoyed & was interested in. I suppose it's not exactly a shock that people shoot to law school for income. Not saying that has nothing to do with my decision to go - I want to be able to live lol.. but 45-60K can be shitty as fuck or it can be avg/above avg living depending on where you're living/practicing. But, that's nothing new. I guess that just makes it all the more clear that I'm taking more of a personal/jaded look at it. I can definitely say that I wouldn't have a different outlook if I was anywhere else. I'd definitely be more stoked about the doors opening up for me, but I've alluded to it before I guess.. I enjoy the chance to prove myself. If I can get 5 minutes with an employer I deserve/want to work for, I know I can sell myself to at least advance on in the hiring process.. maybe not hired, of course, but I guess the point is that I think I can make lemons-->lemonade here. A little confidence is dangerous, sometimes.


That makes sense, but traditionally if you want to pursue your intellectual curiosity you go for a PhD which is an academic/research/scholarly degree. Law, as well as med, vet, dental, etc. are professional degrees - which are really just post-bac vocational training. PhDs allow you to learn, research, explore and contribute to the discipline, while professional doctorates just hone your skills at doing a job. If you are interested in legal studies, you can go for a JSD, which is not as competitive as JDs. The reason JD admission is so competitive (and MD as well) is because people are rushing in to make money. Graduate legal degrees (and other advanced academic/research degrees) are easier to get into in comparison because they don't offer the same income potential.


PhDs offer decent income potential (if you can find a job; there are a glut of PhDs, just like JDs). But unlike a JD, they help with expenses though assistantship/teaching position pay, and often $$ for tuition through grants and awards. If you love learning a PhD is more your route, as r6_philly stated above.

sethc
Posts: 208
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2010 1:55 pm

Re: Cooley

Postby sethc » Thu Jan 20, 2011 2:52 am

r6_philly wrote:
sethc wrote:Oh, that makes sense. I just think that if that's the sole reason, then some people (not saying you) might be selling themselves short. I don't know, I mean I've always had a personal penchant for academic learning - so long as it was something I enjoyed & was interested in. I suppose it's not exactly a shock that people shoot to law school for income. Not saying that has nothing to do with my decision to go - I want to be able to live lol.. but 45-60K can be shitty as fuck or it can be avg/above avg living depending on where you're living/practicing. But, that's nothing new. I guess that just makes it all the more clear that I'm taking more of a personal/jaded look at it. I can definitely say that I wouldn't have a different outlook if I was anywhere else. I'd definitely be more stoked about the doors opening up for me, but I've alluded to it before I guess.. I enjoy the chance to prove myself. If I can get 5 minutes with an employer I deserve/want to work for, I know I can sell myself to at least advance on in the hiring process.. maybe not hired, of course, but I guess the point is that I think I can make lemons-->lemonade here. A little confidence is dangerous, sometimes.


That makes sense, but traditionally if you want to pursue your intellectual curiosity you go for a PhD which is an academic/research/scholarly degree. Law, as well as med, vet, dental, etc. are professional degrees - which are really just post-bac vocational training. PhDs allow you to learn, research, explore and contribute to the discipline, while professional doctorates just hone your skills at doing a job. If you are interested in legal studies, you can go for a JSD, which is not as competitive as JDs. The reason JD admission is so competitive (and MD as well) is because people are rushing in to make money. Graduate legal degrees (and other advanced academic/research degrees) are easier to get into in comparison because they don't offer the same income potential.


That's true, and I may wind up doing that one day who knows. But I enjoy the aspect of defending & helping in conjunction with the education. I am very fascinated by research (most notably sociological) and have always took an interest. I do like the mix of practical + academic, however.

thmgoodw
Posts: 36
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 6:26 pm

Re: Cooley

Postby thmgoodw » Thu Jan 20, 2011 2:17 pm

esq wrote:Last year UVA Law had 8,560 students apply. Each director would have had to field 4280 interviews, on top of their other responsibilities. If performed back to back each director would spend 1070 hrs interviewing, which would be 26.75 (27 wks) 40hr work weeks, 6.69 (7 mos) 4 week months.



I think you are assuming that the admission committee would do the actual interviewing. For business school, while admissions folks might do a few, most often schools have current students do the interviewing on campus, and alumni do the interviewing for people who can't make it to campus.

In addition, there needs to be some sort of cut off in terms of who gets an interview, so not all 8560 would get interviews.

User avatar
androstan
Posts: 3662
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 8:07 am

Re: Cooley

Postby androstan » Thu Jan 20, 2011 2:34 pm

thmgoodw wrote:
esq wrote:Last year UVA Law had 8,560 students apply. Each director would have had to field 4280 interviews, on top of their other responsibilities. If performed back to back each director would spend 1070 hrs interviewing, which would be 26.75 (27 wks) 40hr work weeks, 6.69 (7 mos) 4 week months.



I think you are assuming that the admission committee would do the actual interviewing. For business school, while admissions folks might do a few, most often schools have current students do the interviewing on campus, and alumni do the interviewing for people who can't make it to campus.

In addition, there needs to be some sort of cut off in terms of who gets an interview, so not all 8560 would get interviews.


Agreed, a prescreening based on PS/GPA/LSAT/etc. to autoding obviously weak and/or unqualified applicants (under both 25th percentiles, unremarkable PS, unremarkable softs). A quick phone interview to to weed out a bit more chaff. I don't know how many fewer interviews you'd have to do, but probably significantly fewer.

GreenHeels
Posts: 58
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 11:48 pm

Re: Cooley

Postby GreenHeels » Thu Jan 20, 2011 4:50 pm

sethc wrote:A little confidence is dangerous, sometimes.


This is the correct answer. And the confidence that those Cooley people have that it "won't be me" that ends up bussing the tables is the pitfall that lead a ton down the road to worthless debt.

And while I have obviously never attended Cooley, my assessment is not in the least bit harsh. The school is not ABA accredited. They are a cereal box degree mill. Anyone who does a half hour of serious research on them will find out Cooley has 0 cache in the legal community. You are absolutely better off getting a non-law professional degree from Local State U than paying the way for a Cooley degree. The only way to dispute these facts is to trot out the anecdotal "I/my friend/my mom went to Cooley and SHE'S a lawyer." Yes, some Cooley grads are employed as attorneys. This does nothing to alter the general landscape of faaaaar more Cooley grads sitting out there gnashing.

Good luck.

User avatar
fundamentallybroken
Posts: 663
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2010 11:52 am

Re: Cooley

Postby fundamentallybroken » Thu Jan 20, 2011 5:21 pm

GreenHeels wrote:
sethc wrote:A little confidence is dangerous, sometimes.


This is the correct answer. And the confidence that those Cooley people have that it "won't be me" that ends up bussing the tables is the pitfall that lead a ton down the road to worthless debt.

And while I have obviously never attended Cooley, my assessment is not in the least bit harsh. The school is not ABA accredited. They are a cereal box degree mill. Anyone who does a half hour of serious research on them will find out Cooley has 0 cache in the legal community. You are absolutely better off getting a non-law professional degree from Local State U than paying the way for a Cooley degree. The only way to dispute these facts is to trot out the anecdotal "I/my friend/my mom went to Cooley and SHE'S a lawyer." Yes, some Cooley grads are employed as attorneys. This does nothing to alter the general landscape of faaaaar more Cooley grads sitting out there gnashing.

Good luck.


I can't believe this thread made it to 8 pages - yikes.

I'm not a Cooley, and don't disagree with most of what you said. However, I must point out that Cooley is, in fact, ABA accredited.

GreenHeels
Posts: 58
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 11:48 pm

Re: Cooley

Postby GreenHeels » Thu Jan 20, 2011 5:43 pm

fundamentallybroken wrote:
GreenHeels wrote:
sethc wrote:A little confidence is dangerous, sometimes.


This is the correct answer. And the confidence that those Cooley people have that it "won't be me" that ends up bussing the tables is the pitfall that lead a ton down the road to worthless debt.

And while I have obviously never attended Cooley, my assessment is not in the least bit harsh. The school is not ABA accredited. They are a cereal box degree mill. Anyone who does a half hour of serious research on them will find out Cooley has 0 cache in the legal community. You are absolutely better off getting a non-law professional degree from Local State U than paying the way for a Cooley degree. The only way to dispute these facts is to trot out the anecdotal "I/my friend/my mom went to Cooley and SHE'S a lawyer." Yes, some Cooley grads are employed as attorneys. This does nothing to alter the general landscape of faaaaar more Cooley grads sitting out there gnashing.

Good luck.


I can't believe this thread made it to 8 pages - yikes.

I'm not a Cooley, and don't disagree with most of what you said. However, I must point out that Cooley is, in fact, ABA accredited.



I stand absolutely corrected. I was thinking of the fact that they had to sue to get their satellites accredited, which the ABA did, eventually. Their reputation is just so bad, I got it in my head they couldn't even muster the slightest shred of credibility.

User avatar
androstan
Posts: 3662
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 8:07 am

Re: Cooley

Postby androstan » Thu Jan 20, 2011 6:51 pm

thread wrote:Cooley.


lol

User avatar
gothamm
Posts: 506
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2010 12:10 am

Re: Cooley

Postby gothamm » Fri Jan 21, 2011 8:59 am

northwood wrote:I think all schools should have some sort of screening interview.



this would be highly, highly inefficient. Not to mention the overhead costs.

User avatar
danquayle
Posts: 1108
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 2:12 am

Re: Cooley

Postby danquayle » Fri Jan 21, 2011 9:48 am

gothamm wrote:
northwood wrote:I think all schools should have some sort of screening interview.



this would be highly, highly inefficient. Not to mention the overhead costs.


Again, what makes this possible for law school but not for business school? An ideal lawyer should be just as well spoken and personable as an ideal businessman, if not more.

sethc
Posts: 208
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2010 1:55 pm

Re: Cooley

Postby sethc » Fri Jan 21, 2011 10:07 am

Agree, this could be contracted to some kind of independent company to handle.. or better yet, like I had mentioned earlier, let the ABA/LSAC shoulder some of the cost so the schools will (a) get some subsidy to help with time/$ & (b) buy-in or credibility for the screening process & (c) it would greatly help reduce the negative "unfair" stigma of the LSAT. I can't imagine that would be a bad thing with the way the legal job market is right now, IMO.

User avatar
DubPoker
Posts: 211
Joined: Wed May 06, 2009 4:13 pm

Re: Cooley

Postby DubPoker » Fri Jan 21, 2011 8:05 pm

This may have been posted in this thread or somewhere else, but I just came across it on cooley's website.

Cooling considers itself ranked 12 out of every law school in the nation (--LinkRemoved--)* Before I felt it bad mannered to insult Cooley fer lolz, but common they put themselves in front of Stanford? lolz. more info on it http://politicalcartel.org/2010/03/03/t ... rrassment/

*2008 estimates of course

User avatar
bk1
Posts: 19125
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:06 pm

Re: Cooley

Postby bk1 » Fri Jan 21, 2011 8:06 pm

DubPoker wrote:This may have been posted in this thread or somewhere else, but I just came across it on cooley's website.

Cooling considers itself ranked 12 out of every law school in the nation (--LinkRemoved--)* Before I felt it bad mannered to insult Cooley fer lolz, but common they put themselves in front of Stanford? lolz. more info on it http://politicalcartel.org/2010/03/03/t ... rrassment/

*2008 estimates of course


Thanks for the relevant info that nobody has ever seen before.

User avatar
bergg007
Posts: 412
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 12:21 am

Re: Cooley

Postby bergg007 » Fri Jan 21, 2011 8:18 pm

DubPoker wrote:This may have been posted in this thread or somewhere else, but I just came across it on cooley's website.

Cooling considers itself ranked 12 out of every law school in the nation (--LinkRemoved--)* Before I felt it bad mannered to insult Cooley fer lolz, but common they put themselves in front of Stanford? lolz. more info on it http://politicalcartel.org/2010/03/03/t ... rrassment/

*2008 estimates of course

I'd never seen this before but i laughed pretty hard. I love how total law school square footage is calculated and considered equal to Bar passage rate. And even then Cooley is #12. hahahahaha

User avatar
DubPoker
Posts: 211
Joined: Wed May 06, 2009 4:13 pm

Re: Cooley

Postby DubPoker » Fri Jan 21, 2011 8:50 pm

bk1 wrote:Thanks for the relevant info that nobody has ever seen before.

That is why I posted the disclaimer
DubPoker wrote:This may have been posted in this thread or somewhere else, but I just came across it on cooley's website.

sorry for upsetting you

edit: I honestly thought it was too awesome to not have been posted already, but I have not seen it and I've been lurking for a while

User avatar
TJISMYHERO
Posts: 291
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2010 1:14 pm

Re: Cooley

Postby TJISMYHERO » Fri Jan 21, 2011 10:21 pm

I had not seen it. I had heard of it, but never actually seen it. I'm amazed honestly that they obviously feel some people (their prospectives) will buy that.

User avatar
retake
Posts: 64
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2011 10:08 pm

Re: Cooley

Postby retake » Fri Jan 21, 2011 10:24 pm

retake

User avatar
TommyK
Posts: 1309
Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2010 3:08 pm

Re: Cooley

Postby TommyK » Fri Jan 21, 2011 11:08 pm

TJISMYHERO wrote:I had not seen it. I had heard of it, but never actually seen it. I'm amazed honestly that they obviously feel some people (their prospectives) will buy that.


When your target student population are those who did not do very well on the LSAT, there's a solid chance they don't have the logical reasoning skills to identify the problems with the ranking.




Return to “Law School Admissions Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: calmike, ghytu48 and 3 guests