Just read Don't Go to Law School (Unless)

(Applications Advice, Letters of Recommendation . . . )
User avatar
dingbat
Posts: 4976
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 9:12 pm

Re: Just read Don't Go to Law School (Unless)

Postby dingbat » Tue Oct 23, 2012 9:34 pm

JCougar wrote: I doubt $20K in NYC is very doable for a practicing lawyer.

$20k is barely doable in NY if you're a bum

User avatar
megagnarley
Posts: 497
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2012 1:58 am

Re: Just read Don't Go to Law School (Unless)

Postby megagnarley » Tue Oct 23, 2012 9:34 pm

JCougar wrote:
megagnarley wrote:It's blowing my mind that people are approaching these numbers as if they will be subject to them as if by an unalterable force.

30% (arbitrary) of people don't make big law therefore any one person's odds are 30%? Sure, if you assume that it is based entirely on factors outside of your control.

The fact is that it is in your control to a large extent. If you are awful at interviews, not the best student, having drinking problems--the concern is elevated. And even if you are a complete stud, there is always a chance you will "strike out."

But the fact of the matter is you have far more control than is assumed by looking at these numbers and assuming you can do nothing to affect them.

The ball is in your court. Swing.


You must be an 0L. Welcome. You're in for a surprise.


Pray tell...

And if you intend to say anything to the tune of "One has no bearing over his/her own odds of succeeding at OCI's" well...that is ludicrous.

User avatar
bk1
Posts: 18414
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:06 pm

Re: Just read Don't Go to Law School (Unless)

Postby bk1 » Tue Oct 23, 2012 9:37 pm

megagnarley wrote:Pray tell...

And if you intend to say anything to the tune of "One has no bearing over his/her own odds of succeeding at OCI's" well...that is ludicrous.


Protip:

You're competing against people working just as hard and who are just as competent as you are. You have control over yourself but when you have to deal with a curve it's not just you that matters.

User avatar
dingbat
Posts: 4976
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 9:12 pm

Re: Just read Don't Go to Law School (Unless)

Postby dingbat » Tue Oct 23, 2012 9:40 pm

megagnarley wrote:
JCougar wrote:
megagnarley wrote:It's blowing my mind that people are approaching these numbers as if they will be subject to them as if by an unalterable force.

30% (arbitrary) of people don't make big law therefore any one person's odds are 30%? Sure, if you assume that it is based entirely on factors outside of your control.

The fact is that it is in your control to a large extent. If you are awful at interviews, not the best student, having drinking problems--the concern is elevated. And even if you are a complete stud, there is always a chance you will "strike out."

But the fact of the matter is you have far more control than is assumed by looking at these numbers and assuming you can do nothing to affect them.

The ball is in your court. Swing.


You must be an 0L. Welcome. You're in for a surprise.


Pray tell...

And if you intend to say anything to the tune of "One has no bearing over his/her own odds of succeeding at OCI's" well...that is ludicrous.

To sum up: almost everybody who goes to the same law school is of more or less the same level of intelligence and works more or less just as hard as everyone else. You are not smarter than your classmates. You will not work harder than your classmates, nor will working harder guarantee you better grades.
You do not know how well you will do in law school until you're actually in law school (either you "get it" or you don't), therefore, before you start law school, you have no way of knowing if you're gonna be at the top or the bottom of the pile. Even then, while class rank correlates to employment prospects, you could strike out for a number of reasons (bad bid strategy, bad interview skills, bad luck, etc).
The only fact is that X% get biglaw and Y% get employed. Therefore, you should assume your chances of getting biglaw is X% and your chance of getting a job is Y%

User avatar
megagnarley
Posts: 497
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2012 1:58 am

Re: Just read Don't Go to Law School (Unless)

Postby megagnarley » Tue Oct 23, 2012 9:40 pm

bk1 wrote:
megagnarley wrote:Pray tell...

And if you intend to say anything to the tune of "One has no bearing over his/her own odds of succeeding at OCI's" well...that is ludicrous.


Protip:

You're competing against people working just as hard and who are just as competent as you are. You have control over yourself but when you have to deal with a curve it's not just you that matters.


Point to where I said it is only you that matters. I did not.

I said you are more in control than simply being a product of a years employment statistics.

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

Re: Just read Don't Go to Law School (Unless)

Postby vanwinkle » Tue Oct 23, 2012 9:42 pm

megagnarley wrote:
bk1 wrote:
megagnarley wrote:Pray tell...

And if you intend to say anything to the tune of "One has no bearing over his/her own odds of succeeding at OCI's" well...that is ludicrous.


Protip:

You're competing against people working just as hard and who are just as competent as you are. You have control over yourself but when you have to deal with a curve it's not just you that matters.

Point to where I said it is only you that matters. I did not.

I said you are more in control than simply being a product of a years employment statistics.

And you are wrong in saying that.

bhan87
Posts: 850
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2007 8:08 pm

Re: Just read Don't Go to Law School (Unless)

Postby bhan87 » Tue Oct 23, 2012 9:44 pm

megagnarley wrote:
bk1 wrote:
megagnarley wrote:Pray tell...

And if you intend to say anything to the tune of "One has no bearing over his/her own odds of succeeding at OCI's" well...that is ludicrous.


Protip:

You're competing against people working just as hard and who are just as competent as you are. You have control over yourself but when you have to deal with a curve it's not just you that matters.


Point to where I said it is only you that matters. I did not.

I said you are more in control than simply being a product of a years employment statistics.


And you were promptly smacked down for assuming you have more control than you actually have because:

dingbat wrote:To sum up: almost everybody who goes to the same law school is of more or less the same level of intelligence and works more or less just as hard as everyone else. You are not smarter than your classmates. You will not work harder than your classmates, nor will working harder guarantee you better grades.
You do not know how well you will do in law school until you're actually in law school (either you "get it" or you don't), therefore, before you start law school, you have no way of knowing if you're gonna be at the top or the bottom of the pile. Even then, while class rank correlates to employment prospects, you could strike out for a number of reasons (bad bid strategy, bad interview skills, bad luck, etc).
The only fact is that X% get biglaw and Y% get employed. Therefore, you should assume your chances of getting biglaw is X% and your chance of getting a job is Y%

User avatar
Tiago Splitter
Posts: 15477
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 1:20 am

Re: Just read Don't Go to Law School (Unless)

Postby Tiago Splitter » Tue Oct 23, 2012 9:44 pm

megagnarley wrote:The ball is in your court. Swing.


Swing for that touchdown baby.

User avatar
sinfiery
Posts: 3308
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 2:55 am

Re: Just read Don't Go to Law School (Unless)

Postby sinfiery » Tue Oct 23, 2012 9:46 pm

dingbat wrote:To sum up: almost everybody who goes to the same law school is of more or less the same level of intelligence and works more or less just as hard as everyone else. You are not smarter than your classmates. You will not work harder than your classmates, nor will working harder guarantee you better grades.
You do not know how well you will do in law school until you're actually in law school (either you "get it" or you don't), therefore, before you start law school, you have no way of knowing if you're gonna be at the top or the bottom of the pile. Even then, while class rank correlates to employment prospects, you could strike out for a number of reasons (bad bid strategy, bad interview skills, bad luck, etc).
The only fact is that X% get biglaw and Y% get employed. Therefore, you should assume your chances of getting biglaw is X% and your chance of getting a job is Y%

I am curious why this is different from your UG institution.
Weren't they largely based on SAT/ACT scores (Which apparently are less learnable than the LSAT) and GPA? which correlates to hard work?

UG really didn't work out that way. Why would law school be different?

User avatar
bk1
Posts: 18414
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:06 pm

Re: Just read Don't Go to Law School (Unless)

Postby bk1 » Tue Oct 23, 2012 9:46 pm

Tiago Splitter wrote:
megagnarley wrote:The ball is in your court. Swing.


Swing for that touchdown baby.


Struck out throwing an interception.

User avatar
Tiago Splitter
Posts: 15477
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 1:20 am

Re: Just read Don't Go to Law School (Unless)

Postby Tiago Splitter » Tue Oct 23, 2012 9:47 pm

sinfiery wrote:I am curious why this is different from your UG institution.
Weren't they largely based on SAT/ACT scores (Which apparently are less learnable than the LSAT) and GPA? which correlates to hard work?

UG really didn't work out that way. Why would law school be different?

There isn't a forced curve in undergrad, for the most part. If you put in the right amount of effort you were guaranteed a high GPA.
Last edited by Tiago Splitter on Tue Oct 23, 2012 9:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
dingbat
Posts: 4976
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 9:12 pm

Re: Just read Don't Go to Law School (Unless)

Postby dingbat » Tue Oct 23, 2012 9:48 pm

On that note, I've already figured out who will be best and who will be worst in our section. Unfortunately, the rest of the class isn't quite as easy to spot.

(coincidentally, someone whose LSAT was way way way above 75% and someone who got pulled off the waitlist at the end of July)

User avatar
sinfiery
Posts: 3308
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 2:55 am

Re: Just read Don't Go to Law School (Unless)

Postby sinfiery » Tue Oct 23, 2012 9:52 pm

Tiago Splitter wrote:
sinfiery wrote:I am curious why this is different from your UG institution.
Weren't they largely based on SAT/ACT scores (Which apparently are less learnable than the LSAT) and GPA? which correlates to hard work?

UG really didn't work out that way. Why would law school be different?

There isn't a forced curve in undergrad, for the most part. If you put in the right amount of effort you were guaranteed a high GPA.

Eh, there kind of was for most of my classes. Roughly 10-15% got As. Most got B/Cs. Every single class.
I guess if everyone got a 90+ the professor wouldn't have changed the grades to 95+ is only an A but that never happened.

But the biggest comment I can make is that the peoplein my UG definitely weren't as hardworking/smart as me in my UG institution.


The LSAT/ACT/SAT aren't perfect indicators of intelligence. HS/UG GPA isn't a perfect indicator of how hard the person will be willing to work.

You guys are simplifying the formula because you want a formula. There really isn't one though. I will give you that is one place to start, but from personal experience, there wasn't a strong correlation in UG and the same potential can exist in LS.
Last edited by sinfiery on Tue Oct 23, 2012 9:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
megagnarley
Posts: 497
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2012 1:58 am

Re: Just read Don't Go to Law School (Unless)

Postby megagnarley » Tue Oct 23, 2012 9:53 pm

dingbat wrote:
megagnarley wrote:
JCougar wrote:
megagnarley wrote:It's blowing my mind that people are approaching these numbers as if they will be subject to them as if by an unalterable force.

30% (arbitrary) of people don't make big law therefore any one person's odds are 30%? Sure, if you assume that it is based entirely on factors outside of your control.

The fact is that it is in your control to a large extent. If you are awful at interviews, not the best student, having drinking problems--the concern is elevated. And even if you are a complete stud, there is always a chance you will "strike out."

But the fact of the matter is you have far more control than is assumed by looking at these numbers and assuming you can do nothing to affect them.

The ball is in your court. Swing.


You must be an 0L. Welcome. You're in for a surprise.


Pray tell...

And if you intend to say anything to the tune of "One has no bearing over his/her own odds of succeeding at OCI's" well...that is ludicrous.

To sum up: almost everybody who goes to the same law school is of more or less the same level of intelligence and works more or less just as hard as everyone else. You are not smarter than your classmates. You will not work harder than your classmates, nor will working harder guarantee you better grades.
You do not know how well you will do in law school until you're actually in law school (either you "get it" or you don't), therefore, before you start law school, you have no way of knowing if you're gonna be at the top or the bottom of the pile. Even then, while class rank correlates to employment prospects, you could strike out for a number of reasons (bad bid strategy, bad interview skills, bad luck, etc).
The only fact is that X% get biglaw and Y% get employed. Therefore, you should assume your chances of getting biglaw is X% and your chance of getting a job is Y%


In principle, I disagree.

Assuming that everyone at the same law school (actually ALL law schools, as your argument implies), is of the same intelligence is simply not true. There are far more things that factor into intelligence than is able to be quantified by the adcoms, meaning there is unequivocally varying levels of intelligence, especially given the fact that even in that incredibly narrow scope there exists variance. (Ex. Just because a student with a 3.3/175 and a 3.9/169 got into the same school only implies they are of equal intelligence in the vaguest of situational standings).

Beyond that, there are myriad factors which contribute to success, many of which are determined by your approach while in law school and not simply by number of hours logged.

Yes, luck undoubtedly plays a role in many circumstances, but that does not mean the individual is incapable of effecting his/her own circumstance. Beyond law school, that holds true in any personal/professional undertaking.
Last edited by megagnarley on Tue Oct 23, 2012 10:00 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
justonemoregame
Posts: 1160
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 3:51 pm

Re: Just read Don't Go to Law School (Unless)

Postby justonemoregame » Tue Oct 23, 2012 9:53 pm

sinfiery: why the law school market will never fix itself.

User avatar
sinfiery
Posts: 3308
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 2:55 am

Re: Just read Don't Go to Law School (Unless)

Postby sinfiery » Tue Oct 23, 2012 9:56 pm

justonemoregame wrote:sinfiery: why the law school market will never fix itself.

I'm starting to think TLS exists to fix the market and I'm ruining the giant troll that current LS and current JDs are working on to accelerate the fix to the market themselves

User avatar
megagnarley
Posts: 497
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2012 1:58 am

Re: Just read Don't Go to Law School (Unless)

Postby megagnarley » Tue Oct 23, 2012 9:58 pm

vanwinkle wrote:
megagnarley wrote:
bk1 wrote:
megagnarley wrote:Pray tell...

And if you intend to say anything to the tune of "One has no bearing over his/her own odds of succeeding at OCI's" well...that is ludicrous.


Protip:

You're competing against people working just as hard and who are just as competent as you are. You have control over yourself but when you have to deal with a curve it's not just you that matters.

Point to where I said it is only you that matters. I did not.

I said you are more in control than simply being a product of a years employment statistics.

And you are wrong in saying that.


Correct. These are facts, not opinions. Well put.

bhan87
Posts: 850
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2007 8:08 pm

Re: Just read Don't Go to Law School (Unless)

Postby bhan87 » Tue Oct 23, 2012 9:59 pm

megagnarley wrote:In principle, I disagree.

Assuming that everyone at the same law school (actually ALL law schools, as your argument implies), is of the same intelligence is simply not true. There are far more things that factor into intelligence than is able to be quantified by the adcoms, meaning there is unequivocally varying levels of intelligence, especially given the fact that even in that incredibly narrow scope there exists variance. (Ex. Just because a student with a 3.3/175 and a 3.9/169 got into the same school only implies they are of equal intelligence in the vaguest of situational standings).

Beyond that, there are myriad factors which contribute to success, many of which are determined by your approach while in law school and not simply by number of hours logged.

Yes, luck undoubtedly plays a role in many circumstances, but that does not mean the individual is incapable of effecting his/her own circumstance. Beyond law school, that does not hold true in any personal/professional undertaking.


Again, you seem to be missing the point. It's not like you can work harder than your classmates to a significant degree because all your classmates are going to be working pretty damn hard as well. The level of commitment is about all you can control (doing more reading, more supplements, more practice tests, etc.), but even if you maximized this commitment, it guarantees nothing. Some of the people who spent the most time studying at my school ended up at the bottom while there are those that goofed around and played computer games every night ended up at the top.

User avatar
minnbills
Posts: 3153
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2010 2:04 pm

Re: Just read Don't Go to Law School (Unless)

Postby minnbills » Tue Oct 23, 2012 10:00 pm

dingbat wrote:On that note, I've already figured out who will be best and who will be worst in our section. Unfortunately, the rest of the class isn't quite as easy to spot.


Same. ugh.

User avatar
dingbat
Posts: 4976
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 9:12 pm

Re: Just read Don't Go to Law School (Unless)

Postby dingbat » Tue Oct 23, 2012 10:00 pm

sinfiery wrote:
Tiago Splitter wrote:
sinfiery wrote:I am curious why this is different from your UG institution.
Weren't they largely based on SAT/ACT scores (Which apparently are less learnable than the LSAT) and GPA? which correlates to hard work?

UG really didn't work out that way. Why would law school be different?

There isn't a forced curve in undergrad, for the most part. If you put in the right amount of effort you were guaranteed a high GPA.

Eh, there kind of was for most of my classes. Roughly 10-15% got As. Most got B/Cs. Every single class.
I guess if everyone got a 90+ the professor wouldn't have changed the grades to 95+ is only an A but that never happened.

But the biggest comment I can make is that the people aren't me definitely weren't as hardworking/smart as me in my UG institution.


The LSAT/ACT/SAT aren't perfect indicators of intelligence. HS/UG GPA isn't a perfect indicator of how hard the person will be willing to work.

You guys are simplifying the formula because you want a formula. There really isn't one though. I will give you that is one place to start, but from personal experience, there wasn't a strong correlation in UG and the same potential can exist in LS.
I'm sure this is true at plenty of law schools, but not so much at the better ones, where everyone has excellent credentials. Not a single non-TTT has a 25% GPA lower than 3.0, and just about every school in the top 50 has a median over 3.5. With respect to LSAT, you generally need to be in the top 5% of all test takers to get into the T14.
No one is "simplifying the formula", as you said, there is no formula. However, it's a good proxy. You'll find thread after thread here about how law students discover at the end of the year that they didn't do anywhere near as well as they thought. Ok, it's not true that every student hopes to be in the top 10%, nor does every student plan to work hard and expect to excel, just the vast majority. Most of those will be disappointed.
There's a guy at my school who'se already slept in the library. Half my section is putting in 12 hour days. Want to know how many will be top of the class?

User avatar
bk1
Posts: 18414
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:06 pm

Re: Just read Don't Go to Law School (Unless)

Postby bk1 » Tue Oct 23, 2012 10:01 pm

ITT: A special snowflake.

User avatar
sinfiery
Posts: 3308
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 2:55 am

Re: Just read Don't Go to Law School (Unless)

Postby sinfiery » Tue Oct 23, 2012 10:04 pm

dingbat wrote:I'm sure this is true at plenty of law schools, but not so much at the better ones, where everyone has excellent credentials. Not a single non-TTT has a 25% GPA lower than 3.0, and just about every school in the top 50 has a median over 3.5. With respect to LSAT, you generally need to be in the top 5% of all test takers to get into the T14.
No one is "simplifying the formula", as you said, there is no formula. However, it's a good proxy. You'll find thread after thread here about how law students discover at the end of the year that they didn't do anywhere near as well as they thought. Ok, it's not true that every student hopes to be in the top 10%, nor does every student plan to work hard and expect to excel, just the vast majority. Most of those will be disappointed.
There's a guy at my school who'se already slept in the library. Half my section is putting in 12 hour days. Want to know how many will be top of the class?

Lol, I've been waiting my whole life for such competition. Can't wait.
I've got chills.

User avatar
Tiago Splitter
Posts: 15477
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 1:20 am

Re: Just read Don't Go to Law School (Unless)

Postby Tiago Splitter » Tue Oct 23, 2012 10:07 pm

sinfiery wrote:Eh, there kind of was for most of my classes. Roughly 10-15% got As. Most got B/Cs. Every single class.
I guess if everyone got a 90+ the professor wouldn't have changed the grades to 95+ is only an A but that never happened.


But this wouldn't happen in law school. That's the point; people in undergrad can put in the work and guarantee themselves good if not perfect grades. And grades matter in law school in a way that they simply don't in undergrad. C's get degrees is a famous phrase for a reason. Plenty of the UG class at most schools will put in just enough effort to get a B/C and that gives those of you who actually care about getting good grades the chance to stand out, even in the face of a curve. In law school everybody knows how important 1L grades are, so everybody puts their best foot forward. I'm a prime example of this--I didn't put any feet forward in undergrad because I figured it didn't matter. Not the story any longer.

User avatar
megagnarley
Posts: 497
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2012 1:58 am

Re: Just read Don't Go to Law School (Unless)

Postby megagnarley » Tue Oct 23, 2012 10:11 pm

bhan87 wrote:
megagnarley wrote:In principle, I disagree.

Assuming that everyone at the same law school (actually ALL law schools, as your argument implies), is of the same intelligence is simply not true. There are far more things that factor into intelligence than is able to be quantified by the adcoms, meaning there is unequivocally varying levels of intelligence, especially given the fact that even in that incredibly narrow scope there exists variance. (Ex. Just because a student with a 3.3/175 and a 3.9/169 got into the same school only implies they are of equal intelligence in the vaguest of situational standings).

Beyond that, there are myriad factors which contribute to success, many of which are determined by your approach while in law school and not simply by number of hours logged.

Yes, luck undoubtedly plays a role in many circumstances, but that does not mean the individual is incapable of effecting his/her own circumstance. Beyond law school, that does not hold true in any personal/professional undertaking.


Again, you seem to be missing the point. It's not like you can work harder than your classmates to a significant degree because all your classmates are going to be working pretty damn hard as well. The level of commitment is about all you can control (doing more reading, more supplements, more practice tests, etc.), but even if you maximized this commitment, it guarantees nothing. Some of the people who spent the most time studying at my school ended up at the bottom while there are those that goofed around and played computer games every night ended up at the top.


This makes sense. I do not disagree.

But would you argue that those who maximized their commitment and ended up at the bottom were simply unlucky or were not cut from the proper cloth?

I would argue the latter and would see the first as fatalistic.

User avatar
dingbat
Posts: 4976
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 9:12 pm

Re: Just read Don't Go to Law School (Unless)

Postby dingbat » Tue Oct 23, 2012 10:16 pm

megagnarley wrote:
dingbat wrote:
megagnarley wrote:
JCougar wrote:
You must be an 0L. Welcome. You're in for a surprise.


Pray tell...

And if you intend to say anything to the tune of "One has no bearing over his/her own odds of succeeding at OCI's" well...that is ludicrous.

To sum up: almost everybody who goes to the same law school is of more or less the same level of intelligence and works more or less just as hard as everyone else. You are not smarter than your classmates. You will not work harder than your classmates, nor will working harder guarantee you better grades.
You do not know how well you will do in law school until you're actually in law school (either you "get it" or you don't), therefore, before you start law school, you have no way of knowing if you're gonna be at the top or the bottom of the pile. Even then, while class rank correlates to employment prospects, you could strike out for a number of reasons (bad bid strategy, bad interview skills, bad luck, etc).
The only fact is that X% get biglaw and Y% get employed. Therefore, you should assume your chances of getting biglaw is X% and your chance of getting a job is Y%


In principle, I disagree.

Assuming that everyone at the same law school (actually ALL law schools, as your argument implies), is of the same intelligence is simply not true. There are far more things that factor into intelligence than is able to be quantified by the adcoms, meaning there is unequivocally varying levels of intelligence, especially given the fact that even in that incredibly narrow scope there exists variance. (Ex. Just because a student with a 3.3/175 and a 3.9/169 got into the same school only implies they are of equal intelligence in the vaguest of situational standings).

Beyond that, there are myriad factors which contribute to success, many of which are determined by your approach while in law school and not simply by number of hours logged.

Yes, luck undoubtedly plays a role in many circumstances, but that does not mean the individual is incapable of effecting his/her own circumstance. Beyond law school, that holds true in any personal/professional undertaking.

My argument doesn't imply everyone at every law school is of the same intelligence, but rather that every student at the same law school is of the same intelligence. However, even that's a straw man. most people are within a narrow band of each other (pro-tip: the difference between the bottom 25% and top 75% LSAT at, e.g. NYU, are within 1 percentile of test takers (97-98 percentiles). Yes, there are exceptions, but they're few and far between. If you're one of those exceptions, good for you (and you're a dumbass for turning down a better school)
There are a myriad of factors which contribute to success, I agree. The problem is, you don't know which factors are going to work in your favor until you're there. Practically everyone will memorize the black letter law - that should be considered a given. However, not everyone will be equally adept at understanding how to apply the law. It's not just a matter of practice. It's like how some people are really good with numbers and others are really good at languages. It's a talent, which some people have more of than others. Unfortunately, there's very little else that correlates to talent at law school exams, so you don't know if you've got it or not.
So, you don't know if your grades are going to be near the top or near the bottom, until you've actually taken a law school exam and learned whether or not you've got a talent for taking law school exams.

Hiring is mostly a matter of grades, although connections and hustling do count. the big problem is that employers often have cutoffs. For example, a firm might have a rule in place that they will not interview anyone who isn't at least top 25% at school X, at least top 1/3 at school Y and at least above median at school Z. Doesn't matter if you're an equity partner's son (anti-nepotism rules), if your grades aren't above the cutoff they won't talk to you. Hustling is great as it gives you more options, but, most people will also be hustling, so it's more like not hustling is a disadvantage, rather than hustling being an advantage. Now there are some positions that are open if you have connections, and good for you if you have them. But for everyone else, that possibility is irrelevant.
The gist is, for the vast majority of people, there's very little they can control about the hiring process, and until you go through it, you don't know how you'll fare (particularly the luck factor). So again, the hiring statistics are a good proxy for what a typical incoming 1L's chances are.




Return to “Law School Admissions Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests