What accounts for Fordham's free fall in the rankings?

(Applications Advice, Letters of Recommendation . . . )
User avatar
cinephile
Posts: 3469
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2010 3:50 pm

Re: What accounts for Fordham's free fall in the rankings?

Postby cinephile » Thu Jan 23, 2014 2:42 am

How are you confident that you'll place in the top 15-20% of your class? You realize that the people who tend to say this sort of thing invariably end up at the bottom, right?

You've never taken a law school exam in your life. You have no idea where you'll fall. You've already set your mind on something and want other people to validate your decision, but that isn't going to happen. Either be as confident as you claim to be or take the advice given.

Moneytrees
Posts: 646
Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2014 11:41 pm

Re: What accounts for Fordham's free fall in the rankings?

Postby Moneytrees » Thu Jan 23, 2014 3:20 am

BigZuck wrote:
Moneytrees wrote:
phillywc wrote:You have poor odds at Fordham, and if you got in it would be at sticker. Objectively bad decision.


Even at sticker, it's not an "objectively bad" decision. It all depends on how confident you are that you can land a job in Biglaw. 150K of debt is a large investment, but one that pays off in the long run with Biglaw. I have 3 uncles/aunts that went to Fordham and all went on to work in Biglaw. One of them is the chief legal head at American Express. Needless to say, I wouldn't ideally want to pay sticker.

I don't need a lecture about the risks of going to Fordham (or any other schools outside of the top 14). Personally, I am very confident in my chances of finishing in the top 15/20 percent of my class. I was in the top 20 percent at UCSD with a double major and playing on the soccer team (I also probably spent too much time at the frat house). I've done all the research, and am aware of both the weakness and positives of the schools that I've applied to. All I was asking was: is there any specific, glaring weakness that has caused Fordham to free fall in the rankings? The answer, from what I can discern, is no. Also apparent is the fact that knowledgeable people on here don't seem to respect the methodology behind the rankings in the first place. I appreciate the perspective.


This is an objectively bad post and you should feel bad (objectively speaking).

Boomer anecdotes don't matter, and as has been said you can't predict 1L performance with such a high degree of accuracy.

As an aside- lol@being in the top 20% of UG at UCSD meaning anything. Being top 20% of a middling UC doesn't mean you'll be in an equivalent rank at a law school like Fordham with a much stronger student body and the curve to combat.

As a second aside- being in the top 20% might be close to necessary but it's not sufficient to snag big law. It's Fordham were talking about, not Yale.

You need to do way more research on how all this law school stuff works. Also, stop acting like you're special. Everyone in law school is special. That means, more likely than not, you will be average. Being average at Fordham with 150K+ debt is a very scary place to be.



UCSD is by no means a "middling" university. That's just inaccurate. Its SAT and GPA averages are just a notch under UCLA and Berkeley's. It does a ton of noteworthy research, has a top 10/15 med school in the country, and is a respected school in California (not so much on the East coast, but that is to be expected).

I've been graded on a curve before, it's not some novel concept to me. Actually, I got an A+ in a pre-law class that was graded on a curve, which was great news to me since it raised my LSAC GPA (the + might have been luck, I'll give ya that). Maybe I'm being naive, but in my experience, getting graded on a curve is actually a good thing, because there are so many people that don't write well, and thus struggle to transmit their ideas in an effective manner to the professors grading their tests.

Obviously it's not easy to do well in law school, but I stand by the above statement. I'm a first generation immigrant from Italy (I was born and raised in Rome), and basically have to do well in law school to help myself and my family. I am prepared for this task, and view it like as a job.

Now, you may think "so what, everybody views it that way". But the sad reality is, no, not everyone views it that way. Most people on these boards do, but TLS users are not an accurate representation of the average law school student. It's impossible to know whether or not you will succeed in law school before you even start, but it's not impossible to give yourself a real chance to do well by having the right study habits and focus. Furthermore, you are kidding yourself if you think that the vast majority of law school grades are based on luck or lack thereof. Having the right approach to studying is a much more important factor than mere luck in determining the outcome of your academic career. This is what I've come to understand through my family, the vast majority of which are lawyers (Fordham, Notre Dame, and Penn grads).

Yeah, if I get sick and fail a final, I'm fucked. But that is true at any school. Employment numbers don't matter if you are getting Fs' in law school.

Anyways, this conversation is descending into a pointless stream of personal attacks and predictions of my future academic performance. Nothing left to for me to add here. Thanks to those who provided actual advice.

Moneytrees
Posts: 646
Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2014 11:41 pm

Re: What accounts for Fordham's free fall in the rankings?

Postby Moneytrees » Thu Jan 23, 2014 3:26 am

cinephile wrote:How are you confident that you'll place in the top 15-20% of your class? You realize that the people who tend to say this sort of thing invariably end up at the bottom, right?

You've never taken a law school exam in your life. You have no idea where you'll fall. You've already set your mind on something and want other people to validate your decision, but that isn't going to happen. Either be as confident as you claim to be or take the advice given.


You are right. I agree with your last sentence.

Not looking for validation, however. I've done the research, I'm aware of the risks, and never asked advice as to the pros/cons of going to a school outside the T14. I was just wondering about Fordham's odd placement in the rankings despite its relatively strong employment numbers.

03152016
Posts: 9189
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 3:14 am

Re: What accounts for Fordham's free fall in the rankings?

Postby 03152016 » Thu Jan 23, 2014 3:48 am

Moneytrees wrote:I have 3 uncles/aunts that went to Fordham and all went on to work in Biglaw. One of them is the chief legal head at American Express.

I suggest completely disregarding this.

One of my mentors went to an unaccredited school, graduated at the top of his class and had a successful career in Big Law, eventually landing in-house at a VC firm. He advised that even if I ended up at a TTT, I just need to work extra hard and I'll be able to make the big bucks after graduation. He was shocked when I told him that tuition at many schools is in excess of $50k.

Another mentor has a husband who attended a TT decades ago and has had a successful career as well; she thought it would be a good idea for me to put in an app, even though one of my priorities in selecting a LS is keeping the Big Law option open.

My point is -- you'll meet plenty of people who went to lower-tier schools and were successful, and many of them believe you can follow in their footsteps. But a) they went to LS in an era where jobs were more plentiful, b) the crushing debt burden in their time was less than for our generation, and c) it's extremely hard to predict how well you'll do in law school; you can't count on performing as well as they did.

The statistical evidence shows Fordham is a risky proposition if you're gunning for Big Law. Why not retake and aim for C/N?

Moneytrees
Posts: 646
Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2014 11:41 pm

Re: What accounts for Fordham's free fall in the rankings?

Postby Moneytrees » Thu Jan 23, 2014 4:03 am

Max324 wrote:
Moneytrees wrote:I have 3 uncles/aunts that went to Fordham and all went on to work in Biglaw. One of them is the chief legal head at American Express.

I suggest completely disregarding this.

One of my mentors went to an unaccredited school, graduated at the top of his class and had a successful career in Big Law, eventually landing in-house at a VC firm. He advised that even if I ended up at a TTT, I just need to work extra hard and I'll be able to make the big bucks after graduation. He was shocked when I told him that tuition at many schools is in excess of $50k.

Another mentor has a husband who attended a TT decades ago and has had a successful career as well; she thought it would be a good idea for me to put in an app, even though one of my priorities in selecting a LS is keeping the Big Law option open.

My point is -- you'll meet plenty of people who went to lower-tier schools and were successful, and many of them believe you can follow in their footsteps. But a) they went to LS in an era where jobs were more plentiful, b) the crushing debt burden in their time was less than for our generation, and c) it's extremely hard to predict how well you'll do in law school; you can't count on performing as well as they did.

The statistical evidence shows Fordham is a risky proposition if you're gunning for Big Law. Why not retake and aim for C/N?


.
Last edited by Moneytrees on Sun Mar 15, 2015 10:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
guano
Posts: 2268
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 9:49 am

Re: What accounts for Fordham's free fall in the rankings?

Postby guano » Thu Jan 23, 2014 8:23 am

Moneytrees wrote:Fair points. I might retake, but as I said above, I'm living with my grandmother and helping to take care of her right now. I'm also working full time as a paralegal. I can't see myself improving so much as to have a real shot at NYU/Columbia.

Do you think you're the only one having issues re studying?
You'll be in a class with people who similarly were unable to study, but were able to snag a much higher score.
As for future grades, it is incredibly arrogant to think you'll be top anything, and the same arrogance that lets you believe that will result in you not getting it. More importantly, that arrogance will result in you not getting a job upon graduation.
There are kids from c/o 2015 who are roughly top 10% but don't have a job yet.

As for the curve, it is entirely possible that you end up in a section with a disproportionately high amount of talented overachievers. You're not up against the entire class, but against your section, which is 1/10th of the class. Also keep in mind that law school curves work differently than many UG curves. Most importantly, what constitutes being a good writer in law school is very different than what being a good writer means in virtually any other setting. Legal writing is an entirely different beast. Just about everyone at Fordham is a good writer, but not everyone is a good legal writer.

I'm not trying to put you down, but, the mentality that you've displayed in this thread is the kind that rounds out the bottom of the curve, and then ends up bemoaning the arbitrariness of law school grading, and subsequently bombs what few interviews you can scrape together and then complains about how it's all grade driven.
Hint: grading is unpredictable but not arbitrary, and law firm hiring is prestige driven but is not solely about grades

User avatar
nothingtosee
Posts: 865
Joined: Tue May 03, 2011 12:08 am

Re: What accounts for Fordham's free fall in the rankings?

Postby nothingtosee » Thu Jan 23, 2014 8:57 am

OP - you posted that mean LSAT at ucsd is 157, whereas median LSAT at Fordham is 162. That's 70th percentile vs 85th percentile. So top 15-20% at ucsd would seem to go less than that at Fordham. (Totally disregarding the gpa component, etc)

Edit: ucsd is more legit than I knew qua LSAT. Equal to ut, one below ucla, two below Berkeley

User avatar
lawhopeful10
Posts: 984
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2012 2:29 pm

Re: What accounts for Fordham's free fall in the rankings?

Postby lawhopeful10 » Thu Jan 23, 2014 9:10 am

Retake if you can so you can go there as cheaply as possible. The retake can only help. Then if you don't do well first semester drop out. As others have said you can't guarantee where you will finish. Like I said, I go to a school where you need top 10% for big law and I don't think you realize how stressful it is looking around a room of other very intelligent people and thinking you need to be able to beat any random 9 of them. At Fordham your margin for error won't be as bad as mine but moral of the story is don't assume anything and retake to get as much money as you can.

BigZuck
Posts: 10870
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2012 9:53 am

Re: What accounts for Fordham's free fall in the rankings?

Postby BigZuck » Thu Jan 23, 2014 9:46 am

Considering you have never taken a law school exam before, against other law students, I don't get how you can claim to know how much of a luck/arbitrariness factor there is to it.

Assume you will be median at whatever school you go to, and proceed from there.

Also in regards to UCSD, I'm sure Santa Barbara and Davis kids say the same thing. Being in the top 20% of those schools is not some amazing accomplishment that means automatic success and whatever you set your mind to.

Paul Campos
Posts: 644
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:44 am

Re: What accounts for Fordham's free fall in the rankings?

Postby Paul Campos » Thu Jan 23, 2014 9:58 am

Something that ought to be added to the read before you post sticky in the Choosing a Law School forum is a line about opportunity cost, i.e., "what is your current employment situation?"

Dumping a minimum wage job to attend Fordham at sticker is risky but arguably defensible. Leaving a full-time paralegal position is not.

The Godfather
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu Jan 16, 2014 10:59 pm

Re: What accounts for Fordham's free fall in the rankings?

Postby The Godfather » Thu Jan 23, 2014 10:17 am

If you are so smart just retake the damn thing, even if you have to postpone law school an extra year because you need to take care of your grandmother. The difference between a 163 and a 168 is 5 questions, of course you can improve ur score that much.

sparty99
Posts: 1433
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2010 8:41 pm

Re: What accounts for Fordham's free fall in the rankings?

Postby sparty99 » Thu Jan 23, 2014 1:47 pm

Moneytrees wrote:
BigZuck wrote:
Moneytrees wrote:
phillywc wrote:You have poor odds at Fordham, and if you got in it would be at sticker. Objectively bad decision.


Even at sticker, it's not an "objectively bad" decision. It all depends on how confident you are that you can land a job in Biglaw. 150K of debt is a large investment, but one that pays off in the long run with Biglaw. I have 3 uncles/aunts that went to Fordham and all went on to work in Biglaw. One of them is the chief legal head at American Express. Needless to say, I wouldn't ideally want to pay sticker.

I don't need a lecture about the risks of going to Fordham (or any other schools outside of the top 14). Personally, I am very confident in my chances of finishing in the top 15/20 percent of my class. I was in the top 20 percent at UCSD with a double major and playing on the soccer team (I also probably spent too much time at the frat house). I've done all the research, and am aware of both the weakness and positives of the schools that I've applied to. All I was asking was: is there any specific, glaring weakness that has caused Fordham to free fall in the rankings? The answer, from what I can discern, is no. Also apparent is the fact that knowledgeable people on here don't seem to respect the methodology behind the rankings in the first place. I appreciate the perspective.


This is an objectively bad post and you should feel bad (objectively speaking).

Boomer anecdotes don't matter, and as has been said you can't predict 1L performance with such a high degree of accuracy.

As an aside- lol@being in the top 20% of UG at UCSD meaning anything. Being top 20% of a middling UC doesn't mean you'll be in an equivalent rank at a law school like Fordham with a much stronger student body and the curve to combat.

As a second aside- being in the top 20% might be close to necessary but it's not sufficient to snag big law. It's Fordham were talking about, not Yale.

You need to do way more research on how all this law school stuff works. Also, stop acting like you're special. Everyone in law school is special. That means, more likely than not, you will be average. Being average at Fordham with 150K+ debt is a very scary place to be.



UCSD is by no means a "middling" university. That's just inaccurate. Its SAT and GPA averages are just a notch under UCLA and Berkeley's. It does a ton of noteworthy research, has a top 10/15 med school in the country, and is a respected school in California (not so much on the East coast, but that is to be expected).

I've been graded on a curve before, it's not some novel concept to me. Actually, I got an A+ in a pre-law class that was graded on a curve, which was great news to me since it raised my LSAC GPA (the + might have been luck, I'll give ya that). Maybe I'm being naive, but in my experience, getting graded on a curve is actually a good thing, because there are so many people that don't write well, and thus struggle to transmit their ideas in an effective manner to the professors grading their tests.

Obviously it's not easy to do well in law school, but I stand by the above statement. I'm a first generation immigrant from Italy (I was born and raised in Rome), and basically have to do well in law school to help myself and my family. I am prepared for this task, and view it like as a job.

Now, you may think "so what, everybody views it that way". But the sad reality is, no, not everyone views it that way. Most people on these boards do, but TLS users are not an accurate representation of the average law school student. It's impossible to know whether or not you will succeed in law school before you even start, but it's not impossible to give yourself a real chance to do well by having the right study habits and focus. Furthermore, you are kidding yourself if you think that the vast majority of law school grades are based on luck or lack thereof. Having the right approach to studying is a much more important factor than mere luck in determining the outcome of your academic career. This is what I've come to understand through my family, the vast majority of which are lawyers (Fordham, Notre Dame, and Penn grads).

Yeah, if I get sick and fail a final, I'm fucked. But that is true at any school. Employment numbers don't matter if you are getting Fs' in law school.

Anyways, this conversation is descending into a pointless stream of personal attacks and predictions of my future academic performance. Nothing left to for me to add here. Thanks to those who provided actual advice.


You cumsquat, retake the damn exam. These people are trying to help your future and you are too arrogant/naive to understand. We are law students, some who are going to graduate soon. We have scholarships, go to higher ranked schools than Fordham, and know what it's like to take a law school exam and to search for a job in this fading legal market. If you were so great academically, you would have scored a 170+ on the LSAT and finished at UCD in the top 5%. You did neither. So welcome to reality and stop saying you will finish in the Top 20% at Fordham, a school where you will be competing with students who only went to that school because they wanted NYC so they go because they didn't get accepted at NYU and Columbia and they took significant scholarships to attend Fordham. You will be competing with ex wall street goons who have top tier I-banking backgrounds. You can study all damn day for a law school exam. That won't mean you will finish in the top 20%. In some cases, either you got it or you don't. If you are smart, you will retake the test and stop trying to justify going to Fordham. At the end of the day, we don't care where you go. We don't have to deal with the ramifications of you finishing below median and facing sticker. But if you want to ignore are advice, do so at your own peril.

californiauser
Posts: 1184
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2012 1:10 am

Re: What accounts for Fordham's free fall in the rankings?

Postby californiauser » Thu Jan 23, 2014 2:13 pm

Also, being top 25% at Fordham doesn't even mean you'll get big law. A non-negligible chunk of the 20ish% getting big law will be good looking women, engineers/IP people, URMs, i-banking/finance people, and well-connected people. You probably need to be top 10% to be "big law secure" and even then, nothing is guranteed.

BigZuck
Posts: 10870
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2012 9:53 am

Re: What accounts for Fordham's free fall in the rankings?

Postby BigZuck » Thu Jan 23, 2014 3:45 pm

californiauser wrote:Also, being top 25% at Fordham doesn't even mean you'll get big law. A non-negligible chunk of the 20ish% getting big law will be good looking women, engineers/IP people, URMs, i-banking/finance people, and well-connected people. You probably need to be top 10% to be "big law secure" and even then, nothing is guranteed.


This all seems true in my very limited experience.

Moneytrees
Posts: 646
Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2014 11:41 pm

Re: What accounts for Fordham's free fall in the rankings?

Postby Moneytrees » Thu Jan 23, 2014 5:50 pm

.
Last edited by Moneytrees on Sun Mar 15, 2015 10:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.

rad lulz
Posts: 9844
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2012 10:53 pm

Re: What accounts for Fordham's free fall in the rankings?

Postby rad lulz » Thu Jan 23, 2014 5:53 pm

m




Return to “Law School Admissions Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot] and 2 guests