UChicago OCI Alums Answering Questions About the Job Hunt

(On Campus Interviews, Summer Associate positions, Firm Reviews, Tips, ...)
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting

Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.

Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
User avatar
bk1
Posts: 18422
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:06 pm

Re: UChicago OCI Alums Answering Questions About the Job Hunt

Postby bk1 » Fri Apr 11, 2014 4:51 pm

Friendly reminder: this forum is not for 0Ls. If you are a 0L and have questions/comments, that is what the "Ask a Law Student/Grad" forum is for.

Mal Reynolds
Posts: 12630
Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2011 12:16 am

Re: UChicago OCI Alums Answering Questions About the Job Hunt

Postby Mal Reynolds » Fri Apr 11, 2014 5:10 pm

I want to petition the OP to not be such a topic nazi. People are asking questions that Uchicago alumi are in a special position to answer but are benefitting from the anon function. Its not like were taking about movies or something.

User avatar
2014
Posts: 5831
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2010 3:53 pm

Re: UChicago OCI Alums Answering Questions About the Job Hunt

Postby 2014 » Fri Apr 11, 2014 5:58 pm

Mal Reynolds wrote:I want to petition the OP to not be such a topic nazi. People are asking questions that Uchicago alumi are in a special position to answer but are benefitting from the anon function. Its not like were taking about movies or something.

Don't worry I'll answer whatever lol. Only one sample but w/e

Anonymous User
Posts: 273443
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: UChicago OCI Alums Answering Questions About the Job Hunt

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Apr 11, 2014 7:47 pm

Mal Reynolds wrote:I want to petition the OP to not be such a topic nazi. People are asking questions that Uchicago alumi are in a special position to answer but are benefitting from the anon function. Its not like were taking about movies or something.


"I did well on the memo, will I not get a good grade?" isn't really about employment.

Derailing
1) hurts value for future 1Ls (readability/usefulness of the thread) for the sake of the current (who are understandably neurotic about grades),
2) makes people who have graduated and work on recruiting matters in firms (such as myself) less likely to want to check the thread to help out, and
3) is violating TLS rules on anon and I don't want people getting outed or the thread being moved to a different forum.

I don't want this to just be a "UChicago answering questions" thread that's under the guise of an employment thread so it can be in a forum where you can post anonymously. I did this so I can give back and help people get jobs, and I think there is some good advice in here so far. If you intentionally derail, it's going to make the thread less valuable for both yourself and future students, and has a chance of destroying the thread completely.

Mal Reynolds
Posts: 12630
Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2011 12:16 am

Re: UChicago OCI Alums Answering Questions About the Job Hunt

Postby Mal Reynolds » Fri Apr 11, 2014 8:17 pm

I think you're conflating derailment and the natural progression of the conversation. The question was about grade distributions not someone being neurotic. If LRW converges everyone to the median that is of interest to students their employment prospects. I haven't seen any abuse of anon or people dominating the conversation with non-employment questions. The last time you got on someone about staying on topic they asked about finals or something and presumably didn't want to out themselves about their grades. The thread is only fifteen pages and if people are checking tls it's not like a few questions about class or grades is going to ruin their interest in answering questions.

Ultimately it's up to the mods so I encourage people to keep asking the questions they are.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273443
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: UChicago OCI Alums Answering Questions About the Job Hunt

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Apr 11, 2014 9:44 pm

Mal Reynolds wrote:I think you're conflating derailment and the natural progression of the conversation. The question was about grade distributions not someone being neurotic. If LRW converges everyone to the median that is of interest to students their employment prospects. I haven't seen any abuse of anon or people dominating the conversation with non-employment questions. The last time you got on someone about staying on topic they asked about finals or something and presumably didn't want to out themselves about their grades. The thread is only fifteen pages and if people are checking tls it's not like a few questions about class or grades is going to ruin their interest in answering questions.

Ultimately it's up to the mods so I encourage people to keep asking the questions they are.


People with jobs don't want to waste time checking a thread full of questions they can no longer answer. If you want to roll the dice and be defiant to people who are trying to help you, so be it. It doesn't hurt us.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273443
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: UChicago OCI Alums Answering Questions About the Job Hunt

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Apr 12, 2014 11:04 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:FYI NY People: those NYC grade cutoffs from the earlier post are wrong. All of those firms except Wachtell (i.e., entire NYC V20, minus maybe Boies) will take you even if you are sub 177. Can confirm multiple CBs at V2-10 with sub-median grades.

Obviously if you are 178+ you have better odds at all of them, but whether you not you get a CB at those firms once you have passed the 177.5 mark will turn almost entirely on the interview. There is no distinction between grade selectivity at, for example, Cravath or Kirkland.

Edit: sorry, I just re-read that post, and I don't think the poster mentioned those grades as cutoffs, but the main point that you should take away here is that there is no difference in grade requirements for V2-20 minus Boies.


Previous anon you're criticizing. Those are the "ideal" grades to feel comfortable bidding them. I mentioned the possibility of outliers, I just didn't want everyone with 176s to be bidding v10 firms exclusively.

I do, however, think there are disparities between grade selectivity between Cravath and Kirkland NY, but both sides of this are probably equally hard to prove considering there are so many variables to a hiring process. IMO, 1Ls should have in mind that some firms are slightly more selective than others but they shouldnt let these distinctions control their bidding process or interviewing strategy heavily.


I don't disagree with you at all about V10s being somewhat selective (i.e., don't have great odds until you are around the 178 mark).

I do disagree with you about variation in grade selectivity among the non-Wachtell V10, though. Obviously, neither of us have more than anecdotal evidence either way (e.g., I know the OCI performance of 5 people with 178s, and 4 people with 177s, and I have the callback report), but my rough estimate is that there is no distinguishable variation in grade cutoffs from V2-V10.

20141023
Posts: 3072
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 12:17 am

Re: UChicago OCI Alums Answering Questions About the Job Hunt

Postby 20141023 » Sat Apr 12, 2014 11:15 pm

.
Last edited by 20141023 on Sun Feb 15, 2015 6:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273443
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: UChicago OCI Alums Answering Questions About the Job Hunt

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Apr 12, 2014 11:31 pm

kappycaft1 wrote:How useful are the minimums on the callback report, though? If 2L OCI is anything like law school admissions, the lowest end of the spectrum is probably comprised mainly of URMs, so if you're a white straight dude (like me), it doesn't seem like that would be a good indicator whatsoever. Also, putting the "max" on the callback report seems like a fucking stupid thing to do. That's like UChicago saying "the highest LSAT/GPA combination we admitted was a 180/4.0." That information is useful to about 0.5% of the people doing OCI.


Anon from above:

Oh, I generally agree that the callback report is essentially useless. Really unfortunate that they don't provide medians/averages.

I would say that it's probably not quite as pointless as you make it out to be based on the URM thing. First, if you take a look at the numbers, there's a LOT of variation. Granted, this is over a 3 year period, but it's unlikely that every single one of those GPAs belongs to a URM. Second, I'm not convinced at that firms are dipping that low beyond their minimums for URMs--there are enough URMs with good GPAs at this school anyway--so I don't think the minimums are completely irrelevant for a non-URM.

So, given the small amount of valuable information the callback report provides, plus my anecdotal evidence of ~10 peoples' performances, I think I have some sense of variation in V10 selectivity.

The key point is that, if you are within spitting distance of a 178, you should be bidding every V10 firm sans Wachtell. If you are around a 177, you should probably still be bidding a bunch of them, but you probably want to make sure you get some less selective firms in there too. Given the multitude of factors that go into whether you get a callback, it is silly to prioritize one V10 firm over another just because you think they are more selective grade-wise (which is doubtful). Much more important to consider, for example, # of people that a firm is interviewing at OCI (fewer people = you have to spend a higher bid on them, and probably indicative of them not wanting to hire too many, e.g., last year Weil interviewed only 21 while SullCrom interviewed like 48 or something), size of summer class, history of hiring a lot of UChi students, whether you actually prefer one firm over another, etc.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273443
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: UChicago OCI Alums Answering Questions About the Job Hunt

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Apr 14, 2014 1:46 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
kappycaft1 wrote:How useful are the minimums on the callback report, though? If 2L OCI is anything like law school admissions, the lowest end of the spectrum is probably comprised mainly of URMs, so if you're a white straight dude (like me), it doesn't seem like that would be a good indicator whatsoever. Also, putting the "max" on the callback report seems like a fucking stupid thing to do. That's like UChicago saying "the highest LSAT/GPA combination we admitted was a 180/4.0." That information is useful to about 0.5% of the people doing OCI.


Anon from above:

Oh, I generally agree that the callback report is essentially useless. Really unfortunate that they don't provide medians/averages.

I would say that it's probably not quite as pointless as you make it out to be based on the URM thing. First, if you take a look at the numbers, there's a LOT of variation. Granted, this is over a 3 year period, but it's unlikely that every single one of those GPAs belongs to a URM. Second, I'm not convinced at that firms are dipping that low beyond their minimums for URMs--there are enough URMs with good GPAs at this school anyway--so I don't think the minimums are completely irrelevant for a non-URM.

So, given the small amount of valuable information the callback report provides, plus my anecdotal evidence of ~10 peoples' performances, I think I have some sense of variation in V10 selectivity.

The key point is that, if you are within spitting distance of a 178, you should be bidding every V10 firm sans Wachtell. If you are around a 177, you should probably still be bidding a bunch of them, but you probably want to make sure you get some less selective firms in there too. Given the multitude of factors that go into whether you get a callback, it is silly to prioritize one V10 firm over another just because you think they are more selective grade-wise (which is doubtful). Much more important to consider, for example, # of people that a firm is interviewing at OCI (fewer people = you have to spend a higher bid on them, and probably indicative of them not wanting to hire too many, e.g., last year Weil interviewed only 21 while SullCrom interviewed like 48 or something), size of summer class, history of hiring a lot of UChi students, whether you actually prefer one firm over another, etc.


Previous anon and I agree with all of this. I think we may have been talking past each other. If you're closer to a 178, these firms are OK to bid (maybe a few safeties lower down on the bid list or picked up in add/drop). Closer to 177, bid them but include more safeties. This, of course, assumes average interview competence.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273443
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: UChicago OCI Alums Answering Questions About the Job Hunt

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Apr 14, 2014 9:43 pm

Can anyone comment on whether they were considering one of the big firms v. a boutique for their 2L summer. It seems like reputable, market-paying boutiques would be a solid alternative to the big firm route. I'm sure you're working the same hours but do they give you better substantive experience right off the bat or other tangible benefits? Also are any of them attainable without astronomical grades like Bartlit Beck? Just curious if this is a real thing or not.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273443
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: UChicago OCI Alums Answering Questions About the Job Hunt

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Apr 15, 2014 12:27 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Can anyone comment on whether they were considering one of the big firms v. a boutique for their 2L summer. It seems like reputable, market-paying boutiques would be a solid alternative to the big firm route. I'm sure you're working the same hours but do they give you better substantive experience right off the bat or other tangible benefits? Also are any of them attainable without astronomical grades like Bartlit Beck? Just curious if this is a real thing or not.


Depends what you consider a boutique. Someone is working at Kellog Huber in D.C., and a couple took an offer from Susman. In my experience, Bartlit Beck does not take summers.

If you want to expand it out a bit to capture firms like Munger, Irell, Williams & Connolly, then a good number of students are working there. They require good grades, though not impossibly high.

20141023
Posts: 3072
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 12:17 am

Re: UChicago OCI Alums Answering Questions About the Job Hunt

Postby 20141023 » Tue Apr 15, 2014 6:33 pm

Necessary use of anon ITT is necessary.

User has been warned and outed.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273443
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: UChicago OCI Alums Answering Questions About the Job Hunt

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Apr 15, 2014 7:43 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Can anyone comment on whether they were considering one of the big firms v. a boutique for their 2L summer. It seems like reputable, market-paying boutiques would be a solid alternative to the big firm route. I'm sure you're working the same hours but do they give you better substantive experience right off the bat or other tangible benefits? Also are any of them attainable without astronomical grades like Bartlit Beck? Just curious if this is a real thing or not.


Note: I didn't go to UC but I work at a market paying boutique that does recruiting there.

It is a real thing and there are several Chicago firms, in addition to Bartlit Beck, that fit this mold. Other markets have firms in this category as well, which others have mentioned.

I don't think we have any formal grade requirements but good grades are important at my firm (they also appear to be at our peers as well). Almost all of the hires that we take wind up clerking if that helps to give you a good reference point re:grades. Having a good story about why you want to work at our firm would probably help to make up for grades somewhat, but I doubt we are dropping down to median or below.

Boutiques have a really strong value proposition if you want to do litigation. Here are my high level thoughts regarding boutique vs. biglaw for 2L summer. I'm trying not to be overly biased.

Pro
  • Early substantive work - you will probably draft significant portions of one or more important motions during the summer. The work will be filed with the court and not on a shelf.
  • Equal treatment - You will most likely be treated like the other lawyers in the firm and not like a child/incompetent.
  • Flexibility - You will most likely be able to determine a lot of things about your own experience because there won't be a formal program. You will have a say about what kind of work you do. If you need to start/end at odd times or take a few days off, you can probably do that.

Con
  • Less "fun" - Biglaw SAs are pretty much like summer camp. Boutiques can't replicate this because they have too few SAs and too few attorneys to make a ton of events and daily 2 hour lunches possible. You will go out and have some fun, but not on the same scale as your classmates.
  • Less variety - A biglaw SA will give you an opportunity to try (or at least see) a corporate project, it will probably also have a lot of programming to expose you to the variety of work in the office. You won't get as much breadth at a boutique because the work is likely to be more focused and there will just be fewer active cases.
  • Fewer peers - I actually think this is one of the biggest drawbacks, even for people who know they want to litigate. You will have far fewer people who are at your level (i.e. relatively new associate). This can be kind of isolating since there aren't many people to form friendships with, commiserate with, ask stupid questions of, etc.. It doesn't outweigh the pros of the job, but it makes it harder. If you're someone who needs a support network to function highly I would consider this thoroughly before choosing a boutique.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273443
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: UChicago OCI Alums Answering Questions About the Job Hunt

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Apr 16, 2014 6:08 pm

After winter grades my average is down to a 175. K-JD. 15-25k/year scholarship. Open to NYC but still scared. Is biglaw out?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273443
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: UChicago OCI Alums Answering Questions About the Job Hunt

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Apr 16, 2014 6:30 pm

Anonymous User wrote:After winter grades my average is down to a 175. K-JD. 15-25k/year scholarship. Open to NYC but still scared. Is biglaw out?


Think about your motives for going to law school and what your options would be otherwise. I'm no expert, but 175 is not gloom and doom unless you were shooting for some higher prestige bs, but there is plenty of wiggle room for things to turn in the positive. My two cents= stay positive, keep your head high and work your way through this last quarter...it's too late to get your money back from this quarter if you withdraw now and things can turn positively for you. Make a judgment call once the summer is here. Best of luck!

Anonymous User
Posts: 273443
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: UChicago OCI Alums Answering Questions About the Job Hunt

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Apr 16, 2014 7:06 pm

1) You shouldn't be thinking of dropping out at this point until at least after OCI is over.

2) You need to figure out how to take law school exams and how to properly study. Read model answers and look for what they did that you didn't, talk to professors, talk to academic counselors (if they're any good this year -- no idea), talk to upperclassmen if you know any that did well (taking advice from medianbro likely won't help you), etc. Think about your outlines -- did you write them in two days? Are they 50 pages of word vomit that you didn't internalize or pare down to what is important? Etc.

3) Work on interview skills and networking. It's important to be go in and appear friendly and confident, even if you don't feel that way inside. Do not let your grades make you feel small and insecure come interview season -- that'll hurt you as much or more than the actual numbers will.

You got into this school, so you're probably a capable human being and you can do this.

Pulsar
Posts: 100
Joined: Sun Jan 12, 2014 2:32 pm

Re: UChicago OCI Alums Answering Questions About the Job Hunt

Postby Pulsar » Wed Apr 16, 2014 7:07 pm

^Sorry that was me. Didn't mean to click the anonymous button.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273443
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: UChicago OCI Alums Answering Questions About the Job Hunt

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Apr 16, 2014 8:19 pm

Does anyone know roughly how the curve works? Is 180+ equal to top 10%, or...is it a mystery?

User avatar
beepboopbeep
Posts: 1230
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2012 7:36 pm

Re: UChicago OCI Alums Answering Questions About the Job Hunt

Postby beepboopbeep » Wed Apr 16, 2014 8:22 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Does anyone know roughly how the curve works? Is 180+ equal to top 10%, or...is it a mystery?


182+ = 0.5%
180.5 = 7.2%
179 = 22.7%

These are non-cumulative, so 179+ = top 30% or so.

User avatar
Crowing
Posts: 2636
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2012 4:20 pm

Re: UChicago OCI Alums Answering Questions About the Job Hunt

Postby Crowing » Wed Apr 16, 2014 8:39 pm

beepboopbeep wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Does anyone know roughly how the curve works? Is 180+ equal to top 10%, or...is it a mystery?


182+ = 0.5%
180.5 = 7.2%
179 = 22.7%

These are non-cumulative, so 179+ = top 30% or so.


Keep in mind that's at graduation, not post 1L

User avatar
Robb
Posts: 315
Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2014 10:21 pm

Re: UChicago OCI Alums Answering Questions About the Job Hunt

Postby Robb » Wed Apr 16, 2014 8:40 pm

partially scooped... but just want to add a few more (hopefully helpful) bits of information:

1) the honors cutoffs don't describe percentiles for individual grades, but for averages, so they include the reduction in % that comes from regression to the mean (the presence of which will obviously be limited based on the correlation between exam grades on multiple occasions).

So, for example, chances of getting a 182 on two occasions is lower than getting a 182 on one occasion. The % of people with a 182 average will be less than the % of people who get a 182 on one occasion, so a 182 doesn't mean you're in the top 0.5% of the course, and a 179 doesn't mean you're in the top 30% of the course... it's the 179 average that puts you in the overall top 30% of the class.

2) pretty sure these are for last year, so these aren't like a rubric that all grades must conform to (contrary to the 177 median in all the classes we've taken so far). also keep in mind that they include courses with higher medians than we have during 1L, that we'll take during 2L and 3L (but they also include the further regression to the mean that will occur over that time)

3) Here's a post with a grading curve that was supposedly, in the past, given to visiting professors.

4) Apparently the LR grade on cut off (about top 10%) is typically somewhere between 179.5-180, usually on the higher end of that range, though there is some speculation that it might have been as high as 180.5 last year.


So, to specifically answer your question, 180+ appears to be more around top 20% in a course.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273443
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: UChicago OCI Alums Answering Questions About the Job Hunt

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Apr 16, 2014 8:48 pm

Robb wrote:partially scooped... but just want to add a few more (hopefully helpful) bits of information:

1) the honors cutoffs don't describe percentiles for individual grades, but for averages, so they include the reduction in % that comes from regression to the mean (the presence of which will obviously be limited based on the correlation between exam grades on multiple occasions).

So, for example, chances of getting a 182 on two occasions is lower than getting a 182 on one occasion. The % of people with a 182 average will be less than the % of people who get a 182 on one occasion, so a 182 doesn't mean you're in the top 0.5% of the course, and a 179 doesn't mean you're in the top 30% of the course... it's the 179 average that puts you in the overall top 30% of the class.

2) pretty sure these are for last year, so these aren't like a rubric that all grades must conform to (contrary to the 177 median in all the classes we've taken so far)

3) Here's a post with a grading curve that was supposedly, in the past, given to visiting professors.

4) Apparently the LR grade on cut off (about top 10%) is typically somewhere between 179.5-180, usually on the higher end of that range, though there is some speculation that it might have been as high as 180.5 last year.



Yes, but by graduation you've taken TONS of seminars curved to a 179 and most people try less. My experience is that it is MUCH easier to pull above a 179 2L/3L. IMO, 179.5 is getting close to top 10/15% territory at the end of 1L. I mentor a few 2Ls, and they thought they graded on with a 179.5-180 last year.
Last edited by Anonymous User on Wed Apr 16, 2014 8:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273443
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: UChicago OCI Alums Answering Questions About the Job Hunt

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Apr 16, 2014 8:48 pm

double post bad internet

User avatar
beepboopbeep
Posts: 1230
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2012 7:36 pm

Re: UChicago OCI Alums Answering Questions About the Job Hunt

Postby beepboopbeep » Wed Apr 16, 2014 8:55 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Yes, but by graduation you've taken TONS of seminars curved to a 179 and most people try less. My experience is that it is MUCH easier to pull above a 179 2L/3L. IMO, 179.5 is getting close to top 10/15% territory at the end of 1L. I mentor a few 2Ls, and they thought they graded on with a 179.5-180 last year.


That's roughly what I heard as the cutoff last year as well, but I never know how anyone knows this - it's double-blind selected, right? Unless you got on with a relatively poor written component, it doesn't seem like there's a way to know on the student side, and those picking out the write-ons don't have access to the grades. But this is all secondhand knowledge as to how the process works (as I'm obviously on the 1L side of it) so please correct me if I'm mistaken about anything.

Thanks for the clarifications above. I understood the question to mean overall rank rather than one class, but it's a good point that graduation grades are probably higher than grades at the end of 1L.




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.