Top Law Schools

CE2JD wrote:

ntzsch wrote:Sorry to hi-jack the thread from itsT14 theme. But I would be grateful if any one has some of this info in relation to any of these:

UNC:
W&M:
W&L:
UGA:
Alabama:
Wake:

Or, would people agree that as you go down that list, employment #'s get worse?

No one at any of those schools will be employed at graduation.

I can never decide if I just don't get your sense of humor, or if you're just a jerk.

rondemarino wrote: Stuff like this cracks me up. Tiers within tiers within tiers. Duke's numbers don't seem radically different from NU's, UVA's or Cornell's. We're talking unconfirmed rumors here and "2/3" could easily be 60% and "about half" could easily be 55%. Converse is obviously true. So this sub-sub-Tier stuff based off of this seems like a bit much.

Agreed. The problem is that we don't know whether people who have a job this summer are with a firm that pays market which is all that really matters to most people. When people throw out figures quoting an off the cuff remark by CSO, it's questionable whether the numbers are entirely accurate or if they describe people with firm jobs. The only data I've seen from UVA is from a poll that only has about 120 2L responses that anyone can vote in, and vote multiple times.

As far as Duke, it's a great school and is on par with Penn, Michigan, Northwestern and UVA as far as BigLaw placement, and it might even be marginally better than any of those schools; however, I don't think this data is enough to support that until there are some official CSO remarks.

at SLS the rumor a month ago was that 10% had nothing but now it seems like almost everyone has something this summer. Every 2L I know is working at a firm this summer, and a few are working in public-interest private firms. But that's just anecdote, and seeing what the numbers are at other schools, I think maybe it's worse off than many people here believe?

However, I do think that there are advantages of SLS that may have helped insulate it better than other schools.

1. Small class size
2. Many people want to do governmen/PI and have no interest in private firms
3. Diverse geographic preference. People here don't seem particulary wed to any market. I know a person with an offer from a NY firms but chose to go work in a state they've never even been to before (i think it was b/c of COL calculations).
4. significant % with strong IP background
5. I did check symplicity this morning and found a handful of job postings for non-CA west coast firms looking for 1L summers so I suppose things might be a little better out west (maybe b/c less people willing to work in AZ or WA or OR)?

.

TTT-LS wrote:I challenge. There's no way all of the ones above are correct. You've cherry-picked the highest estimates for each school in this thread, with no verification. It'd be bad for 0Ls to base admissions decisions on these without external verification. Part of that ought to be a uniform criteria for what goes into the % and what doesn't. Is this everyone with any job (e.g., NLJ250 biglaw, non-NLJ-250 law firms, gov, PI, judicial externs, janitors?), or just those with certain kinds of jobs?

I think you're reading a little too much in my collecting the various rumors/guesses in a single post.

.

TTT-LS wrote:^ Fair enough. I don't mean to overstate what your posts were intended to do. That said, never underestimate the willingness of people on TLS to rely on "data" like that your post in ways that are completely inappropriate.

As for % employed by NLJ250 firms, it will be a long time before that data is available publicly. The soonest time I can think of would be for 0Ls attending ASWs to ask admissions officers what % of their 2L class will be working at such firms in summer 2010, and then to post the responses here.

Because that will get an honest answer from admissions officers...

thedogship wrote:

TTT-LS wrote:^ Fair enough. I don't mean to overstate what your posts were intended to do. That said, never underestimate the willingness of people on TLS to rely on "data" like that your post in ways that are completely inappropriate.

As for % employed by NLJ250 firms, it will be a long time before that data is available publicly. The soonest time I can think of would be for 0Ls attending ASWs to ask admissions officers what % of their 2L class will be working at such firms in summer 2010, and then to post the responses here.

Because that will get an honest answer from admissions officers...

at least there's hope for good info out of Duke...I got full placement info from them last year and I'm not going to be shy about asking for it this year.

TTT-LS wrote:^ Fair enough. I don't mean to overstate what your posts were intended to do. That said, never underestimate the willingness of people on TLS to rely on "data" like that your post in ways that are completely inappropriate.

As for % employed by NLJ250 firms, it will be a long time before that data is available publicly. The soonest time I can think of would be for 0Ls attending ASWs to ask admissions officers what % of their 2L class will be working at such firms in summer 2010, and then to post the responses here.

That's not a bad idea, but I don't trust schools to offer accurate information. Even though everyone knows the Big Law gravy train is running out of steam, law schools (probably the least innovative institutions in the history of the universe) are going keep the charade going as long as possible to milk those tuition checks out of us. Until they are forced to re-evaluate their retarded model, I expect the lies to continue.

p.s: With this thread, I was only hoping to figure if there were outliers in the T14 with regard to 2L placement. It sounds like GULC would be a school whose numbers I'll have to seek out if I apply there.

.

TTT-LS wrote:

thedogship wrote:

TTT-LS wrote:^ Fair enough. I don't mean to overstate what your posts were intended to do. That said, never underestimate the willingness of people on TLS to rely on "data" like that your post in ways that are completely inappropriate.

As for % employed by NLJ250 firms, it will be a long time before that data is available publicly. The soonest time I can think of would be for 0Ls attending ASWs to ask admissions officers what % of their 2L class will be working at such firms in summer 2010, and then to post the responses here.

Because that will get an honest answer from admissions officers...

I understand your skepticism, but I doubt many admissions officers would outright lie when asked this precise question: "What percent of your current 2L class will be working as summer associates for NLJ250 firms in summer 2010?" Sure, some admissions people will pull a Sarah Palin and try to confuse you with non-sequiturs, or just say they don't know, but if they do that you're just as well off as if you hadn't asked in the first place. Some might give you the right answer. Surely this data is known to someone at each school, and the harder admits press, the better info they will ultimately get.

Better still, leveraging TLS' market power in reaching 0Ls, Ken could conduct a short survey of top schools (no need to limit to T14) and post the results for all to see. Schools that didn't answer could be assigned a scarlet letter of sorts. Since the survey would be composed of only one question (the one above), it wouldn't be hard to administer.

That's an idea.

I was at the law fair in San Diego and almost every school pulled the "we don't have that data." excuse. Except Vandy. Now, if Vandy can do it, so can Cornell, USC and Michigan. If they can't, I probably shouldn't be sending $150k to a law school with such a clearly incompetent CSO.

TTT-LS: Playing with this idea, what data can one reasonably expect law schools to have by January 15th?

Class of 2011 Data (current 2Ls):
- % of class with paid summer positions in 2009 (breakdown by law firm, govt., RA, PI)
- % of class with offers for paid summer positions in 2010 (similar breakdown)

Class of 2010 (current 3Ls)
- % with employment offers

Class of 2009 (graduates)
- % currently employed or in deferral land (breakdown and salary)

.

.

I think people are giving CSO's too much power in terms of their ability to know how students are doing jobwise. CSOs only get that information if students report the information. Therefore, while CSO could theoretically get this information if all their students participated in a survey (and accurately reported), it's not like when someone accepts an offer the CSO gets notified. I know UVA's CSO has a survey on Symplicity for students to fill out, but students are not forced to fill it out. While I think CSOs have the best idea of how students are doing, I would not treat them as having absolute access to accurate information regarding 2L hiring.

I really, really doubt NYU is at 80% for firm jobs. Maybe 80% have accepted some sort of offer, but certainly not all biglaw.

And Columbia and NYU seem to be having similar results. Students who went straight from undergrad at both schools with median or below grades didn't do that well. Students in the top 2/3s with solid career plans and interviewing skills ended up with offers.

Anonymous User wrote:I really, really doubt NYU is at 80% for firm jobs. Maybe 80% have accepted some sort of offer, but certainly not all biglaw.

And Columbia and NYU seem to be having similar results. Students who went straight from undergrad at both schools with median or below grades didn't do that well. Students in the top 2/3s with solid career plans and interviewing skills ended up with offers.

I don't think anyone said these offers were "biglaw offers." I'd say below HYS and Columbia (not even sure of Chicago since I know people above median who got locked out and had to mass mail secondary markets), that you need to be AT LEAST top 1/3 of your class to have a decent shot at a biglaw job. Of course offers don't necessarily correlate with grades since people with good work experience and personalities might get an offer whereas a person with just a high GPA may not.

I know someone on the California Law Review at Berkeley with NO OFFERS. (It's a write-on law review, not grade on.) Then again, his grades aren't that good, but still, it's not a pretty year, which suggests that you need a ton of HHs and Hs to get offers at Berkeley.

I really don't expect things to look that good outside of HYS. Students everywhere outside of HYS had to heavily mass mail secondary markets and derived from my limited anecdotal evidence, including students at CCN. I think Columbia is a bit better off though than the schools ranked below.

all i said is ~100/450 people are still looking for firm jobs. where did the 80% come from? you got to figure maybe 50 ppl were committed to gov't/PI in the first place, some may have given up (but CS was taking resumes, and it would be simple to just send them your resume and end up on that 100) so...

lol also i really only know my closets friends' grades (and then only a general idea) anyway, so can't speculate on gradez

i posted about NYU

I'm at Vandy. The dean just sent an email that said 50% of the class had secured summer associate positions.

The number of UVA 2Ls applying for public interest grants for summer jobs increased from 18 last year to 40 this year.

TTT-LS wrote:

rondemarino wrote:TTT-LS: Playing with this idea, what data can one reasonably expect law schools to have by January 15th?

Class of 2011 Data (current 2Ls):
- % of class with paid summer positions in 2009 (breakdown by law firm, govt., RA, PI)
- % of class with offers for paid summer positions in 2010 (similar breakdown)

Class of 2010 (current 3Ls)
- % with employment offers

Class of 2009 (graduates)
- % currently employed or in deferral land (breakdown and salary)

Each school's career office unquestionably has this kind of data, with a few caveats:

First, career offices may not be able to give exact numbers as to the c/o 2009, since firms have been rescinding offers, buying some people out, extending deferrals, and doing lots of other things that might cause (1) what was an offer of employment to evaporate; or (2) someone with a really bad offer (e.g., 2 year unpaid deferral) to begin looking elsewhere, such that they effectively are unemployed.

Second, I'm not sure career offices will be ready to give data on "paid" 2L summer employment by January, since many gov/PI employers, plus some small firms, do not hire until the spring. Large law firm hiring, on the other hand, will absolutely be over by then, such that the career offices can definitely give you numbers if they want to.

Third, for current 3Ls (c/o 2010), it may be tough to nail down numbers for firms like Dechert that have not made final decisions on who to hire from their summer classes. But still, there must be some rough numbers floating around internally that schools could disclose if they wanted to.

The bottom line is this: schools have the data, even if they claim otherwise. Career offices are surely providing info to their school's dean, even if there are small uncertainties built into the data.

This is highly credited. To take it in a different direction (which TTT-LS might not ascribe to), if someone with an acceptance in hand contacts a law school and asks to see this information, and the school's response is "we don't have that, sorry," your assumption should be that the school does not value you enough to be honest. The concerns I've heard some schools raise about privacy are just a pretext for not wanting to disclose all the data because they are hiding the worst of it and overrepresenting the best.

At least at our school each career services counselor has a list of 20-30 students, and they have a friendly competition each year to see who does the best. Dean Guthrie's email out to the 2Ls cites to "approximately 50% with summer associate positions," but there is certainly a lot more to discover about that statistic. Per usual, I want to see all law schools operating in a more ethical manner than their historical reputations, so I would suggest anyone considering Vanderbilt to contact the CSO asking them to release better information about 2L and 3L hiring.

Until people convince the ABA to start requiring better employment reporting, schools will only do so if you make it clear their reputations depend on making ethical representations about employment outcomes. And if enough of you do it, the schools that are hiding the bottom halves of their classes will take a hit.

In short, the beatings will continue until morale improves.

I've heard that at Brooklyn Law School (The Harvard of Downtown Brooklyn), something in the neighborhood of 7 students (not 7% of the class, 7 students), have lined up jobs through OCI.

Brooklyn is at more than 7 at V100. Including myself, I know 20 people who remained at the school and have accepted offers. The other roughly 20 people in the top 10% at the end of last year have transferred and of the ones I keep in contact with, all have received V100 offers. I would say the final breakdown is around 5-6% of the class. Not spectacular by any means but certainly glad I turned down the opportunities to transfer and stayed here with the full ride ITE.

UNC 2L here. From gathering information from various groups around the school it seems that possibly 25% have jobs currently. I am, of course, just estimating when I throw out that figure. Of that 25%, only half, possibly less, are big law. As I understand it, in years past UNC students dominated Charlotte. Due to the collapse, these jobs simply don't exist in that market anymore. That having been said, I only know of a couple of people who have gotten jobs there-definitely not a majority. I know several students on law review still searching. Overall, the outlook is fairly bleak.

Anyone know anything about the University of Michigan's numbers?