Top Law Schools

Northwestern 1L here.

I had a 3.8 in the Fall, and I feel really confident that I performed equally well in the Spring, so I anticipate to get another 3.8 for this past term, putting me at a 3.8 1L cumulative. This is top 15% based on my estimation, given that the median is a 3.36 here (I think).

I want to transfer to Harvard Law, but I would be pretty happy at Columbia, Chicago, NYU, or Berkeley.

I've surfed around the Yahoo group, but its hard to find stats for people transferring out of NW to other schools, there seems to be a lot more info for top 5% kids from lower ranked schools. Anybody got a guess as to my chances?

Is a 3.8 enough to grade you on to Law Review? If so, I don't understand why you would transfer to UChicago or Columbia. If not, I still don't really understand UChicago (This from someone who transfered in to Chicago, by the way,) though Columbia might make sense if you really want to practice in NYC.

That said, I'd throw an application at HYS--you might hit one of them, Harvard being most likely.

I do not have the option to grade on to any journal, let alone the law review here. I know multiple people with a higher GPA than myself who are not on law review because they slacked for the writing comp.

U Chi not based on ranking, but based on my significant other going there for business school. I'd take LR @ NW over U Chi or Columbia though. It's just really hard to predict whether I'll get on Law REview, heck I couldn't make that claim even if I had a 4.1 here.

Ah, so no one grades on to LR at Northwestern?

Be aware that getting on to LR via the write-on at Chicago is tough. They only take 10 people via the write-on (19ish grade-on,) and only 2 of those can be transfers (though no transfers made it on to LR the past two years). From there, you have Topic Access (the note-on,) which is a notoriously fickle process (no one managed to do it this year).

Honestly, I hate to say it, but transferring to UChicago because your significant other is going to Booth is a really bad idea. I really do want to emphasize that you *do* lose something when you transfer--whether it's connections with professors, etc. You should also be aware that UChicago really is a different environment--it is much, much more academia-focused. If you enjoy the practical/business outlook at Northwestern, you probably wouldn't be very happy down in Hyde Park--so I'm just not sure exactly how much you have to gain.

Where do you want to practice? I can see CLS for NYC or Berkeley for the west coast. NU to U Chicago would be pretty pointless if you want Chicago and employers will look at you funny (there was one NU to U of C transfer last year IIRC).

If your SO is going to Chicago/Booth, she can take classes at the downtown Gleacher Center -about three blocks away. Lots of full-time students take all of there classes there. What am I missing?

nice GPA, I would say HLS for sure.

.

Why is NW so shady about percentiles?

,

TTT-LS wrote: 1. Rankings and such are not consistent with "the Northwestern Difference(tm)"--i.e., the notion that we're not a competitive, rank-obsessed law school. And for the most part in my three years I've found that to be true.

inconsistent with DVZ's frequent emails re rankings.

TTT-LS wrote: 2. It helps us get people at, just above, and just below the median secure jobs when it is impossible to tell what the median is. See also U. Chicago's completely impenetrable grading system.

I don't think employers respond to confusing statistics regarding standing by "hiring" people, but maybe you're right and a smoke-screen increases employment, although by your theory, people above median could arguably be HURT for employment prospects given that the smoke-screen precludes them from asserting a 'higher than median' standing. So I don't buy this point.

TTT-LS wrote: 3. We do publish some cutoffs at graduation, as I've posted elsewhere, but those cutoffs bear little relation to those at the end of 1L, since there's so much grade inflation in upper division courses.

Meaningless other than for 1) distinction between CL and MCL, 2) no honors and CL, at which point people either have a job, or are not going to rely on grades to get jobs anyway.
The only relevant time for class standing is post 1L, and maybe post 2L.

.

There's a top 2% guy at CCN right now who xferred in, has no LR, and is being told by career services that he might have an outside shot at flyover D. Ct. clerkships.

While your posts on this thread were all very solid, this is just ridiculous.

edit: not to say NU top of the class + LR wouldn't be better for clerking.

TTT-LS wrote: 1. A guy with a 3.8x after my 1L year applied to HLS and did not get in. He did not have stellar uGPA, however, and I don't think he applied to or was accepted by HLS as a 0L. That's just one datapoint, though, and I'm sure a 3.8 is high enough to get HLS if the rest of your app is decent.

This is kind of disappointing, although one data point. I wonder if he was one of the big-time splitters who had a surreal LSAT and a 2.8 GPA.

TTT-LS wrote: 2. You will probably find out about NU Law Review before you have to make a decision about whether to accept a xfer slot. So you could apply, see where you get in, and then decide. My sense is that NU + LR is better than all of the schools you mentioned except maybe HLS--though if you want to practice and live in NYC then I guess NYU or CLS could make sense too.

+ Columbia

TTT-LS wrote: 3. You'll probably cost yourself a lot of clerkship potential if you transfer. You could completely luck out and establish strong ties w/profs + get strong grades at the new school, but you almost certainly won't have LR, putting you at a serious disadvantage. There's a top 2% guy at CCN right now who xferred in, has no LR, and is being told by career services that he might have an outside shot at flyover D. Ct. clerkships.

This is something I haven't given any thought to whatsoever, so thanks for this addition. Sorry if you're all jacked up about me disagreeing with a couple of your earlier points. It is patently false to say that NW isn't 'rank obsessed'. I strongly suspect that the smoke screen's purpose is the same reason 'everybody' journals on, NW wants to maintain that employment ranking on the NLJ, so it spins right back to rank obsession. NW wants "their" rank to be totally empirical and known, but will not extend that convenience to its own student body.

transfering from a t14 to HLS don't you need to be like top 5% in your t14 class?

if it's top 15% you don't have a shot right?

hubtubrub wrote:transfering from a t14 to HLS don't you need to be like top 5% in your t14 class?

if it's top 15% you don't have a shot right?

That's kind of my question. Yahoo transfer board has limited information regarding T14->HLS information.
My hope is it's more like top 10% for t14, but your general proposition has an affirmative action exception to it. I cannot think of a reason why affirmative action would be fine for 1L admission, but not for 2L transfer.

ToTransferOrNot wrote:Ah, so no one grades on to LR at Northwestern?

I'm prepared to go beyond that proposition. Staring at my writing competition packet, I think it might actually be possible that nobody MAKES it on to LR at Northwestern. It might just be an empty group, with no members at all!

.

tbo123123 wrote:

TTT-LS wrote: 2. It helps us get people at, just above, and just below the median secure jobs when it is impossible to tell what the median is. See also U. Chicago's completely impenetrable grading system.

I don't think employers respond to confusing statistics regarding standing by "hiring" people, but maybe you're right and a smoke-screen increases employment, although by your theory, people above median could arguably be HURT for employment prospects given that the smoke-screen precludes them from asserting a 'higher than median' standing. So I don't buy this point.

The smoke screen hurts people just above median, but it probably helps people just below a lot more. There isn't a lick of difference between 3.37 and 3.34, but you tell an employer the median is 3.36, and it creates a cognitive difference. The banded curve ensures that employers have to compare GPAs in rough increments, which makes the whole process more fair.

It is patently false to say that NW isn't 'rank obsessed'.

You're punning on the word 'rank'.

tbo123123 wrote:U Chi not based on ranking, but based on my significant other going there for business school.

you care enough about him/her to make a minor prestige jump, but not enough to stay in Chicago?

IAFG wrote:

tbo123123 wrote:U Chi not based on ranking, but based on my significant other going there for business school.

you care enough about him/her to make a minor prestige jump, but not enough to stay in Chicago?

Well, if there were no minuses to transfering from NU to UChicago, there would be no harm in making the jump--there's really no contradiction there. I just think OP failed to think through the negatives involved with the NU->UChicago xfer.

On the other hand, a switch to HYS is much more than a minor prestige jump--and, for many people, would fully justify a LTR for 2 years. HYS is on a different level than CCN, not to mention the rest of the T14. NU is a fantastic school, but it won't open the same doors HYS will open.