doyleoil wrote:V5 and V10 placements probably got slammed because firms have become more regional in their recruiting. So we put a ton of people at Kirkland/Sidley/Mayer, but no one at, e.g., Cravath or Simpson Thacher.
Any evidence for firms becoming more regional in their recruiting besides the numbers in the Who Worked Where list?
Cravath, for instance, also dramatically shrunk its SA class size down to 27. They could have offered just as many spots percentage-wise to UChi kids. It would then be entirely possible for the very small number of UChi kids receiving offers all to turn down Cravath for offers from other places.
We also put only one person at Simpson Thacher last year.
The large numbers at Kirkland and Sidley might be more difficult to explain, but then I wonder how CLS and NYU fared relative to previous years at those firms. If they placed fewer people there, was that because of the bad economy shrinking the class size as a whole? The NYC office had a much greater reduction in SA class size (to 13 from 48) than the Chicago office (to 32 from 52). Our placement could be preserved simply because the firms have become more selective in terms of which schools they recruit from (based on, loosely, rankings), not which region we are from.
Yeah I probably should have clarified, and I think we're actually on the same page here. What I meant was, because classes are so much smaller, it seems like firms are more likely to make it a priority to keep getting a certain number of students from the local powerhouse but to be more selective elsewhere, where before they might have dipped deeper into the class. I'm sure Cravath would still be happy to get, e.g., the top 10% at U of C (whereas before they might have dipped to top quarter or something). But if none of the top 10% want Cravath, then they're probably not too concerned if they just don't grab any U of C'ers this year.
That's all I meant by "more regional." It's not that the top of the class at U of C can't get Cravath (or Simpson) if they want it. And it's not like those firms stopped coming to OCI (they didn't). We do have 6 people at Debevoise this summer, so it's not like we're getting shut out of NYC or anything.
Hamilton wrote:Can I go back to the transfer student question a few pages back? Do transfers fold into the continuing crowd pretty quickly? How are they viewed by professors/students?
I'm going to be very honest with you on a couple fronts. First, I don't really know any of the transfers in other classes, because I mostly just know my own class. I imagine the transition is made a little easier by the fact that most of your classes will have a mix of 2L's and 3L's. So it's not like you'll stick out like a sore thumb. I personally won't be standoffish, and I can't see people in my class being that way either. But you obviously know that people here already have their established "groups," in some sense. So I think getting involved in student org's, etc. is your best bet for getting to know people and mixing in a little.
Second, and this is far more touchy, the economy makes the transfer phenomenon a little awkward, and you should just be ready to face that head on. No reason for you to apologize for your situation, but neither should you think you're going to come in here and "take over". I think I read in a recent e-mail from our (outgoing) dean of students that Chicago is bringing in 25 people this year. Frankly, that number surprises me, especially when there are a good number of people in our class who are going to have trouble finding jobs. So you should just be sensitive to the fact that the situation "out there" (as much as it sucks) creates a little bit of anxiety in here. Just try to keep a sense of humor (and humility) about it and "lay low" when it comes to certain things. If you display any kind of "entitlement" at all, it will not be well-received.
That said, you're coming to a fantastic place with amazing professors. Appreciate and enjoy the opportunities you have now. You're very lucky.
ETA: One more thing about your relationship with professors. You're a year behind, so you're going to have to work hard to impress and get to know professors (NOT through annoying gunnerism, but through excellent performance on exams, on papers, and in class). If you do that, though, I can't see them being anything but highly receptive. One thing Chicago prides itself on is a fierce commitment to the best thinking without regard for "fame" or "prestige." You should read this description by Martha Nussbaum (on her reasons for turning down offers from Harvard and Brown): But equally important for me is the culture of the University of Chicago Law School, which has an intellectual intensity and fertility that is unique. People talk voraciously across lines of specialization, with a sense of everyone's equality. There are no stars; the entry-level assistant professor is treated with the same respect as the tenured professor. The ideas are what matter, not fame or glamor. This has been so for a long time, but I give particular credit to Saul Levmore, the current Dean, for his extremely fine leadership, both intellectually and in building a community in which this type of equal respect flourishes.http://leiterlawschool.typepad.com/leit ... n-her.html
It is absolutely true, and it is one of the things I appreciate most about this place. "Meritocracy" in the best sense pretty much sums it up.