Harvard Student(s) Answering Your Questions

A forum for applicants and admitted students to ask law students and graduates about law school and the practice of law.
User avatar
radio1nowhere
Posts: 445
Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2015 7:01 pm

Re: Harvard Student(s) Answering Your Questions

Postby radio1nowhere » Wed Feb 15, 2017 2:41 pm

yschaf wrote:Hi guys - anyone had Ramseyer in general, or in particular for Japanese Law? He's visiting at UChicago and would like to get more info on teaching style etc.


Had him for corporations. Tbh the class was so boring that I stopped going after a while. Still did well because I bought his hornbook, which is essentially the ultimate study guide for the class.

However, I dunno if any of that is applicable for your situation — I imagine that he'd be more enthusiastic about a Japanese law class, since that's what his research is all about. I also imagine that the dynamic would be much different in a smaller class (as I assume Japanese law will be), as opposed to a 100-person black-letter.

On a personal level: he's an incredibly nice man who obviously cares a lot about his students and is always willing to explain things. He's also a little awkward and eccentric.

o0o0o0o
Posts: 87
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 4:44 pm

Re: Harvard Student(s) Answering Your Questions

Postby o0o0o0o » Thu Feb 16, 2017 4:30 pm

radio1nowhere wrote:
yschaf wrote:Hi guys - anyone had Ramseyer in general, or in particular for Japanese Law? He's visiting at UChicago and would like to get more info on teaching style etc.


Had him for corporations. Tbh the class was so boring that I stopped going after a while. Still did well because I bought his hornbook, which is essentially the ultimate study guide for the class.

However, I dunno if any of that is applicable for your situation — I imagine that he'd be more enthusiastic about a Japanese law class, since that's what his research is all about. I also imagine that the dynamic would be much different in a smaller class (as I assume Japanese law will be), as opposed to a 100-person black-letter.

On a personal level: he's an incredibly nice man who obviously cares a lot about his students and is always willing to explain things. He's also a little awkward and eccentric.


Also had him for corps, +1 to all of this

esther0123
Posts: 279
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2012 3:40 am

Re: Harvard Student(s) Answering Your Questions

Postby esther0123 » Sun Feb 19, 2017 12:47 am

Can you get a DS in a clinic? How would that even happen? Seems hard to evaluate clinic performance in a standardized way..

thewhalefish
Posts: 91
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2017 10:58 pm

Re: Harvard Student(s) Answering Your Questions

Postby thewhalefish » Sun Feb 19, 2017 1:10 am

Has anyone here taken/ is focusing on constitutional law or civil/human rights? What's that like at HLS?

hlsperson1111
Posts: 320
Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2012 11:10 pm

Re: Harvard Student(s) Answering Your Questions

Postby hlsperson1111 » Sun Feb 19, 2017 12:16 pm

esther0123 wrote:Can you get a DS in a clinic? How would that even happen? Seems hard to evaluate clinic performance in a standardized way..


You can get a DS in a clinic. I did.

User avatar
Nonconsecutive
Posts: 2398
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2012 4:58 pm

Re: Harvard Student(s) Answering Your Questions

Postby Nonconsecutive » Sun Feb 19, 2017 4:38 pm

hlsperson1111 wrote:
esther0123 wrote:Can you get a DS in a clinic? How would that even happen? Seems hard to evaluate clinic performance in a standardized way..


You can get a DS in a clinic. I did.


Yes, I know of DSes in clinics as well (I also know of at least one confirmed LP). That said, I've had one clinic director flat out say they don't give DSes (for what that's worth), so I think this - like everything else - comes down to the specific clinic.

esther0123
Posts: 279
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2012 3:40 am

Re: Harvard Student(s) Answering Your Questions

Postby esther0123 » Sun Feb 19, 2017 7:39 pm

hlsperson1111 wrote:
esther0123 wrote:Can you get a DS in a clinic? How would that even happen? Seems hard to evaluate clinic performance in a standardized way..


You can get a DS in a clinic. I did.


Thanks for your reply -- did you do anything particularly differently? or just "work hard, do your best," as it applies to all other DS-offering courses?

tomwatts
Posts: 1694
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 12:01 am

Re: Harvard Student(s) Answering Your Questions

Postby tomwatts » Mon Feb 20, 2017 12:06 am

thewhalefish wrote:Has anyone here taken/ is focusing on constitutional law or civil/human rights? What's that like at HLS?

As with anything at HLS, because it's a huge school, there are a ton of options. The con law profs at HLS are particularly good; there are at least two who I can say from my own experience are absolutely top-notch teachers, and there are a couple others with good reputations. You can get a range of perspectives: Klarman is a historian, Feldman is a commentator and theorist, Tribe is an appellate advocate, Sutton (who visits every January term and teaches State Con Law) is a sitting judge, etc. There are also classes connected with international human rights, but I know less about those offerings. Regardless, you are unlikely to run out of interesting courses and points of view.

I feel obligated to point out that it's hard (not impossible, but hard) to get a job doing anything directly in those fields, though.

thewhalefish
Posts: 91
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2017 10:58 pm

Re: Harvard Student(s) Answering Your Questions

Postby thewhalefish » Mon Feb 20, 2017 1:03 am

tomwatts wrote:
thewhalefish wrote:Has anyone here taken/ is focusing on constitutional law or civil/human rights? What's that like at HLS?

As with anything at HLS, because it's a huge school, there are a ton of options. The con law profs at HLS are particularly good; there are at least two who I can say from my own experience are absolutely top-notch teachers, and there are a couple others with good reputations. You can get a range of perspectives: Klarman is a historian, Feldman is a commentator and theorist, Tribe is an appellate advocate, Sutton (who visits every January term and teaches State Con Law) is a sitting judge, etc. There are also classes connected with international human rights, but I know less about those offerings. Regardless, you are unlikely to run out of interesting courses and points of view.

I feel obligated to point out that it's hard (not impossible, but hard) to get a job doing anything directly in those fields, though.


Thanks for your reply! I'm trying to find a good balance with those that will allow to work in DC PI. Or heck, even Boston. Of course, this is all assuming I'm admitted, etc.

alpinespring
Posts: 97
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2017 2:59 pm

Re: Harvard Student(s) Answering Your Questions

Postby alpinespring » Wed Feb 22, 2017 4:14 am

Thank you for taking the time to answer our questions.

Just out of curiosity: How would you describe the people who rank in the top 30% / 10% at HLS? Child prodigy-type guys? Super work-hard types?

When academic superstars from all across America (and the world) gather in one place, I wonder who makes it to the top. When ~500 summa / magna cum laudes compete.... most with similar cognitive horsepower (as measured by LSAT)... what's the distinguishing factor?

Is it the gifted/savant types? Photographic memory? Feel like there's a clear limit to how much effort and discipline can make a difference? Do you need to be born with a certain talent (reading for 10 hours straight, etc) to do well at Harvard?

Thank you in advance.

tomwatts
Posts: 1694
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 12:01 am

Re: Harvard Student(s) Answering Your Questions

Postby tomwatts » Wed Feb 22, 2017 11:31 am

alpinespring wrote:Just out of curiosity: How would you describe the people who rank in the top 30% / 10% at HLS?

I was in the top 10%. I think there were probably two major factors. The first is that I can write unusually quickly, typically around 1000 words per half hour in an exam. (This is not particularly fast typing; it's a little over 30 words/min. But for also coming up with those words, it's pretty fast.) So in any exam with a tight time limit — most of my exams in law school — I had an advantage, because I was writing probably 50% more than the average student. One of my friends was a Sears Prize winner in his 2L year and wrote a bit faster than I do, so I think this is a real thing — writing quickly is an advantage.

The second factor is probably that I put in more work than was typical, especially after 1L (but even during 1L). If anyone cares, my method is in the spoiler tags below. I don't think I did a lot more than might be expected for someone who is keeping up with the work in a class. (As I say below, it was probably an extra hour a day beyond just doing the reading, and a couple more hours each weekend.) But I didn't phone it in on any class at any point, and I paid attention in class, and I think a lot of people phone it in and goof off after first semester and especially after 1L.

As much as I'd like to think it was because I'm some sort of genius, it's probably not. Most everybody at Harvard is pretty smart, and I don't think I was especially smart by Harvard standards. I definitely don't have a photographic memory or anything like that. I was just consistently a good student. (And consistency really mattered — I didn't get any DSs after my first semester, but I got straight H's in every class in 2L and 3L.)

[+] Spoiler
My method, if anyone cares:

At least for my first three semesters, I read every assignment twice, first to get a general sense of what was going on and second to write a simple brief for each case. My brief listed facts (and, to the extent that it was relevant, procedural history), reasoning, outcome, and (very concisely) what any concurrences or dissents said. I'd often try to identify the issue or the holding, also, but that was sometimes a fool's game, depending on the class. During class, I transcribed most of what happened, usually at about a 3:1 or 4:1 compression (i.e., about every 3-4 sentences that the prof said, I'd write 1 in my notes, roughly).

Every 2-3 weeks, I went back over my notes for each class — which, for no-laptop classes, meant typing them up — and compressed those notes into an outline. I tried to alternate classes each week, so it was really just a couple hours every weekend going over the past few weeks for a couple of classes, and I usually didn't start doing this until a month or so into class, especially during 1L, when I had no idea what the heck was going on in each class. I again tried for more or less a 4:1 compression, so if I had 20 pages of notes, that would turn into 5 pages of outline, give or take.

Around exam time, I usually created a short outline — because by this point many of my outlines were 30-40 pages — that was pretty close to a checklist of what to look for in an exam, together with sentences or phrases to use in examining those issues. My short outlines were usually 4-6 pages, although some classes (Civ Pro, Fed Courts) couldn't be done in under 10. While my long outlines were chronological, going in the order that we went in class, my short outlines were usually rearranged in logical order, so that I had the issues in the order in which I probably wanted to discuss them on an exam. (This made a big difference in, say, Fed Courts, where the topics were horribly arranged during class, so I had to think a bit about how to rearrange them to hang together logically.) I also worked through as many practice tests from that professor as were available (usually 2-3, but sometimes as many as 5-7, depending on how many I could find).

I usually didn't mess around with hornbooks, but occasionally (e.g., Glannon for Civ Pro) I used one for additional explanation and extra practice. I also didn't highlight/underline/tab in my books at all.

This sounds like a lot of work, but it really wasn't. It was just maybe an extra hour each day and a few extra hours each weekend, compared to just doing the reading. It meant paying attention during class and not goofing off — I also probably had an advantage in laptop-allowed classes, because I was transcribing the class and most other people were on Gchat or buying things on Amazon or something — but paying attention in class isn't hard. It generally meant that I was doing less work during finals period, because I already had read everything and made my long outline.

I occasionally didn't do the reading before a class and had to do it after. I occasionally didn't bring an outline up to date for 5-6 weeks instead of after 2-3. So I didn't always follow the schedule exactly. And after three semesters of this, I found that I didn't have to brief cases anymore, so I generally did the reading once instead of twice. (But that might also have been related to the fact that my profs basically stopped cold calling after my third semester.)

I can't swear that this will work for anyone else, or that I didn't waste some time in doing this. But I did end up getting magna, so it worked for me. And all of my notes, outlines, and exams are on HLS Dope, so you can see for yourself what everything looked like.

User avatar
Hildegard15
Posts: 2159
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2015 6:26 pm

Re: Harvard Student(s) Answering Your Questions

Postby Hildegard15 » Wed Feb 22, 2017 11:33 pm

alpinespring wrote:Thank you for taking the time to answer our questions.

Just out of curiosity: How would you describe the people who rank in the top 30% / 10% at HLS? Child prodigy-type guys? Super work-hard types?

When academic superstars from all across America (and the world) gather in one place, I wonder who makes it to the top. When ~500 summa / magna cum laudes compete.... most with similar cognitive horsepower (as measured by LSAT)... what's the distinguishing factor?

Is it the gifted/savant types? Photographic memory? Feel like there's a clear limit to how much effort and discipline can make a difference? Do you need to be born with a certain talent (reading for 10 hours straight, etc) to do well at Harvard?

Thank you in advance.


I did not do well my first semester, so I just would say not to underestimate how different law school can be from undergrad. At least for me, the material is very different from anything else I've ever studied, and it just doesn't come naturally to me. There are people here that absolutely love the law and get it. So while we all were successful in undergrad, not all of us are as naturally gifted at this type of material as we were with regard to whatever we studied before.

alpinespring
Posts: 97
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2017 2:59 pm

Re: Harvard Student(s) Answering Your Questions

Postby alpinespring » Thu Feb 23, 2017 12:44 am

tomwatts wrote:
alpinespring wrote:Just out of curiosity: How would you describe the people who rank in the top 30% / 10% at HLS?

I was in the top 10%. I think there were probably two major factors. The first is that I can write unusually quickly, typically around 1000 words per half hour in an exam. (This is not particularly fast typing; it's a little over 30 words/min. But for also coming up with those words, it's pretty fast.) So in any exam with a tight time limit — most of my exams in law school — I had an advantage, because I was writing probably 50% more than the average student. One of my friends was a Sears Prize winner in his 2L year and wrote a bit faster than I do, so I think this is a real thing — writing quickly is an advantage.

The second factor is probably that I put in more work than was typical, especially after 1L (but even during 1L). If anyone cares, my method is in the spoiler tags below. I don't think I did a lot more than might be expected for someone who is keeping up with the work in a class. (As I say below, it was probably an extra hour a day beyond just doing the reading, and a couple more hours each weekend.) But I didn't phone it in on any class at any point, and I paid attention in class, and I think a lot of people phone it in and goof off after first semester and especially after 1L.

As much as I'd like to think it was because I'm some sort of genius, it's probably not. Most everybody at Harvard is pretty smart, and I don't think I was especially smart by Harvard standards. I definitely don't have a photographic memory or anything like that. I was just consistently a good student. (And consistency really mattered — I didn't get any DSs after my first semester, but I got straight H's in every class in 2L and 3L.)

[+] Spoiler
My method, if anyone cares:

At least for my first three semesters, I read every assignment twice, first to get a general sense of what was going on and second to write a simple brief for each case. My brief listed facts (and, to the extent that it was relevant, procedural history), reasoning, outcome, and (very concisely) what any concurrences or dissents said. I'd often try to identify the issue or the holding, also, but that was sometimes a fool's game, depending on the class. During class, I transcribed most of what happened, usually at about a 3:1 or 4:1 compression (i.e., about every 3-4 sentences that the prof said, I'd write 1 in my notes, roughly).

Every 2-3 weeks, I went back over my notes for each class — which, for no-laptop classes, meant typing them up — and compressed those notes into an outline. I tried to alternate classes each week, so it was really just a couple hours every weekend going over the past few weeks for a couple of classes, and I usually didn't start doing this until a month or so into class, especially during 1L, when I had no idea what the heck was going on in each class. I again tried for more or less a 4:1 compression, so if I had 20 pages of notes, that would turn into 5 pages of outline, give or take.

Around exam time, I usually created a short outline — because by this point many of my outlines were 30-40 pages — that was pretty close to a checklist of what to look for in an exam, together with sentences or phrases to use in examining those issues. My short outlines were usually 4-6 pages, although some classes (Civ Pro, Fed Courts) couldn't be done in under 10. While my long outlines were chronological, going in the order that we went in class, my short outlines were usually rearranged in logical order, so that I had the issues in the order in which I probably wanted to discuss them on an exam. (This made a big difference in, say, Fed Courts, where the topics were horribly arranged during class, so I had to think a bit about how to rearrange them to hang together logically.) I also worked through as many practice tests from that professor as were available (usually 2-3, but sometimes as many as 5-7, depending on how many I could find).

I usually didn't mess around with hornbooks, but occasionally (e.g., Glannon for Civ Pro) I used one for additional explanation and extra practice. I also didn't highlight/underline/tab in my books at all.

This sounds like a lot of work, but it really wasn't. It was just maybe an extra hour each day and a few extra hours each weekend, compared to just doing the reading. It meant paying attention during class and not goofing off — I also probably had an advantage in laptop-allowed classes, because I was transcribing the class and most other people were on Gchat or buying things on Amazon or something — but paying attention in class isn't hard. It generally meant that I was doing less work during finals period, because I already had read everything and made my long outline.

I occasionally didn't do the reading before a class and had to do it after. I occasionally didn't bring an outline up to date for 5-6 weeks instead of after 2-3. So I didn't always follow the schedule exactly. And after three semesters of this, I found that I didn't have to brief cases anymore, so I generally did the reading once instead of twice. (But that might also have been related to the fact that my profs basically stopped cold calling after my third semester.)

I can't swear that this will work for anyone else, or that I didn't waste some time in doing this. But I did end up getting magna, so it worked for me. And all of my notes, outlines, and exams are on HLS Dope, so you can see for yourself what everything looked like.


Thank you for the insightful post! Congratulations on your amazing grades!

hlsperson1111
Posts: 320
Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2012 11:10 pm

Re: Harvard Student(s) Answering Your Questions

Postby hlsperson1111 » Thu Feb 23, 2017 7:51 pm

Chiming in to add that it sometimes takes a bit to get it. I had median-ish grades first semester 1L (2 H's, 3 P's). I got a total of 3 DS's and 4 P's in the remaining 5 semesters of law school. I don't think I'm a genius and I don't think I worked any harder - it's just a question of figuring out how to absorb the material and take exams.
Last edited by hlsperson1111 on Wed Mar 01, 2017 11:55 am, edited 1 time in total.

despina
Posts: 486
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2013 10:09 pm

Re: Harvard Student(s) Answering Your Questions

Postby despina » Thu Feb 23, 2017 11:23 pm

hlsperson1111 wrote:Chiming in to add that it sometimes takes a bit to get it. I had median-ish grades first semester 1L (2 H's, 3 P's). I got a total of 3 DS's and 4 P's in the remaining 5 semesters of law school. I don't think I'm a genius andI don't think I worked any harder - it's just a question of figuring out how to absorb the material and take exams.


Same. My 1L fall was 2H, 3P. I ended up with several DS and mostly H for the other five semesters, and wound up right around the middle of the cum laude range (so I'm guessing 15th percentile ish?).

In looking at the magna and cum laude lists at graduation, there were definitely people I was like "of course" (because they were just obviously geniuses or people who worked insanely hard or people who seemed to intuitively "get it"). But that's a smaller number, and I doubt I would have been an "of course" for anybody who had a class with me. For the rest of us, it seems to come down to some combination of dumb luck, "getting it", being solid / fast writers, and maybe taking classes with more generous curves. As tomwatts wrote above, I'm sure I benefited from being a fast and solid writer.

User avatar
jrf12886
Posts: 282
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2012 11:52 am

Re: Harvard Student(s) Answering Your Questions

Postby jrf12886 » Fri Feb 24, 2017 1:52 am

tomwatts wrote:
alpinespring wrote:Just out of curiosity: How would you describe the people who rank in the top 30% / 10% at HLS?

I was in the top 10%. I think there were probably two major factors. The first is that I can write unusually quickly, typically around 1000 words per half hour in an exam. (This is not particularly fast typing; it's a little over 30 words/min. But for also coming up with those words, it's pretty fast.) So in any exam with a tight time limit — most of my exams in law school — I had an advantage, because I was writing probably 50% more than the average student. One of my friends was a Sears Prize winner in his 2L year and wrote a bit faster than I do, so I think this is a real thing — writing quickly is an advantage.

The second factor is probably that I put in more work than was typical, especially after 1L (but even during 1L). If anyone cares, my method is in the spoiler tags below. I don't think I did a lot more than might be expected for someone who is keeping up with the work in a class. (As I say below, it was probably an extra hour a day beyond just doing the reading, and a couple more hours each weekend.) But I didn't phone it in on any class at any point, and I paid attention in class, and I think a lot of people phone it in and goof off after first semester and especially after 1L.

As much as I'd like to think it was because I'm some sort of genius, it's probably not. Most everybody at Harvard is pretty smart, and I don't think I was especially smart by Harvard standards. I definitely don't have a photographic memory or anything like that. I was just consistently a good student. (And consistency really mattered — I didn't get any DSs after my first semester, but I got straight H's in every class in 2L and 3L.)

[+] Spoiler
My method, if anyone cares:

At least for my first three semesters, I read every assignment twice, first to get a general sense of what was going on and second to write a simple brief for each case. My brief listed facts (and, to the extent that it was relevant, procedural history), reasoning, outcome, and (very concisely) what any concurrences or dissents said. I'd often try to identify the issue or the holding, also, but that was sometimes a fool's game, depending on the class. During class, I transcribed most of what happened, usually at about a 3:1 or 4:1 compression (i.e., about every 3-4 sentences that the prof said, I'd write 1 in my notes, roughly).

Every 2-3 weeks, I went back over my notes for each class — which, for no-laptop classes, meant typing them up — and compressed those notes into an outline. I tried to alternate classes each week, so it was really just a couple hours every weekend going over the past few weeks for a couple of classes, and I usually didn't start doing this until a month or so into class, especially during 1L, when I had no idea what the heck was going on in each class. I again tried for more or less a 4:1 compression, so if I had 20 pages of notes, that would turn into 5 pages of outline, give or take.

Around exam time, I usually created a short outline — because by this point many of my outlines were 30-40 pages — that was pretty close to a checklist of what to look for in an exam, together with sentences or phrases to use in examining those issues. My short outlines were usually 4-6 pages, although some classes (Civ Pro, Fed Courts) couldn't be done in under 10. While my long outlines were chronological, going in the order that we went in class, my short outlines were usually rearranged in logical order, so that I had the issues in the order in which I probably wanted to discuss them on an exam. (This made a big difference in, say, Fed Courts, where the topics were horribly arranged during class, so I had to think a bit about how to rearrange them to hang together logically.) I also worked through as many practice tests from that professor as were available (usually 2-3, but sometimes as many as 5-7, depending on how many I could find).

I usually didn't mess around with hornbooks, but occasionally (e.g., Glannon for Civ Pro) I used one for additional explanation and extra practice. I also didn't highlight/underline/tab in my books at all.

This sounds like a lot of work, but it really wasn't. It was just maybe an extra hour each day and a few extra hours each weekend, compared to just doing the reading. It meant paying attention during class and not goofing off — I also probably had an advantage in laptop-allowed classes, because I was transcribing the class and most other people were on Gchat or buying things on Amazon or something — but paying attention in class isn't hard. It generally meant that I was doing less work during finals period, because I already had read everything and made my long outline.

I occasionally didn't do the reading before a class and had to do it after. I occasionally didn't bring an outline up to date for 5-6 weeks instead of after 2-3. So I didn't always follow the schedule exactly. And after three semesters of this, I found that I didn't have to brief cases anymore, so I generally did the reading once instead of twice. (But that might also have been related to the fact that my profs basically stopped cold calling after my third semester.)

I can't swear that this will work for anyone else, or that I didn't waste some time in doing this. But I did end up getting magna, so it worked for me. And all of my notes, outlines, and exams are on HLS Dope, so you can see for yourself what everything looked like.


I just want to say this is really good advice, and I followed a similar routine (and had the same outcome). The main way I differed from this approach is I never really took notes on the facts of cases or the procedural background; instead, I focused on the holding. My view is that when you read the material (and you should be taking notes as you read to be suplemented by notes from the lectutre) is that you are preparing for the exam, not the lecture. Never get too worked up about being cold called. It does not effect your grade. It's more important that you understand the major concepts (for issue spotting) and be able quickly recall the relevant case (to flesh out your exam answer). The lecture is basically to highlite what the professor thinks is important (which you should definitely take note of for the exam).

Also, the advice about starting to outline a month into the semester is highly credited. This will put you ahead of the pack. I typically dedicated weekends to outlining the previous week's material (at least for 1L...I got lazier in subsequent years). Then I also made a short outline about 2-3 weeks before the exam. (for example: 80-100 pages of notes becomes 40 pages of outine, becomes 5 pages of short outline)

The only other piece of advice I'd give is to do practice exams. I tried to do one practice exam for each course under timed conditions in the library. There is a databank of old exams, I believe in the library wesite. Even if my professor didn't have any, I would take one from another professor. This is very helpful in just calming your nerves about time pressure and gives you a chance to spot areas where your knowledge may be thin so you can go back and review.

CenterFringe
Posts: 104
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2016 7:30 pm

Re: Harvard Student(s) Answering Your Questions

Postby CenterFringe » Fri Mar 03, 2017 7:46 pm

Just spent quite a bit of time reading the old parking posts, figure I might summarize to help out the next guy, and I'd like to have my misconceptions corrected. Please feel free to jump in and I'll update this post.

As you'd expect, people were split on whether it was worth it to own a car. I'm not going to touch that argument, but this summary is assuming you own one.

To summarize what I've read, if you live in Cambridge, you can get a $25 resident parking pass that allows you to park on most of the streets in Cambridge, including within a couple blocks of the school. It doesn't seem like too much trouble to find street parking close to campus. Quite a few other people keep a car, but still walk/public transport to school. You do need to move your car one day a month during street cleaning days, and be prepared to dig out a spot during the winter.

You can buy a reserved parking permit on campus for about 4k/year, which can be utilized 24/7. Unreserved spots are 2200 and can only be used 5am-3am M-F, and all weekend. There are additional special options. HLS official policy is "Parking at Harvard University is extremely limited and Harvard Parking Services recommends not bringing a car to campus."

The other option is check craigslist and pay 100-200/month to rent a spot from someone who lives in the area.

User avatar
polareagle
Posts: 211
Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2010 2:04 pm

Re: Harvard Student(s) Answering Your Questions

Postby polareagle » Fri Mar 03, 2017 9:44 pm

CenterFringe wrote:Just spent quite a bit of time reading the old parking posts, figure I might summarize to help out the next guy, and I'd like to have my misconceptions corrected. Please feel free to jump in and I'll update this post.

As you'd expect, people were split on whether it was worth it to own a car. I'm not going to touch that argument, but this summary is assuming you own one.

To summarize what I've read, if you live in Cambridge, you can get a $25 resident parking pass that allows you to park on most of the streets in Cambridge, including within a couple blocks of the school. It doesn't seem like too much trouble to find street parking close to campus. Quite a few other people keep a car, but still walk/public transport to school. You do need to move your car one day a month during street cleaning days, and be prepared to dig out a spot during the winter.

You can buy a reserved parking permit on campus for about 4k/year, which can be utilized 24/7. Unreserved spots are 2200 and can only be used 5am-3am M-F, and all weekend. There are additional special options. HLS official policy is "Parking at Harvard University is extremely limited and Harvard Parking Services recommends not bringing a car to campus."

The other option is check craigslist and pay 100-200/month to rent a spot from someone who lives in the area.


The only caveat to this, I believe, is that if you live in the dorms you don't qualify for a Cambridge parking pass. (I think they have it listed in their system and will reject your application.) But I'm recalling this from several years ago now and may be wrong.

alpinespring
Posts: 97
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2017 2:59 pm

Re: Harvard Student(s) Answering Your Questions

Postby alpinespring » Sat Mar 04, 2017 3:17 am

.
Last edited by alpinespring on Wed Mar 08, 2017 1:43 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
leslieknope
Posts: 1111
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2012 8:53 pm

Re: Harvard Student(s) Answering Your Questions

Postby leslieknope » Sun Mar 05, 2017 2:38 am

alpinespring wrote:Thank you Hilde.
I heard that many times before -- that there are people who just naturally "get" the law as if it's their second nature.

Do you think there's any meaningful way to tell if you're one of those people who will naturally "get" the law?

I'll give a contrary view - the people who go this school are, almost overwhelmingly, total normals who happen to have above average intelligence and/or work ethic. I know exactly one person who just "gets" the law because they're that smart and that intuitively gifted. Everyone else I know, even if they're brilliant and successful law students, have to work pretty hard to "get" the law. If you are that guy, you probably already know that. Otherwise, doing well is entirely about the work you're willing to put in and how skilled you are in transmitting that work into a good law school exam (and frankly, a good bit of luck too).

User avatar
TripTrip
Posts: 2758
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2012 9:52 am

Re: Harvard Student(s) Answering Your Questions

Postby TripTrip » Sun Mar 05, 2017 8:30 am

leslieknope wrote:
alpinespring wrote:Thank you Hilde.
I heard that many times before -- that there are people who just naturally "get" the law as if it's their second nature.

Do you think there's any meaningful way to tell if you're one of those people who will naturally "get" the law?

I'll give a contrary view - the people who go this school are, almost overwhelmingly, total normals who happen to have above average intelligence and/or work ethic. I know exactly one person who just "gets" the law because they're that smart and that intuitively gifted. Everyone else I know, even if they're brilliant and successful law students, have to work pretty hard to "get" the law. If you are that guy, you probably already know that. Otherwise, doing well is entirely about the work you're willing to put in and how skilled you are in transmitting that work into a good law school exam (and frankly, a good bit of luck too).

+1

The only people I know who just "instinctively got" the law were either kids of lawyers or they worked as paralegals out of undergrad.

User avatar
MyNameIsFlynn!
Posts: 806
Joined: Wed Apr 03, 2013 10:29 pm

Re: Harvard Student(s) Answering Your Questions

Postby MyNameIsFlynn! » Sun Mar 05, 2017 3:39 pm

TripTrip wrote:
leslieknope wrote:
alpinespring wrote:Thank you Hilde.
I heard that many times before -- that there are people who just naturally "get" the law as if it's their second nature.

Do you think there's any meaningful way to tell if you're one of those people who will naturally "get" the law?

I'll give a contrary view - the people who go this school are, almost overwhelmingly, total normals who happen to have above average intelligence and/or work ethic. I know exactly one person who just "gets" the law because they're that smart and that intuitively gifted. Everyone else I know, even if they're brilliant and successful law students, have to work pretty hard to "get" the law. If you are that guy, you probably already know that. Otherwise, doing well is entirely about the work you're willing to put in and how skilled you are in transmitting that work into a good law school exam (and frankly, a good bit of luck too).

+1

The only people I know who just "instinctively got" the law were either kids of lawyers or they worked as paralegals out of undergrad.


And what % of the student body do you think either descended from lawyers or worked as a paralegal?

robotrick
Posts: 156
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 11:53 am

Re: Harvard Student(s) Answering Your Questions

Postby robotrick » Sun Mar 05, 2017 3:49 pm

MyNameIsFlynn! wrote:
TripTrip wrote:
leslieknope wrote:
alpinespring wrote:Thank you Hilde.
I heard that many times before -- that there are people who just naturally "get" the law as if it's their second nature.

Do you think there's any meaningful way to tell if you're one of those people who will naturally "get" the law?

I'll give a contrary view - the people who go this school are, almost overwhelmingly, total normals who happen to have above average intelligence and/or work ethic. I know exactly one person who just "gets" the law because they're that smart and that intuitively gifted. Everyone else I know, even if they're brilliant and successful law students, have to work pretty hard to "get" the law. If you are that guy, you probably already know that. Otherwise, doing well is entirely about the work you're willing to put in and how skilled you are in transmitting that work into a good law school exam (and frankly, a good bit of luck too).

+1

The only people I know who just "instinctively got" the law were either kids of lawyers or they worked as paralegals out of undergrad.


And what % of the student body do you think either descended from lawyers or worked as a paralegal?

50%

User avatar
Dcc617
Posts: 2215
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2014 3:01 pm

Re: Harvard Student(s) Answering Your Questions

Postby Dcc617 » Sun Mar 05, 2017 4:05 pm

The real question is what do you hope to get from being at the top of your class? Do you want one of the handful of jobs that require it from Harvard (arguably just academia or super competitive clerkships)? If you don't, then why do you care? I feel like there is a group that feels the need to endlessly chase prestige and get the biggest ribbons possible. God bless them, but it's not how I want to live my life.

Right now I'm middle of the class. I want to work biglaw for a couple years and then go into public defense work. I'm still hammering out the details of how to make that happen, but I know grades won't stop me. If you want a biglaw job, grades won't stop you. If you want a cool government job, grades won't stop you. Public interest, etc.

Stop stressing about being in the top of your class before you even walk through the doors. Take time to make friends and enjoy life.

User avatar
TripTrip
Posts: 2758
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2012 9:52 am

Re: Harvard Student(s) Answering Your Questions

Postby TripTrip » Sun Mar 05, 2017 5:59 pm

Dcc617 wrote:The real question is what do you hope to get from being at the top of your class? Do you want one of the handful of jobs that require it from Harvard (arguably just academia or super competitive clerkships)? If you don't, then why do you care? I feel like there is a group that feels the need to endlessly chase prestige and get the biggest ribbons possible. God bless them, but it's not how I want to live my life.

Right now I'm middle of the class. I want to work biglaw for a couple years and then go into public defense work. I'm still hammering out the details of how to make that happen, but I know grades won't stop me. If you want a biglaw job, grades won't stop you. If you want a cool government job, grades won't stop you. Public interest, etc.

Stop stressing about being in the top of your class before you even walk through the doors. Take time to make friends and enjoy life.

+1 again.

tomwatts is the poster child for studying. I definitely didn't do that. I never wrote my own outline, never read a case twice, and focused on people instead of studying. I don't regret those decisions at all.




Return to “Ask a Law Student / Graduate”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: bluebottle, nasphill, ValeVale and 5 guests