Harvard 2011 Applicants Forum

[cardinals1989]

I've been praying. Hard.

Wanna swap my Harvard acceptance for your Stanford acceptance? Because I would totally do that

if only there were some kind of acceptance seat black market!

The irony of having a black market for a legal degree is quite amusing.

[neonx]

I've been praying. Hard.

Wanna swap my Harvard acceptance for your Stanford acceptance? Because I would totally do that

if only there were some kind of acceptance seat black market!

The irony of having a black market for a legal degree is quite amusing.

Didn't we talk about this, cardsies? IDENTITY EXCHANGE.

[WestOfTheRest]

So waitlists this week. When do we think? My hope is monday, but I really can't say for sure.

[Knock]

So waitlists this week. When do we think? My hope is monday, but I really can't say for sure.

The sooner the better, imo.

[Xifeng]

.

[law_monkey]

So waitlists this week. When do we think? My hope is monday, but I really can't say for sure.

Since they're actually behind schedule for when they came out last year, my guess is definitely tomorrow. I do not expect to make it through tomorrow without an email from Harvard.

[WestOfTheRest]

So waitlists this week. When do we think? My hope is monday, but I really can't say for sure.

Since they're actually behind schedule for when they came out last year, my guess is definitely tomorrow. I do not expect to make it through tomorrow without an email from Harvard.

Last year a large round of rejections went out after the waitlists went out.

[neonx]

Tears will be shed tomorrow.

[tomwatts]

You think? I'd expect them to wait until they're done with the ASW (which has its final day tomorrow) before they do any more decisions.

[misterbingley]

So waitlists this week. When do we think? My hope is monday, but I really can't say for sure.

Since they're actually behind schedule for when they came out last year, my guess is definitely tomorrow. I do not expect to make it through tomorrow without an email from Harvard.

Too much optimism. I fully expect to make it to Friday before we hear a peep from the big H.

[ebeth]

You think? I'd expect them to wait until they're done with the ASW (which has its final day tomorrow) before they do any more decisions.

JR made admit calls on the Monday of March ASW. He's pretty good at multitasking.

[misterbingley]

Start of another business week...not good for my TLS addiction.
I srsly need to get work done, so I'm just gonna throw it out there that I'm not going to sign on again until the end of the business day.

If someone sees me posting, please call me out!

[slax]

-

[NikaneOkie]

My brother is partner in a top law firm, and he says the same thing.
Of course, my father says the opposite so...

For those feeling sad about not being admitted (yet of course, there is still hope), I thought this would cheer you up and also provide good material for the ding bar. This is advice sent to me by a seasoned, practicing big law lawyer. The world is not over if Harvard says no.

During my time at the firm I have served on the recruiting committee and get a window into the quality of education schools offer, the types of people that attend certain schools, etc. Every program has ups and downs, but in a nutshell my experience (time and again) with Harvard law grads is very negative.

Bottom line, the name alone gets you in the door - that much is true. People will almost always take a B student from Harvard over an A- student from GW (at least for the initial interview). There is something to be said for that kind of powerful cache. HOWEVER, once you are in the door, it is entirely up to you to be successful. Where people went to school is old news once you are IN the workforce. And, here is where Harvard grads are at a serious disadvantage. My experience is that they are (for the most part) NOT good practicing lawyers. They don't "get it." They don't realize that law is a lot of roll-up-your-sleeves hard work (or they feel above doing that). They don't understand that everything you do and say needs to be ticked, tied and fully supported. They order, pontificate and criticize, but can't produce. All of which is the kiss of death among practicing lawyers. Of course, all of the above is my personal (and certainly not the Firm's) opinion based on my experience with a handful of grads with whom I have worked and spoken re Harvard.

Just another opinion from someone out of law school and actually in the workforce. Your school helps you get in the door, but it doesn't define your career.

[chasgoose]

For those feeling sad about not being admitted (yet of course, there is still hope), I thought this would cheer you up and also provide good material for the ding bar. This is advice sent to me by a seasoned, practicing big law lawyer. The world is not over if Harvard says no.

During my time at the firm I have served on the recruiting committee and get a window into the quality of education schools offer, the types of people that attend certain schools, etc. Every program has ups and downs, but in a nutshell my experience (time and again) with Harvard law grads is very negative.

Bottom line, the name alone gets you in the door - that much is true. People will almost always take a B student from Harvard over an A- student from GW (at least for the initial interview). There is something to be said for that kind of powerful cache. HOWEVER, once you are in the door, it is entirely up to you to be successful. Where people went to school is old news once you are IN the workforce. And, here is where Harvard grads are at a serious disadvantage. My experience is that they are (for the most part) NOT good practicing lawyers. They don't "get it." They don't realize that law is a lot of roll-up-your-sleeves hard work (or they feel above doing that). They don't understand that everything you do and say needs to be ticked, tied and fully supported. They order, pontificate and criticize, but can't produce. All of which is the kiss of death among practicing lawyers. Of course, all of the above is my personal (and certainly not the Firm's) opinion based on my experience with a handful of grads with whom I have worked and spoken re Harvard.

Just another opinion from someone out of law school and actually in the workforce. Your school helps you get in the door, but it doesn't define your career.

Yeah, but going to HLS doesn't change you into someone that can't figure out how to be a successful lawyer and do the work necessary. HLS does change you into someone who can get that job a lot more easily than another candidate. Who cares if you have the chops to be a good lawyer if you can't get your foot in the door in the first place? Mostly playing devil's advocate here, but a little serious...

[neonx]

For those feeling sad about not being admitted (yet of course, there is still hope), I thought this would cheer you up and also provide good material for the ding bar. This is advice sent to me by a seasoned, practicing big law lawyer. The world is not over if Harvard says no.

During my time at the firm I have served on the recruiting committee and get a window into the quality of education schools offer, the types of people that attend certain schools, etc. Every program has ups and downs, but in a nutshell my experience (time and again) with Harvard law grads is very negative.

Bottom line, the name alone gets you in the door - that much is true. People will almost always take a B student from Harvard over an A- student from GW (at least for the initial interview). There is something to be said for that kind of powerful cache. HOWEVER, once you are in the door, it is entirely up to you to be successful. Where people went to school is old news once you are IN the workforce. And, here is where Harvard grads are at a serious disadvantage. My experience is that they are (for the most part) NOT good practicing lawyers. They don't "get it." They don't realize that law is a lot of roll-up-your-sleeves hard work (or they feel above doing that). They don't understand that everything you do and say needs to be ticked, tied and fully supported. They order, pontificate and criticize, but can't produce. All of which is the kiss of death among practicing lawyers. Of course, all of the above is my personal (and certainly not the Firm's) opinion based on my experience with a handful of grads with whom I have worked and spoken re Harvard.

Just another opinion from someone out of law school and actually in the workforce. Your school helps you get in the door, but it doesn't define your career.

Yeah, but going to HLS doesn't change you into someone that can't figure out how to be a successful lawyer and do the work necessary. HLS does change you into someone who can get that job a lot more easily than another candidate. Who cares if you have the chops to be a good lawyer if you can't get your foot in the door in the first place? Mostly playing devil's advocate here, but a little serious...

I'm interested to find out whether the same rules apply for Yale and Stanford.

[WestOfTheRest]

Thanks for the encouragement. Unfortunately it's not much of a consolation.

For those feeling sad about not being admitted (yet of course, there is still hope), I thought this would cheer you up and also provide good material for the ding bar. This is advice sent to me by a seasoned, practicing big law lawyer. The world is not over if Harvard says no.

During my time at the firm I have served on the recruiting committee and get a window into the quality of education schools offer, the types of people that attend certain schools, etc. Every program has ups and downs, but in a nutshell my experience (time and again) with Harvard law grads is very negative.

Bottom line, the name alone gets you in the door - that much is true. People will almost always take a B student from Harvard over an A- student from GW (at least for the initial interview). There is something to be said for that kind of powerful cache. HOWEVER, once you are in the door, it is entirely up to you to be successful. Where people went to school is old news once you are IN the workforce. And, here is where Harvard grads are at a serious disadvantage. My experience is that they are (for the most part) NOT good practicing lawyers. They don't "get it." They don't realize that law is a lot of roll-up-your-sleeves hard work (or they feel above doing that). They don't understand that everything you do and say needs to be ticked, tied and fully supported. They order, pontificate and criticize, but can't produce. All of which is the kiss of death among practicing lawyers. Of course, all of the above is my personal (and certainly not the Firm's) opinion based on my experience with a handful of grads with whom I have worked and spoken re Harvard.

Just another opinion from someone out of law school and actually in the workforce. Your school helps you get in the door, but it doesn't define your career.

[mcweanis]

tell me how unwaveringly fantastic everyone finds NYU grads to be, and THEN i'll feel better about not getting in to hahvahd.

[juliachild-ish]

For those feeling sad about not being admitted (yet of course, there is still hope), I thought this would cheer you up and also provide good material for the ding bar. This is advice sent to me by a seasoned, practicing big law lawyer. The world is not over if Harvard says no.

During my time at the firm I have served on the recruiting committee and get a window into the quality of education schools offer, the types of people that attend certain schools, etc. Every program has ups and downs, but in a nutshell my experience (time and again) with Harvard law grads is very negative.

Bottom line, the name alone gets you in the door - that much is true. People will almost always take a B student from Harvard over an A- student from GW (at least for the initial interview). There is something to be said for that kind of powerful cache. HOWEVER, once you are in the door, it is entirely up to you to be successful. Where people went to school is old news once you are IN the workforce. And, here is where Harvard grads are at a serious disadvantage. My experience is that they are (for the most part) NOT good practicing lawyers. They don't "get it." They don't realize that law is a lot of roll-up-your-sleeves hard work (or they feel above doing that). They don't understand that everything you do and say needs to be ticked, tied and fully supported. They order, pontificate and criticize, but can't produce. All of which is the kiss of death among practicing lawyers. Of course, all of the above is my personal (and certainly not the Firm's) opinion based on my experience with a handful of grads with whom I have worked and spoken re Harvard.

Just another opinion from someone out of law school and actually in the workforce. Your school helps you get in the door, but it doesn't define your career.

Yeah, but going to HLS doesn't change you into someone that can't figure out how to be a successful lawyer and do the work necessary. HLS does change you into someone who can get that job a lot more easily than another candidate. Who cares if you have the chops to be a good lawyer if you can't get your foot in the door in the first place? Mostly playing devil's advocate here, but a little serious...

Ah, but potentially other law schools do train you how to be a successful lawyer and work extremely hard (I'm just a 0L though, so what do I know). My personal anti-Harvard bias is well-known, but here is a direct quote from a major partner at Jones Day: "Frankly (and I will just speak for myself on this, trust me) some of the Harvard students these days are less grounded; I can't explain it, but we seem to do better from some other schools." That is an extremely diplomatic quote from an email written to my dad, who went to Harvard. He then went on to strongly encourage me towards a full-ride at either UT or Northwestern.

[NikaneOkie]

I'm interested to find out whether the same rules apply for Yale and Stanford.

I do want to mention that most of my information comes from my family members and their partners- Nevertheless, they're good lawyers (and still young), so I think their advice is decent.

I've heard that Yale actually makes quite bad lawyers, since they don't really prepare you to practice. Rather, they simply prepare you for academic careers.
Stanford has very few graduates, so the pool is quite small, but I've heard good things about SLS lawyers.

[jd2014!]

tell me how unwaveringly fantastic everyone finds NYU grads to be, and THEN i'll feel better about not getting in to hahvahd.

this.

[chasgoose]

For those feeling sad about not being admitted (yet of course, there is still hope), I thought this would cheer you up and also provide good material for the ding bar. This is advice sent to me by a seasoned, practicing big law lawyer. The world is not over if Harvard says no.

During my time at the firm I have served on the recruiting committee and get a window into the quality of education schools offer, the types of people that attend certain schools, etc. Every program has ups and downs, but in a nutshell my experience (time and again) with Harvard law grads is very negative.

Bottom line, the name alone gets you in the door - that much is true. People will almost always take a B student from Harvard over an A- student from GW (at least for the initial interview). There is something to be said for that kind of powerful cache. HOWEVER, once you are in the door, it is entirely up to you to be successful. Where people went to school is old news once you are IN the workforce. And, here is where Harvard grads are at a serious disadvantage. My experience is that they are (for the most part) NOT good practicing lawyers. They don't "get it." They don't realize that law is a lot of roll-up-your-sleeves hard work (or they feel above doing that). They don't understand that everything you do and say needs to be ticked, tied and fully supported. They order, pontificate and criticize, but can't produce. All of which is the kiss of death among practicing lawyers. Of course, all of the above is my personal (and certainly not the Firm's) opinion based on my experience with a handful of grads with whom I have worked and spoken re Harvard.

Just another opinion from someone out of law school and actually in the workforce. Your school helps you get in the door, but it doesn't define your career.

Yeah, but going to HLS doesn't change you into someone that can't figure out how to be a successful lawyer and do the work necessary. HLS does change you into someone who can get that job a lot more easily than another candidate. Who cares if you have the chops to be a good lawyer if you can't get your foot in the door in the first place? Mostly playing devil's advocate here, but a little serious...

Ah, but potentially other law schools do train you how to be a successful lawyer and work extremely hard (I'm just a 0L though, so what do I know). My personal anti-Harvard bias is well-known, but here is a direct quote from a major partner at Jones Day: "Frankly (and I will just speak for myself on this, trust me) some of the Harvard students these days are less grounded; I can't explain it, but we seem to do better from some other schools." That is an extremely diplomatic quote from an email written to my dad, who went to Harvard. He then went on to strongly encourage me towards a full-ride at either UT or Northwestern.

Unfortunately most law schools don't seem to really train you how to be a lawyer. Going to Harvard isn't going to put you at a disadvantage in that regard.

[vanwinkle]

Ah, but potentially other law schools do train you how to be a successful lawyer and work extremely hard (I'm just a 0L though, so what do I know).

As someone who has attended both a lower T14 and Harvard, let me address a couple things:

1) No law school trains you how to work extremely hard. You're expected to bring that with you, or have some natural talent that enables you to live without it, or end up in the bottom of the class. In fact, that's a large part of the reason top schools are focusing so much on prior work experience now; it's a sign that you already know hard work. Getting into Harvard means essentially you've been pre-screened and deemed likely to have that quality already.

2) I think there may be a sense of entitlement among some Harvard students, but it's on an individual basis. If you're not entitled when you get here, it's not likely to make you that way. People who carry that sense of entitlement, I think, bring it with them, and it's more noticeable here because the Harvard name just feeds that already-existing trait.

3) You get roughly the same classroom training at Harvard and other law schools. The difference in classroom education is not, based on what I can tell, significantly different from what you'd get at a lower T14, or even a lower T1 school. You're learning roughly the same subjects, often from the same casebook, and from professors who themselves learned at HLS/YLS and use that as a model for teaching. The reason professors at Harvard are impressive is typically their prior experience and knowledge, or their current scholarship and publishing, not that they're somehow magically better at teaching law than every other school out there.

4) You're responsible in law school for determining your own level of practical training, and this is true everywhere you go. I think a lot of people here just do three years of classroom study and don't take an interest in real-world legal training, so when they graduate they have little experience in practical application of law. But the school offers clinics, workshops, and student organizations that enable you to prepare yourself if you choose to do so. By now I've written dozens of motions, briefs, and letters used in actual litigation through the clinics, internships, and pro bono work that I've done.

It's just bad to assume that stereotypes are universal, in general. You can come here and do poorly. You can go elsewhere and do well. There's a definite name advantage to going to Harvard, but you shouldn't assume that coming here over another school magically means everything about who you are as an individual will be radically different when you graduate.

[slax]

-

[WestOfTheRest]

So have you decided not to go to Harvard now?

Ah, but potentially other law schools do train you how to be a successful lawyer and work extremely hard (I'm just a 0L though, so what do I know).

As someone who has attended both a lower T14 and Harvard, let me address a couple things:

1) No law school trains you how to work extremely hard. You're expected to bring that with you, or have some natural talent that enables you to live without it, or end up in the bottom of the class. In fact, that's a large part of the reason top schools are focusing so much on prior work experience now; it's a sign that you already know hard work. Getting into Harvard means essentially you've been pre-screened and deemed likely to have that quality already.

2) I think there may be a sense of entitlement among some Harvard students, but it's on an individual basis. If you're not entitled when you get here, it's not likely to make you that way. People who carry that sense of entitlement, I think, bring it with them, and it's more noticeable here because the Harvard name just feeds that already-existing trait.

3) You get roughly the same classroom training at Harvard and other law schools. The difference in classroom education is not, based on what I can tell, significantly different from what you'd get at a lower T14, or even a lower T1 school. You're learning roughly the same subjects, often from the same subject, and from professors who themselves learned at HLS/YLS and use that as a model for teaching. The reason professors at Harvard are impressive is typically their prior experience and knowledge, or their current scholarship and publishing, not that they're somehow magically better at teaching law than every other school out there.

4) You're responsible in law school for determining your own level of practical training, and this is true everywhere you go. I think a lot of people here just do three years of classroom study and don't take an interest in real-world legal training, so when they graduate they have little experience in practical application of law. But the school offers clinics, workshops, and student organizations that enable you to prepare yourself if you choose to do so. By now I've written dozens of motions, briefs, and letters used in actual litigation through the clinics, internships, and pro bono work that I've done.

It's just bad to assume that stereotypes are universal, in general. You can come here and do poorly. You can go elsewhere and do well. There's a definite name advantage to going to Harvard, but you shouldn't assume that coming here over another school magically means everything about who you are as an individual will be radically different when you graduate.

Not a student there, but from my experience at ASW, it seemed that clinics at Harvard, according to the presentations and literature, do lean towards theory over practice compared to other schools I visited.

I also asked the dean at the Q&A: We've heard so much about research opportunities and traveling abroad. To that point, one of the presenters stated that Harvard teaches leaders who need to know about the law rather than lawyers. So what is special about Harvard for someone who just wants to be a plain old lawyer?

She said that Harvard employs people to teach who are at the peak of the profession and that she promises that Harvard does in fact care about the actual practice of law. That's pretty much all she offered before returning to the idea of theory in her answer directly about practice.

Should a law school really need to convince people that they care about the practice of law? For someone like me who does not want to do public interest, research, academia, theory work, or work in NYC - why is Harvard worth the full price? I don't see a reason, but just my opinion.

I would love to know why you left UVa for Harvard, but that it a bit off topic and personal, so I understand if you don't want to answer in this thread or at all.