CU Boulder 2011

Share Your Experiences, Read About Other Experiences. Please keep posts organized by school and expected year of graduation.
User avatar
upfish
Posts: 507
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2010 3:51 pm

Re: CU Boulder 2011

Postby upfish » Wed Mar 16, 2011 12:33 pm

Anybody else tried to negotiate scholarships? If so, have you heard anything back?

User avatar
chrisbru
Posts: 4252
Joined: Thu Oct 28, 2010 1:44 pm

Re: CU Boulder 2011

Postby chrisbru » Wed Mar 16, 2011 12:53 pm

typ3 wrote:

Full at Iowa vs Full at DU vs Full at Minnesota vs 45k At Michigan vs CC vs CU (Assuming I ever get in)?

Can't put a price on skiing, Chris.



As much as I want to tell you Iowa... I would guess Michigan being the best bet with Minnesota second. Gotta factor in the gf thing though...

User avatar
LeDique
Posts: 12695
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 2:10 pm

Re: CU Boulder 2011

Postby LeDique » Wed Mar 16, 2011 1:01 pm

upfish wrote:Anybody else tried to negotiate scholarships? If so, have you heard anything back?


I'm waiting until early next week to see if I have more offers to negotiate with. Otherwise I'll work with what I've got.

krad
Posts: 1897
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2010 10:33 am

Re: CU Boulder 2011

Postby krad » Wed Mar 16, 2011 1:02 pm

FWIW I know that they've told a few people that the scholly is non-negotiable.

User avatar
typ3
Posts: 1362
Joined: Sun Feb 28, 2010 12:04 am

Re: CU Boulder 2011

Postby typ3 » Wed Mar 16, 2011 1:05 pm

krad wrote:FWIW I know that they've told a few people that the scholly is non-negotiable.


Doesn't it generally depend on the candidate and their other offers? If it's a person with one other offer from a lower ranked school I imagine they wouldn't have much wiggle room. If it were a person with scholarship offers from the T-14 they might adjust (or at least one would hope).

LawSchoolPorFavor
Posts: 139
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2010 11:21 am

Re: CU Boulder 2011

Postby LawSchoolPorFavor » Wed Mar 16, 2011 1:35 pm

typ3 wrote:
krad wrote:FWIW I know that they've told a few people that the scholly is non-negotiable.


Doesn't it generally depend on the candidate and their other offers? If it's a person with one other offer from a lower ranked school I imagine they wouldn't have much wiggle room. If it were a person with scholarship offers from the T-14 they might adjust (or at least one would hope).


Some time ago I spoke with someone in the financial aid office about negotiating an offer- while I've seen on this board that most negotiations were knocked down, we spoke about my personal offers from other schools and are in the negotiation process now. I'm an out of state URM, so I think it depends on the candidate

User avatar
upfish
Posts: 507
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2010 3:51 pm

Re: CU Boulder 2011

Postby upfish » Wed Mar 16, 2011 2:12 pm

LawSchoolPorFavor wrote:
typ3 wrote:
krad wrote:FWIW I know that they've told a few people that the scholly is non-negotiable.


Doesn't it generally depend on the candidate and their other offers? If it's a person with one other offer from a lower ranked school I imagine they wouldn't have much wiggle room. If it were a person with scholarship offers from the T-14 they might adjust (or at least one would hope).


Some time ago I spoke with someone in the financial aid office about negotiating an offer- while I've seen on this board that most negotiations were knocked down, we spoke about my personal offers from other schools and are in the negotiation process now. I'm an out of state URM, so I think it depends on the candidate


I am this same type of candidate! I want CU to adjust their offer because at present my other offers make going to school elsewhere cheaper. :( I don't want to go $100k in the hole just on tuition, you know? But I DO really want to go to CU, so.

User avatar
oldhippie
Posts: 538
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2010 3:41 pm

Re: CU Boulder 2011

Postby oldhippie » Wed Mar 16, 2011 2:29 pm

negotiating certainly can't hurt....it might not help, but they won't withdraw your acceptance just for trying!
of course, this comes from someone who was so damned glad to finally get my scholarship offer that i took it right away, but others are probably more patient/thoughtful/reasonable than i :D

User avatar
Pufer
Posts: 309
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2007 1:32 am

Re: CU Boulder 2011

Postby Pufer » Wed Mar 16, 2011 2:34 pm

mrwarre85 wrote:You are massively incorrect about that last part, -Pufer. Denver offers scholarships to less than half the class and the stipulation to maintain the scholarship is set at median. 90 kids would be 1/3 the class, which would be about the total amount of kids who got scholarships in the first place.


And is also the total number on the curve who would risk ending up with a 3.0 or below, as I understand DU's curve. I suppose I did state that in an overbroad manner, though, so allow me to correct myself: That's like 90 folks who would not retain scholarship eligibility after their first year, none of whom expected to get lower than a 3.0.

This alteration doesn't change my point at all. Everybody going to either DU or CU got pretty solid grades during undergrad, and probably throughout their entire lives. None of these folks think that they'll ever be in the bottom third of their law school class. That all notwithstanding, a third of these folks will end up in the bottom third, and will risk losing whatever scholarship they may have (if any).

mrwarre85 wrote:Only a handful of kids massively underachieve and lose their scholarship at DU


"Therefore, there is zero chance that typ3 can be one of those massive underachievers and lose his/her scholarship. QED, Pufer; you best stop asserting that anyone ever loses their scholarship at DU (despite the fact that I fully admit that some people do lose their scholarships, and that the 90 people stat is roughly accurate as to scholarship eligibility at such a GPA condition level). That's reckless, man; reckless. Thank God I'm here to smite the nonbelievers!" :roll:

To be clear, I would imagine that most TLSers (typ3 included) are the type of overachievers who would have a pretty fair chance at not being among those losing their scholarships, but, at a 3.0, there is still a sizable chunk of folks who would lose scholarship eligibility under that condition. Whether they actually have scholarships or not is somewhat irrelevant. This is still a not-insubstantial risk given that nobody here (except me and rekopter) has anything other than a guess as to how well they're going to do at law school.

mrwarre85 wrote:Also, I agree with incoming students stats and to some extent job placement-- although the top students are no different at the two schools, it is only the bottom where you see the difference.


I strongly disagree. A number of prestigious clerkships, a number of prestigious federal government jobs, and some larger firms clearly favor CU's top end and are not reasonably accessible from DU (i.e., the employers haven't interviewed nor ever hired a DU grad not coming off a clerkship or with an established book).

Additionally, as I have said a number of times in this and other topics, the bottom end of DU has clearly superior job prospects to the bottom end at CU given the proximity to Denver, the emphasis on networking, and the manner in which DU's career services office operates. In this economy, the bottom end at CU ignores the worthlessness that is career services and is considering non-law jobs up here in Boulder, whereas the bottom end at DU is working its ass off with the assistance of career services and is catching on at a small social security disability firm in Aurora.

In the middle third, both schools are about equal in terms of job opportunities (except CU is biased towards clerkships, and DU is biased towards firms). In the top third, CU is generally superior. In the bottom third, DU is—counterintuitively—generally superior. If you're taking my worst-case scenario view, DU really is probably the better option in terms of pure job attainment, especially given how much bigger each of these categories is at DU (as you pointed out).

mrwarre85 wrote:Lastly, your point about the faculties is pure speculation.


"Speculation" based upon faculty prestige rankings, discussions with Denver practitioners, and speaking at length about the topic with a number of DU students and faculty. I am not saying that DU's faculty is not also stellar (indeed, superior to CU's in some areas - sports law, for instance); I'm merely asserting that there is a not-insignificant difference between the faculties at the two schools, especially when you take into account how many classes at DU aren't taught by faculty at all (which is "speculation" based upon looking at the number of adjuncts on DU Law's class listing), which accounts for a large proportion of the rankings differential between the two schools.

mrwarre85 wrote:In fact, DU is on 5 or 6 specialty rankings every year, and that is a good measure of noted and published faculty in those specific areas, and is not necessarily a good measure of overall faculty quality.


Fixed that to include the necessary missing clause for you. Further, a lot of specialty rankings depend more on the presence of clinical opportunities and school connections than faculty quality; DU has a lot of clinics in a lot of specialty areas (which is absolutely a good thing, don't get me wrong).

mrwarre85 wrote:The whole CU vs. DU thing is overblown and immature.


I agree that it is overblown. Amongst CU students, I don't think most folks—myself included—give a damn about DU one way or the other (sounds like one of the exceptions may have been on the student panel at the last open house, however).

Personally, I think typ3, assuming he doesn't get a huge sack of money from CU, should absolutely go to DU with that GPA stipulation. I, myself, agreed to a GPA condition that was far worse than the one he has from DU when I came to CU (keep a 3.0 back when the median was at 3.0 - that's 50% of the class, including some of my good friends with pre-law school stats as good as mine, losing eligibility; fortunately, it's never been an issue for me). That said, I thought long and hard about that decision with full knowledge that I might be fucking myself. I routinely recommend around here that folks do the same thing and think about the worst-case scenario, whether they're going to CU, DU, Texas, or the Tri-State Clown College School of Law. That is all I did above.

As to what is immature, I'd go with your panicked, arms-waving defense against some perceived slight against DU where none was intended nor even plausibly present. This type of thing is what CU students get annoyed about; we generally have no problem with DU otherwise.

-Pufer

User avatar
upfish
Posts: 507
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2010 3:51 pm

Re: CU Boulder 2011

Postby upfish » Wed Mar 16, 2011 2:54 pm

oldhippie wrote:negotiating certainly can't hurt....it might not help, but they won't withdraw your acceptance just for trying!
of course, this comes from someone who was so damned glad to finally get my scholarship offer that i took it right away, but others are probably more patient/thoughtful/reasonable than i :D


My thoughts exactly! I sent them an email last week, but I haven't heard anything. They were slow on my stipend request too. If I don't hear by next week, I'll probably email them again.

krad
Posts: 1897
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2010 10:33 am

Re: CU Boulder 2011

Postby krad » Wed Mar 16, 2011 3:07 pm

upfish I PM'd you :)

User avatar
chrisbru
Posts: 4252
Joined: Thu Oct 28, 2010 1:44 pm

Re: CU Boulder 2011

Postby chrisbru » Wed Mar 16, 2011 3:26 pm

Pufer wrote:
Well thought out, well written, and well supported argument by Pufer




Boom. Lawyered.

mrwarre85
Posts: 685
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 8:40 pm

Re: CU Boulder 2011

Postby mrwarre85 » Wed Mar 16, 2011 5:51 pm

Which is like 90 folks losing their scholarships, none of whom expected to get lower than a 3.0. Unless you're talking 2.8 or lower, it still deserves some thought.

-Pufer[/quote]


You wrote the above. This is wrong, and I corrected you. You then accused me of a:

your panicked, arms-waving defense against some perceived slight against DU where none was intended nor even plausibly present. This type of thing is what CU students get annoyed about; we generally have no problem with DU otherwise.

-Pufer[/quote]

Seems to me that the book you wrote in defense of yourself would be a lot easier to interpret as a : "panicked, arms-waving defense." Haha also I think you took a picture of yourself and submitted it as your avatar. You're too cute.

-Pufet's best friend

User avatar
oldhippie
Posts: 538
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2010 3:41 pm

Re: CU Boulder 2011

Postby oldhippie » Thu Mar 17, 2011 8:19 am

i appreciate all the argumentative lawyer types in here, but can we please stop now? this has been a great, supportive, informative thread and it would be awesome if it could stay that way. clearly pufer and mrwarre disagree. next topic? please?
(not trying to be ugly, but it feels like the usefulness of the disagreement is over at this point)

User avatar
typ3
Posts: 1362
Joined: Sun Feb 28, 2010 12:04 am

Re: CU Boulder 2011

Postby typ3 » Thu Mar 17, 2011 9:09 am

oldhippie wrote:i appreciate all the argumentative lawyer types in here, but can we please stop now? this has been a great, supportive, informative thread and it would be awesome if it could stay that way. clearly pufer and mrwarre disagree. next topic? please?
(not trying to be ugly, but it feels like the usefulness of the disagreement is over at this point)


My money is on Old Hippie. I bet she could body slam both of those bullies.

User avatar
oldhippie
Posts: 538
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2010 3:41 pm

Re: CU Boulder 2011

Postby oldhippie » Thu Mar 17, 2011 9:14 am

typ3 wrote:
oldhippie wrote:i appreciate all the argumentative lawyer types in here, but can we please stop now? this has been a great, supportive, informative thread and it would be awesome if it could stay that way. clearly pufer and mrwarre disagree. next topic? please?
(not trying to be ugly, but it feels like the usefulness of the disagreement is over at this point)


My money is on Old Hippie. I bet she could body slam both of those bullies.

:lol: :lol:
more likely smother them with rainbows and daisies and kittens or somesuch:D

krad
Posts: 1897
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2010 10:33 am

Re: CU Boulder 2011

Postby krad » Thu Mar 17, 2011 9:55 am

oldhippie wrote: :lol: :lol:
more likely smother them with rainbows and daisies and kittens or somesuch:D


--ImageRemoved--
:mrgreen:

User avatar
oldhippie
Posts: 538
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2010 3:41 pm

Re: CU Boulder 2011

Postby oldhippie » Thu Mar 17, 2011 9:56 am

and krad wins the award for the most appropriate and timely lolcat ever.
:mrgreen:

franklin14
Posts: 36
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 11:24 am

Re: CU Boulder 2011

Postby franklin14 » Thu Mar 17, 2011 11:01 am

Thanks for your points Pufer and mrwarre85.

bananeez
Posts: 248
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2010 11:47 am

Re: CU Boulder 2011

Postby bananeez » Thu Mar 17, 2011 11:02 am

oldhippie wrote:and krad wins the award for the most appropriate and timely lolcat ever.
:mrgreen:


Hahah, it only took the two of you and the help of a lolcat to turn the thread around 180 degrees in about five minutes... :D

User avatar
fundamentallybroken
Posts: 663
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2010 11:52 am

Re: CU Boulder 2011

Postby fundamentallybroken » Thu Mar 17, 2011 11:17 am

On to the next topic:

Everyone at CU hates kittens and rainbows. And ice cream. Discuss.

krad
Posts: 1897
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2010 10:33 am

Re: CU Boulder 2011

Postby krad » Thu Mar 17, 2011 11:28 am

Also, I do appreciate both Pufer and mwarre's discussion ITT.

I hate ice cream. I'm lactose intolerant and even with a million lactaid pills, I still can't have ice cream :cry:

User avatar
seaboot
Posts: 35
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2011 9:05 pm

Re: CU Boulder 2011

Postby seaboot » Thu Mar 17, 2011 11:39 am

In Boulder, visiting CU this morning. Had a tour, then headed to the admissions office to ask them if they could just tell me my decision (since I was there and all). Given what I've read on various forums, I didn't expect them to be so kind... But they did.

Wait listed. But, for me, this is great news. I'll be riding this one out till the end...

mrwarre85
Posts: 685
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 8:40 pm

Re: CU Boulder 2011

Postby mrwarre85 » Thu Mar 17, 2011 11:42 am

Can we trust the employment numbers on USNEWS? I knew before they were bogus but the questions they make the schools fill out seem so much more airtight now.. They respond with data at graduation and nine months out about the class of 2009, and if you have paid the 10 bucks or whatever to USNEWS you can see:

Percent employed, percent unemployed and looking/not looking, where employed, what type of job -- IE JD preferred/JD required/non-professional, percent in private sector reporting salary, etc etc etc.

It would seem very difficult to answer these questions in a misleading way.

Some of the schools I'm considering look pretty rosy actually. UTK stands out for me.

However, the two Colorado schools don't either A. do as well or B. report as well.

By my calculations, only 28% at DU, or 96 grads, could have or did make their median salaries of 55k,71k,110k.
Only 41% of CU grads, or 67 students, could have or did make their median salaries of 60k,95k,120k.

This of course makes the assumption that those who choose not to report their salaries do not have respectable salaries. This is a common assumption on TLS. I also had to make a few guesses as to who self-selected out of private work, which is the only type of work they gathered the employment data above from. For example, at CU it seemed that lots of people selected clerkship's (25%). I made the assumption that all 25% could have worked for a private firm had they gone that route, and that is a big part of the reason CU outperforms DU for 2009.

Both schools didn't fare well overall though.

Also whats with CU having the highest number of "unemployed but not seeking" vs all other schools in the country? (18% of grads).

Another interesting caveat was that DU sent 20% of its class out of state while CU only sent 13%-- I suppose this is because CU has a higher proportion of Colorado students to begin with.

User avatar
oldhippie
Posts: 538
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2010 3:41 pm

Re: CU Boulder 2011

Postby oldhippie » Thu Mar 17, 2011 11:50 am

krad wrote:Also, I do appreciate both Pufer and mwarre's discussion ITT.

i hope i didn't offend anyone - i also appreciated the discussion until it seemed to turn into an argument that was becoming unproductive. i'm sure not the boss of this thread, so feel free to continue if it is of value to other folks...




Return to “Law School Acceptances, Denials, and Waitlists”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: CaptKangaroo, Christinabruin, Kaziende, PDX4343 and 10 guests