Columbia vs. Stanford Forum

[michlaw]

Stanford, particularly so when it is even money. There is nothing from Columbia that you can't get from Stanford. There are some things from Stanford you can't get from Columbia. If you come back east you are a bit of a special snowflake since something like 80% of Stanford stays out west. The weather, the change of pace, the smaller class size. I know and appreciate the allure of NYC but you can work there as a summer and after you graduate. Given the competitiveness of Columbia you will never get out of the library anyway so it won't matter where you are.

Do not imo underestimate the stark differences in grading systems. Good luck. Both are great choices.

The competitiveness of Columbia? Lol, what a joke . People say the weirdest shit on this website

I'm curious. If Stanford has a system where you might be able to identify the top 20% and then there is the rest, and they essentially give no low passes, and Columbia has a forced curved letter grade system where inevitably 25% of the class will be in the bottom 25% of the class, even though no one thinks it will be them, then wouldn't the competition for grades be more fierce at Columbia? Maybe I don't understand properly the grading system at Columbia. I am aware there are people on both sides of the argument of whether the systems at HYS are preferable or not but still where there are grades is there not competition? And as the highest ranked school that gives grades would not the completion be the greatest?

Strawmaning me a bit. I'm sure at Stanford there's less explicit competition for good grades, but the idea that CLS students have this particularly competitive environment is utterly false. People are incredibly social and even fuck the library. People are ambitious at both schools and that creates a certain atmosphere, but its not worse at CLS than anywhere else.

Not clever enough to be a straw-man. But since you can't be in the bottom 25% of Stanford and you can at Columbia isn't that a real factor to consider? They have to work harder to figure out who they don't want to hire from Stanford, it can't be reduced to a number. HYS might be questioned for their systems but they do have some undeniable advantages and imo when considering C vs HYS that should be a consideration.

I am sure there is a wonderfully supportive and collegial environment at Columbia. Coupling in the library well I won't touch that one.

[jbagelboy]

The competitiveness of Columbia? Lol, what a joke . People say the weirdest shit on this website

I'm curious. If Stanford has a system where you might be able to identify the top 20% and then there is the rest, and they essentially give no low passes, and Columbia has a forced curved letter grade system where inevitably 25% of the class will be in the bottom 25% of the class, even though no one thinks it will be them, then wouldn't the competition for grades be more fierce at Columbia? Maybe I don't understand properly the grading system at Columbia. I am aware there are people on both sides of the argument of whether the systems at HYS are preferable or not but still where there are grades is there not competition? And as the highest ranked school that gives grades would not the completion be the greatest?

Strawmaning me a bit. I'm sure at Stanford there's less explicit competition for good grades, but the idea that CLS students have this particularly competitive environment is utterly false. People are incredibly social and even fuck the library. People are ambitious at both schools and that creates a certain atmosphere, but its not worse at CLS than anywhere else.

Not clever enough to be a straw-man. But since you can't be in the bottom 25% of Stanford and you can at Columbia isn't that a real factor to consider? They have to work harder to figure out who they don't want to hire from Stanford, it can't be reduced to a number. HYS might be questioned for their systems but they do have some undeniable advantages and imo when considering C vs HYS that should be a consideration.

I am sure there is a wonderfully supportive and collegial environment at Columbia. Coupling in the library well I won't touch that one.

Hahaha, that's not what I meant to suggest. I was just saying fuck the library. But I like your style.

I wouldn't put too much stock in the grading systems. Keep in mind it's not easy to distinguish bottom 25% at CLS either: roughly 40% of any 1L class receives B's and that's the lowest grade.

[banjo]

At CLS people stress about grades in November and April of 1L year and never again. I know 2Ls who don't even check their grades. The "competitive environment" -- to the extent it exists at all -- lasts two months out of three years. And if you want, you can largely avoid the law school in those two months.

[Tiago Splitter]

The percentage of people getting straight P's at Stanford has to be pretty low. I can't imagine an employer who does any meaningful amount of hiring out of Stanford looking at a straight P transcript and not knowing that person is near the bottom of the class.

[michlaw]

But that's the whole point they cannot tell. At HYS with subtle variations 70 percent of each class get P. You can't discern a high P from a low P. At the top of the classes there are things like ds' s and book honors so you can figure it out a little. For 70 percent of the students you can't on paper sort them. They initiated these systems for well thought out reasons and it is part of the allure.

[Tiago Splitter]

But that's the whole point they cannot tell. At HYS with subtle variations 70 percent of each class get P. You can't discern a high P from a low P. At the top of the classes there are things like ds' s and book honors so you can figure it out a little. For 70 percent of the students you can't on paper sort them. They initiated these systems for well thought out reasons and it is part of the allure.

You don't seriously think that the same 70% of people get a P in every class, right? And since you couldn't possibly think that, surely you understand why someone who has a P in every class would clearly stand out as being near the bottom. There's no way this is hard to understand.

[michlaw]

But that's the whole point they cannot tell. At HYS with subtle variations 70 percent of each class get P. You can't discern a high P from a low P. At the top of the classes there are things like ds' s and book honors so you can figure it out a little. For 70 percent of the students you can't on paper sort them. They initiated these systems for well thought out reasons and it is part of the allure.

You don't seriously think that the same 70% of people get a P in every class, right? And since you couldn't possibly think that, surely you understand why someone who has a P in every class would clearly stand out as being near the bottom. There's no way this is hard to understand.

It doesn't matter who gets them the average gpa is a p.

[Tiago Splitter]

But that's the whole point they cannot tell. At HYS with subtle variations 70 percent of each class get P. You can't discern a high P from a low P. At the top of the classes there are things like ds' s and book honors so you can figure it out a little. For 70 percent of the students you can't on paper sort them. They initiated these systems for well thought out reasons and it is part of the allure.

You don't seriously think that the same 70% of people get a P in every class, right? And since you couldn't possibly think that, surely you understand why someone who has a P in every class would clearly stand out as being near the bottom. There's no way this is hard to understand.

Yes 70% get p. You may not believe it but it is true.

You've got to be kidding me.

In one class, yes, 70% of people get a P. Then in a different class made up of the same 100 students, 70 get P, but certainly not the exact same 70. So now with two grades under our belt we've probably got something like 40-50 people who have at least one H. Repeat for ten grades and you will see, or most people will see, that not very many people are left with only P's.

An employer would have to be remarkably stupid to look at 20 Harvard or Stanford transcripts, see 18 of them with at least one H, and not be able to conclude that the 2 who have straight P's are near the bottom of the class.

It doesn't matter who gets them the average gpa is a p.

Sweet edit. Just incredible.

[michlaw]

No. The people with the H's are in the top of the class. There is no bottom.

[Tiago Splitter]

No. The people with the H's are in the top of the class. There is no bottom.

Fuckin a I was getting trolled this whole time. You had me

[AspiringAspirant]

But that's the whole point they cannot tell. At HYS with subtle variations 70 percent of each class get P. You can't discern a high P from a low P. At the top of the classes there are things like ds' s and book honors so you can figure it out a little. For 70 percent of the students you can't on paper sort them. They initiated these systems for well thought out reasons and it is part of the allure.

You don't seriously think that the same 70% of people get a P in every class, right? And since you couldn't possibly think that, surely you understand why someone who has a P in every class would clearly stand out as being near the bottom. There's no way this is hard to understand.

Actually this makes no sense to me. It is completely feasible that someone happens to be in the middle of the pack in all their classes. To assume that just because a person can't excel in a few particular classes, that they therefore must be scraping by with a passing grade in every class, is shaky logic at best.

[Tiago Splitter]

But that's the whole point they cannot tell. At HYS with subtle variations 70 percent of each class get P. You can't discern a high P from a low P. At the top of the classes there are things like ds' s and book honors so you can figure it out a little. For 70 percent of the students you can't on paper sort them. They initiated these systems for well thought out reasons and it is part of the allure.

You don't seriously think that the same 70% of people get a P in every class, right? And since you couldn't possibly think that, surely you understand why someone who has a P in every class would clearly stand out as being near the bottom. There's no way this is hard to understand.

Actually this makes no sense to me. It is completely feasible that someone happens to be in the middle of the pack in all their classes. To assume that just because a person can't excel in a few particular classes, that they therefore must be scraping by with a passing grade in every class, is shaky logic at best.

Employers count H's. This is what I've been told by hiring partners at large law firms. Rather than a grade cutoff like 3.5 that you'd see at other schools, they just cut it off at a certain number of H's.

FWIW you could finish last in every single class at Columbia and have a 3.0 or you could finish in the 60th percentile in every class and have a 3.0. But employers will think you're in the bottom of the class either way. They don't have any other way to sort transcripts.

Also Harvard tells employers that P is worth 3, H is worth 4, and DS is worth 5 and everyone, including students, calculates a GPA from these numbers. Why employers would be incapable of doing this just because it says "P" instead of "B" is beyond me.

[michlaw]

But that's the whole point they cannot tell. At HYS with subtle variations 70 percent of each class get P. You can't discern a high P from a low P. At the top of the classes there are things like ds' s and book honors so you can figure it out a little. For 70 percent of the students you can't on paper sort them. They initiated these systems for well thought out reasons and it is part of the allure.

You don't seriously think that the same 70% of people get a P in every class, right? And since you couldn't possibly think that, surely you understand why someone who has a P in every class would clearly stand out as being near the bottom. There's no way this is hard to understand.

Actually this makes no sense to me. It is completely feasible that someone happens to be in the middle of the pack in all their classes. To assume that just because a person can't excel in a few particular classes, that they therefore must be scraping by with a passing grade in every class, is shaky logic at best.

You are correct of course. All P's gets you biglaw if that's what you want. If you look at Stanford's placement numbers (50%) and then consider that clerkships are not included in that number the median at Stanford gets biglaw and the median is a P. It is certainly true that Wachtell might want all H's and as you go down the list the number of expected honors varies. That doesn't change the average outcome.

This is from Stanford's website.

Interpreting Stanford’s Grades
Stanford Law School imposes strict limitations on the percentage of Honors grades that professors may award.
These vary a bit depending on the type of class, but employers should expect to see approximately a third of
students receive honors in any exam class and approximately 2/5th in other classes. This means that students
who, under the former numerical system, would have received a grade on the mandatory mean (3.4), or even a
3.5 or 3.6, would receive a Pass under the current grading system. It is not unusual, especially if looking at
students only after the first year, for someone in the middle of the class, or even in the top 40%, to have all P’s
on his or her transcript.
We, thus, strongly encourage employers who use grades as part of their hiring criteria to set standards
specifically for Stanford students. Grading policies vary significantly from school to school. Other schools
that have a similar system impose no limits on the number of Honors grades that can be awarded in all or in
certain categories of classes, and it is not uncommon at those schools for over 70 or 80 percent of a class to
receive Honors. Students, in turn, often select classes for precisely this reason: to load up the number of H’s
on their transcript (which is why Stanford enforces strict limits on all classes). As a result, imposing the same
grade requirements on Stanford students as is used on candidates from other schools may result in the
inadvertent elimination of highly-qualified Stanford candidates.

[Tiago Splitter]

It is certainly true that Wachtell might want all H's and as you go down the list the number of expected honors varies.

Exactly. Wachtell and every other firm that hires these students with regularity can line up the transcripts and order them from best to worst.

Michlaw's own posting history suggests he understands the median at Harvard is roughly 3 H's. That means 0-2 (to say nothing of LP's, which we'll continue to pretend don't exist) H's is "below median"

[michlaw]

This is a stanford discussion. I know harvard is different. It is harvard that the stanford website is highlighting. Proported h grade inflation. I also know harvard gives some low passes. Stanford doesn't. Stop comparing h and s. They do not grade the same. And Y they don't grade at all.

[jbagelboy]

This is a stanford discussion. I know harvard is different. It is harvard that the stanford website is highlighting. Proported h grade inflation. I also know harvard gives some low passes. Stanford doesn't. Stop comparing h and s. They do not grade the same. And Y they don't grade at all.

True the systems are different, but hold on. Stanford does have a "low pass" type grade called restricted credit: https://www.law.stanford.edu/organizati ... ange-stu-9. This is probably a "know they exist but no one I know admits to getting one" type deal. But regardless you can earn a grade between fail and pass.

[rpupkin]

This is a stanford discussion. I know harvard is different. It is harvard that the stanford website is highlighting. Proported h grade inflation. I also know harvard gives some low passes. Stanford doesn't. Stop comparing h and s. They do not grade the same. And Y they don't grade at all.

True the systems are different, but hold on. Stanford does have a "low pass" type grade called restricted credit: https://www.law.stanford.edu/organizati ... ange-stu-9. This is probably a "know they exist but no one I know admits to getting one" type deal. But regardless you can earn a grade between fail and pass.

I know two people at SLS who got RC grades. It's rare but it happens.

[abl]

This is a stanford discussion. I know harvard is different. It is harvard that the stanford website is highlighting. Proported h grade inflation. I also know harvard gives some low passes. Stanford doesn't. Stop comparing h and s. They do not grade the same. And Y they don't grade at all.

True the systems are different, but hold on. Stanford does have a "low pass" type grade called restricted credit: https://www.law.stanford.edu/organizati ... ange-stu-9. This is probably a "know they exist but no one I know admits to getting one" type deal. But regardless you can earn a grade between fail and pass.

I know two people at SLS who got RC grades. It's rare but it happens.

RKs are extraordinarily unusual, though -- less than a handful per year for the entire school. You probably knew of roughly half of the RKs given out among all 1Ls, 2Ls, and 3Ls in your given year if you knew two people who got them. I've heard from profs that each year is a bit different but that straight Ps can be around median. Regardless, straight Ps will get you biglaw at Stanford.

I would not underestimate the impact of grading system of student culture. I think it's a huge part of why Stanford is as relaxed and collegial as it is (also, the California thing helps).