U Colorado or Hastings & Waitlist conundrum Forum

[QContinuum]

I am not "selling" 0Ls anything. I am providing information based on firsthand knowledge. But, I am not saying that attending Hastings is without risk.

No, you pretty much said that attending Hastings was "without risk." You said:

If you want to do IP and work in CA, go to Hastings. There is no section stacking and it should be very easy to keep your scholarship, or even to increase it after 1L. I think you have a better chance of doing IP work from Hastings than you would if you got off the Davis waitlist, actually. Being in SF is a big advantage

Over and over you uncritically pumped up Hastings' virtues, with zero mention of the fact that the advertised outcomes were only available to "the top 15%".

85% of Hastings students will not be in the top 15%.

[265489164158]

OP 's LSAT is in 75th percentile for Hastings and between 50th and 75th percentile for GPA. I stand by the assertion that OP should find it very easy to keep a conditional scholarship that only requires OP to stay out of the bottom quarter of the class.

Over and over you uncritically pumped up Hastings' virtues

I disagree with this characterization of my statement. Hastings does have some virtues. To completely overlook the location and fact that it does place people into IP jobs is as much a mistake as overlooking the downside. OP should go where he/she wants.

[cavalier1138]

OP 's LSAT is in 75th percentile for Hastings and between 50th and 75th percentile for GPA. I stand by the assertion that OP should find it very easy to keep a conditional scholarship that only requires OP to stay out of the bottom quarter of the class.

Over and over you uncritically pumped up Hastings' virtues

I disagree with this characterization of my statement. Hastings does have some virtues. To completely overlook the location and fact that it does place people into IP jobs is as much a mistake as overlooking the downside. OP should go where he/she wants.

Every school "places people into IP jobs." That's not the same as good job placement for the average Hastings student. Telling someone to go to Hastings because the top 15% have decent job outcomes is borderline irresponsible.

And although it should be easy enough for OP to keep their conditional scholarship (which is a bullshit practice to begin with), your initial post on the subject was poorly written. You stated that you didn't intend to claim that it would be easy for OP to increase their scholarship, but that's pretty much the only way your initial claim could have been read.

[QContinuum]

OP 's LSAT is in 75th percentile for Hastings and between 50th and 75th percentile for GPA.

LSAT and college GPA are borderline meaningless for predicting 1L grades/class rank because in any given class, everyone's GPA and LSAT will be very similar. For example, the difference between a median and 75% LSAT at Hastings represents getting an extra 3 questions right, which could very easily be due to nothing more than sheer luck on exam day.

I stand by the assertion that OP should find it very easy to keep a conditional scholarship that only requires OP to stay out of the bottom quarter of the class.

So you're walking back your earlier claim that it'd be very easy for OP to increase their scholarship after 1L?

I note that no one ITT claimed that OP would find it difficult to keep their top-75% conditional scholarship. But that's very different from your earlier claim that it'd be "very easy" for OP to increase said scholarship after 1L.

Hastings does have some virtues. To completely overlook the location and fact that it does place people into IP jobs is as much a mistake as overlooking the downside. OP should go where he/she wants.

No one ITT claimed Hastings was irredeemably bad. But it's important to be realistic, and the fact is, no 0L* can expect to land a BigLaw/IP job out of Hastings, because no 0L can reasonably predict that they'll outperform 85% of their Hastings classmates.

*Excluding patent agents who're already working in BigLaw pre-law school. A lot of the Hastings grads going into IP aren't getting there due to Hastings' help. (You see a similar effect at, say, Suffolk in Boston, Fordham in NYC, GWU in D.C.)

[hannah.roro0401]

If you want to do IP and work in CA, go to Hastings. There is no section stacking and it should be very easy to keep your scholarship, or even to increase it after 1L. I think you have a better chance of doing IP work from Hastings than you would if you got off the Davis waitlist, actually. Being in SF is a big advantage over being outside of it. FWIW, I am a Hastings 3L and am grateful that I didn't get off the Davis waitlist before I place my seat deposit at Hastings.

Are you saying that you know Hastings students without a STEM background who have scored IP jobs in the San Francisco market?

Also, don't sell 0Ls on the idea that because your school doesn't section-stack, it'll somehow be "easy" to increase their scholarship. That's absurd reasoning. And the 509 makes it clear that OP's scholarship offer is in the upper third of scholarships given out to begin with.

Do you know of any instances when an applicant has been able to negotiate the removal of the scholarship conditions? That's a large part of why I'm hesitant about choosing Hastings- the scholarship is conditional.

[cavalier1138]

If you want to do IP and work in CA, go to Hastings. There is no section stacking and it should be very easy to keep your scholarship, or even to increase it after 1L. I think you have a better chance of doing IP work from Hastings than you would if you got off the Davis waitlist, actually. Being in SF is a big advantage over being outside of it. FWIW, I am a Hastings 3L and am grateful that I didn't get off the Davis waitlist before I place my seat deposit at Hastings.

Are you saying that you know Hastings students without a STEM background who have scored IP jobs in the San Francisco market?

Also, don't sell 0Ls on the idea that because your school doesn't section-stack, it'll somehow be "easy" to increase their scholarship. That's absurd reasoning. And the 509 makes it clear that OP's scholarship offer is in the upper third of scholarships given out to begin with.

Do you know of any instances when an applicant has been able to negotiate the removal of the scholarship conditions? That's a large part of why I'm hesitant about choosing Hastings- the scholarship is conditional.

It can be done. You usually need leverage (i.e. a comparable no-strings-attached scholarship from a peer school), but if you have that leverage, you can use it to negotiate the stipulation away.

[hannah.roro0401]

If you want to do IP and work in CA, go to Hastings. There is no section stacking and it should be very easy to keep your scholarship, or even to increase it after 1L. I think you have a better chance of doing IP work from Hastings than you would if you got off the Davis waitlist, actually. Being in SF is a big advantage over being outside of it. FWIW, I am a Hastings 3L and am grateful that I didn't get off the Davis waitlist before I place my seat deposit at Hastings.

Are you saying that you know Hastings students without a STEM background who have scored IP jobs in the San Francisco market?

Also, don't sell 0Ls on the idea that because your school doesn't section-stack, it'll somehow be "easy" to increase their scholarship. That's absurd reasoning. And the 509 makes it clear that OP's scholarship offer is in the upper third of scholarships given out to begin with.

Do you know of any instances when an applicant has been able to negotiate the removal of the scholarship conditions? That's a large part of why I'm hesitant about choosing Hastings- the scholarship is conditional.

It can be done. You usually need leverage (i.e. a comparable no-strings-attached scholarship from a peer school), but if you have that leverage, you can use it to negotiate the stipulation away.

Colorado offered 44k total, no conditions, except for maintaining good standing- basically not having a complete disaster of a GPA, but the admissions rep. said it'd be very difficult to lose that good standing.

[grovestreet123]

Hi OP! I was in the same exact boat when I applied, except I got into Davis with scholy also. I ended up getting off the UW waitlist (rejected from UCI), but I chose Hastings. It's not too difficult to stay within top 75%, I think.. Despite our drop in rankings, Hastings has a strong alum network, is in an ideal location for big law/IP/tech, and is overall a pretty solid school. It *is* competitive here -- be prepared for that. I hope you went to admit day so you could get a sense of how you like the school. Also, it is possible to get a scholy increase provided you do well in 1L. Hope this helps!

[cavalier1138]

Colorado offered 44k total, no conditions, except for maintaining good standing- basically not having a complete disaster of a GPA, but the admissions rep. said it'd be very difficult to lose that good standing.

That's leverage. Just to be clear, I think it's a bad decision to go to either of these schools with your goals, but if you want to negotiate away the stipulation, Colorado's offer will be helpful.

Despite our drop in rankings, Hastings has a strong alum network, is in an ideal location for big law/IP/tech, and is overall a pretty solid school.

It's so solid that you're trying to transfer out! What a deal! Seriously, guys. No one is comparing Hastings to Whittier, but stop painting a rosy picture of a "solid" school with good employment outcomes when over 40% of the class aren't getting full-time jobs as lawyers after graduation.

[hannah.roro0401]

Hi OP! I was in the same exact boat when I applied, except I got into Davis with scholy also. I ended up getting off the UW waitlist (rejected from UCI), but I chose Hastings. It's not too difficult to stay within top 75%, I think.. Despite our drop in rankings, Hastings has a strong alum network, is in an ideal location for big law/IP/tech, and is overall a pretty solid school. It *is* competitive here -- be prepared for that. I hope you went to admit day so you could get a sense of how you like the school. Also, it is possible to get a scholy increase provided you do well in 1L. Hope this helps!

Why did you choose Hastings over Davis & UW? What year are you in Hastings? Can you talk about your experiences thus far there?

[grovestreet123]

Colorado offered 44k total, no conditions, except for maintaining good standing- basically not having a complete disaster of a GPA, but the admissions rep. said it'd be very difficult to lose that good standing.

That's leverage. Just to be clear, I think it's a bad decision to go to either of these schools with your goals, but if you want to negotiate away the stipulation, Colorado's offer will be helpful.

Despite our drop in rankings, Hastings has a strong alum network, is in an ideal location for big law/IP/tech, and is overall a pretty solid school.

It's so solid that you're trying to transfer out! What a deal! Seriously, guys. No one is comparing Hastings to Whittier, but stop painting a rosy picture of a "solid" school with good employment outcomes when over 40% of the class aren't getting full-time jobs as lawyers after graduation.

No offense but who are you and what do you know about Hastings aside from trolling the web? Have you attended? Can you really claim to know the school better than I do? I'm perplexed.
Most people I know from first-hand experience are successful alum working in reputable lawfirms in downtown SF, or working in great public interest jobs. The school has strong programs in all of the major legal practices (IP, enviro, business, health), the professors care about their students, everyone in the classroom is highly intelligent.

OP --- I chose Hastings for the location because Davis was close to nothing, and I was used to being in the city. It makes attending networking events a lot more convenient. I could see why you would choose the reverse, and I think that's fine. I really feel the two schools are very comparable. I chose Hastings over UW because I'm set on practicing in CA, and I wanted to attend a school that could prep me to pass the CA bar. Only CA schools really have bar courses during 3L year, and knowing how tough it is to pass, I wanted that extra preparation. I would highly encourage going on campus to each of the schools before making a decision, if you could, because that played a big role in my choice of a school. I asked to attend some classes, chat with professors, and meet with admissions to answer specific questions regarding my practice interests and concerns. I felt that if people who didn't know me were trying so hard to get me attend this school, I would be cared for when I was here, and I was right.

[QContinuum]

It's so solid that you're trying to transfer out! What a deal! Seriously, guys. No one is comparing Hastings to Whittier, but stop painting a rosy picture of a "solid" school with good employment outcomes when over 40% of the class aren't getting full-time jobs as lawyers after graduation.

No offense but who are you and what do you know about Hastings aside from trolling the web? Have you attended? Can you really claim to know the school better than I do? I'm perplexed.

We don't need to be Hastings alumni to analyze its employment stats or note the fact that you're trying to transfer out to a T14.

Most people I know from first-hand experience are successful alum working in reputable lawfirms in downtown SF, or working in great public interest jobs. The school has strong programs in all of the major legal practices (IP, enviro, business, health), the professors care about their students, everyone in the classroom is highly intelligent.

Counterpoint: None of the above is inconsistent with Hastings' employment numbers. No one has disputed that there are some successful alumni. The stats simply indicate that a BigLaw outcome is the exception, not the norm.

I chose Hastings over UW because I'm set on practicing in CA, and I wanted to attend a school that could prep me to pass the CA bar. Only CA schools really have bar courses during 3L year, and knowing how tough it is to pass, I wanted that extra preparation.

So why are you looking to give up Hastings and its 3L bar prep for Georgetown, a school that's on the other side of the country?

[grovestreet123]

It's so solid that you're trying to transfer out! What a deal! Seriously, guys. No one is comparing Hastings to Whittier, but stop painting a rosy picture of a "solid" school with good employment outcomes when over 40% of the class aren't getting full-time jobs as lawyers after graduation.

No offense but who are you and what do you know about Hastings aside from trolling the web? Have you attended? Can you really claim to know the school better than I do? I'm perplexed.

We don't need to be Hastings alumni to analyze its employment stats or note the fact that you're trying to transfer out to a T14.

Most people I know from first-hand experience are successful alum working in reputable lawfirms in downtown SF, or working in great public interest jobs. The school has strong programs in all of the major legal practices (IP, enviro, business, health), the professors care about their students, everyone in the classroom is highly intelligent.

Counterpoint: None of the above is inconsistent with Hastings' employment numbers. No one has disputed that there are some successful alumni. The stats simply indicate that a BigLaw outcome is the exception, not the norm.

I chose Hastings over UW because I'm set on practicing in CA, and I wanted to attend a school that could prep me to pass the CA bar. Only CA schools really have bar courses during 3L year, and knowing how tough it is to pass, I wanted that extra preparation.

So why are you looking to give up Hastings and its 3L bar prep for Georgetown, a school that's on the other side of the country?

I was responding to this post, which presented Davis, UW, Hastings as options. I plainly told OP that I was in the same boat with these same considerations at the time I was choosing a school. Georgetown wasn't an option and now it might be. OP asked a specific question, and I'm answering within the parameter of her choices. You guys TLS think you're helping when you tell someone to just apply next year or to retake the LSAT, as if that's such a plausible option for everyone. The majority of people just need to proceed to school because we don't want to be applying to law school forever, and you can get a really decent legal education at any of the schools OP has suggested. I was in the same situation as OP, with the same scholy and probably similar stats, and I'm doing well, and my experience at Hastings has been really good. That's literally all OP needs to know.

[grovestreet123]

It's so solid that you're trying to transfer out! What a deal! Seriously, guys. No one is comparing Hastings to Whittier, but stop painting a rosy picture of a "solid" school with good employment outcomes when over 40% of the class aren't getting full-time jobs as lawyers after graduation.

No offense but who are you and what do you know about Hastings aside from trolling the web? Have you attended? Can you really claim to know the school better than I do? I'm perplexed.

We don't need to be Hastings alumni to analyze its employment stats or note the fact that you're trying to transfer out to a T14.

Most people I know from first-hand experience are successful alum working in reputable lawfirms in downtown SF, or working in great public interest jobs. The school has strong programs in all of the major legal practices (IP, enviro, business, health), the professors care about their students, everyone in the classroom is highly intelligent.

Counterpoint: None of the above is inconsistent with Hastings' employment numbers. No one has disputed that there are some successful alumni. The stats simply indicate that a BigLaw outcome is the exception, not the norm.

I chose Hastings over UW because I'm set on practicing in CA, and I wanted to attend a school that could prep me to pass the CA bar. Only CA schools really have bar courses during 3L year, and knowing how tough it is to pass, I wanted that extra preparation.

So why are you looking to give up Hastings and its 3L bar prep for Georgetown, a school that's on the other side of the country?

Also it's pretty insulting that you're drudging up my posts to attack my credibility, as if I'm not being honest about my feedback. I literally stand to gain nothing from posting here. That's the whole point of the anonymity of an online forum -- so that you can be truthful. If you're a moderator and trying to shut down people's opinions, it really deters people from contributing, and this forum will cease to be helpful.

[QContinuum]

I chose Hastings over UW because I'm set on practicing in CA, and I wanted to attend a school that could prep me to pass the CA bar. Only CA schools really have bar courses during 3L year, and knowing how tough it is to pass, I wanted that extra preparation.

Georgetown wasn't an option and now it might be.

Georgetown could be an option for OP too. OP isn't under any obligation to matriculate to either CU or Hastings.

My issue with your advice to OP is that you clearly don't believe in it yourself. You encouraged OP to follow in your footsteps and choose Hastings if she's "set on practicing in CA," because "only CA schools really have bar courses during 3L year." But if you actually believed your own bar-prep argument, you'd be staying at Hastings to take advantage of those 3L bar courses. Or at most, you'd be trying to transfer to a higher-ranked CA school. If you trusted your own advice, you certainly wouldn't be trying to transfer to an East Coast law school that most certainly doesn't offer CA bar prep courses.

It's one thing to give good-faith advice that's actually wrong - we all make mistakes. It's a whole different kettle of fish to intentionally give bad advice.

You guys TLS think you're helping when you tell someone to just apply next year or to retake the LSAT, as if that's such a plausible option for everyone. The majority of people just need to proceed to school

Narrator: In fact, the majority of people do not "need" to proceed to law school immediately. Postponing law school for a year is entirely plausible for just about anyone.

you can get a really decent legal education at any of the schools OP has suggested.

Quality of education is all but irrelevant (unless you get down to unranked or unaccredited law schools). Even down to the T3/T4, the professors will generally have impressive/T13 backgrounds and will generally be good instructors. What's key is whether CU or Hastings will allow OP to achieve her BigLaw goals. They are good law schools, but neither school gives OP (or any other 0L) a reasonable chance of success at BigLaw.

I was in the same situation as OP, with the same scholy and probably similar stats, and I'm doing well, and my experience at Hastings has been really good. That's literally all OP needs to know.

Narrator: In fact, OP really needs to know that the typical Hastings student will not do nearly well enough to make a T14 transfer a possibility.

Also it's pretty insulting that you're drudging up my posts to attack my credibility, as if I'm not being honest about my feedback.

Narrator: In fact, you were not being honest about your feedback. A classic case of "do as I say, not as I do."

If you're a moderator and trying to shut down people's opinions, it really deters people from contributing, and this forum will cease to be helpful.

So you think I'm trying to shut you down... based on the fact that I've been using my moderation powers to approve your posts?

[cavalier1138]

You guys TLS think you're helping when you tell someone to just apply next year or to retake the LSAT, as if that's such a plausible option for everyone.

When is it not?

Please identify a situation in which delaying law school a year is not feasible.

(Also, ditto to everything Q said about your rank hypocrisy and misrepresentation.)