Michigan v. Penn Forum

[WhatOurBodiesAreFor]

This is crazy. The amount of hate Michigan's been getting lately is completely unfounded. I'm a 3L here, and I'll just say you should take clowns like this with a grain of salt.

It is really not hard to get a good job from Michigan, despite what people on this stupid website say. Random posters make proclamations like "you have to be top-33% to have a fighting chance in California from Michigan" or "median is going to really struggle" while having no idea what the hell they are talking about. People at the very, very bottom of the class are finding high-paying firm jobs in secondary markets they have never even been to, or good DA fellowships in competitive markets. I have friends well-below median who have received offers from top Detroit firms and market-paying firms in California without ever having visited. A non-negligible number of below-median students receive Article III clerkships, even if not in their first-choice cities. Median students get jobs in DC, and just about ANYBODY can get a firm job in NYC if they are really set on it. Of course, if you are at the top of the class, you can do go do just about whatever the hell you want. Last year, Michigan placed more students in the mythical DOJ SLIP and Honors programs than any other school.

People so often fail to appreciate self-selection when looking at stats like the ones above. I know several people with very high grades who just didn't participate in OCI because that's just not what they want to do. They will be clerking in... STATE court next year because that's the track they need to take to get their dream jobs. That's several students on your unemployed chart. Many more are pursuing dual-degrees (significantly more than at peer schools, from the numbers I have seen), either in hopes of entering academia or a niche field or a different profession altogether. These students count as "not working" in the LST numbers above. The EIC of the law review decided they would rather work for a top consulting firm. That registers under "business" in the under-employed graph.

Michigan is a great school, and whatever you decide you want to do, it will give you a great shot at getting there. Penn is a great school also, and you shouldn't read this to take anything away from them. My friends there have very good things to say. But apart from the top three schools (and Columbia and NYU for New York City biglaw only), Michigan will give you as good a chance as ANY place else to get the career you want.

Yes. This.

Its crazy how much you guys read into slight differences in percentages between Duke and Michigan when you write off the difference between UVA and Y's LST. I understand why you do so but let's use our top analytical minds here and factor in some relevant anecdotes here like: Mich's huge pi-interested student body or Duke and Penn's disproportionate self-selection into nyc biglaw. Mich is still Mich and will always be, even if its LST is 3 points lower than Duke's.

eta to clarify, my point with the yale/uva thing is that you use some assumptions to make their lsts make sense. why must you only use this assumptions in extreme cases? can you not use them to a smaller degree in mich/duke/penn's case?

[WhatOurBodiesAreFor]

You guys realize the OP decided on Penn on April 30th, right?

Was thinking the same thing as I read through the thread. But considering half of them don't even know that it's now the T12 after Michigan was kicked out I don't expect them to be in touch with reality.

j/k Michigan totally isn't slipping and its placement power is just as strong as its "peers"

Lol. love the anti-Mich trolling, but they still maintained biglaw+fedclerk over 50% for the time being, so it's still T13 (even though Mich should be number 13). GTown gets kicked out though for having a sub-50 biglaw+fedclerk %

Sorry for the double post but isnt Mich's LST like 7 percentage pts better than NU this year. And Mich (pi) likes non-LST-countable jobs just as much as NU (business) does.

Man, I understand that Mich's unemployed numbers were high this year, but can we at least make some of the reasonable assumptions here? Mich's decline is at not nearly as drastic as you guys say? come on.

MVBD NC G seems like the reasonable grouping these days.

Not P VB DNC M G

[JamesDean1955]

michwolv, don't you think you are hyping up your school a bit much? People who read your overzealous post will come away with the wrong impression. Thinking you have a good chance at a biglaw job in a secondary market you've never been to at any school other than maybe HYS is ridiculous. And what you're saying is ridiculously over optimistic and not supported by what many of your peers told me at ASW or, yes, statistics. Michigan, Virginia, Penn, Duke, etc. are all fantastic schools no doubt about that. But don't overhype your school. People should take what you said with a big grain of salt.

And yes, I'm an 0L, I did not fancy Michigan, and I'm probably going to Penn. But unlike you I'm not here to troll or put a particular school on a pedestal or trash talk. I'm simply stating that you are clearly lacking a bit of objectivity here.

Sorry you don't like TLS and sorry you're butthurt over what people say on the internet about Michigan. But that doesn't mean you need to go around trolling and giving ridiculously hyped up opinions of your school.

Also whatourbodiesarefor, enough with the fucking tiers already.

[WhatOurBodiesAreFor]

michwolv, don't you think you are hyping up your school a bit much? People who read your overzealous post will come away with the wrong impression. Thinking you have a good chance at a biglaw job in a secondary market you've never been to at any school other than maybe HYS is ridiculous. And what you're saying is ridiculously over optimistic and not supported by what many of your peers told me at ASW or, yes, statistics. Michigan, Virginia, Penn, Duke, etc. are all fantastic schools no doubt about that. But don't overhype your school. People should take what you said with a big grain of salt.

And yes, I'm an 0L, I did not fancy Michigan, and I'm probably going to Penn. But unlike you I'm not here to troll or put a particular school on a pedestal or trash talk. I'm simply stating that you are clearly lacking a bit of objectivity here.

Sorry you don't like TLS and sorry you're butthurt over what people say on the internet about Michigan. But that doesn't mean you need to go around trolling and giving ridiculously hyped up opinions of your school.

Also whatourbodiesarefor, enough with the fucking tiers already.

you read my post and all you can say is "enough with the tiers?" clearly wasnt my point. come on dude.

[Rahviveh]

Its crazy how much you guys read into slight differences in percentages between Duke and Michigan when you write off the difference between UVA and Y's LST. I understand why you do so but let's use our top analytical minds here and factor in some relevant anecdotes here like: Mich's huge pi-interested student body or Duke and Penn's disproportionate self-selection into nyc biglaw. Mich is still Mich and will always be, even if its LST is 3 points lower than Duke's.

Well it's accepted knowledge that a Yale student will have plenty of non-biglaw options compared to a UVA student. Do we really have any evidence to show Michigan kids are more likely than Duke kids to prefer PI? I don't see why this would be the case.

[JamesDean1955]

Its crazy how much you guys read into slight differences in percentages between Duke and Michigan when you write off the difference between UVA and Y's LST. I understand why you do so but let's use our top analytical minds here and factor in some relevant anecdotes here like: Mich's huge pi-interested student body or Duke and Penn's disproportionate self-selection into nyc biglaw. Mich is still Mich and will always be, even if its LST is 3 points lower than Duke's.

Well it's accepted knowledge that a Yale student will have plenty of non-biglaw options compared to a UVA student. Do we really have any evidence to show Michigan kids are more likely than Duke kids to prefer PI? I don't see why this would be the case.

+1. Michigan has clearly underperformed its potential recently, and it is not simply due to self selection.

(Paging Regulus, comprehensive statistical analysis needed).

Plus, I have heard from multiple Michigan sources that their career planning office has given students some really bad advice over the past couple of years.

ETA: To reiterate, no one is claiming that Michigan is a bad school. Michigan is a great school. But it has underperformed recently relative to other schools.

[WhatOurBodiesAreFor]

And I am not at all disputing what guys just said. I just think TLS in general is vastly overstating those facts. Self-selection can't speak to all the ground they've lost recently, I grant that. But is it not plausible to think that higher % of Duke grads wanted biglaw/clerkship than did Michigan? Or a higher percentage of Mich grads wanted PI than did Duke's? Or even that Mich grads were more picky than Duke's? This is what the anecdotes about these two schools suggest. At worst, they have equal placement potential.

Michigan has lost ground to Penn recently, no doubt. But it still deserves to be where it is in the rankings and students should not pick penn over mich $ or duke over mich at equal cost all things equal. self-selection accounts for much more of the difference in the employment numbers than reading tls would suggest.

[WhatOurBodiesAreFor]

Sorry, forgot to speak to your point, Champagne.

The answer is absolutely yes. Have you read about Michigan's LRAP? It's crazy good and much more appealing than any LRAP I have seen from a t14. I would pick Michigan over anywhere non-HYSCC at equal cost for this reason if I was set on PI or more non-trad jobs.

[BigZuck]

self-selection accounts for much more of the difference in the employment numbers than reading tls would suggest.

*needs source*

[JamesDean1955]

And I am not at all disputing what guys just said. I just think TLS in general is vastly overstating those facts. Self-selection can't speak to all the ground they've lost recently, I grant that. But is it not plausible to think that higher % of Duke grads wanted biglaw/clerkship than did Michigan? Or a higher percentage of Mich grads wanted PI than did Duke's? Or even that Mich grads were more picky than Duke's? This is what the anecdotes about these two schools suggest. At worst, they have equal placement potential.

Michigan has lost ground to Penn recently, no doubt. But it still deserves to be where it is in the rankings and students should not pick penn over mich $ or duke over mich at equal cost all things equal. self-selection accounts for much more of the difference in the employment numbers than reading tls would suggest.

Absolutely not true if:

1. You want biglaw
2. Especially if you want NYC biglaw

If you want PI, or want to work in the Mid-West, then Michigan at equal cost, every day of the week and twice on Sundays.

Otherwise, neither school is worth more than $5,000.00 - $15,000.00 (possibly $20,000.00 for a few people) a year over the other, no doubt. It depends on your career goals, and debt level. If you absolutely want biglaw, hate public interest, and are going to be in so much debt that you need biglaw (PI w/LRAP) to pay off your loans, Penn is the no brainer choice up to this limit.

This seems like pretty common sense stuff to me. But maybe I'm the only one.

[WhatOurBodiesAreFor]

And I am not at all disputing what guys just said. I just think TLS in general is vastly overstating those facts. Self-selection can't speak to all the ground they've lost recently, I grant that. But is it not plausible to think that higher % of Duke grads wanted biglaw/clerkship than did Michigan? Or a higher percentage of Mich grads wanted PI than did Duke's? Or even that Mich grads were more picky than Duke's? This is what the anecdotes about these two schools suggest. At worst, they have equal placement potential.

Michigan has lost ground to Penn recently, no doubt. But it still deserves to be where it is in the rankings and students should not pick penn over mich $ or duke over mich at equal cost all things equal. self-selection accounts for much more of the difference in the employment numbers than reading tls would suggest.

Absolutely not true if:

1. You want biglaw
2. Especially if you want NYC biglaw

If you want PI, or want to work in the Mid-West, then Michigan at equal cost, every day of the week and twice on Sundays.

Otherwise, neither school is worth more than $5,000.00 - $15,000.00 (possibly $20,000.00 for a few people) a year over the other, no doubt. It depends on your career goals, and debt level. If you absolutely want biglaw, hate public interest, and are going to be in so much debt that you need biglaw (PI w/LRAP) to pay off your loans, Penn is the no brainer choice up to this limit.

This seems like pretty common sense stuff to me. But maybe I'm the only one.

Yes but I would just add that Penn doesn't have that much better placement power for NYC biglaw so to justify like 15K more a year. I don't fault someone with OP's estimated COA going for Penn if he was biglaw or bust, but if the difference was any more it would start to be a questionable decision.

[JamesDean1955]

Yeah $20,000 a year is too high. But there are certainly scenarios that justify choosing one over the other at small differences in cost. Pre-ITE I would say it wouldn't matter which school and just follow the money.

[gnuwheels]

These arguments are all the same. Majority of people point out what is true, that Michigan is struggling and #s-wise these days is closer to Georgetown than Duke or Northwestern let alone Penn (see: ATL rankings), and then a minority of current Mich students contest this by saying "blah blah self-selection blah blah bad advice from career services." But the numbers have been consistently bad for a few years now and until they fix themselves those counter-arguments are pretty weak. Maybe more Mich students should stop pretending there isn't a problem and focus their energy on trying to get the school to fix it instead of arguing with the numbers.

[JamesDean1955]

I agree this has been discussed 1,000,000 times in various threads, and there isn't a way to definitively conclude one side of the argument with 100% certainty (although I certainly know what I believe). Let's get back to helping OP in his specific situation, unless he decided already...

[Lavitz]

I agree this has been discussed 1,000,000 times in various threads, and there isn't a way to definitively conclude one side of the argument with 100% certainty (although I certainly know what I believe). Let's get back to helping OP in his specific situation, unless he decided already...

You guys realize the OP decided on Penn on April 30th, right?

[JamesDean1955]

^ That's what I get for skimming the thread. Didn't see the OP post in the Penn c/o 2016 thread either, maybe I missed that too. Anyways congrats on the choice OP. This thread can die now.

[WhatOurBodiesAreFor]

Sorry to keep on reviving this thread but I just come across a statistic that speaks quite well to the argument I have been making here.

Michigan, since 2006, has consistently sent a lower percentage of grads into big law. there was one year where they only sent 4 percentage pts less than the average of other top schools. But for the other 5 years, theyve sent 13/14 percentage pts less. This ranges over periods where Michigan was ranked 7 consistantly and pushing t6.

Still not arguing that Mich is worth the same as Penn if you want biglaw, but its really not nearly as far behind as TLS suggests.

[BigZuck]

Sorry to keep on reviving this thread but I just come across a statistic that speaks quite well to the argument I have been making here.

Michigan, since 2006, has consistently sent a lower percentage of grads into big law. there was one year where they only sent 4 percentage pts less than the average of other top schools. But for the other 5 years, theyve sent 13/14 percentage pts less. This ranges over periods where Michigan was ranked 7 consistantly and pushing t6.

Still not arguing that Mich is worth the same as Penn if you want biglaw, but its really not nearly as far behind as TLS suggests.

So Michigan has been slipping for even longer than I realized? Sweet, this will give my anti-Michigan trolling even more of a punch.

What does USNWR ranking have to do with anything? Also, you need a source in regards to self-selection.

[JamesDean1955]

Sorry to keep on reviving this thread but I just come across a statistic that speaks quite well to the argument I have been making here.

Michigan, since 2006, has consistently sent a lower percentage of grads into big law. there was one year where they only sent 4 percentage pts less than the average of other top schools. But for the other 5 years, theyve sent 13/14 percentage pts less. This ranges over periods where Michigan was ranked 7 consistantly and pushing t6.

Still not arguing that Mich is worth the same as Penn if you want biglaw, but its really not nearly as far behind as TLS suggests.

So Michigan has been slipping for even longer than I realized? Sweet, this will give my anti-Michigan trolling even more of a punch.

What does USNWR ranking have to do with anything? Also, you need a source in regards to self-selection.

Yeah man, I read your post and that made Michigan seem even worse. Are you sure what you posted argues in favor of your conclusion?

[michwolv]

michwolv, don't you think you are hyping up your school a bit much? People who read your overzealous post will come away with the wrong impression. Thinking you have a good chance at a biglaw job in a secondary market you've never been to at any school other than maybe HYS is ridiculous. And what you're saying is ridiculously over optimistic and not supported by what many of your peers told me at ASW or, yes, statistics. Michigan, Virginia, Penn, Duke, etc. are all fantastic schools no doubt about that. But don't overhype your school. People should take what you said with a big grain of salt.

And yes, I'm an 0L, I did not fancy Michigan, and I'm probably going to Penn. But unlike you I'm not here to troll or put a particular school on a pedestal or trash talk. I'm simply stating that you are clearly lacking a bit of objectivity here.

Sorry you don't like TLS and sorry you're butthurt over what people say on the internet about Michigan. But that doesn't mean you need to go around trolling and giving ridiculously hyped up opinions of your school.

Also whatourbodiesarefor, enough with the fucking tiers already.

Curious, which stats exactly show that it's hard to get to a secondary market you haven't been to from non-HYS schools? Or that it's hard to get NYC biglaw from Michigan? Objectivity is not my problem. Indeed, I can only speak objectively about one school. Just because my assessment differs from that of outsiders does not make it any less "objective." Nor am I looking to place my school up on a pedestal or trash talk any other. I am simply rebutting some of the off-base and inaccurate talking points from the TLS echo chamber for the benefit of prospective 1L's making a tough decision right now.

Your takeaway from my post should not be that it's all rainbows and butterflies in Ann Arbor. Law school is difficult, risky, and expensive. But the difference between the schools, as far as placement power for an individual student, is negligible. Any difference between peer schools is more likely attributable to self-selection. Let's use LST, a favorite here. 38% of Penn goes to NYC. Just 18% of Michigan goes to NYC. Even disregarding any PI-selection, that's your score differential right there. The vast majority of students at Michigan simply do not interview in New York, because they have no desire to be in New York. But New York also happens to be where most biglaw jobs are, so there will be an aggregate advantage for Penn in biglaw scores. More students at Michigan simply target markets where biglaw is tougher to crack or doesn't exist at all.

At Michigan, some students strike out, but for the most part, students who focus on NYC can find a job through OCI unless they are at the bottom of the class. And of course, self-selection cuts both ways. Michigan placed 13% of its grads in Illinois. Penn placed just 1.5%. Does this mean Michigan gives you a 9X better chance to get to Illinois? No, it doesn't. I would be shocked if a comparable student at Penn had a significantly harder time getting to Chicago than his Michigan counterpart.

But you are a 0L. You would have no way of seeing the nuances of the OCI process or legal hiring in general. Once you go through it, no matter which school you choose, I think you will understand better that TLS's broad generalizations about peer schools exist, for the most part, in the minds of prospective students. Legal employers do not make the sorts of highly granular distinctions between Michigan and Penn that you think they do.

[BigZuck]

michwolv, don't you think you are hyping up your school a bit much? People who read your overzealous post will come away with the wrong impression. Thinking you have a good chance at a biglaw job in a secondary market you've never been to at any school other than maybe HYS is ridiculous. And what you're saying is ridiculously over optimistic and not supported by what many of your peers told me at ASW or, yes, statistics. Michigan, Virginia, Penn, Duke, etc. are all fantastic schools no doubt about that. But don't overhype your school. People should take what you said with a big grain of salt.

And yes, I'm an 0L, I did not fancy Michigan, and I'm probably going to Penn. But unlike you I'm not here to troll or put a particular school on a pedestal or trash talk. I'm simply stating that you are clearly lacking a bit of objectivity here.

Sorry you don't like TLS and sorry you're butthurt over what people say on the internet about Michigan. But that doesn't mean you need to go around trolling and giving ridiculously hyped up opinions of your school.

Also whatourbodiesarefor, enough with the fucking tiers already.

Curious, which stats exactly show that it's hard to get to a secondary market you haven't been to from non-HYS schools? Or that it's hard to get NYC biglaw from Michigan? Objectivity is not my problem. Indeed, I can only speak objectively about one school. Just because my assessment differs from that of outsiders does not make it any less "objective." Nor am I looking to place my school up on a pedestal or trash talk any other. I am simply rebutting some of the off-base and inaccurate talking points from the TLS echo chamber for the benefit of prospective 1L's making a tough decision right now.

Your takeaway from my post should not be that it's all rainbows and butterflies in Ann Arbor. Law school is difficult, risky, and expensive. But the difference between the schools, as far as placement power for an individual student, is negligible. Any difference between peer schools is more likely attributable to self-selection. Let's use LST, a favorite here. 38% of Penn goes to NYC. Just 18% of Michigan goes to NYC. Even disregarding any PI-selection, that's your score differential right there. The vast majority of students at Michigan simply do not interview in New York, because they have no desire to be in New York. But New York also happens to be where most biglaw jobs are, so there will be an aggregate advantage for Penn in biglaw scores. More students at Michigan simply target markets where biglaw is tougher to crack or doesn't exist at all.

At Michigan, some students strike out, but for the most part, students who focus on NYC can find a job through OCI unless they are at the bottom of the class. And of course, self-selection cuts both ways. Michigan placed 13% of its grads in Illinois. Penn placed just 1.5%. Does this mean Michigan gives you a 9X better chance to get to Illinois? No, it doesn't. I would be shocked if a comparable student at Penn had a significantly harder time getting to Chicago than his Michigan counterpart.

But you are a 0L. You would have no way of seeing the nuances of the OCI process or legal hiring in general. Once you go through it, no matter which school you choose, I think you will understand better that TLS's broad generalizations about peer schools exist, for the most part, in the minds of prospective students. Legal employers do not make the sorts of highly granular distinctions between Michigan and Penn that you think they do.

So it's not the schools fault, it's just that the students there make dumb choices at OCI and/or willingly opt into un/underemployment (the latter being more of a problem last year than this year of course). Basically the students are failing the school and not vice versa?

[BigZuck]

I'm also curious why Michigans numbers aren't closer to Berkeley if the students there really are "different" (I read that as do-goodery but maybe that means something else when people say it)

[jbagelboy]

Curious, which stats exactly show that it's hard to get to a secondary market you haven't been to from non-HYS schools? Or that it's hard to get NYC biglaw from Michigan? Objectivity is not my problem. Indeed, I can only speak objectively about one school. Just because my assessment differs from that of outsiders does not make it any less "objective." Nor am I looking to place my school up on a pedestal or trash talk any other. I am simply rebutting some of the off-base and inaccurate talking points from the TLS echo chamber for the benefit of prospective 1L's making a tough decision right now.

Your takeaway from my post should not be that it's all rainbows and butterflies in Ann Arbor. Law school is difficult, risky, and expensive. But the difference between the schools, as far as placement power for an individual student, is negligible. Any difference between peer schools is more likely attributable to self-selection. Let's use LST, a favorite here. 38% of Penn goes to NYC. Just 18% of Michigan goes to NYC. Even disregarding any PI-selection, that's your score differential right there. The vast majority of students at Michigan simply do not interview in New York, because they have no desire to be in New York. But New York also happens to be where most biglaw jobs are, so there will be an aggregate advantage for Penn in biglaw scores. More students at Michigan simply target markets where biglaw is tougher to crack or doesn't exist at all.

At Michigan, some students strike out, but for the most part, students who focus on NYC can find a job through OCI unless they are at the bottom of the class. And of course, self-selection cuts both ways. Michigan placed 13% of its grads in Illinois. Penn placed just 1.5%. Does this mean Michigan gives you a 9X better chance to get to Illinois? No, it doesn't. I would be shocked if a comparable student at Penn had a significantly harder time getting to Chicago than his Michigan counterpart.

Another 0L here, but one who has conversed at great length with various admissions officers and major firm hiring partners prior to making my final decision.

Michigan IS a great school. James Dean isn't denying that either. But referring to the bolded, here's an informative little note dropped from the dean of financial aid at Michigan in an email to me several months ago during scholarship negotiation. I made it clear over several emails I could not attend Michigan at that debt load, and she had this to say (among many other things):

If you feel like Michigan – for reasons of curricular strengths, or differences in the student body, or differences in job prospects, or differences in atmosphere and community – is the place you would prefer to be, then consider that our graduates confirm the top salaries in top firms in the top markets, and the debt becomes much less significant when balanced against, say, a New York firm salary of $140,000.

Her advice in response to my concern about debt was, 'oh, well with a biglaw job in NYC you'll be fine'. She didn't say Chicago or "secondary market". So clearly NYC biglaw is on Michigan's radar to the point where its their very first default advice (I never even said anything about wanting biglaw or to live on the east coast). The fact that Michigan can't place as many of its grads into this ostensibly debt-nullifying market as its peers directly contradicts with the language employed by the school and the pride of its admissions staff. Based on LST, a more accurate statement than the above might have been: "some marginal percentage of our students are able to secure biglaw jobs in new york paying market salary and that might allow you to pay off your ridiculous debt".

tl;dr, Your portrayal of self selection at Michigan runs against its own justification

[michwolv]

michwolv, don't you think you are hyping up your school a bit much? People who read your overzealous post will come away with the wrong impression. Thinking you have a good chance at a biglaw job in a secondary market you've never been to at any school other than maybe HYS is ridiculous. And what you're saying is ridiculously over optimistic and not supported by what many of your peers told me at ASW or, yes, statistics. Michigan, Virginia, Penn, Duke, etc. are all fantastic schools no doubt about that. But don't overhype your school. People should take what you said with a big grain of salt.

And yes, I'm an 0L, I did not fancy Michigan, and I'm probably going to Penn. But unlike you I'm not here to troll or put a particular school on a pedestal or trash talk. I'm simply stating that you are clearly lacking a bit of objectivity here.

Sorry you don't like TLS and sorry you're butthurt over what people say on the internet about Michigan. But that doesn't mean you need to go around trolling and giving ridiculously hyped up opinions of your school.

Also whatourbodiesarefor, enough with the fucking tiers already.

Curious, which stats exactly show that it's hard to get to a secondary market you haven't been to from non-HYS schools? Or that it's hard to get NYC biglaw from Michigan? Objectivity is not my problem. Indeed, I can only speak objectively about one school. Just because my assessment differs from that of outsiders does not make it any less "objective." Nor am I looking to place my school up on a pedestal or trash talk any other. I am simply rebutting some of the off-base and inaccurate talking points from the TLS echo chamber for the benefit of prospective 1L's making a tough decision right now.

Your takeaway from my post should not be that it's all rainbows and butterflies in Ann Arbor. Law school is difficult, risky, and expensive. But the difference between the schools, as far as placement power for an individual student, is negligible. Any difference between peer schools is more likely attributable to self-selection. Let's use LST, a favorite here. 38% of Penn goes to NYC. Just 18% of Michigan goes to NYC. Even disregarding any PI-selection, that's your score differential right there. The vast majority of students at Michigan simply do not interview in New York, because they have no desire to be in New York. But New York also happens to be where most biglaw jobs are, so there will be an aggregate advantage for Penn in biglaw scores. More students at Michigan simply target markets where biglaw is tougher to crack or doesn't exist at all.

At Michigan, some students strike out, but for the most part, students who focus on NYC can find a job through OCI unless they are at the bottom of the class. And of course, self-selection cuts both ways. Michigan placed 13% of its grads in Illinois. Penn placed just 1.5%. Does this mean Michigan gives you a 9X better chance to get to Illinois? No, it doesn't. I would be shocked if a comparable student at Penn had a significantly harder time getting to Chicago than his Michigan counterpart.

But you are a 0L. You would have no way of seeing the nuances of the OCI process or legal hiring in general. Once you go through it, no matter which school you choose, I think you will understand better that TLS's broad generalizations about peer schools exist, for the most part, in the minds of prospective students. Legal employers do not make the sorts of highly granular distinctions between Michigan and Penn that you think they do.

So it's not the schools fault, it's just that the students there make dumb choices at OCI and/or willingly opt into un/underemployment (the latter being more of a problem last year than this year of course). Basically the students are failing the school and not vice versa?

No, and that's a ridiculous way to look at it. There is nothing wrong with not wanting to work in NYC. I didn't. If a student wants to work in Chicago or San Francisco, it's a reasonable decision to interview there even knowing it will be riskier. Especially if they decide that, even if it doesn't work out, they would still rather do something less prestigious in the cities they are from than move their lives to NYC.

[Nelson]

Why is this year's batch of TLS 0Ls mostly composed of over the top trolls?