Study: Don't sweat your school's status. Forum

[bigkahuna2020]

This study is utterly retarded.

Code: Select all

Consider, for example, a hypothetical law student with a 3.25 – 3.5 grade point average (GPA) at forty-seventh-ranked University of Florida. Under the authors' analysis, if that student had attended twentieth-ranked George Washington University, her grades would likely slip to the 2.75 – 3.0 range, and her salary would be 22 percent lower, if all other factors held constant. Had that student landed at seventh-ranked University of California at Berkeley, her grades would drop to the 2.5 – 2.75 range, and her salary would dip 7 percent. 

UF's median is 3.15, so we're talking about someone who is probably top 1/3 at UF. This person will not get biglaw at UF, and the projection supposes that she'd probably be dead-fucking-last at Berkeley to have that GPA. That's just unbelievable.

Is that really how they are equating law schools and GPA's? That is fucking dumb. And horribly unscientific. He could at least possibly work with transfer student data and actually find datapoints that have empirical grounding, not normative garbage

[rundoxierun]

Is that really how they are equating law schools and GPA's? That is fucking dumb. And horribly unscientific. He could at least possibly work with transfer student data and actually find datapoints that have empirical grounding, not normative garbage

What they are doing is what you do in undergrad level intro to quant. analysis in econ when you are just learning about regression analysis. They just have LSACs regression equation and are basically simply plugging in LSAT scores and GPAs into the equation and applying it to the numerical ranges of the different schools without doing any kind of analysis of the implications or real life situations.

[rayiner]

Is that really how they are equating law schools and GPA's? That is fucking dumb. And horribly unscientific. He could at least possibly work with transfer student data and actually find datapoints that have empirical grounding, not normative garbage

What they are doing is what you do in undergrad level intro to quant. analysis in econ when you are just learning about regression analysis. They just have LSACs regression equation and are basically simply plugging in LSAT scores and GPAs into the equation and applying it to the numerical ranges of the different schools without doing any kind of analysis of the implications or real life situations.

Methodology is on page 24: http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/ ... kowitz.pdf

The methodology is painfully terrible.

[FMaze]

No, I wouldn't say that.

Your response was stated in very lawyer like fashion : ).

As a reverse-splitter (3.9 • 165), I went the ED route―enticed by the possibility of securing a top 10 law school, I thought I might not be able to secure otherwise―I believe the adage is, people want what they can’t have!

Now that I have the acceptance (with a stout price tag), I certainly have second-guessed the discounted ride aspect. By the tone of the phone calls and emails from a few top 25-50 schools, I believe they would have significantly discounted their sticker price. A few +50 schools just came out and offered a full ride. So now I am thinking, with a +150K debt, it is BigLaw or bust. Versus, it could have been close to no debt and a potential $80K income in a state (like Florida) with no state taxes.

[09042014]

No, I wouldn't say that.

Your response was stated in very lawyer like fashion .

As a reverse-splitter (3.9 • 165), I went the ED route―enticed by the possibility of securing a top 10 law school, I thought I might not be able to secure otherwise―I believe the adage is, people want what they can’t have!

Now that I have the acceptance (with a stout price tag), I certainly have second-guessed the discounted ride aspect. By the tone of the phone calls and emails from a few top 25-50 schools, I believe they would have significantly discounted their sticker price. A few +50 schools just came out and offered a full ride. So now I am thinking, with a +150K debt, it is BigLaw or bust. Versus, it could have been close to no debt and a potential $80K income in a state (like Florida) with no state taxes.

Don't be silly UVA will be 200K+ debt.

[megaTTTron]

No, I wouldn't say that.

Your response was stated in very lawyer like fashion .

As a reverse-splitter (3.9 • 165), I went the ED route―enticed by the possibility of securing a top 10 law school, I thought I might not be able to secure otherwise―I believe the adage is, people want what they can’t have!

Now that I have the acceptance (with a stout price tag), I certainly have second-guessed the discounted ride aspect. By the tone of the phone calls and emails from a few top 25-50 schools, I believe they would have significantly discounted their sticker price. A few +50 schools just came out and offered a full ride. So now I am thinking, with a +150K debt, it is BigLaw or bust. Versus, it could have been close to no debt and a potential $80K income in a state (like Florida) with no state taxes.

Don't be silly UVA will be 200K+ debt.

hahah. but now FMaze goes to a t10!!!!

[09042014]

hahah. but now FMaze goes to a t10!!!!

Though to be fair, I'd rather have 200K debt at UVA than 80K debt at Iowa.

[megaTTTron]

hahah. but now FMaze goes to a t10!!!!

Though to be fair, I'd rather have 200K debt at UVA than 80K debt at Iowa.

I'm living it now.

[09042014]

hahah. but now FMaze goes to a t10!!!!

Though to be fair, I'd rather have 200K debt at UVA than 80K debt at Iowa.

I'm living it now.

My choice was easier. 220K from NU or 150K from UIUC. Not really much a choice.

[plum]

Though to be fair, I'd rather have 200K debt at UVA than 80K debt at Iowa.

grass is always greener on the other side

[20160810]

I agree. The metric of how many are partners is wholly unrelated to the concept of a school being relegated to "non partner track positions"

Baker & McKenzie (Chicago, New York)
DLA Piper (Chicago, New York)
Jones Day (New York, Washington)
White & Case (New York, Washington)
Skadden Arps (New York, Washington)

these aren't really the cream of the crop

A V5 firm isn't the cream of the crop? This is a little silly.

[romothesavior]

I agree. The metric of how many are partners is wholly unrelated to the concept of a school being relegated to "non partner track positions"

Baker & McKenzie (Chicago, New York)
DLA Piper (Chicago, New York)
Jones Day (New York, Washington)
White & Case (New York, Washington)
Skadden Arps (New York, Washington)

these aren't really the cream of the crop

A V5 firm isn't the cream of the crop? This is a little silly.

+1. I love how TLS thinks there are about 3-4 good biglaw firms, even though any of us would give an arm and a leg to work at any of these firms mentioned.

[20160810]

I agree. The metric of how many are partners is wholly unrelated to the concept of a school being relegated to "non partner track positions"

Baker & McKenzie (Chicago, New York)
DLA Piper (Chicago, New York)
Jones Day (New York, Washington)
White & Case (New York, Washington)
Skadden Arps (New York, Washington)

these aren't really the cream of the crop

A V5 firm isn't the cream of the crop? This is a little silly.

+1. I love how TLS thinks there are about 3-4 good biglaw firms, even though any of us would give an arm and a leg to work at any of these firms mentioned.

Sure they all pay the same, BUT SOME OF THEM ARE LOWER ON A RANKING!!!!!!!!!!