DePaul Vs Chicago Kent Forum

[unbrokenchain]

Hello everybody, here is my situation... I TRULY appreciate all input.

I have been admitted to DePaul with an offer of 15k a year if I maintain a 3.2 or better and Chicago Kent with 20k a year if I maintain a 3.25 or better. I will be contacting DePaul to tell them about Kent and the importance of funds and see if they will give more. (should I email or real letter?)

As far as the GPA requirement, I am smart and plan on working my ass off so I think I could definitely maintain that GPA. I am also shooting for top 10% and transfer possibilities but I understand there are no guarantees... so is a 3.2 or 3.25 requirement an evil scam or fairly reasonable like it sounds?

I have not visited either yet but will obviously do that soon. I do want work in Chicago afterwards and Big Law would be the ideal future employment. I have heard Kent has far superior facilities and I know it is higher in the rankings but nothing means more to me than post grad employment. That is what leads me to SERIOUSLY consider DePaul. I know they have the biggest alumni network in the city and the most judges sitting that went there. Also, in searching through the lawyers of the top 10 chicago firms, all but one have more, or far more DePaul grads employed than Kent.

I have this sneaking suspicion that in the nature of the ULTIMATE world truth, that it’s not what you know, it’s who you know, that maybe DePaul is better connected throughout Chicago, rankings be damned. I even read one article where a high ranking firm recruiter said “We only visit U Chicago, NW, and DePaul. We visit DePaul because it has political clout within the firm.”

Lastly, although I have some interests in specific areas of study, I won’t really make that decision until I know more/have been through a year of law school, so strengths in specific areas don’t factor into the decision.

WHERE SHOULD I GO?


Subquestion - would transferring to UIUC be worth it?


Thank you so much for your time.

ps. I work till 6 today, so I'm posting it and returning later. so if you ask me something and don't get an immediate response don't be offended.

[BarbellDreams]

1. Kent is a much better school than DePaul. Don't let anyone fool you, DePaul was a TTT just 2 tears ago, has slipped in the rankings already this year, and really should be at the top of the TTT, not a T2. Kent places slightly over 13% in biglaw, have a good alumni network, and are overall better regarded in Chicago (I am from Chicago so I have some credibility on this) than DePaul. Kent's degree is also a bit more portable than DePaul's. Go to Kent.

2. In regards to your other questions, if you could get into U of I I would run, not walk. Although Chicago's market is having problems right now and is over saturated U of I is regarded VERY highly here. They also place a good deal into big firms. Competition with U of Chicago and NU is bad, but its much better than competing with T2's like Loyola, DePaul, and Kent if you went to one of those.

[PlugInBaby]

If you really want big law is retaking the LSAT and applying next cycle an option?

[im_blue]

DePaul was a TTT just a couple of years ago. With similar scholarships, Chicago Kent is the obvious answer.

[remotelyfeasible]

At either of these schools, you will need to work very hard to get biglaw. Many try; few succeed.

[unbrokenchain]

If you really want big law is retaking the LSAT and applying next cycle an option?

Well I'm not hell bent on big law it's just the most tangible goal. I'll probably take the LSAT again this june (have to decide soon) because I should have done better than I did and probably could (got a 161 but had practice test range of 164-168). If I do substantially better, I might try to either leverage a good bump in financial aid (pretty much a full ride or close to) from Kent/DePaul or wait and try to get in to UIUC. If I don't do much better I would probably just go to Kent or DePaul. Also, like I mentioned before, when it comes to asking for more aid? Email ok or is old fashioned mail the way to go?

The big thing I don't like about taking a year off is that the job market for recent college grads, especially those with history degrees, is abysmal, worse than the job market for newly graduated law students that's for sure. So really it would feel like wasting time, and this may sound ridiculous, but graduating law school at 26 seems much better than 27 to me.



as for Kent being a better school... that's what everyone says, and I have no problem believing that it's true... but the fact remains, there are far more DePaul grads at the top 10 Chicago firms than Kent grads. Why is that when EVERYONE seems to be immediately confident in Kent's superiority as a school and in its reputation among chicago firms?

I've heard from a lot of people that as far as big law and a lot of firms are concerned, Loyola, Kent, and DePaul are pretty much all considered equal and it boils down to where you are ranked. The only exception is when alumni or other factors create pull within a firm and I get the impression from the numbers that DePaul has that in more places than Kent.

Lastly, Rank being so hugely important when going to a lower tier school as well as its importance in transferring, in a way, wouldn't the smartest move be to go to the easiest school to maximize your chances of ranking high?


Oh, and here are the respective grading curves for the schools. See any HUGE difference that points toward one school over the other?


DePaul Grading Curve

7.2 First-Year Grade Curve
The College of Law faculty adopted the following mandatory grade curve that applies to all
first-year courses:
A 10%-15%
B+ 20%-25%
B 25%-30%
C+ 20%-25%
C or below 15%-20%
The curve is applied in LARC across all sections taught by the same professor.

Upper-Level Grade Curve: Classes With 50 or more Students
The College of Law faculty adopted the following mandatory grade curve for all upper-level
classes with enrollments of 50 or more students:
A 12%-20%
B+ 21%-27%
B 25%-31%
C+ 16%-22%
C or below 10%-16%

Upper-Level Grade Curve: Classes with 26 - 49 Students
The College of Law faculty adopted a mandatory mean grade curve of between 2.95 and
3.15 for classes with enrollments of between 26 and 49 students, including LARC III.

Upper-Level Classes with 25 or Fewer Students
No curve applies to courses with enrollments of 25 or fewer students.


Grading curve for Kent

The following curve is required for all required courses, except Legal Writing courses and seminars.


The Format could not be salvaged, the first number is Recommended, the Second is Range, the third is Cumulative.
Recommended

Range

Cumulative Range
A
5%

0-10%

0-10%
A-
10%

5-15%

5-20%
B+
20%

15-25%

30-40%
B
20%

15-25%

45-60%
B-
20%

15-30%

60-80%
C+
15%

10-20%

80-90%
C & Lower
10%

10-20%



The following curve is highly recommended (but not required) for all elective courses (except Appellate Advocacy and Judicial Externship) if at least 40 students are enrolled. Beginning with the Summer 2010 term, this curve will be required for Professional Responsibility (currently, the curve for required courses, above, applies to Professional Responsibility).

Cumulative Range
A- maximum of 30%
B+ maximum of 50%
B- maximum of 85%

[thinkbig]

I had exactly the same options. After visiting both schools, my sense was that overall, Kent students seemed a little more ambitious and polished. Don't get me wrong, DePaul seems like a very good quality program and there were certainly impressive students there. Kent's facilities are much nicer and more modern, but DePaul is beginning a renovation and has more real estate (although Kent's library is bigger and more chic). I've solicited input on the DePaul vs. Kent (vs. Loyola) question from several attorneys practicing in Chicago, and the general consensus seems to be that DePaul is marginally less prestigious than the other two. But practically speaking, DePaul's larger alumni network may be an asset. Kent is very proud of their legal writing program, which required 5 semesters of writing courses. This could be a plus when applying for jobs if Kent graduates really do have a reputation for being superior writers, as the school claims. In the end, though, the best law school for you will be the one where you will feel most comfortable, do your best work, and network effectively; this is a personal choice for you to decide when you have all the information necessary to make such a decision. If it is possible to visit each school before deciding, definitely do that.

[savagecheater]

I've personally never been one to favor GPA-contingent scholarships, especially if they're not freerides.

[as stars burn]

1. Kent is a much better school than DePaul. Don't let anyone fool you, DePaul was a TTT just 2 tears ago, has slipped in the rankings already this year, and really should be at the top of the TTT, not a T2. Kent places slightly over 13% in biglaw, have a good alumni network, and are overall better regarded in Chicago (I am from Chicago so I have some credibility on this) than DePaul. Kent's degree is also a bit more portable than DePaul's. Go to Kent.

2. In regards to your other questions, if you could get into U of I I would run, not walk. Although Chicago's market is having problems right now and is over saturated U of I is regarded VERY highly here. They also place a good deal into big firms. Competition with U of Chicago and NU is bad, but its much better than competing with T2's like Loyola, DePaul, and Kent if you went to one of those.

+1---however, I'm biased. I'll be at Kent in the Fall!! (that is if Illinois doesn't let me in off the waitlist).

[unbrokenchain]

I had exactly the same options. After visiting both schools, my sense was that overall, Kent students seemed a little more ambitious and polished. Don't get me wrong, DePaul seems like a very good quality program and there were certainly impressive students there. Kent's facilities are much nicer and more modern, but DePaul is beginning a renovation and has more real estate (although Kent's library is bigger and more chic). I've solicited input on the DePaul vs. Kent (vs. Loyola) question from several attorneys practicing in Chicago, and the general consensus seems to be that DePaul is marginally less prestigious than the other two. But practically speaking, DePaul's larger alumni network may be an asset. Kent is very proud of their legal writing program, which required 5 semesters of writing courses. This could be a plus when applying for jobs if Kent graduates really do have a reputation for being superior writers, as the school claims. In the end, though, where you will feel most comfortable, do your best work, and network effectively, is a personal choice for you to decide when you have all the information necessary to make such a decision. If it is possible to visit each school before deciding, definitely do that.

Good post. Thanks. What school did you end up choosing and why?

Also, that's one other thing about Kent that intimidates me is all the legal writing. It seems like legal writing would be the driest, least interesting part of law school and the idea of being FORCED to take it through ALL of law school except 1 semester seems a little like torture. (is it possible to take more than one legal writing class in a semester or would that be suicide?) On the other hand I could understand it being crucial to succeeding in law and maybe thus worth the pain in the ass.

and like I said earlier, have you, or has anybody reading this considered that for higher ranking the easier school might be the way to go?

lastly, and please excuse the massive ignorance I'm sure this will expose, but what does TTT stand for?

[unbrokenchain]

I've personally never been one to favor GPA-contingent scholarships, especially if they're not freerides.

Oh and let me add this to the discussion...

The details of Kent's offer...

option a 20k a year if a 3.25 or better is kept at the end of each year. renewable for 10k each year if a 3.0 or better is maintained. but once it goes down, it can never go back up

option b 12k a year, no conditions.

[as stars burn]

I've personally never been one to favor GPA-contingent scholarships, especially if they're not freerides.

Oh and let me add this to the discussion...

The details of Kent's offer...

option a 20k a year if a 3.25 or better is kept at the end of each year. renewable for 10k each year if a 3.0 or better is maintained. but once it goes down, it can never go back up

option b 12k a year, no conditions.

I vote option b. Seriously, less stress. You can't guarantee you'll get a 3.25 or better and it's nice to be GUARANTEED that 12k regardless.

[unbrokenchain]

I've personally never been one to favor GPA-contingent scholarships, especially if they're not freerides.

Oh and let me add this to the discussion...

The details of Kent's offer...

option a 20k a year if a 3.25 or better is kept at the end of each year. renewable for 10k each year if a 3.0 or better is maintained. but once it goes down, it can never go back up

option b 12k a year, no conditions.

I vote option b. Seriously, less stress. You can't guarantee you'll get a 3.25 or better and it's nice to be GUARANTEED that 12k regardless.

I've considered that but A) I feel like an extra 24K of free money is worth the stress because let's face it, I'd be busting my ass to get top 10% even if money didn't ride on it. and B) If I can't maintain a 3.25, I should at least be able to maintain a 3.0 and then I only am 2k worse off than the guarantee but I didn't give up the 50% off potential. If I can't maintain a 3.0, then I'm just screwed in general. I suppose the loss of money would increase the level of screwed but I'm pretty damn sure I could get at LEAST a 3.0 and if I can't maybe law isn't for me...

[thinkbig]

.

[Kobe_Teeth]

Just talked to an associate at one of the bigger firms in Chicago. This person claimed that Loyola>Kent>>>DePaul.

This person advised me to go to Loyola or Kent if it ponied up more $$$.....and not to worry about DePaul.

[unbrokenchain]

.

intriguing....

[unbrokenchain]

Just talked to an associate at one of the bigger firms in Chicago. This person claimed that Loyola>Kent>>>DePaul.

This person advised me to go to Loyola or Kent if it ponied up more $$$.....and not to worry about DePaul.

I've heard that and the rankings back it up. But would you mind asking your associate his guess as to why there are more DePaul grads in the top 10 chicago firms than loyola grads and kent grads. Just for one example... Kirkland and Ellis, chicago's biggest firm... DePaul grads employed 27, Kent Grads 21, Loyala Grads 13.

[thinkbig]

but once it goes down, it can never go back up

option b 12k a year, no conditions.

Not true. The award letter states that if you drop below a 3.25, but remain above a 3.0, the award drops down to $10k. If you bring it back up past 3.25 at the end of your second year, you get $20k again for your 3rd year. Let's say you got the following:
Year 1: $20k (automatically upon acceptance of option A), GPA 3.15
Year 2: $10k (due to GPA in Year 1), GPA 3.35
Year 3: $20k (due to GPA in Year 2), GPA hopefully high enough.

Compare the above hypothetical total of $50k to the alternative of $36k if you went with option B.

It's a gamble either way... but if the you who is making the decision of A vs. B is the same you who believes you will pull off a 3.25, then going with option A would be significantly in your favor.

[thinkbig]

Just talked to an associate at one of the bigger firms in Chicago. This person claimed that Loyola>Kent>>>DePaul.

This person advised me to go to Loyola or Kent if it ponied up more $$$.....and not to worry about DePaul.

I've heard that and the rankings back it up. But would you mind asking your associate his guess as to why there are more DePaul grads in the top 10 chicago firms than loyola grads and kent grads. Just for one example... Kirkland and Ellis, chicago's biggest firm... DePaul grads employed 27, Kent Grads 21, Loyala Grads 13.

Looking at one or two or even ten firms isn't terribly informative. Sure, top ten in Chicago = biglaw and mega salaries. But look at it realistically. Kent has more associates placed into the 100 largest firms in Chicago that any other law school.

[unbrokenchain]

but once it goes down, it can never go back up

option b 12k a year, no conditions.

Not true. The award letter states that if you drop below a 3.25, but remain above a 3.0, the award drops down to $10k. If you bring it back up past 3.25 at the end of your second year, you get $20k again for your 3rd year. Let's say you got the following:
Year 1: $20k (automatically upon acceptance of option A), GPA 3.15
Year 2: $10k (due to GPA in Year 1), GPA 3.35
Year 3: $20k (due to GPA in Year 2), GPA hopefully high enough.

Compare the above hypothetical total of $50k to the alternative of $36k if you went with option B.

It's a gamble either way... but if the you who is making the decision of A vs. B is the same you who believes you will pull off a 3.25, then going with option A would be significantly in your favor.

That all makes sense except the Year 1 part. Are you saying I get the 20k for the first year guaranteed if I accept that option and the GPA from my first year only effects how much for year 2? That makes sense I just never put that together.

[unbrokenchain]

Just talked to an associate at one of the bigger firms in Chicago. This person claimed that Loyola>Kent>>>DePaul.

This person advised me to go to Loyola or Kent if it ponied up more $$$.....and not to worry about DePaul.

I've heard that and the rankings back it up. But would you mind asking your associate his guess as to why there are more DePaul grads in the top 10 chicago firms than loyola grads and kent grads. Just for one example... Kirkland and Ellis, chicago's biggest firm... DePaul grads employed 27, Kent Grads 21, Loyala Grads 13.

Looking at one or two or even ten firms isn't terribly informative. Sure, top ten in Chicago = biglaw and mega salaries. But look at it realistically. Kent has more associates placed into the 100 largest firms in Chicago that any other law school.

Now THAT is a useful bit of info. source?

[Kobe_Teeth]

He's actually at a top 10 and said he doesn't know anyone from depaul and knows a lot more at loyola. Also said they didn't go to depaul this year for oci but did go to loyola (or went deeper into the class from loyola than depaul...not sure).

So....it could just be anecdotal evidence and the flaws that come with anecdotal evidence. Not sure. However, I do know that I hear time and time again that Loyola and Kent are a step above DePaul. If you look at the employment stats...it backs that up.

However, if you were Chicago born and raised and the "Ol Boys Club" network to go with it, DePaul might be your choice.

Furthering my anecdotal evidence motif for the night, I also had a friend who went to DePaul and was making more money DJ'ing karaoke on the weekends. He just recently got a job as a public defender and "likes it."

[Kobe_Teeth]

Just talked to an associate at one of the bigger firms in Chicago. This person claimed that Loyola>Kent>>>DePaul.

This person advised me to go to Loyola or Kent if it ponied up more $$$.....and not to worry about DePaul.

I've heard that and the rankings back it up. But would you mind asking your associate his guess as to why there are more DePaul grads in the top 10 chicago firms than loyola grads and kent grads. Just for one example... Kirkland and Ellis, chicago's biggest firm... DePaul grads employed 27, Kent Grads 21, Loyala Grads 13.

Looking at one or two or even ten firms isn't terribly informative. Sure, top ten in Chicago = biglaw and mega salaries. But look at it realistically. Kent has more associates placed into the 100 largest firms in Chicago that any other law school.

Now THAT is a useful bit of info. source?

Were you at the admitted students event tonight too?!?!

Dean Krent dropped that nugget of info tonight at an admitted students event. That's where I heard it anyway.

PS....there was free beer there!

[thinkbig]

but once it goes down, it can never go back up

option b 12k a year, no conditions.

Not true. The award letter states that if you drop below a 3.25, but remain above a 3.0, the award drops down to $10k. If you bring it back up past 3.25 at the end of your second year, you get $20k again for your 3rd year. Let's say you got the following:
Year 1: $20k (automatically upon acceptance of option A), GPA 3.15
Year 2: $10k (due to GPA in Year 1), GPA 3.35
Year 3: $20k (due to GPA in Year 2), GPA hopefully high enough.

Compare the above hypothetical total of $50k to the alternative of $36k if you went with option B.

It's a gamble either way... but if the you who is making the decision of A vs. B is the same you who believes you will pull off a 3.25, then going with option A would be significantly in your favor.

That all makes sense except the Year 1 part. Are you saying I get the 20k for the first year guaranteed if I accept that option and the GPA from my first year only effects how much for year 2? That makes sense I just never put that together.

Yes. If you accept option A, you have already been awarded $20k your first year. That award is then renewable for the next academic year conditional on your cumulative GPA as of the end of the current academic year.

[PlugInBaby]

If you really want big law is retaking the LSAT and applying next cycle an option?

The big thing I don't like about taking a year off is that the job market for recent college grads, especially those with history degrees, is abysmal, worse than the job market for newly graduated law students that's for sure. So really it would feel like wasting time, and this may sound ridiculous, but graduating law school at 26 seems much better than 27 to me.

Well honestly, it does sound ridiculous. I graduated in 2009 with a sociology degree with seemingly over 9000 academic accolades. I haven't gotten one job offer. Not even part time. I am currently 26 and had a subpar cycle. However since I was not satisfied with my choice, I am going to retake and redo. If you have a stable source of income (or swallow your pride and live with your folks for a year) I advise you to enjoy your youth and take the time to do your cycle right: retake the LSAT, be a fee waiver whore and apply to tons of schools you would seriously consider attending (you could hit the bullseye), revamp that PS, and apply early among other things.