Top Law Schools

I continually see posts in this part of the forum where people state that they've fallen in love with a certain school after attending their ASW, and it seems like this experience is often used as the basis for their decision to attend that school (even though it also seems like many of these people didn't go to other ASWs and may have had the same experience at those).

I've always been skeptical of ASWs though. They seem like exercises in marketing, and rather than applicants making decisions based only on employment differences, available programs, debt incurred, etc., how much fun they had at the event (which is often based on who had the best food/alcohol and interactions with a limited number of other applicants) seems to come into play as a decision making criterion.

Can sometime tell me why people should be attending ASWs when trying to choose a law school? To those who go to these, what did you get out of them?

For me the value was more in making sure that I didn't hate a certain school rather than in seeing which one I liked more.

The way I saw it, one of those schools was going to be sucking 3 years and potentially thousands of dollars out of me, so the least they could do is give me some free booze and a t-shirt.

And, like Pneumonia said, I just wanted to make sure I didn't hate the place/culture.

Even though "fit" shouldn't be a major factor, I think you're rolling the dice by not at least visiting a school before matriculating.

Plus, free booze.

I can only really see it mattering if you're deciding between two peer schools at equal costs. Like, if you're deciding between USC and UCLA with the same COA at each, it really comes down to which area you like more and the culture of the place. But most of the time, employment data and cost should override the "I fell in love with the place" thing.

It can be helpful to check out the area and neighborhood, figure out where you might want to live, and to just have some sort of idea or picture in your head of where you will be spending the next 3 years at. I agree, though, that you can't really put very much stock into ASWs for the purposes of deciding between schools in most situations. I agree with the poster who said that maybe in really close cases it might push you one way or the other, but that's about that.

ASWs aren't representing of being in law school, except for maybe sitting in on an actual class.

I'm going to go against popular opinion here and say that ASWs were immensely helpful in my decisionmaking process this cycle. Sure, ASWs are basically exercises in propaganda, but I do think you get a "feel" for the school, and being able to speak to a significant number of current students one-on-one was pretty helpful/insightful. I also went out of my way to ask the current students I spoke to whether they went to ASW before they made their decision, and if so, if they felt that the impression they got of the school during ASW lined up with their actual experience (basically all of them said yes).

One ASW I went to was at a school that I had huge reservations about coming in to the cycle, and was not even in my top 3 at the start of the cycle. I am now 99% certain I'll be going to that school, and going to their ASW helped dispel some major (unwarranted) concerns I had about the school.

One ASW I went to was at a school that was in my top 3 coming into the cycle, and I was sure I'd love the school during ASW. I didn't. This was a major surprise, but I'm glad I figured it out now rather than in September.

Also, someone close to me went to the ASW 3 cycles ago of the same school I'll (almost certainly) be attending and absolutely hated it. Different strokes for different folks and all that.

Pneumonia wrote:For me the value was more in making sure that I didn't hate a certain school rather than in seeing which one I liked more.

This was pretty much how I viewed it as well. I only went to a the ASW of those schools that I was seriously considering and by that I mean the final choices. Primarily because of finances but also because my mind was pretty much made up based on things such as placement, cost, etc. The ASW was essentially to make sure I didn't seriously despise the school or the location. In fact, the ASW was more about seeing the area I'd be living in than the law program itself. All the free stuff and the stipends were just icing on the cake.

..

I agree with You Dumb Dildo. If two schools have equivalent placement power + COAs and you'd be happy in either geography, then simply liking a place more is a reasonable tiebreaker.

That said, I can't possibly justify picking a school with worse placement and cost just because you vibe better there, or bc you heard something from some 1L who couldn't care less about your outcomes. That's decision-making that only the wealthy can afford. I'm a 0L, and I would nevernever do that. Didn't do so for grad school, either - went with the most secure stipend at a reasonable school that did my specialty.

TheSpanishMain wrote:I can only really see it mattering if you're deciding between two peer schools at equal costs. Like, if you're deciding between USC and UCLA with the same COA at each, it really comes down to which area you like more and the culture of the place. But most of the time, employment data and cost should override the "I fell in love with the place" thing.

This is the only time it matters. If you're picking a professional school based on feel, you're doing it wrong. Pick based on getting the job you want to get for a reasonable cost. I, personally, could give a damn about things like collegiality and other buzzwords thrown around in admissions. All that matters is getting the job I'm trying to get.

cron1834 wrote:I agree with You Dumb Dildo. If two schools have equivalent placement power + COAs and you'd be happy in either geography, then simply liking a place more is a reasonable tiebreaker.

That said, I can't possibly justify picking a school with worse placement and cost just because you vibe better there, or bc you heard something from some 1L who couldn't care less about your outcomes. That's decision-making that only the wealthy can afford. I'm a 0L, and I would nevernever do that.

Well, I think you have some reasonable leeway. Like if you're picking one of CCN and you've been admitted to all 3, or one of HYS, etc. Even if costs of attendance aren't identical (but in the same ballpark). It's still 3 years of your life and you want to be happy. But you also want to be happy and employed afterward.

ph14 wrote:

cron1834 wrote:I agree with You Dumb Dildo. If two schools have equivalent placement power + COAs and you'd be happy in either geography, then simply liking a place more is a reasonable tiebreaker.

That said, I can't possibly justify picking a school with worse placement and cost just because you vibe better there, or bc you heard something from some 1L who couldn't care less about your outcomes. That's decision-making that only the wealthy can afford. I'm a 0L, and I would nevernever do that.

Well, I think you have some reasonable leeway. Like if you're picking one of CCN and you've been admitted to all 3, or one of HYS, etc. Even if costs of attendance aren't identical (but in the same ballpark). It's still 3 years of your life and you want to be happy. But you also want to be happy and employed afterward.

Yeah, if they're ballpark, this sounds convincing. The two Cs are obviously peers, though the geography you desire is going to matter. But if you "fell in love" with Ann Arbor during ASW and have it for a similar cost (sometimes finaid is weird)? No way.

How do you feel about swag?

ph14 wrote:

cron1834 wrote:I agree with You Dumb Dildo. If two schools have equivalent placement power + COAs and you'd be happy in either geography, then simply liking a place more is a reasonable tiebreaker.

That said, I can't possibly justify picking a school with worse placement and cost just because you vibe better there, or bc you heard something from some 1L who couldn't care less about your outcomes. That's decision-making that only the wealthy can afford. I'm a 0L, and I would nevernever do that.

Well, I think you have some reasonable leeway. Like if you're picking one of CCN and you've been admitted to all 3, or one of HYS, etc. Even if costs of attendance aren't identical (but in the same ballpark). It's still 3 years of your life and you want to be happy. But you also want to be happy and employed afterward.

I think we're splitting hairs at this point. For each person, the calculus will be different when we're talking about T14 at marginally similar costs. Depending on goals and current situation, the difference is truly marginal. The more important point is focusing on whether the two schools are truly peers and whether either of them are worth the cost at the time of decision. If they provide an equal chance at the job you want at an equal cost, you can absolutely pick based on "feel," but other than that, pick based on what is right for your goals and your financial situation.

matthewsean85 wrote:

ph14 wrote:

cron1834 wrote:I agree with You Dumb Dildo. If two schools have equivalent placement power + COAs and you'd be happy in either geography, then simply liking a place more is a reasonable tiebreaker.

That said, I can't possibly justify picking a school with worse placement and cost just because you vibe better there, or bc you heard something from some 1L who couldn't care less about your outcomes. That's decision-making that only the wealthy can afford. I'm a 0L, and I would nevernever do that.

Well, I think you have some reasonable leeway. Like if you're picking one of CCN and you've been admitted to all 3, or one of HYS, etc. Even if costs of attendance aren't identical (but in the same ballpark). It's still 3 years of your life and you want to be happy. But you also want to be happy and employed afterward.

I think we're splitting hairs at this point. For each person, the calculus will be different when we're talking about T14 at marginally similar costs. Depending on goals and current situation, the difference is truly marginal. The more important point is focusing on whether the two schools are truly peers and whether either of them are worth the cost at the time of decision. If they provide an equal chance at the job you want at an equal cost, you can absolutely pick based on "feel," but other than that, pick based on what is right for your goals and your financial situation.

Splitting hairs is what you do in law school and as a lawyer.

matthewsean85 wrote:

ph14 wrote:

cron1834 wrote:I agree with You Dumb Dildo. If two schools have equivalent placement power + COAs and you'd be happy in either geography, then simply liking a place more is a reasonable tiebreaker.

That said, I can't possibly justify picking a school with worse placement and cost just because you vibe better there, or bc you heard something from some 1L who couldn't care less about your outcomes. That's decision-making that only the wealthy can afford. I'm a 0L, and I would nevernever do that.

Well, I think you have some reasonable leeway. Like if you're picking one of CCN and you've been admitted to all 3, or one of HYS, etc. Even if costs of attendance aren't identical (but in the same ballpark). It's still 3 years of your life and you want to be happy. But you also want to be happy and employed afterward.

I think we're splitting hairs at this point. For each person, the calculus will be different when we're talking about T14 at marginally similar costs. Depending on goals and current situation, the difference is truly marginal. The more important point is focusing on whether the two schools are truly peers and whether either of them are worth the cost at the time of decision. If they provide an equal chance at the job you want at an equal cost, you can absolutely pick based on "feel," but other than that, pick based on what is right for your goals and your financial situation.

Disagree, I think it's actually the other way around, the differences career wise are marginally different, but where you live and attend is pretty important..

I agree with ph14 that the essential value of the ASW is for testing whether you could actually live in the location for 3 years. "Loving" the ASW is not as important as not hating it.

ASW's are far less important at schools you are familiar with in cities and geographic regions you've visited many times. For example, I would not have packed my shit up and gone to Duke without seeing Durham first. I just wouldn't - I'd never even been to North Carolina except one grounded flight in Greensboro when I was eleven. Similarly, I would want to see and experience Chicago before heading to NU or Chi; the city would seem to form a large part of the experience. Whereas I was a little more familiar with New York, Cambridge, and San Francisco so those experiences would be far less critical.

Clearly wrote:

matthewsean85 wrote:

ph14 wrote:

cron1834 wrote:I agree with You Dumb Dildo. If two schools have equivalent placement power + COAs and you'd be happy in either geography, then simply liking a place more is a reasonable tiebreaker.

That said, I can't possibly justify picking a school with worse placement and cost just because you vibe better there, or bc you heard something from some 1L who couldn't care less about your outcomes. That's decision-making that only the wealthy can afford. I'm a 0L, and I would nevernever do that.

Well, I think you have some reasonable leeway. Like if you're picking one of CCN and you've been admitted to all 3, or one of HYS, etc. Even if costs of attendance aren't identical (but in the same ballpark). It's still 3 years of your life and you want to be happy. But you also want to be happy and employed afterward.

I think we're splitting hairs at this point. For each person, the calculus will be different when we're talking about T14 at marginally similar costs. Depending on goals and current situation, the difference is truly marginal. The more important point is focusing on whether the two schools are truly peers and whether either of them are worth the cost at the time of decision. If they provide an equal chance at the job you want at an equal cost, you can absolutely pick based on "feel," but other than that, pick based on what is right for your goals and your financial situation.

Disagree, I think it's actually the other way around, the differences career wise are marginally different, but where you live and attend is pretty important..

I guess I conveyed it poorly, because this is mostly what I meant. What I was talking about was saying, "my goal is X (for argument, let's call X=DC biglaw, just for giggles), and school Y does marginally better to get me X, so maybe picking school Y is better than school Z, even though school Z has better general placement than school Y." This can even go into what you prefer for an environment, but mostly I think it should focus on pushing toward the outcome you're looking for in attending law school if the costs are substantially the same.

cron1834 wrote:I agree with You Dumb Dildo.

Haha, I always forget that you have an actual handle.

cron1834 wrote:Haha, I always forget that you have an actual handle.

A dildo with an actual handle... not so dumb if you think about it