MUST have WE for NU law? Forum

[vanwinkle]

No, but NU values WE more than most law schools so it's certainly a bump. and what's 3ish? 2.98? 3.0? 3.2? Massive difference between all three.

Massive difference between a 2.98 and a 3.0?

I see you started another thread for this here: http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 2&t=138327

I guess folks can go there if they want to talk about the difference between a 2.95 and a 3.

[09042014]

Only 2% of their most recent class did not have at least a year of full-time WE. http://www.law.northwestern.edu/admissions/profile/

Those 5-6 people typically have CCN numbers and impressive internships and other part-time experience.

Only exception for this rule that I've seen was someone who had a science background for patent law.

[motiontodismiss]

Short Answer: Yes for anyone who doesn't have a 3.8/173 and a Goldman/McKinsey/BCG/Blackstone internship.

[Sinra]

...nevermind

[gambelda]

This is nice that you two have found a way to rationalize it to yourself, but the fact remains from an economic standpoint it's better to get educated first. Of course there are some benefits to having WE, but they don't outweigh the benefits of spending those years as a lawyer.

I wholeheartedly disagree. Show me where it is better economically to get educated first. I work, 2 years, I cut through my debt more than you do, which means I'm paying far less in interest thanks to a lower principle, and I make much much more with much higher chance of actually getting a job once I graduate.

I'm working right now with people who went for an mBA straight out of UG. They have way more debt than I do and are making the exact same as me because they failed to realize that no one really wants to pay someone who they don't know can work. ESPECIALY IN THIS ECONOMY.