Top Law Schools

I looked on LSN and it seems like rejections were pretty much all across the board. Just curious, thanks.

The trend seems to be high GPA, good softs.

High GPA + Good softs + Good personal statement

Also early applicants.

How about the PS? They say they want applicants to use the full 4 page limit they give. Do many people expand theirs from the normal 2-3 pages other schools ask for, and if so, does it make any difference?

yes to all.

FlamingCow wrote:How about the PS? They say they want applicants to use the full 4 page limit they give. Do many people expand theirs from the normal 2-3 pages other schools ask for, and if so, does it make any difference?

Didn't realize they wanted us to use the full four pages. My 1.5 page statement is gonna bite me in the ass.

Well that and my mediocre scores and GPA.

Arbiter213 wrote:

FlamingCow wrote:How about the PS? They say they want applicants to use the full 4 page limit they give. Do many people expand theirs from the normal 2-3 pages other schools ask for, and if so, does it make any difference?

Didn't realize they wanted us to use the full four pages. My 1.5 page statement is gonna bite me in the ass.

Well that and my mediocre scores and GPA.

Here's a tip for law school. Page limits are also minimum requirements. "No more than 16 pages" means "write 16 pages."

JazzOne wrote:

Arbiter213 wrote:

FlamingCow wrote:How about the PS? They say they want applicants to use the full 4 page limit they give. Do many people expand theirs from the normal 2-3 pages other schools ask for, and if so, does it make any difference?

Didn't realize they wanted us to use the full four pages. My 1.5 page statement is gonna bite me in the ass.

Well that and my mediocre scores and GPA.

Here's a tip for law school. Page limits are also minimum requirements. "No more than 16 pages" means "write 16 pages."

Good to know. I was under the impression concision was valued. I will rectify that.

Arbiter213 wrote:

JazzOne wrote: Here's a tip for law school. Page limits are also minimum requirements. "No more than 16 pages" means "write 16 pages."

Good to know. I was under the impression concision was valued. I will rectify that.

Being concise is still highly valued. I consistently did better than my peers who wrote twice as much as me on exams. For example, I wrote 8 pages for an exam and did better than a friend who wrote 16 pages. With that said, I think that JazzOne is implying that most law school exams are written so that you don't have enough time to address all the issues and therefore if you don't reach the page limit, you missed important issues. I think that this is for the most part true. However, on an exam that had a 14 page limit, I wrote 11 pages and still did well. The keys to good exam writing are to address the issues directly, concisely, and clearly.

CredoUtIntellegam wrote:

Arbiter213 wrote:

JazzOne wrote: Here's a tip for law school. Page limits are also minimum requirements. "No more than 16 pages" means "write 16 pages."

Good to know. I was under the impression concision was valued. I will rectify that.

Being concise is still highly valued. I consistently did better than my peers who wrote twice as much as me on exams. For example, I wrote 8 pages for an exam and did better than a friend who wrote 16 pages. With that said, I think that JazzOne is implying that most law school exams are written so that you don't have enough time to address all the issues and therefore if you don't reach the page limit, you missed important issues. I think that this is for the most part true. However, on an exam that had a 14 page limit, I wrote 11 pages and still did well. The keys to good exam writing are to address the issues directly, concisely, and clearly.

In that case I find the implication that you need to use all 4 pages interesting. On the one hand, obviously you can address more in more space. On the other hand, no matter how much space you have you're not going to be able to cover all the material (your self). My statement could have covered more information but it would have been difficult if not impossible to do it well since I wasn't writing in a narrative structure.

In short: Good writing is apparently good writing.

CredoUtIntellegam wrote:

Arbiter213 wrote:

JazzOne wrote: Here's a tip for law school. Page limits are also minimum requirements. "No more than 16 pages" means "write 16 pages."

Good to know. I was under the impression concision was valued. I will rectify that.

Being concise is still highly valued. I consistently did better than my peers who wrote twice as much as me on exams. For example, I wrote 8 pages for an exam and did better than a friend who wrote 16 pages. With that said, I think that JazzOne is implying that most law school exams are written so that you don't have enough time to address all the issues and therefore if you don't reach the page limit, you missed important issues. I think that this is for the most part true. However, on an exam that had a 14 page limit, I wrote 11 pages and still did well. The keys to good exam writing are to address the issues directly, concisely, and clearly.

I was talking about writing assignments (like memos or briefs). In my experience, the expectation is that you will use the full page limit. Then again, LRLW was graded at my school, so this may be irrelevant to some of you. If it's pass fail, just do enough to pass.

FYI - Boalt has a much lower offer rate than most of its peer schools, but has med/high GPA and low LSAT numbers. They clearly value much more than just numbers, so I would focus your efforts on your application materials if you want a shot.

Also, being a California resident seems to help.

Interesting applicants. In the Montauk admissions guide, a Berkeley adcomm states that the school has occasionally rejected boring people with near-perfect numbers.

JOThompson wrote:Interesting applicants. In the Montauk admissions guide, a Berkeley adcomm states that the school has occasionally rejected boring people with near-perfect numbers.

Occasionally? Berkeley rejects about 40% of applicants above both 75th percentiles of 3.89/170, including many who get into Harvard!

im_blue wrote:

JOThompson wrote:Interesting applicants. In the Montauk admissions guide, a Berkeley adcomm states that the school has occasionally rejected boring people with near-perfect numbers.

Occasionally? Berkeley rejects about 40% of applicants above both 75th percentiles of 3.89/170, including many who get into Harvard!

Seriously? So what kind of profiles do they look for? Do employers treat their grads different because of the admission philosophy?

im_blue wrote:

JOThompson wrote:Interesting applicants. In the Montauk admissions guide, a Berkeley adcomm states that the school has occasionally rejected boring people with near-perfect numbers.

Occasionally? Berkeley rejects about 40% of applicants above both 75th percentiles of 3.89/170, including many who get into Harvard!

Rejected for being boring and dull, that's a close paraphrase. Think 4.0/178 on the LSAT. I'll drag up the book over winter break if you want the exact quotation. The point is that Berkeley emphasizes the PS and other soft factors more than other schools, though it's obviously not going to be enough to get you in with shit numbers.

JOThompson wrote:

im_blue wrote:

JOThompson wrote:Interesting applicants. In the Montauk admissions guide, a Berkeley adcomm states that the school has occasionally rejected boring people with near-perfect numbers.

Occasionally? Berkeley rejects about 40% of applicants above both 75th percentiles of 3.89/170, including many who get into Harvard!

Rejected for being boring and dull, that's a close paraphrase. Think 4.0/178 on the LSAT. I'll drag up the book over winter break if you want the exact quotation. The point is that Berkeley emphasizes the PS and other soft factors more than other schools, though it's obviously not going to be enough to get you in with shit numbers.

Are they rejecting them for being boring, or are they yield protecting?

r6_philly wrote:

im_blue wrote:

JOThompson wrote:Interesting applicants. In the Montauk admissions guide, a Berkeley adcomm states that the school has occasionally rejected boring people with near-perfect numbers.

Occasionally? Berkeley rejects about 40% of applicants above both 75th percentiles of 3.89/170, including many who get into Harvard!

Seriously? So what kind of profiles do they look for? Do employers treat their grads different because of the admission philosophy?

Yep, they take their holistic admissions seriously - good softs are necessary but not sufficient.

From the Legal Employment board, Boalt has placed about 1/3 of their class at OCI, which lags far behind their MVPDN peers, especially since a large percentage of their class is gunning for IP. Some have claimed that the PI self-selection explains the OCI stats, but the difference is only a few percentage points compared to MVPDN. I believe their lack of traditional curved grades is killing them ITE (HH = top 10%, H = top 40%, P = bottom 60%), because a lot of students near the median are not able to distinguish themselves from the bottom half of the class, and there aren't enough jobs available for employers to give them the benefit of the doubt.

FlamingCow wrote:

JOThompson wrote:

im_blue wrote:

JOThompson wrote:Interesting applicants. In the Montauk admissions guide, a Berkeley adcomm states that the school has occasionally rejected boring people with near-perfect numbers.

Occasionally? Berkeley rejects about 40% of applicants above both 75th percentiles of 3.89/170, including many who get into Harvard!

Rejected for being boring and dull, that's a close paraphrase. Think 4.0/178 on the LSAT. I'll drag up the book over winter break if you want the exact quotation. The point is that Berkeley emphasizes the PS and other soft factors more than other schools, though it's obviously not going to be enough to get you in with shit numbers.

Are they rejecting them for being boring, or are they yield protecting?

If you believe the adcomm, the rejection hinged on the boring character of the applicant. I'm just repeating what the adcomm professed.

Edit: Necessary but not sufficient is a fine way to describe softs for Berkeley.

JOThompson wrote:I'm just repeating what the adcomm professed.

Well, if the adcomm said it with conviction, it must be true

im_blue wrote:

r6_philly wrote:

im_blue wrote:

JOThompson wrote:Interesting applicants. In the Montauk admissions guide, a Berkeley adcomm states that the school has occasionally rejected boring people with near-perfect numbers.

Occasionally? Berkeley rejects about 40% of applicants above both 75th percentiles of 3.89/170, including many who get into Harvard!

Seriously? So what kind of profiles do they look for? Do employers treat their grads different because of the admission philosophy?

Yep, they take their holistic admissions seriously - good softs are necessary but not sufficient.

From the Legal Employment board, Boalt has placed about 1/3 of their class at OCI, which lags far behind their MVPDN peers, especially since a large percentage of their class is gunning for IP. Some have claimed that the PI self-selection explains the OCI stats, but the difference is only a few percentage points compared to MVPDN. I believe their lack of traditional curved grades is killing them ITE (HH = top 10%, H = top 40%, P = bottom 60%), because a lot of students near the median are not able to distinguish themselves from the bottom half of the class, and there aren't enough jobs available for employers to give them the benefit of the doubt.

Thanks for that info. The grade/curve is cause for concern. Do they compete with Stanford grads for the same (IP) jobs? It is very ironic that they carefully pick their students yet somehow end up placing worse - my guess would be opposite, like how NU place better because of the WE focus. While I have your attention, do you feel that UCLA with $$$ is a better option for CA than Boalt sticker? (if no Stanford). TIA

FlamingCow wrote:

JOThompson wrote:I'm just repeating what the adcomm professed.

Well, if the adcomm said it with conviction, it must be true

Even if the particular tale was conjured, I think the effort of lying proves that Berkeley strongly values interesting personal statements and resumes.

r6_philly wrote:

im_blue wrote: Yep, they take their holistic admissions seriously - good softs are necessary but not sufficient.

From the Legal Employment board, Boalt has placed about 1/3 of their class at OCI, which lags far behind their MVPDN peers, especially since a large percentage of their class is gunning for IP. Some have claimed that the PI self-selection explains the OCI stats, but the difference is only a few percentage points compared to MVPDN. I believe their lack of traditional curved grades is killing them ITE (HH = top 10%, H = top 40%, P = bottom 60%), because a lot of students near the median are not able to distinguish themselves from the bottom half of the class, and there aren't enough jobs available for employers to give them the benefit of the doubt.

Thanks for that info. The grade/curve is cause for concern. Do they compete with Stanford grads for the same (IP) jobs? It is very ironic that they carefully pick their students yet somehow end up placing worse - my guess would be opposite, like how NU place better because of the WE focus. While I have your attention, do you feel that UCLA with $$$ is a better option for CA than Boalt sticker? (if no Stanford). TIA

Yeah, Stanford also has tons of IP people, especially with their top engineering programs and Silicon Valley connections. It better be big money at UCLA - their placement has also dropped off a cliff ITE relative to peer schools, but maybe CA will pick up with Jerry Brown at the helm. You're in a better position than most with a CS degree, and I'm assuming gunning for IP?

im_blue wrote: Yeah, Stanford also has tons of IP people, especially with their top engineering programs and Silicon Valley connections. It better be big money at UCLA - their placement has also dropped off a cliff ITE relative to peer schools, but maybe CA will pick up with Jerry Brown at the helm. You're in a better position than most with a CS degree, and I'm assuming gunning for IP?

Yup, somewhere in software/privacy/security/patent/internet anything, fits my WE/background better. Penn doesn't quite have the same IP courses/programs, and I don't think I would be willing to pay CCN sticker. So if Stanford is no go, BMP and UCLA/USC/UT are on my mind (I would welcome the warmth).