Top Law Schools

Is there a scenario in which it would be beneficial for someone straight out of UG to forgo acceptance at a T14 school in order to gain work experience for a few years in the hopes of increasing job prospects at OCI? I'm in undergrad and have below-average softs, and am fearful that I might be the type of candidate that may strike out at OCI because I have little useful work experience to attract future Biglaw employers.

At the same time, it would suck to be admitted to a top school, decide not to go, and then not have the opportunity to attend said top school in the future. I currently have numbers to be competitive at T6 schools.

TL;DR version-should I pass on HYSCCNMVP to get work experience to improve my chances at OCI?

EDIT: for clarity/accuracy.

Have you already applied? If you have an acceptance from a T6, you should go. If you haven't applied yet, then it's more reasonable to get some WE. I'd still go T6 over WE if I could unless it was really high-paying WE.

Deferral is TCR. Not sure which other T6 schools will let you, but I talked to an NYU deferred student who said it was ridiculously easy.

eskimo wrote:Deferral is TCR. Not sure which other T6 schools will let you, but I talked to an NYU deferred student who said it was ridiculously easy.

Ya, but he said a "few" years of WE. Deferral isn't going to do that for you.

I haven't applied this cycle, this would be in regards to next year. I know it's a lame hypo, but I didn't see much info on this topic in a brief search of past TLS posts.

D-ROCCA wrote:I haven't applied this cycle, this would be in regards to next year. I know it's a lame hypo, but I didn't see much info on this topic in a brief search of past TLS posts.

I think it's a legitimate concern. If your goal is biglaw and you have no WE, you won't be as competitive as someone with similar grades who has WE. Still, it would have to be some pretty impressive WE for me to turn down a T6.

Your numbers will always be there. I'd recommend taking some time off not just for better softs but to gain some new experiences.

Wait - if you have numbers good enough for T6 now, how would those numbers + good WE not be good enough in the future? The T6 isn't going to drastically up its standards in the span of just a few cycles...

eskimo wrote:Wait - if you have numbers good enough for T6 now, how would those numbers + good WE not be good enough in the future? The T6 isn't going to drastically up its standards in the span of just a few cycles...

A good point. I'm naturally risk averse, I suppose that explains my thinking.

eskimo wrote:Wait - if you have numbers good enough for T6 now, how would those numbers + good WE not be good enough in the future? The T6 isn't going to drastically up its standards in the span of just a few cycles...

Depending on how many years he works, the LSAT score might not be good anymore.

Good work experience should also make you more competitive for Harvard (not sure about the other T6 schools.) For the 2010 entering class, 72% were at least 1 year out of college, and 52% were 2+ years out of college.

JR likes more WE and higher GPA?

JazzOne wrote:

eskimo wrote:Wait - if you have numbers good enough for T6 now, how would those numbers + good WE not be good enough in the future? The T6 isn't going to drastically up its standards in the span of just a few cycles...

Depending on how many years he works, the LSAT score might not be good anymore.

I just assumed that since OP is still in undergrad he took the test recently enough that it would still be valid by the time he applied. But if not, that's a valid concern. No way would I want to retake a good score because of time.

D-ROCCA wrote:JR likes more WE and higher GPA?

Guess so? I haven't done too much research on H because I'm pretty much an auto-ding, but that would appear to be the case.

LSAT was taken earlier this year. Pleased with my score, don't relish the thought of having to take it again.

eskimo wrote:

D-ROCCA wrote:JR likes more WE and higher GPA?

Guess so? I haven't done too much research on H because I'm pretty much an auto-ding, but that would appear to be the case.

The GPA medians barely moved under JR, but a number of high LSAT (176+)/3.7X students did not get in last year (which was very rare under TS). So yes, it appears that JR is more sensitive to GPA than TS was. He might be on record suggesting as much, but I'm not certain on this point.

The Real Jack McCoy wrote:

eskimo wrote:

D-ROCCA wrote:JR likes more WE and higher GPA?

Guess so? I haven't done too much research on H because I'm pretty much an auto-ding, but that would appear to be the case.

The GPA medians barely moved under JR, but a number of high LSAT (176+)/3.7X students did not get in last year (which was very rare under TS). So yes, it appears that JR is more sensitive to GPA than TS was. He might be on record suggesting as much, but I'm not certain on this point.

Also, supposedly under TS, pretty much everyone who went to Harvard undergrad and had at least a 3.5 GPA could get in.

Admissions philosophies can change when there is a new dean and some years are going to see more applicants than others, so I think it is possible someone could get in now but not a few years from now with more work experience.

law firms don't really care about work experience, unless it's in a highly relevant field (e.g. engineering for patent, i-banking or legitimate business work for corporate). WE might help with getting into a better law school, but firm hiring is almost entirely based on grades and the interview, which is mostly dependent on personality. unless the WE is in a highly relevant field, will help you get better grades in LS (unlikely), or will improve your personality/maturity (possible, but uncertain), then it is unlikely to seriously affect your chances with law firms.

turkfish wrote:law firms don't really care about work experience, unless it's in a highly relevant field

The Vault firm I'm working for next summer very eagerly told me otherwise.

If you have numbers to get into T6, then those numbers + WE should make you even more attractive as an applicant in a couple years. And since I attribute so much of my success (both in 1L/having discipline to have good grades, and in OCI and dealing with law firms) to having had multiple years of WE after UG, I'd highly recommend you do it.

I would not pass up an HYS acceptance, since OCI chances are significantly better than at CCN. If your only options are CCN, then you might have a decision to make.

im_blue wrote:I would not pass up an HYS acceptance, since OCI chances are significantly better than at CCN. If your only options are CCN, then you might have a decision to make.

Even at HYS, some people have struggled this year at OCI, and WE makes a difference. WE helps you stand out against those who're here without any WE, and also can help give you the real-life discipline to do better during 1L and get grades that help you stand out, as well.

This is a good question and one that I'm concerned with myself. Just curious, if OP were to be accepted to HYS and still wanted to get some WE, how long could he reasonably look to defer for? Would 1-2 years of WE (say, at an investment bank) help at OCI?

If you get into Yale, go.

SLS and HLS I am not so sure about. Per Vanwinkle and others, I've heard you're not safe just having gone to Harvard. Stanford I haven't heard much about.

For the rest, WE is a good call I think. It'll make you more marketable to firms both big and small. It will also be valuable experience in and of itself (assuming you are working some kind of office job, at least). Plus, the longer you wait, the more time you've given the economy to recover, and while I seriously doubt it will be booming in 3-4 years time, at the very least you'll be able to better gauge where it's at and the general trend with regard to the legal world.

vanwinkle wrote:

im_blue wrote:I would not pass up an HYS acceptance, since OCI chances are significantly better than at CCN. If your only options are CCN, then you might have a decision to make.

Even at HYS, some people have struggled this year at OCI, and WE makes a difference. WE helps you stand out against those who're here without any WE, and also can help give you the real-life discipline to do better during 1L and get grades that help you stand out, as well.

Agreed, but you have to balance getting WE against possibly not getting into HYS again a few years later.

mrmangs wrote:If you get into Yale, go.

SLS and HLS I am not so sure about. Per Vanwinkle and others, I've heard you're not safe just having gone to Harvard. Stanford I haven't heard much about.

For the rest, WE is a good call I think. It'll make you more marketable to firms both big and small. It will also be valuable experience in and of itself (assuming you are working some kind of office job, at least). Plus, the longer you wait, the more time you've given the economy to recover, and while I seriously doubt it will be booming in 3-4 years time, at the very least you'll be able to better gauge where it's at and the general trend with regard to the legal world.

Pretty much on point, but I would say that you should also attend Stanford regardless of circumstances. I'm not as favorable to Harvard because of the class size.