Top Law Schools

Hello,

I'm a URM (AA male) from a public University in Texas. GPA is 3.64 LSAT 168/173.
Softs: Good LORs, honors research, jobs through out university etc.

The only problems I have is 1. I attended a CC for the first two years of undergrad. (finished CC with a 3.4, after transfer I've maintained a 4.0 at current institution) 2. I have 3 Ws from my time at CC. I was younger and stupid, didn't have a clear focus on what I wanted to major in so I switched classes a lot.

I'm applying for Next cycle because I'm technically a senior but still have one more year left at my current institution due to double majoring.

School List:
Yale: Just for shits and giggles
H,S: My main goals
Columbia: Early Decision applicant
NYU
Chicago
Penn
Duke
Cornell
Georgetown
UT: In state resident
Any other suggestions or things I should add?

You'll get accepted to every school you apply to with a full ride, a stipend, and all the female co-eds you can handle... You'll have it better than top tier college basketball recruits.

Do not apply Early Decision to Columbia. Don't apply early decision anywhere.

You should do fine. I have almost the same stats as you and I'm not a URM. This cycle I got into NYU, Berkeley, Duke, Cornell, and Georgetown.

Tiago Splitter wrote:Do not apply Early Decision to Columbia. Don't apply early decision anywhere.

+1

You have good stats for your goals. I wouldn't worry about your specifics from CC, etc. Especially because you have a good LSAT.

Good luck!!

Tiago Splitter wrote:Do not apply Early Decision to Columbia. Don't apply early decision anywhere.

Yeah like why the eff would you ED to a school that wasn't your top choice. That is extremely silly, no?

Fellow CC transfer student, and while I didn't have any grade issues at my CC, I haven't had any issues with that in my current app cycle. I got asked a question about it during one interview (to the effect of "do you think that you were equally challenged during all four years of your undergrad?"), but so far I think it has actually helped more than hurt.

But yeah, with your numbers you're looking at numerous T14 full rides, and I would be surprised if you didn't get into at least HLS of the top three. DO NOT apply ED to CLS. Write an addendum for your CC Ws, and you'll be golden.

Don't ED to Columbia.

You have a good shot for getting money at T6 schools--EDing at Columbia is a terrible idea.

The CC and the Ws probably won't make a difference, IMO. Your stats + your URM status are relatively rare. Make sure your application materials are polished and very good and you have a great shot at every law school you choose to apply to.

Good luck!

ssppiikkeerr wrote:Hello,

I'm a URM (AA male) from a public University in Texas. GPA is 3.64 LSAT 168/173.
Softs: Good LORs, honors research, jobs through out university etc.

The only problems I have is 1. I attended a CC for the first two years of undergrad. (finished CC with a 3.4, after transfer I've maintained a 4.0 at current institution) 2. I have 3 Ws from my time at CC. I was younger and stupid, didn't have a clear focus on what I wanted to major in so I switched classes a lot.

I'm applying for Next cycle because I'm technically a senior but still have one more year left at my current institution due to double majoring.

School List:
Yale: Just for shits and giggles
H,S: My main goals
Columbia: Early Decision applicant
NYU
Chicago
Penn
Duke
Cornell
Georgetown
UT: In state resident
Any other suggestions or things I should add?

No Michigan, UVA, Berkeley, Northwestern (all of which are better than Cornell, GULC, and UT)? Looks like your list is based on lay prestige.

I will look in to, and consider UVA and Michigan. I still have plenty of time to change and rearrange my list..

RZ5646 wrote:No Michigan, UVA, Berkeley, Northwestern (all of which are better than Cornell, GULC, and UT)? Looks like your list is based on lay prestige.

What are you talking about? Michigan absolutely sucks. And Cornell beats or equals the other schools you mentioned in terms of (biglaw + federal clerkships percentage).

http://www.lstscorereports.com/compare/ ... /berkeley/

Op, you should land at least one of HYS. Good luck!

Good chance EVERYWHERE. Depends on your goals, which one to pick. To echo, you should land one of HYS. Weigh you aid packages. Also, if you plan to practice in TX, UT for free is not a bad situation. But again, depends on your goals. Duke is a great wildcard here (if you get a full scholly), and if you want to stay in TX.

Duke would be great when it comes to scholarships and also for staying in Texas to practice. I go to UT Austin, so going to UT law school is natural for many of my fellow pre-laws here. The problem is I'm not considerably interested in staying within Texas besides the cost of living and close to family aspect. Nothing beats scholarships/full rides except for HYS to me though so I will take any scholarship offers, if I receive them, In consideration for sure.

ssppiikkeerr wrote:Duke would be great when it comes to scholarships and also for staying in Texas to practice. I go to UT Austin, so going to UT law school is natural for many of my fellow pre-laws here. The problem is I'm not considerably interested in staying within Texas besides the cost of living and close to family aspect. Nothing beats scholarships/full rides except for HYS to me though so I will take any scholarship offers, if I receive them, In consideration for sure.

You will get lots of T14 full rides. Just pick whichever you like best.

Trippel wrote:

RZ5646 wrote:No Michigan, UVA, Berkeley, Northwestern (all of which are better than Cornell, GULC, and UT)? Looks like your list is based on lay prestige.

What are you talking about? Michigan absolutely sucks. And Cornell beats or equals the other schools you mentioned in terms of (biglaw + federal clerkships percentage).

http://www.lstscorereports.com/compare/ ... /berkeley/

Op, you should land at least one of HYS. Good luck!

Why does Michigan suck?

gtrs09 wrote: Why does Michigan suck?

It "sucks" because it places a noticeably smaller percentage of its graduating classes into big law + fed clerk jobs, which is the metric used by most of TLS to measure a school's value, than nearly every other t14 school.

here's a post from another thread ranking all of them:

seagan823 wrote:NVM, did it really quickly.

Big Law + Fed Clerk Numbers for T-14 (added from LST reports)

Columbia University 79%
University of Pennsylvania 78%
University of Chicago 76%
Stanford University 75%
Cornell University 74%
New York University 71%
Harvard University 71%
Duke University 70%
University of Virginia 68%
Northwestern University 65%
University of California - Berkeley 62%
Yale University 61%
University of Michigan 54%
Georgetown University 48%

Of course these numbers do blow away all non-t14s in terms of big law + fed clerk placement.

deant286 wrote:

gtrs09 wrote: Why does Michigan suck?

It "sucks" because it places a noticeably smaller percentage of its graduating classes into big law + fed clerk jobs, which is the metric used by most of TLS to measure a school's value, than nearly every other t14 school.

here's a post from another thread ranking all of them:

seagan823 wrote:NVM, did it really quickly.

Big Law + Fed Clerk Numbers for T-14 (added from LST reports)

Columbia University 79%
University of Pennsylvania 78%
University of Chicago 76%
Stanford University 75%
Cornell University 74%
New York University 71%
Harvard University 71%
Duke University 70%
University of Virginia 68%
Northwestern University 65%
University of California - Berkeley 62%
Yale University 61%
University of Michigan 54%
Georgetown University 48%

Of course these numbers do blow away all non-t14s in terms of big law + fed clerk placement.

In honour of the Feb LSAT what is the flaw in this argument?

its not my argument - although I have a feeling I'm going to disagree with your response to it anyway - but I was clarifying why the other poster said that Michigan sucked

jnwa wrote:

deant286 wrote:

gtrs09 wrote: Why does Michigan suck?

It "sucks" because it places a noticeably smaller percentage of its graduating classes into big law + fed clerk jobs, which is the metric used by most of TLS to measure a school's value, than nearly every other t14 school.

here's a post from another thread ranking all of them:

seagan823 wrote:NVM, did it really quickly.

Big Law + Fed Clerk Numbers for T-14 (added from LST reports)

Columbia University 79%
University of Pennsylvania 78%
University of Chicago 76%
Stanford University 75%
Cornell University 74%
New York University 71%
Harvard University 71%
Duke University 70%
University of Virginia 68%
Northwestern University 65%
University of California - Berkeley 62%
Yale University 61%
University of Michigan 54%
Georgetown University 48%

Of course these numbers do blow away all non-t14s in terms of big law + fed clerk placement.

In honour of the Feb LSAT what is the flaw in this argument?

It assumes every student wants BL or FC!!!!!! Which is absolutely not the case.

Iwanttolawschool wrote:

jnwa wrote:

deant286 wrote:

gtrs09 wrote: Why does Michigan suck?

It "sucks" because it places a noticeably smaller percentage of its graduating classes into big law + fed clerk jobs, which is the metric used by most of TLS to measure a school's value, than nearly every other t14 school.

here's a post from another thread ranking all of them:

seagan823 wrote:NVM, did it really quickly.

Big Law + Fed Clerk Numbers for T-14 (added from LST reports)

Columbia University 79%
University of Pennsylvania 78%
University of Chicago 76%
Stanford University 75%
Cornell University 74%
New York University 71%
Harvard University 71%
Duke University 70%
University of Virginia 68%
Northwestern University 65%
University of California - Berkeley 62%
Yale University 61%
University of Michigan 54%
Georgetown University 48%

Of course these numbers do blow away all non-t14s in terms of big law + fed clerk placement.

In honour of the Feb LSAT what is the flaw in this argument?

It assumes every student wants BL or FC!!!!!! Which is absolutely not the case.

True but usually if you can get BL or fed clerkship you can also land gov/PI.

If self-selection out of big law is to blame for Michigan's lower placement numbers, wouldn't those bl+fc percentages vary more than a few points each way, year to year? What is it about Michigan that makes its graduates so consistently pursue 60k/yr jobs, for similar work hours and shitty QOL, over 160k jobs?

Until there is hard data that can prove otherwise, the above rankings and percentages are the ones a rational decision maker should use to choose a school given big law goals.

deant286 wrote:its not my argument - although I have a feeling I'm going to disagree with your response to it anyway - but I was clarifying why the other poster said that Michigan sucked

They do poorly in BL/fedclerkship job placement and nothing indicates Mich students do better in the more competitive PI/gov jobs. I've also heard Michigan has a harsh curve which fucks many students competing with other T-14s in the job search. Although, supposedly they fixed that this year?

Curve changed, entering class size has dropped from 376 for Class of 2013 to 267 for Class of 2018. Not saying Michigan is the place to go for biglaw but what we really want to know is whether a firm will reach deeper into a class as Mich vs other schools. The LST data is masked by so much self selection and year to year variation that its ridiculous to make a judgment based on it. Cornell, for example, has gone from 38% BL 100+ lawyers in the c/o 2011 to 64% in the c/o 2014. Did firms just realize that they are a powerhouse above all but Columbia or Penn. Furthermore if we pretend that this data is good enough to make decisions on, someone who wanted biglaw in the c/o 2012 would have been right to choose Duke over Cornell based on it yet by the time they graduate, that decision looks ridiculous.

jnwa wrote:Curve changed, entering class size has dropped from 376 for Class of 2013 to 267 for Class of 2018. Not saying Michigan is the place to go for biglaw but what we really want to know is whether a firm will reach deeper into a class as Mich vs other schools. The LST data is masked by so much self selection and year to year variation that its ridiculous to make a judgment based on it. Cornell, for example, has gone from 38% BL 100+ lawyers in the c/o 2011 to 64% in the c/o 2014. Did firms just realize that they are a powerhouse above all but Columbia or Penn. Furthermore if we pretend that this data is good enough to make decisions on, someone who wanted biglaw in the c/o 2012 would have been right to choose Duke over Cornell based on it yet by the time they graduate, that decision looks ridiculous.

I think you are over simplifying your analysis. The class of 2011 graduated into the worst market since 1994.
http://www.nalp.org/2011selectedfindingsrelease
Edited to add:
Another historic economic issue for Michigan falling in placement is the collapse of Detroit which was its home market.

If you don't think LST data is good enough to make a decision on, you should have tried making decisions without that data, which was obtained from schools with a fight that LST spearheaded.

Tls2016 wrote:

jnwa wrote:Curve changed, entering class size has dropped from 376 for Class of 2013 to 267 for Class of 2018. Not saying Michigan is the place to go for biglaw but what we really want to know is whether a firm will reach deeper into a class as Mich vs other schools. The LST data is masked by so much self selection and year to year variation that its ridiculous to make a judgment based on it. Cornell, for example, has gone from 38% BL 100+ lawyers in the c/o 2011 to 64% in the c/o 2014. Did firms just realize that they are a powerhouse above all but Columbia or Penn. Furthermore if we pretend that this data is good enough to make decisions on, someone who wanted biglaw in the c/o 2012 would have been right to choose Duke over Cornell based on it yet by the time they graduate, that decision looks ridiculous.

I think you are over simplifying your analysis. The class of 2011 graduated into the worst market since 1994.
http://www.nalp.org/2011selectedfindingsrelease

Fair enough. I was using that as an illustration but my point still stands that the tremendous variation in year to year let alone 3 year(which is the timeframe decisions are most likely going to be made on) LST statistics combined with the clear indications of self selection bias make it a problematic indicator of biglaw prospects if we define that as how deep a given firm is willing to go into a class.

Also not sure how big of a legal market Detroit ever had but again I don't know enough to dispute that. As for your last point, LST data is better than nothing, doesn't mean its a good idea to base decisions on it. It's has significant and fundamental flaws. The number were actually looking for is the people who want biglaw and can't get it because they are too low in their class at Mich but would be able to get it from a similar position at non t6 t14s. LST doesn't give us nearly enough info for that.