Survey of Job Outcome and Grades compared to LSAT Score Forum

[Old Gregg]

Large market midlaw boutique (with statewide satellite offices). Pays market.
173
School was Tier 3 (now tier 2). They did not provide class ranking.
Turned down T-14 prices. Leverage LSAT/GPA for free ride in my home town. Given SA income, actually made +$ during my 3 years.

IMO: As I’ve noted before, firms want smart people (which is what LSAT/GPA indicates), thus firms deem that avoiding high debt is a positive. Worked for me and many others I know IRL. I also work with smart T14ers but who are constantly grumbling about their debt.

So, although your firm deems avoiding high debt to be smart, they still hired plenty of people from the T14 who took on high debt?

Yeah, kind of an unnecessary statement from him. And false.

[02122015]

Large market midlaw boutique (with statewide satellite offices). Pays market.
173
School was Tier 3 (now tier 2). They did not provide class ranking.
Turned down T-14 prices. Leverage LSAT/GPA for free ride in my home town. Given SA income, actually made +$ during my 3 years.

IMO: As I’ve noted before, firms want smart people (which is what LSAT/GPA indicates), thus firms deem that avoiding high debt is a positive. Worked for me and many others I know IRL. I also work with smart T14ers but who are constantly grumbling about their debt.

So, although your firm deems avoiding high debt to be smart, they still hired plenty of people from the T14 who took on high debt?

Yeah, kind of an unnecessary statement from him. And false.

I assume he mentioned why he went to the TTT to avoid debt during an interview, and the partner said "that's smart" and he thinks it actually mattered to their decision.

[Frothingslosh]

1) Job Outcome - MidLaw (regional BigLaw)
2) LSAT score - 156, 162
3) T50, 3.7 (top 12%)

[Anonymous User]

1. V40 Satellite
2. 173
3. MVP little below median

[Anonymous User]

I don't really get how you're seeing "low LSAT + TTT + top grades = meaningless" out of anything that has been said in this thread. That seems like an argument you want to have, but that no one else is interested in.

People with high LSAT scores and low ugpas can be confronted with the option "Go to a local TT and get a full ride, or go to a lower t14 for full sticker?" That can be a legitimately difficult decision to make depending upon your goals (Are you willing to risk the possibility of no real legal career for the certainty of no debt? Are you willing to trade potentially life-crippling debt for a much greater chance at a real legal career?); but the calculation *might* be different if it turns out that someone with a high LSAT score is disproportionately likely to blow the curve at the local TT.

"meaningless" in the sense that this thread implies that data doesn't impact the hypothetical decision you're highlighting because the two correlations don't really need to be coupled in any way (LSAT-->grades and grades-->job are meaningful, but LSAT-->job isn't as useful).

For simplicity's sake, I think we can just leave it at agreeing this thread is dumb.

Right, but we're only seeing that top grades at a TTT are a necessary condition to finding gainful employment. We're not accounting for the possibility that there are many, many people with top grades from a TTT struggling to find similar employment.

Can back this up. At a T50-60 school. Two people in my year have biglaw. Both in top 5%, people like #1 don't even have it after getting rejected at a bunch of places. Super easy to strike out at the t2 schools and below, regardless of rank. Its a special snowflake who can even manage biglaw out of there.

Jesus, you must either be in a really competitive market, or your school has a lackluster regional reputation. I'm at a school that's lower ranked than yours and I know of at least 25 people with Biglaw, albeit all top 10-15% with law review. I only know of 3 people in the top 10-15% that struck out at OCI.

[Old Gregg]

Large market midlaw boutique (with statewide satellite offices). Pays market.
173
School was Tier 3 (now tier 2). They did not provide class ranking.
Turned down T-14 prices. Leverage LSAT/GPA for free ride in my home town. Given SA income, actually made +$ during my 3 years.

IMO: As I’ve noted before, firms want smart people (which is what LSAT/GPA indicates), thus firms deem that avoiding high debt is a positive. Worked for me and many others I know IRL. I also work with smart T14ers but who are constantly grumbling about their debt.

So, although your firm deems avoiding high debt to be smart, they still hired plenty of people from the T14 who took on high debt?

Yeah, kind of an unnecessary statement from him. And false.

I assume he mentioned why he went to the TTT to avoid debt during an interview, and the partner said "that's smart" and he thinks it actually mattered to their decision.

Or he put his LSAT score on his resume...?

I don't know. It's all really silly. I interview people all the time, both from TTTs and from T14s. Thought never occurred to me. Maybe I'm just not one of the smart guys.

[mvp99]

[/quote]
I assume he mentioned why he went to the TTT to avoid debt during an interview, and the partner said "that's smart" and he thinks it actually mattered to their decision.[/quote]

Or he put his LSAT score on his resume...?

I don't know. It's all really silly. I interview people all the time, both from TTTs and from T14s. Thought never occurred to me. Maybe I'm just not one of the smart guys.[/quote]

The idea simply doesn't make sense. Who would think "wow you chose no debt over attending a top school, you're smart"?? At most, the interviewer maybe thought "no debt? wow this guy is here on a scholarship because he had a high LSAT score"... what's the predictive value of the LSAT if all it does is try to predict your 1L performance? lol All things being equal I would actually select the candidate with some debt (if somehow I knew that, which is weird) at least he/she has a reason to stay until midnight on a Friday

[Old Gregg]

The idea simply doesn't make sense. Who would think "wow you chose no debt over attending a top school, you're smart"?? At most, the interviewer maybe thought "no debt? wow this guy is here on a scholarship because he had a high LSAT score"... what's the predictive value of the LSAT if all it does is try to predict your 1L performance? lol All things being equal I would actually select the candidate with some debt (if somehow I knew that, which is weird) at least he/she has a reason to stay until midnight on a Friday

It was a statement made from a blatant inferiority complex. No other explanation or deeper thought is needed.

[Anonymous User]

The idea simply doesn't make sense. Who would think "wow you chose no debt over attending a top school, you're smart"?? At most, the interviewer maybe thought "no debt? wow this guy is here on a scholarship because he had a high LSAT score"... what's the predictive value of the LSAT if all it does is try to predict your 1L performance? lol All things being equal I would actually select the candidate with some debt (if somehow I knew that, which is weird) at least he/she has a reason to stay until midnight on a Friday

The other unaddressed issue here is that firms use the reputation of the schools that associates went to for selling work. They need to say to clients that they have the best qualified associates, and the easiest way to do that is brand-whoring based on schools.