redacted. Forum

[A'nold]

I'm really curious about this as well. I'm going to W&M and will probably be only taking about 5-8k per year in loans due to scholarship and some savings, but I'm horrified of what I'm going into.

You will be in a great position. I don't even see how you could be worried about 15-25k in loans.....c'mon man.

[bbermud]

I'm really curious about this as well. I'm going to W&M and will probably be only taking about 5-8k per year in loans due to scholarship and some savings, but I'm horrified of what I'm going into.

Seriously, dude?

[20160810]

What a wonderful system. Curved grading that insures half of entering students can pay tuition for 3 years but will be lucky to ever find gainful employment.

My wife is finishing up pharmacy school in May. Nothing was graded on a mandatory curve but plenty of people still manage to do poorly. At least with them we can feel confident they just didn't know the material (or they did other stupid things that reflect poorly on their ability to be a competent professional i.e. late night drinking before exam). You either know the subject matter, prepare adequately, take things seriously and get good grades or you don't.

Not in LS. You can know the subject matter extraordinarily well, but as long some argument can be made for why the grader likes 50 other students' responses better than yours, you're SOL.

Step 1: abolish curve
Step 2: everyone gets a 4.0 who earns it
Step 3: everyone gets biglaw! who earns it

Why didn't anyone think of this before??

Other grad programs don't need a curve to prevent everyone from getting a 4.0.

What you're not getting is the chicken-and-egg-ness of the curve. Law firms don't (and won't) want to hire more than 20-25% of people from these schools. The curve is as good a way as any to help them figure out which 20-25% to take. If we got rid of the curve, they wouldn't suddenly find openings for half of the class.

[A'nold]

What a wonderful system. Curved grading that insures half of entering students can pay tuition for 3 years but will be lucky to ever find gainful employment.

My wife is finishing up pharmacy school in May. Nothing was graded on a mandatory curve but plenty of people still manage to do poorly. At least with them we can feel confident they just didn't know the material (or they did other stupid things that reflect poorly on their ability to be a competent professional i.e. late night drinking before exam). You either know the subject matter, prepare adequately, take things seriously and get good grades or you don't.

Not in LS. You can know the subject matter extraordinarily well, but as long some argument can be made for why the grader likes 50 other students' responses better than yours, you're SOL.

Step 1: abolish curve
Step 2: everyone gets a 4.0 who earns it
Step 3: everyone gets biglaw! who earns it

Why didn't anyone think of this before??

Other grad programs don't need a curve to prevent everyone from getting a 4.0.

What you're not getting is the chicken-and-egg-ness of the curve. Law firms don't (and won't) want to hire more than 20-25% of people from these schools. The curve is as good a way as any to help them figure out which 20-25% to take. If we got rid of the curve, they wouldn't suddenly find openings for half of the class.

Just think about how bad it could be. To weed out the 25% of students the firms might use things like *shudder* leadership in clubs, number of publications, recommendations from professors, etc. that would allow the most horrific gunners to get the good jobs without ever actually proving their intelligence or at least intellectual efficiency and resourcefulness relative to their peers.

[Sandro]

I'm interested in this. All the schools I'm looking at are t19(lol)-t30 and come with varying degrees of cost. While I acknowledge the outlook is grim right now I'm having a hard time believing the notion on TLS that outside of the top 15% at these schools you are screwed and would be better off working at burger king for the rest of your life - that in general the remaining 85% of the class is just wallowing in self pity and resigned to unemployment/unpaid/doc review.

No, but outside the top third you're pretty screwed if you're going $200,000 into debt for a JD from one of these schools, and this is coming from a guy who goes to (and loves) one such school. There are a lot of good options for folks at T30s, but go into this shit eyes open.

Granted 200k or anywhere close to it is soul crushing and you really NEED biglaw to come out from under it. I'd be willing to venture that a large portion of those of us on TLS are considering t20-t30s but with large scholarships/instate tuition involved which brings the cost to 100k or under.

Is a t20-30 still such a terrible decision with a smaller debt load ? What are some rough estimates of the number of people who are not working at burger king but who aren't in biglaw or jobs paying biglaw-esque salaries?

[20160810]

I'm interested in this. All the schools I'm looking at are t19(lol)-t30 and come with varying degrees of cost. While I acknowledge the outlook is grim right now I'm having a hard time believing the notion on TLS that outside of the top 15% at these schools you are screwed and would be better off working at burger king for the rest of your life - that in general the remaining 85% of the class is just wallowing in self pity and resigned to unemployment/unpaid/doc review.

No, but outside the top third you're pretty screwed if you're going $200,000 into debt for a JD from one of these schools, and this is coming from a guy who goes to (and loves) one such school. There are a lot of good options for folks at T30s, but go into this shit eyes open.

Granted 200k or anywhere close to it is soul crushing and you really NEED biglaw to come out from under it. I'd be willing to venture that a large portion of those of us on TLS are considering t20-t30s but with large scholarships/instate tuition involved which brings the cost to 100k or under.

Is a t20-30 still such a terrible decision with a smaller debt load ? What are some rough estimates of the number of people who are not working at burger king but who aren't in biglaw or jobs paying biglaw-esque salaries?

My total debt load will be in the 40K range and I have no regrets whatsoever about my choice.

[20160810]

Just think about how bad it could be. To weed out the 25% of students the firms might use things like *shudder* leadership in clubs, number of publications, recommendations from professors, etc. that would allow the most horrific gunners to get the good jobs without ever actually proving their intelligence or at least intellectual efficiency and resourcefulness relative to their peers.

Professor recommendations still matter in some cases. Publications don't really matter in most instances, and nor should they. You wrote a note for the Cooley Journal of Hats and Hat-Related Law? Big whoop. Leadership in clubs? Please. If I were a hiring partner, I'd look for students who do nothing whatsoever outside of a journal or moot court, just to make sure they knew how to budget their time rationally.

[A'nold]

Just think about how bad it could be. To weed out the 25% of students the firms might use things like *shudder* leadership in clubs, number of publications, recommendations from professors, etc. that would allow the most horrific gunners to get the good jobs without ever actually proving their intelligence or at least intellectual efficiency and resourcefulness relative to their peers.

Professor recommendations still matter in some cases. Publications don't really matter in most instances, and nor should they. You wrote a note for the Cooley Journal of Hats and Hat-Related Law? Big whoop. Leadership in clubs? Please. If I were a hiring partner, I'd look for students who do nothing whatsoever outside of a journal or moot court, just to make sure they knew how to budget their time rationally.

Haha, I wasn't being sarcastic in my post. I really do shudder at the idea that anything but grades could be given any significant weight.

[20160810]

Just think about how bad it could be. To weed out the 25% of students the firms might use things like *shudder* leadership in clubs, number of publications, recommendations from professors, etc. that would allow the most horrific gunners to get the good jobs without ever actually proving their intelligence or at least intellectual efficiency and resourcefulness relative to their peers.

Professor recommendations still matter in some cases. Publications don't really matter in most instances, and nor should they. You wrote a note for the Cooley Journal of Hats and Hat-Related Law? Big whoop. Leadership in clubs? Please. If I were a hiring partner, I'd look for students who do nothing whatsoever outside of a journal or moot court, just to make sure they knew how to budget their time rationally.

Haha, I wasn't being sarcastic in my post. I really do shudder at the idea that anything but grades could be given any significant weight.

Oh, OK, we cool then bro. *Fist pounds*

Prof recommendations are the one thing I am cool with. If a prof calls a firm on a student's behalf and says "Look, the curve is X, this student barely missed getting an A, but I'm obviously impressed enough that I'm calling you now" (or something to that basic effect), then I see no reason why that shouldn't be given some weight.

[A'nold]

Just think about how bad it could be. To weed out the 25% of students the firms might use things like *shudder* leadership in clubs, number of publications, recommendations from professors, etc. that would allow the most horrific gunners to get the good jobs without ever actually proving their intelligence or at least intellectual efficiency and resourcefulness relative to their peers.

Professor recommendations still matter in some cases. Publications don't really matter in most instances, and nor should they. You wrote a note for the Cooley Journal of Hats and Hat-Related Law? Big whoop. Leadership in clubs? Please. If I were a hiring partner, I'd look for students who do nothing whatsoever outside of a journal or moot court, just to make sure they knew how to budget their time rationally.

Haha, I wasn't being sarcastic in my post. I really do shudder at the idea that anything but grades could be given any significant weight.

Oh, OK, we cool then bro. *Fist pounds*

Prof recommendations are the one thing I am cool with. If a prof calls a firm on a student's behalf and says "Look, the curve is X, this student barely missed getting an A, but I'm obviously impressed enough that I'm calling you now" (or something to that basic effect), then I see no reason why that shouldn't be given some weight.

Yeah, I am a big fan of the curve, for various reasons.

On a side note, I am extremely jealous that you will have like 1/5 or 1/6 of my debt upon graduation and likely have a better job lined up than I could ever dream of getting. Props to you man!

[Aggiegrad2011]

Yeah, I am a big fan of the curve, for various reasons.

On a side note, I am extremely jealous that you will have like 1/5 or 1/6 of my debt upon graduation and likely have a better job lined up than I could ever dream of getting. Props to you man!

I hope you don't mean JUST LS debt, A'nold. If $40,000 is ~1/6 of your debt upon graduation, you'll have what, $240,000 in debt? $200,000 to $240,000?

I am planning to attend UW Law this fall and I can't see how you're accumulating that much debt there (esp. with the 2L/3L waiver) so... please tell me some (most?) of that is UG? D:

[A'nold]

Yeah, I am a big fan of the curve, for various reasons.

On a side note, I am extremely jealous that you will have like 1/5 or 1/6 of my debt upon graduation and likely have a better job lined up than I could ever dream of getting. Props to you man!

I hope you don't mean JUST LS debt, A'nold. If $40,000 is ~1/6 of your debt upon graduation, you'll have what, $240,000 in debt? $200,000 to $240,000?

I am planning to attend UW Law this fall and I can't see how you're accumulating that much debt there (esp. with the 2L/3L waiver) so... please tell me some (most?) of that is UG? D:

I have quite a bit of UG debt. What is this "2L/3L waiver" nonsense you speak of?

[Aggiegrad2011]

Yeah, I am a big fan of the curve, for various reasons.

On a side note, I am extremely jealous that you will have like 1/5 or 1/6 of my debt upon graduation and likely have a better job lined up than I could ever dream of getting. Props to you man!

I hope you don't mean JUST LS debt, A'nold. If $40,000 is ~1/6 of your debt upon graduation, you'll have what, $240,000 in debt? $200,000 to $240,000?

I am planning to attend UW Law this fall and I can't see how you're accumulating that much debt there (esp. with the 2L/3L waiver) so... please tell me some (most?) of that is UG? D:

I have quite a bit of UG debt. What is this "2L/3L waiver" nonsense you speak of?

Nonsense????

"What is the "Graduate/Professional Waiver?" The Graduate/Professional Waiver is a waiver that gives a graduate/professional students in-state tuition. Although the students receive in-state tuition..."


It gives you in-state tuition for your 2L and 3L years...

http://www.washington.edu/students/reg/ ... ProfWaiver

I've already spoken at length with the folks at admissions and they've given me a check-list of things to do to ensure that I get the waiver in my 2nd year. I don't see how this is at all "nonsense."

Edit: Information about it was included in the packet.

[A'nold]

Yeah, I am a big fan of the curve, for various reasons.

On a side note, I am extremely jealous that you will have like 1/5 or 1/6 of my debt upon graduation and likely have a better job lined up than I could ever dream of getting. Props to you man!

I hope you don't mean JUST LS debt, A'nold. If $40,000 is ~1/6 of your debt upon graduation, you'll have what, $240,000 in debt? $200,000 to $240,000?

I am planning to attend UW Law this fall and I can't see how you're accumulating that much debt there (esp. with the 2L/3L waiver) so... please tell me some (most?) of that is UG? D:

I have quite a bit of UG debt. What is this "2L/3L waiver" nonsense you speak of?

Nonsense????

"What is the "Graduate/Professional Waiver?" The Graduate/Professional Waiver is a waiver that gives a graduate/professional students in-state tuition. Although the students receive in-state tuition..."


It gives you in-state tuition for your 2L and 3L years...

http://www.washington.edu/students/reg/ ... ProfWaiver

I've already spoken at length with the folks at admissions and they've given me a check-list of things to do to ensure that I get the waiver in my 2nd year. I don't see how this is at all "nonsense."

Sent you a pm.

[Anonymous User]

how does being at UC Davis(T28), a little bit above the 20th percentile (which means 1 out of every 5 kids is below me)...with no debt coming out...and wants to go into private practice, but wants to work in bay area(maybe Sacramento)...i'd be fine with 60k starting

i should be able to get outside the bottom quarter and hopefully out of the bottom third by the end of 1L year.

[Anonymous User]

how does being at UC Davis(T28), a little bit above the 20th percentile (which means 1 out of every 5 kids is below me)...with no debt coming out...and wants to go into private practice, but wants to work in bay area(maybe Sacramento)

i should be able to get outside the bottom quarter and hopefully out of the bottom third by the end of 1L year.

I go to Davis and am in the TOP 25% and barely got a firm job. You are completely, 100%, beyond all doubt, certainly, absolutely, entirely, for-sure BONED when it comes to finding ANY FIRM JOB at ANY FIRM of ANY SIZE through OCI or right after 3L unless you have a family connection who can get you the job no matter what.

[Teoeo]

I have a friend who is bottom of the class at Davis, you think he/she is completely boned for the public sector?

[RPK34]

I'm really curious about this as well. I'm going to W&M and will probably be only taking about 5-8k per year in loans due to scholarship and some savings, but I'm horrified of what I'm going into.

You will be in a great position. I don't even see how you could be worried about 15-25k in loans.....c'mon man.

That was me originally, didn't mean to go anon.

But reading stories about NYU grads ending up unemployed suggests that a decent percentage of kids from T30s are probably unemployed as well. I'm not really concerned about the "soul crushing debt," but the fear of spending 3 years without much to show for it really is a bit scary.

[20160810]

I have a friend who is bottom of the class at Davis, you think he/she is completely boned for the public sector?

How bottom? Below median, something might work out. Bottom 25%, I genuinely don't think most of those people find any work whatsoever in the legal field. I wouldn't be surprised if they become paralegals.

[Aggiegrad2011]

I have a friend who is bottom of the class at Davis, you think he/she is completely boned for the public sector?

How bottom? Below median, something might work out. Bottom 25%, I genuinely don't think most of those people find any work whatsoever in the legal field. I wouldn't be surprised if they become paralegals.

Would firms even want someone with a JD to be acting as a paralegal? Seems like they'd be thought of as "over-qualified" and labeled as flight risks.

[bbermud]

I have a friend who is bottom of the class at Davis, you think he/she is completely boned for the public sector?

How bottom? Below median, something might work out. Bottom 25%, I genuinely don't think most of those people find any work whatsoever in the legal field. I wouldn't be surprised if they become paralegals.

Would firms even want someone with a JD to be acting as a paralegal? Seems like they'd be thought of as "over-qualified" and labeled as flight risks.

good point. but these guys are going no where when they have 100-200K loans to pay off.

[Teoeo]

Eh, lets hope that it isn't that grim :/

[Anonymous User]

i'm bottom quarter at T30...and will have no debt coming out...Do you really think it will be hard to find a 50-70k legal related job coming out first year?

[androstan]

What a wonderful system. Curved grading that insures half of entering students can pay tuition for 3 years but will be lucky to ever find gainful employment.

My wife is finishing up pharmacy school in May. Nothing was graded on a mandatory curve but plenty of people still manage to do poorly. At least with them we can feel confident they just didn't know the material (or they did other stupid things that reflect poorly on their ability to be a competent professional i.e. late night drinking before exam). You either know the subject matter, prepare adequately, take things seriously and get good grades or you don't.

Not in LS. You can know the subject matter extraordinarily well, but as long some argument can be made for why the grader likes 50 other students' responses better than yours, you're SOL.

Step 1: abolish curve
Step 2: everyone gets a 4.0 who earns it
Step 3: everyone gets biglaw! who earns it

Why didn't anyone think of this before??

Other grad programs don't need a curve to prevent everyone from getting a 4.0.

What you're not getting is the chicken-and-egg-ness of the curve. Law firms don't (and won't) want to hire more than 20-25% of people from these schools. The curve is as good a way as any to help them figure out which 20-25% to take. If we got rid of the curve, they wouldn't suddenly find openings for half of the class.

Of course they wouldn't suddenly find more openings. However, mandatory curve is NOT "as good as any" way to tell firms which 25% to hire. If your knowledge/application of the law is good enough, you should get the grade that goes with that level. If everyone in the class is excellent, has great knowledge, great application, etc. they should all get similar grades.

Law firms can then use plenty of other criteria to stratify the class. Past WE, leadership roles, moot court, journal, recommendations, writing samples, etc. etc. etc. The mandatory curve is A criterion for separating students, but it can often become an arbitrary one when a majority of the class is of a very high quality. There's no reason to introduce additional arbitrariness into candidate evaluation.

[A'nold]

Step 1: abolish curve
Step 2: everyone gets a 4.0 who earns it
Step 3: everyone gets biglaw! who earns it

Why didn't anyone think of this before??

Other grad programs don't need a curve to prevent everyone from getting a 4.0.

What you're not getting is the chicken-and-egg-ness of the curve. Law firms don't (and won't) want to hire more than 20-25% of people from these schools. The curve is as good a way as any to help them figure out which 20-25% to take. If we got rid of the curve, they wouldn't suddenly find openings for half of the class.

Of course they wouldn't suddenly find more openings. However, mandatory curve is NOT "as good as any" way to tell firms which 25% to hire. If your knowledge/application of the law is good enough, you should get the grade that goes with that level. If everyone in the class is excellent, has great knowledge, great application, etc. they should all get similar grades.

Law firms can then use plenty of other criteria to stratify the class. Past WE, leadership roles, moot court, journal, recommendations, writing samples, etc. etc. etc. The mandatory curve is A criterion for separating students, but it can often become an arbitrary one when a majority of the class is of a very high quality. There's no reason to introduce additional arbitrariness into candidate evaluation.