Mich OCI 2011 Forum

[Anonymous User]

I'd like to know a little bit more about the fall recruiting time-frame. Do firms tell you what days to come in for callbacks? How soon after EIW do they typically occur? Are they always at the end of the week?

You schedule your own callback by calling their recruiter. SCHEDULE IT FOR AS EARLY AS POSSIBLE. They take place throughout the week. End of the week is most popular. Just remember, earlier callbacks >>> attending class. If you have to miss 3-4 weeks of class, so be it. You have retroactive pass/fails for a reason. Don't worry about class, because callbacks >>>>> attending class. I think I got screwed on 2 callbacks because the firms told me I was one of the last 3 people to interview -- and they probably interview 3-5 times the amount they plan on offering -- and presumably had already given out their offers.

The best advice I can give is to research the firm thoroughly before attending callbacks. Talk to current 3Ls who summered at the firm. Get insider info.

Good luck. It's a nerve-wracking process.

[Anonymous User]

Can anyone confirm what was said in the other thread about the average being 10-11 interviews? I was under the impression it as more like 14-15.

I am likely only going to target NYC and Chicago, but that would be the case for me even if OCS recommending targeting 10+ Markets. I don't quite get the logic behind only targeting 1 or 2. If just getting a job is the goal, it would seem that bidding on the firms that would give you the best job of getting a job (how's that for circular reasoning?) would be the right idea, regardless of what market they're in. I know that most of the easiest firms to get jobs in are in NYC, but not all of them are (right?).

The average was 14. I called Career Services after I got only 11 interviews, because I was freaking out, and they flat out told me the average was 14. No idea who said it was 10-11, but this person is full of shit.

I think what happened last year was a ton of people bid on New York, so people who solely bid on New York got fewer interviews than people who bid on other markets. (My friend who bid on DC got 18 interviews, and people who bid on CA got even more. I don't think Chicago was nearly as popular as it was the previous year - thank you Career Services -- so I think people who bid on Chicago also had a decent number of interviews.) But don't worry, if you don't get enough interviews, go early to the hotel and sign up for interviews manually. I was too exhausted to do this, but I know someone who did and scored something like 10+ interviews through signing up. I also know people who ended up getting offers from firms after signing up.

Also, you guys should think about mass mailing midlaw and other firms in July and August in secondary markets you have ties to, before OCI, just in case. I scored 4 callback interviews this way (1 biglaw in secondary market) before OCI even started. A lot of smaller firms begin recruiting in the summer, because they realize they have to compete with biglaw firms for applicants.

And I can't stress this enough, SCHEDULE YOUR CALLBACKS AS EARLY AS POSSIBLE.

[Anonymous User]

Is OCI really so complicated?

Edit: That said, the post above this is really on the mark.

I thought about my bid list for 1 to 2 weeks, no joke.

I ended up getting callbacks from safeties and targets, no reaches, so honestly, I'd bid safeties and targets higher on the list. Nobody except top 10% people are going to be gunning for GDC or whatever, so you can safely bid the highest ranked firms lower.

Good luck, all! I remember not being able to sleep at all the night before, and being continuously nervous throughout all of the interviews. Most of us have been there. As I mentioned earlier, talking to 3Ls who summered at your firm helps a ton. You'll have a lot more to talk about.

[Helmholtz]

Is OCI really so complicated?

Edit: That said, the post above this is really on the mark.

I thought about my bid list for 1 to 2 weeks, no joke.

I ended up getting callbacks from safeties and targets, no reaches, so honestly, I'd bid safeties and targets higher on the list. Nobody except top 10% people are going to be gunning for GDC or whatever, so you can safely bid the highest ranked firms lower.

Why would only the top 10% be gunning for GDC? That seems like a firm well within the grasp of the top quarter. Wouldn't top 10% be gunning for Cravath, DPW, Cleary, SullCrom, Covington, etc.?

[Anonymous User]

Is OCI really so complicated?

Edit: That said, the post above this is really on the mark.

I thought about my bid list for 1 to 2 weeks, no joke.

I ended up getting callbacks from safeties and targets, no reaches, so honestly, I'd bid safeties and targets higher on the list. Nobody except top 10% people are going to be gunning for GDC or whatever, so you can safely bid the highest ranked firms lower.

Why would only the top 10% be gunning for GDC? That seems like a firm well within the grasp of the top quarter. Wouldn't top 10% be gunning for Cravath, DPW, Cleary, SullCrom, Covington, etc.?

I don't know, I've just heard it was super grade-conscious. I didn't have remotely close to top 10% grades so I did not bid on any of those firms. I also don't really know anything about them except that Cravath works you like a dog (something like 2800+ billable hours) or something insane, even for New York biglaw.

[Helmholtz]

I don't know, I've just heard it was super grade-conscious.

Maybe they are, but the data given by OCS doesn't seem to indicate that (maybe it's not telling the whole story).

[seriouslyinformative]

GDC NY is not grade conscious.

[Anonymous User]

Does anyone know the scoop on Schulte, Roth, and Zabel? Curious why so few U of M students have gone there considering numbers at comparable firms.

[Bronte]

I'm curious why Cahill doesn't come to OCI.

[Anonymous User]

Would a firm care if you got an "H" in LP? No, right?

[Anonymous User]

Yes, it guarantees you a job and success in life.

[JetstoRJC]

Yes, it guarantees you a job and success in life.

Such an unhelpful post shouldn't be anonymous.

Congrats on the H in Legal Practice. I think it will help more than most posters would likely indicate, but still probably won't help much as it has no impact on GPA. If nothing else, it indicates that you excelled in legal research and writing. I would hope that would impress some firms at least a little bit.

[goodolgil]

Yeah, getting an H in Legal Practice is really hard at Michigan. It should mean something, but the question is whether employers will know the difficulty of it, which seems doubtful for most employers.

I might hint at it an interview ("I feel like I excelled at legal writing") and then maybe they'll notice it on your transcript.

[Anonymous User]

Yeah, getting an H in Legal Practice is really hard at Michigan.

It is really hard in the sense that only 20% of a small class size gets it and expectations are not often very clear on memos/briefs/bluebooking. With that said, I am not sure how representative Legal Practice writings are to actual legal practice. You have way more time to write a memo or brief, with the cases spoon fed to you, than you ever will in real life.

I wouldn't say getting an H is nearly as hard as getting an A (top ~10%) or maybe even A- (top ~ 25%) in a substantive class. There are several people who are not gunning for honors, and do enough work to pass, but not too much more. This is not true for any of the substantive classes. Furthermore, there is a great deal of randomness in Legal Practice grading (between sections, assignments, etc.).

So even if you were to somehow weight it, I would only weight it as doing better than median in a class. It's surely a good tiebreak, and a good talking point, but I doubt it does or should matter much more than that. But I am just a rising 2L, if 3Ls have a better understanding they should share it.

[Edit] Congrats on your H though. It is definitely something to be proud about.

[Helmholtz]

Yeah, getting an H in Legal Practice is really hard at Michigan.

It is really hard in the sense that only 20% of a small class size gets it and expectations are not often very clear on memos/briefs/bluebooking. With that said, I am not sure how representative Legal Practice writings are to actual legal practice. You have way more time to write a memo or brief, with the cases spoon fed to you, than you ever will in real life.

I wouldn't say getting an H is nearly as hard as getting an A (top ~10%) or maybe even A- (top ~ 25%) in a substantive class. There are several people who are not gunning for honors, and do enough work to pass, but not too much more. This is not true for any of the substantive classes. Furthermore, there is a great deal of randomness in Legal Practice grading (between sections, assignments, etc.).

So even if you were to somehow weight it, I would only weight it as doing better than median in a class. It's surely a good tiebreak, and a good talking point, but I doubt it does or should matter much more than that. But I am just a rising 2L, if 3Ls have a better understanding they should share it.

I generally agree with this analysis. Also, I'm pretty sure the bulk of OCI interviewers are going to be people who attended Michigan Law, so they should have some sense of how things go.

If somebody has a mediocre GPA, but honors in legal practice, will the OCI interviewer question how well the student prioritized his time, perhaps devoting too much time to a P/F legal practice class to the detriment of substantive classes?

[Bronte]

Yeah, getting an H in Legal Practice is really hard at Michigan.

It is really hard in the sense that only 20% of a small class size gets it and expectations are not often very clear on memos/briefs/bluebooking. With that said, I am not sure how representative Legal Practice writings are to actual legal practice. You have way more time to write a memo or brief, with the cases spoon fed to you, than you ever will in real life.

I wouldn't say getting an H is nearly as hard as getting an A (top ~10%) or maybe even A- (top ~ 25%) in a substantive class. There are several people who are not gunning for honors, and do enough work to pass, but not too much more. This is not true for any of the substantive classes. Furthermore, there is a great deal of randomness in Legal Practice grading (between sections, assignments, etc.).

So even if you were to somehow weight it, I would only weight it as doing better than median in a class. It's surely a good tiebreak, and a good talking point, but I doubt it does or should matter much more than that. But I am just a rising 2L, if 3Ls have a better understanding they should share it.

[Edit] Congrats on your H though. It is definitely something to be proud about.

I think people underestimate how much employers care about legal practice. Sure, legal practice does not perfectly translate to real legal practice, but it gets a lot closer than any of the substantive classes. In fact, it's the only class that involves research, citations, and reading full opinions, which is a major part of legal practice.

I think an H safely equates to an A- in a substantive class. As you mentioned, getting an H equates to the top 20% in your small section. It's true that some people at least claim not to try in legal practice, but this is probably more than compensated for by the fact that it's a 5% higher cutoff than an A- and that legal practice is the only practical course.

Finally, employers are likely aware of the import of an H. They're used to the class being graded at other schools, and they're used to semi-pass fail systems from other schools (like HYS). The fact that it doesn't factor into your GPA is somewhat relevant, since firm's like to put latin honors on their associates firm bios. However, it's not like law school admissions, where the hard GPA has a major impact on the school. Law firms are genuinely looking for the strongest candidates. They'll certainly prefer an H to a P, and I think they'll give it a fair amount of weight, at least in favor of those who have an H.

[Anonymous User]

I think an H safely equates to an A- in a substantive class. As you mentioned, getting an H equates to the top 20% in your small section. It's true that some people at least claim not to try in legal practice, but this is probably more than compensated for by the fact that it's a 5% higher cutoff than an A- and that legal practice is the only practical course.

Finally, employers are likely aware of the import of an H. They're used to the class being graded at other schools, and they're used to semi-pass fail systems from other schools (like HYS). The fact that it doesn't factor into your GPA is somewhat relevant, since firm's like to put latin honors on their associates firm bios. However, it's not like law school admissions, where the hard GPA has a major impact on the school. Law firms are genuinely looking for the strongest candidates. They'll certainly prefer an H to a P, and I think they'll give it a fair amount of weight, at least in favor of those who have an H.

I understand where you are coming from, and I could see some, maybe most or all firms siding with you, but this is largely an empirical question: do you have any data that supports this position? If you look at the 2L data that just got posted on lawopen, faulted/self-selected as it may be, shows that there is no boost for law review or any other journal, when controlling for grades. And law review, and other journals, are arguably much more legal writing intensive than Legal Practice.

Yeah, at the target range, it would be 5% more likely to get an A-. If you have 3.5, let's assume your H you got is equivalent to an A- in legal practice, and it counts as one substantive class. That would put your gpa at a 3.523. I can buy that it matters that much, but that's what I am saying: it's a good talking point or a good tiebreaker, between you and someone with a 3.5 or a 3.55. As you noted, firms are not nearly this grade responsive. If your 3.5 is good, your 3.53 is good too. If it's not, it's similarly likely not going to be. It's not going to get you in a firm that has a 3.6, 3.7 floor.

[Bronte]

I understand where you are coming from, and I could see some, maybe most or all firms siding with you, but this is largely an empirical question: do you have any data that supports this position? If you look at the 2L data that just got posted on lawopen, faulted/self-selected as it may be, shows that there is no boost for law review or any other journal, when controlling for grades. And law review, and other journals, are arguably much more legal writing intensive than Legal Practice.

Yeah, at the target range, it would be 5% more likely to get an A-. If you have 3.5, let's assume your H you got is equivalent to an A- in legal practice, and it counts as one substantive class. That would put your gpa at a 3.523. I can buy that it matters that much, but that's what I am saying: it's a good talking point or a good tiebreaker, between you and someone with a 3.5 or a 3.55. As you noted, firms are not nearly this grade responsive. If your 3.5 is good, your 3.53 is good too. If it's not, it's similarly likely not going to be. It's not going to get you in a firm that has a 3.6, 3.7 floor. They're not going to put you got an H in legal practice on your firm bio... that seems a bit silly.

Yeah I think we're on pretty much the same page. I definitely don't think it's going to make or break anyone. I just think it's a substantive plus on the resume. With stellar grades, I think it just makes the transcript that much more stellar. With lesser grades, it's at least a talking point, like you said.

Actually, I unsubscribed from law open. I'd love to get a look at that data. Wanna PM or otherwise hook me up? Thanks. (I'll respect your anonymity. Although hell we probably know each other.)

[Anonymous User]

Actually, I unsubscribed from law open. I'd love to get a look at that data.

https://mfile.umich.edu/?path=/afs/umic ... wsc/Shared

You need your umich id/password to login, so I thought I would just post it here, in case other Michigan people hadn't had a chance to see it. It's not finalized though.

[Bronte]

Actually, I unsubscribed from law open. I'd love to get a look at that data.

https://mfile.umich.edu/?path=/afs/umic ... wsc/Shared

You need your umich id/password to login, so I thought I would just post it here, in case other Michigan people hadn't had a chance to see it. It's not finalized though.

Thanks. Yeah it actually went out on lsorgs, I just didn't notice what it was.

[Bronte]

I understand where you are coming from, and I could see some, maybe most or all firms siding with you, but this is largely an empirical question: do you have any data that supports this position? If you look at the 2L data that just got posted on lawopen, faulted/self-selected as it may be, shows that there is no boost for law review or any other journal, when controlling for grades. And law review, and other journals, are arguably much more legal writing intensive than Legal Practice.

If we're looking at the same thing, what it actually says is: "Correcting for GPA, non-Law Review journal membership has no significant effect." I don't think this serves to disprove the logic in my original post.

Yeah, at the target range, it would be 5% more likely to get an A-. If you have 3.5, let's assume your H you got is equivalent to an A- in legal practice, and it counts as one substantive class. That would put your gpa at a 3.523. I can buy that it matters that much, but that's what I am saying: it's a good talking point or a good tiebreaker, between you and someone with a 3.5 or a 3.55. As you noted, firms are not nearly this grade responsive. If your 3.5 is good, your 3.53 is good too. If it's not, it's similarly likely not going to be. It's not going to get you in a firm that has a 3.6, 3.7 floor. They're not going to put you got an H in legal practice on your firm bio... that seems a bit silly.

Just to be clear, I was not suggesting that they would put an H on your firm bio. I was making the concession that firms do have an interest in raw GPA (as opposed to overall strength of transcript, including P vs. H in LP) because they like to put latin honors on your firm bio, which is dictated by graduating GPA, into which an H does not factor.

[Anonymous User]

If we're looking at the same thing, what it actually says is: "Correcting for GPA, non-Law Review journal membership has no significant effect." I don't think this serves to disprove the logic in my original post.

Just to be clear, I was not suggesting that they would put an H on your firm bio. I was making the concession that firms do have an interest in raw GPA (as opposed to overall strength of transcript, including P vs. H in LP) because they like to put latin honors on your firm bio, which is dictated by graduating GPA, into which an H does not factor.

It does not disprove it, no, but you were making an empirical point and it does not support your empirical point. But, in any case, I don't think we are disagreeing. It certainly is a good thing, how much so, is sorta a black box, but I can agree with your estimate. And yeah, I completely misread your latin honors point, my bad.

[Bronte]

If I remember correctly, OCP strongly suggests we not put our GPAs on our resumes. Is it wise to follow this advice?

[tfer2222]

Not so subtle tag.

[SweetrollStealer]

Is there any way to find out how many people a firm is actually interviewing and/or historical data on how many people bid on a firm and didn't get a screening interview?