Median at UChicago job prospects Forum

[stbyes]

You'll do fine. If you want a V10, just make sure you bid STB NYC as a backup. They'll probably take anyone from Chicago.

[Anonymous User]

It's an amazing aspect of the school and one that I think gets underappreciated by prospectives considering Chicago vs. other T6s / T14s. Not having class rank significantly cuts down on the "competition w/ your classmates" aspect of law school (which is already somewhat muted vs. baseline since you're at a T6 where, per the discussion in this thread, your job prospects are pretty great vs. some unfortunate person scrambling to make top-10 in his class at a third-tier school to be able to get a job). Also throw in the fact that many interviewers can't even read a Chicago transcript because of the grading system lol

Not ranking is definitely a nice feature … but it’s hardly unique to Chicago, right? I go to a T6 that has normal letter grades but does not rank students — and doesn’t even calculate or display GPAs on transcripts (as it appears Chicago might, unless OP arrived at the 177.73 by hand).

I do agree that the arcane-ness of the Chicago grading system could work in y’alls favor, though.

I can promise that the arcaneness of the grading system does NOT work in anyone's favor. Interviewers either know how to translate it or they find it confusing and kind of grumble about it. It's neutral to mildly harmful.

Do you say this as an interviewer? I agree that it shouldn't be hard for firms to translate, and OCI medians suggest the same.

Quoted anon. I say it as an alum of the school and someone that is also doing interviews and find myself having to regularly explain the system to my colleagues. A big part of the problem is having to explain that e.g. a 181 is really quite good and the 185/186 get handed out a heck of a lot less than A+s at other schools. Obviously it's UChicago, so when I say mildly harmful, I mean it--the opaque scale has never somehow lost someone an offer, it's just been a kind of eyeroll situation. It does kind of reinforce the stereotype of the school itself, too, which is good for some people and not as good for others.

[Anonymous User]

Any thoughts on a 175..? Can push it up next quarter for sure. Had too much personal BS going on last term.

[Anonymous User]

Not ranking is definitely a nice feature … but it’s hardly unique to Chicago, right?

FWIW UVA doesn't give class rank, either (unless you're at the tippy top--I think there's some informal communications to the top clerkship candidates about where they stand). In fact, unlike other schools, we don't have any Latin honors upon graduation (aside from order of the coif). That said, when I was there most people knew the VLR grade-on GPA cutoff, which told you where the top 10% or so was.

Michigan does not rank either

[Anonymous User]

It's an amazing aspect of the school and one that I think gets underappreciated by prospectives considering Chicago vs. other T6s / T14s. Not having class rank significantly cuts down on the "competition w/ your classmates" aspect of law school (which is already somewhat muted vs. baseline since you're at a T6 where, per the discussion in this thread, your job prospects are pretty great vs. some unfortunate person scrambling to make top-10 in his class at a third-tier school to be able to get a job). Also throw in the fact that many interviewers can't even read a Chicago transcript because of the grading system lol

Not ranking is definitely a nice feature … but it’s hardly unique to Chicago, right? I go to a T6 that has normal letter grades but does not rank students — and doesn’t even calculate or display GPAs on transcripts (as it appears Chicago might, unless OP arrived at the 177.73 by hand).

I do agree that the arcane-ness of the Chicago grading system could work in y’alls favor, though.

I can promise that the arcaneness of the grading system does NOT work in anyone's favor. Interviewers either know how to translate it or they find it confusing and kind of grumble about it. It's neutral to mildly harmful.

Do you say this as an interviewer? I agree that it shouldn't be hard for firms to translate, and OCI medians suggest the same.

Quoted anon. I say it as an alum of the school and someone that is also doing interviews and find myself having to regularly explain the system to my colleagues. A big part of the problem is having to explain that e.g. a 181 is really quite good and the 185/186 get handed out a heck of a lot less than A+s at other schools. Obviously it's UChicago, so when I say mildly harmful, I mean it--the opaque scale has never somehow lost someone an offer, it's just been a kind of eyeroll situation. It does kind of reinforce the stereotype of the school itself, too, which is good for some people and not as good for others.

I am not a UChicago person, so IDK how this works, but do 185/186 really get handed out that rarely? Like, at CLS the prof gets a maximum of 1 A+ per class. Or is CLS an outlier, and do other schools give out A+ more often?

[Anonymous User]

It's an amazing aspect of the school and one that I think gets underappreciated by prospectives considering Chicago vs. other T6s / T14s. Not having class rank significantly cuts down on the "competition w/ your classmates" aspect of law school (which is already somewhat muted vs. baseline since you're at a T6 where, per the discussion in this thread, your job prospects are pretty great vs. some unfortunate person scrambling to make top-10 in his class at a third-tier school to be able to get a job). Also throw in the fact that many interviewers can't even read a Chicago transcript because of the grading system lol

Not ranking is definitely a nice feature … but it’s hardly unique to Chicago, right? I go to a T6 that has normal letter grades but does not rank students — and doesn’t even calculate or display GPAs on transcripts (as it appears Chicago might, unless OP arrived at the 177.73 by hand).

I do agree that the arcane-ness of the Chicago grading system could work in y’alls favor, though.

I can promise that the arcaneness of the grading system does NOT work in anyone's favor. Interviewers either know how to translate it or they find it confusing and kind of grumble about it. It's neutral to mildly harmful.

Do you say this as an interviewer? I agree that it shouldn't be hard for firms to translate, and OCI medians suggest the same.

Quoted anon. I say it as an alum of the school and someone that is also doing interviews and find myself having to regularly explain the system to my colleagues. A big part of the problem is having to explain that e.g. a 181 is really quite good and the 185/186 get handed out a heck of a lot less than A+s at other schools. Obviously it's UChicago, so when I say mildly harmful, I mean it--the opaque scale has never somehow lost someone an offer, it's just been a kind of eyeroll situation. It does kind of reinforce the stereotype of the school itself, too, which is good for some people and not as good for others.

I am not a UChicago person, so IDK how this works, but do 185/186 really get handed out that rarely? Like, at CLS the prof gets a maximum of 1 A+ per class. Or is CLS an outlier, and do other schools give out A+ more often?

You get highest honors with a 182 average. It used to be the case that UChicago transcripts said that in general one or fewer students per year get highest honors--not sure if it's still that rare or if it's creeped up. My understanding is that it's more the exception than the rule that a 185 or 186 gets handed out in any particular class. So, my understanding, anyway, is that 185s and 186s really are more rare than A+s elsewhere. Maybe my impression is wrong, but at least from my interviews I've seen more A+s than 185s. I'm not sure I've ever actually seen a 186 on a transcript.

[Anonymous User]

It's an amazing aspect of the school and one that I think gets underappreciated by prospectives considering Chicago vs. other T6s / T14s. Not having class rank significantly cuts down on the "competition w/ your classmates" aspect of law school (which is already somewhat muted vs. baseline since you're at a T6 where, per the discussion in this thread, your job prospects are pretty great vs. some unfortunate person scrambling to make top-10 in his class at a third-tier school to be able to get a job). Also throw in the fact that many interviewers can't even read a Chicago transcript because of the grading system lol

Not ranking is definitely a nice feature … but it’s hardly unique to Chicago, right? I go to a T6 that has normal letter grades but does not rank students — and doesn’t even calculate or display GPAs on transcripts (as it appears Chicago might, unless OP arrived at the 177.73 by hand).

I do agree that the arcane-ness of the Chicago grading system could work in y’alls favor, though.

I can promise that the arcaneness of the grading system does NOT work in anyone's favor. Interviewers either know how to translate it or they find it confusing and kind of grumble about it. It's neutral to mildly harmful.

Do you say this as an interviewer? I agree that it shouldn't be hard for firms to translate, and OCI medians suggest the same.

Quoted anon. I say it as an alum of the school and someone that is also doing interviews and find myself having to regularly explain the system to my colleagues. A big part of the problem is having to explain that e.g. a 181 is really quite good and the 185/186 get handed out a heck of a lot less than A+s at other schools. Obviously it's UChicago, so when I say mildly harmful, I mean it--the opaque scale has never somehow lost someone an offer, it's just been a kind of eyeroll situation. It does kind of reinforce the stereotype of the school itself, too, which is good for some people and not as good for others.

I am not a UChicago person, so IDK how this works, but do 185/186 really get handed out that rarely? Like, at CLS the prof gets a maximum of 1 A+ per class. Or is CLS an outlier, and do other schools give out A+ more often?

You get highest honors with a 182 average. It used to be the case that UChicago transcripts said that in general one or fewer students per year get highest honors--not sure if it's still that rare or if it's creeped up. My understanding is that it's more the exception than the rule that a 185 or 186 gets handed out in any particular class. So, my understanding, anyway, is that 185s and 186s really are more rare than A+s elsewhere. Maybe my impression is wrong, but at least from my interviews I've seen more A+s than 185s. I'm not sure I've ever actually seen a 186 on a transcript.

Can’t speak to other schools but at Columbia, the grade of A+ is discretionary (and capped at one max per class). However, in practice, most professors will award the A+ given the option.

Highest honors = 182 or above = is that essentially the equivalent of graduating with a cumulative GPA >4.0? My sense is that would also be rare at most other schools, Columbia included — though (to be fair) probably more than 1 student each year.

[Anonymous User]

A 182 GPA is usually #1-2 in the class. I don’t know how that translates to a 4.0 scale. 185s and 186s are extremely rare—in most classes the #1 student gets a 184, and I believe a professor has to get permission to give a 185 or 186. So a 184 is a de facto A+, and usually good for a Dean’s Scholar top exam prize (or Beale Prize in legal writing) in the 1L classes.

[AssociateWQuestions]

If you’re interested in corporate work, you’re golden. Lit is more GPA/credentialing focused.